📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
Sacramento County Grand Jury
• 2011-2012
This page intentionally left blank. egaP Year in Review
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 1 findings
F5
Page 31
The District currently has no policy regarding contracts being awarded to employees who have recently separated from the District. Recommendations
Recommendations 3
-
R1Page 31The District Ethics Policy should be distributed, read, and signed by every District employee on an annual basis. Reviews of guidelines and principles should be conducted with staff periodically. Each incident of review should be documented, signed by the reviewer, and placed in the employee's personnel file. If not now assigned, the District needs to have an ethics officer assigned to monitor this effort on an ongoing basis. Additionally, the District needs to submit an Annual Ethics Report to the District Board.
-
R2Page 31The District should enact provisions to prohibit the awarding of District contract(s) to any past employee for a period of one year subsequent to their date of separation from the District, eliminating the potential for unfair competition.
-
R3Page 31The District contracting officer must be more involved in monitoring contract procedures, performance and compliance, particularly for professional services contracts.