Score: +5 (5/3/0)
Orange County Grand Jury • 2016-2017

To Be Continued… Follow-up for Open Formal Grand Jury Report Responses Grand Jury 2015-2016

28 pages
View Original PDF

Findings 8 findings

F1
The beneficial impact of Grand Jury reports is diminished if recommendations are left open and not properly pursued to closure.
F2
The credibility and impact of the Grand Jury watchdog function is diminished if
F3
Tracking and consolidation of open report recommendations directed to the Target Audience should be the responsibility of the CEO.
F4
The process of tracking open Grand Jury report recommendations is most effective when formalized and instituted as an ongoing procedure by the CEO.
F5
The follow-up of open report recommendations is best done in March of each year to coincide with the requirement that responses of Further Analysis (FA) must have been completed within 180 days from the original response date.
F6
The Target Audience needs written policies and procedures from the CEO for proper use of the “Needs Further Analysis” (FA) response to ensure it complies with CPC section 933.05, including the scope, and parameters of that analysis and timeframe not to exceed six months.
F7
Tracking open Grand Jury recommendations to closure becomes a higher priority for the Target Audience when promoted and endorsed by the Board of Supervisors and the CEO/COO.
F8
The CEO is in the best position to track and consolidate long-standing open report

Recommendations 2

Agency Responses 1

Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.