📋
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.
⚠️ 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 and Recommendations 1 findings
F1
Page 8
– THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS (BOS) 1. Background Check - The BOS, when hiring the CDA Director (Director), failed to follow standard hiring procedures by neglecting to insist that the candidate’s qualifications and past work experience be verified and thoroughly checked. 2. Reporting Relationship - The BOS failed to clearly define the reporting relationship of the position and allowed the Director to circumvent the established line of supervision. The Director reported directly to the BOS with disregard for the published County organization chart. 3. Accountability - After establishing the Director’s direct reporting relationship to the Board, the BOS failed to hold the Director accountable and neglected to prepare any performance evaluations. 4. Job Qualifications - The Director, when hired by the County, lacked the technical skills and sufficient related experience to successfully perform the job. The BOS based their hiring decision on the applicant’s self-reported strong management experience. However, the Grand Jury, in the course of the investigation, could not substantiate many of the claims made on the Director’s resume and application. 4
No recommendations for this finding