Skip Repetitive Navigation Links
California State Auditor Logo COMMITMENT • INTEGRITY • LEADERSHIP

High Risk
The California State Auditor’s Updated Assessment of High-Risk Issues the State and Select State Agencies Face

Report Number: 2017-601

Figure 1

The pie charter shows that a total of $52 billion has been allocated as follows: $19 billion (36%) to the State highway system; $18 billion (35%) to local streets and roads; $7 billion (13%) to transit programs; $5 billion (10%) to trade and congested corridors; and $3 billion (6%) to other programs. Other programs include the Active Transportation Program for projects benefiting bicyclists and pedestrians, local planning grants, parks programs, off-highway vehicle programs, boating programs, the interregional share of the State Transportation Improvement Program, freeway service patrols, and transportation research at the University of California and the California State University.

 Go back to Figure 1

Figure 2

The bar graph shows the following amounts of funding and distressed highway lane miles for each fiscal year before and after the Road Repair Act (Act) funding: 

Go back to Figure 2

Figure 3

The bar graph showing a breakdown of the varying levels of downstream hazard potentials that apply to dams within the following ranges of ages (in years):

 Go back to Figure 3

Figure 4

A county map of California showing the location of dams with varying levels of downstream hazard potentials. The map indicates that many of the dams in less-than-satisfactory condition are near urban areas in the Bay Area, Southern California, and the Central Valley and, as a result, pose an extremely high downstream hazard potential. The maps includes a pullout with a magnified view of the bay area and the numerous dams located there.

 Go back to Figure 4

Figure 5

The project approval lifecycle shows the following steps, in order:

 Go back to Figure 5

Figure 6

The figure describes five key control areas with which reporting entities must comply. The figure identifies the first three areas—information asset management, risk management, and information security program management—as the foundation of an information security control structure. The figure shows that the remaining two control areas—information security incident management and technology recovery—are connected to Information Security Program Management. The figure defines the five control areas as follows:

 Go back to Figure 6

Figure 7

The figure shows the average compliance score on the information security survey in 2015 and 2017 in five key control areas. The average compliance scores are as follows:

The average compliance score for all five key control areas improved by various amounts.

 Go back to Figure 7

Figure 8

A line graph showing the local control funding formula (LCFF) target funding and the actual LCFF funding for fiscal years 2013-14 through 2016-17, as well as the projected LCFF funding and the current LCFF funding for fiscal years 2017-18 through 2020-21. The funding amounts by fiscal year are as follows:

The graph also shows the projected funding required to close the gap by the start of fiscal years 2018-19 through 2020-21, as follows:

 Go back to Figure 8

Figure 9

The bar graph shows the following breakdown of the enrollment and graduation statuses of California State University (CSU) students during their first six academic years:

 Go back to Figure 9

Figure 10

The bar graph shows the following breakdown of the enrollment and graduation statuses of California State University (CSU) science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) students during their first six academic years:

 Go back to Figure 10

Figure 11

A line graph shows the following projected unfunded liability by fiscal year for CalSTRS under the newly authorized contribution levels:

FY 2016-17: $96.7 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2017-18: $111.5 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2018-19: $117.0 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2019-20: $121.5 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2020-21: $125.0 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2021-22: $127.9 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2022-23: $130.7 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2023-24: $133.3 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2024-25: $135.6 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2025-26: $137.4 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2026-27: $138.9 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2027-28: $139.9 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2028-29: $140.4 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2029-30: $140.3 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2030-31: $139.6 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2031-32: $138.1 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2032-33: $135.9 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2033-34: $133.2 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2034-35: $129.7 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2035-36: $125.5 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2036-37: $120.5 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2037-38: $114.6 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2038-39: $107.7 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2039-40: $99.7 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2040-41: $90.6 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2041-42: $80.3 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2042-43: $68.6 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2043-44: $55.4 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2044-45: $40.6 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2045-46: $24.1 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2046-47: $5.8 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2047-48: $4.0 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability
2048-49: $2.0 billion of CalSTRS unfunded liability

 Go back to Figure 11

Figure 12

A line graph showing that the State’s unfunded liability for Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB) for retiree health care would grow as follows if no actions are taken to change the funding process:

 Go back to Figure 12