Report 2016-126 All Recommendation Responses

Report 2016-126: California Department of Social Services: Its Caregiver Background Check Bureau Lacks Criminal History Information It Needs to Protect Vulnerable Populations in Licensed Care Facilities (Release Date: March 2017)

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that Social Services receives all necessary information for making exemption decisions, the Legislature should amend state law to require Justice to send Social Services all available sentencing information for all convictions. Additionally, the Legislature should amend state law to require Justice to send juvenile criminal history information related to serious and violent felony offenses as well as any other juvenile criminal history that Social Services identifies as valuable to its exemption reviews.

Description of Legislative Action

As of March 14, 2022, the Legislature has not taken action to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

As of March 14, 2021, the Legislature has not taken action to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

Assembly Bill 952 (Voepel, 2019) would have required Justice to provide to Social Services all conviction records that Justice receives for an applicant for licensing, employment, certification, or approval as a caregiver. This bill died in the Assembly.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Legislation Proposed But Not Enacted

Description of Legislative Action

Assembly Bill 952 would require Justice to provide to Social Services all conviction records that Justice receives for an applicant for licensing, employment, certification, or approval as a caregiver.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

Assembly Bill 2461 (Flora), was introduced on February 14, 2018, and would require Justice to provide subsequent state or federal arrest notification to an entity authorized by state or federal law to receive state or federal summary criminal history information to assist in fulfilling employment, licensing, or the duties of approving relative caregivers upon the arrest of a person whose fingerprints are on file at Justice or the Federal Bureau of Investigation as the result of an application for licensing or employment.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

Senate Bill 420 (Monning, Chapter 333, Statutes of 2017) includes sentencing information in the state summary criminal history record and requires that information to be provided whenever the information is to be used for employment, licensing, or certification purposes.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that any entity authorized by state or federal law to receive state or federal criminal history information subsequent to receiving the initial RAP sheet is informed of all criminal activity of an individual, the Legislature should amend state law to clearly direct Justice to transmit all convictions it receives to the entities authorized to receive subsequent criminal history and require Justice to obtain and transmit subsequent federal RAP sheets to all entities authorized to receive subsequent California criminal history information and to report to the Legislature periodically about its implementation efforts.

Description of Legislative Action

Assembly Bill 2461 (Chapter 300, Statutes of 2018) requires Justice to provide subsequent state or federal arrest notification to Social Services, the Medical Board of California, and the Osteopathic Medical Board of California to assist in fulfilling employment, licensing, or the duties of approving relative caregivers upon the arrest of a person whose fingerprints are on file at Justice or the Federal Bureau of Investigation as the result of an application for licensing or employment.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Legislation Enacted

Description of Legislative Action

Legislation has not been introduced to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

Legislation has not been introduced to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that all applicable entities share their administrative actions with each other as state law intends, the Legislature should amend state law to require that Social Services, the Department of Aging, Public Health, Health Care Services, Medical Services, and county agencies provide each other their administrative action information.

Description of Legislative Action

As of March 14, 2022, the Legislature has not taken action to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

As of March 14, 2021, the Legislature has not taken action to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

As of March 16, 2020, the Legislature has not taken action to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

Assembly Bill 2397 would have required, rather than permitted, the California Department of Aging, the California Department of Public Health, the Department of Health Care Services, the Department of Social Services, and the Emergency Medical Services Authority to share specified information with respect to applicants, licensees, certificate holders, or individuals who have been the subject of any administrative action resulting in the denial, suspension, probation, revocation, or rescission of a license, permit, or certificate of approval.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Legislation Vetoed

Description of Legislative Action

Assembly Bill 2397 (Obernolte), introduced on February 14, 2018, would require, rather than permit, the California Department of Aging, the Department of Public Health, the Department of Health Care Services, the Department of Social Services, and the Emergency Medical Services Authority to share the information with respect to applicants, licensees, certificate holders, or individuals who have been the subject of any administrative action resulting in the denial of a license, permit, or certificate of approval.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

Legislation has not been introduced to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation #4 To: Justice, Department of

To ensure that Social Services receives all appropriate criminal history information, Justice should immediately update its procedures to accurately reflect that staff should disseminate nonreferable arrests when there is a corresponding conviction and ensure that staff follow these updated procedures.

60-Day Agency Response

As previously reported to the CSA, the DOJ updated its Applicant Procedures on 1/17/2017 to direct staff to disseminate, non-referable arrests when there is a corresponding conviction; specifically to include the entire arrest cycle in the response. The procedure change was noted in the document's change log, and a copy of the updated procedures were provided to the CSA on 2/15/2017. A description of the program's response verification process is outlined in the Applicant Procedures. To ensure all Applicant program staff are aware of the requirement, the supervisors have met with there respective teams to discuss the updated requirement and changes to the Applicant Procedures, completed transactions have been spot checked, and a follow up email reminding staff of the specific procedure change was recently issued by the Section Manager.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Fully Implemented

Recommendation #5 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that it more effectively shares, receives, and uses administrative action information, Social Services should develop and maintain a centralized database containing its own administrative actions and those received from other state departments, in order to share this information among these departments as required by state law. Social Services should seek funding if it believes additional resources are necessary.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2020

CDSS, Department of Health Care Services, Emergency Medical Services Authority, Department of Aging, and Department of Public Health are sharing administrative action information by utilizing the Administrative Action Records System (AARS). The AARS screen shot to support implementation will be submitted to CSA via email.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2019

Department of Social Services (CDSS), Department of Health Care Services, Emergency Medical Services Authority, Department of Aging, and Department of Public Health are sharing administrative action information by utilizing the Administrative Action Records System (AARS).

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services submitted no evidence demonstrating that the relevant departments are using its database to share administrative action information. Therefore, we continue to assess this recommendation as only partially implemented.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2018

The AARS centralized database is still in development with an anticipated implementation date of June 2019. Per an executed agreement, data sharing currently occurs via a manual process between CDSS and Emergency Medical Services Authority, Department of Aging, Department of Public Health, and Department of Health Care Services as needed. Refer to the executed agreements attached.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

1-Year Agency Response

In order to share this information and comply with state law, resources have been redirected to create the centralized database Administrative Action Records System (AARS), which contains CDSS administrative actions and those received from other State departments. Although the information has been made available to Emergency Medical Services Authority, Department of Aging, Department of Public Health, and the counties, the AARS is currently in the development phase. Training has been developed and made available to the counties and Department of Aging, Department of Public Health, Emergency Medical Services Authority, and Department of Health Care Services.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

Due to unforeseen circumstances, progress on this item has been delayed. The Department and the four departments identified above are collaborating to finalize the Interagency Agreements by December 2017.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

The Department is expanding an existing database which will contain all administrative actions filed by the Departments of Public Health, Health Care Services and Aging, the Emergency Medical Services Authority, and all 58 counties. Once operational, the state departments and counties will be able to enter administrative action information, into the database, when the action is finalized. Additionally, authorized users, including authorized exemption analysts, will now have access to all administrative actions in the database.

The Department is providing the Interagency Agreement amendment language that requires actions to be shared as soon as finalized, and no later than five days after the end of the month the action becomes final to the other four state departments. In addition, the Department also will include language in the agreements to change the term of the agreements to indefinite.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #6 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that it more effectively shares, receives, and uses administrative action information, until a centralized database can facilitate real-time information transmittal, Social Services should amend its interagency agreements to specify that the departments should share their administrative action information as soon as possible after the action is final, but no later than five business days after the end of the month in which it became final. It should begin amending its interagency agreements by July 2017.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2018

All Interagency Agreements have been fully executed specifying that the Department of Aging, Department of Public Health, Emergency Medical Services Authority, and Department of Health Care Services and CDSS share administrative action information as soon as possible after the action is final, no later than five business days after the end of the month. Language has also been added that state once the AARS automated data extract functionality is operational, the manual provisions of the agreement will not apply, and that administrative action information will be electronically available to all user agencies through the AARS data system. Refer to the executed agreements attached.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented

1-Year Agency Response

Interagency agreements with Department of Aging, Department of Public Health, and Emergency Medical Services Authority have been amended and executed to reflect that CDSS effectively share, receive, and use administrative action information until a centralized database can facilitate real time information. (Attachment 1)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

Based on additional changes, the Interagency Agreements have been returned to the four participating departments for review and approval. The departments are to finalize the agreements by December 2017. It is anticipated that the Interagency Agreements will be implemented by January 25, 2018 with the terms of these agreements being indefinite.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

See response to Recommendation 1.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

In its response, Social Services refers to recommendation one. This number is different than the numbers assigned to recommendations on our website. Social Services is referring to the recommendation that we have numbered five.

Recommendation #7 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that it more effectively shares, receives, and uses administrative action information, Social Services should amend its interagency agreements so that the agreements remain in effect indefinitely. It should begin amending its interagency agreements by July 2017.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2018

All Interagency Agreements are fully executed, and each reflects that the agreements will remain in effect indefinitely or until cancelled or terminated. Refer to the attached copies of all executed agreements.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented

1-Year Agency Response

Department of Aging, Department of Public Health, and Emergency Medical Services Authority Interagency Agreements have been amended and reflect that the agreements will remain in effect indefinitely. The Department of Health Care Services agreement is still under review.

(Attachment 1)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

See response to Recommendation 5.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

See response to Recommendation 1.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

In its response, Social Services refers to recommendation one. This number is different than the numbers assigned to recommendations on our website. Social Services is referring to the recommendation that we have numbered five.

Recommendation #8 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that it more effectively shares, receives, and uses administrative action information, Social Services should, as it receives administrative action information from other departments, share this information with the county agencies that perform licensing duties on its behalf.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2018

All Interagency Agreements include the requirements for receiving, sharing, and using administrative action information with county agencies that perform licensing on its behalf. Refer to the agreements attached.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented

Social Services interagency agreements provide for the sharing of administrative action information through a centralized database. If implemented as described in the agreements, this sharing would fully implement our recommendation. A full validation of this implementation would require follow up audit work.

1-Year Agency Response

The interagency agreements with the Department of Aging, Department of Public Health, and the Emergency Medical Services Authority have been finalized. The Department of Health Care Services agreement is under review. As part of the Resource Family Approval (RFA) background check, counties are required to, pursuant to RFA Written Directive 6-03A, which states in pertinent part, check for prior licensing-related administrative actions contained in the Administrative Action Records System (AARS) database maintained by the Department; check for prior licensing history and criminal record exemption denial or rescission actions contained in the Licensing Information System (LIS) database maintained by the Department; and check for prior Resource Family-related administrative actions contained in AARS and Notice of Action (NOA) databases maintained by the Department. Thus, the AARS is how the Department shares such information.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

See response to Recommendation 5.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

Social Services indicates in its response to recommendation 5 that it is hoping to finalize the interagency agreements to share administrative action information by December 2017. We look forward to seeing Social Services' progress at the one-year response date.

60-Day Agency Response

See response to Recommendation 1.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

In its response, Social Services refers to recommendation one. This number is different than the numbers assigned to recommendations on our website. Social Services is referring to the recommendation that we have numbered five.

Recommendation #9 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that it more effectively shares, receives, and uses administrative action information, Social Services should direct its exemption analysts to review the administrative action information as part of their background check reviews.

1-Year Agency Response

The Department has directed its designated analysts who are responsible to review administrative action information as a part of the background review process. (See e-mail reminder Attachment 2)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

The Department issued the Administrative Action Exchange Procedures to all exemption analysts in August 2017. These procedures provide direction regarding completing a review of administrative action from other departments when processing an exemption (see Attachment A).

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

Social Services did not provide to us procedures that provide direction to review administrative action information as part of their background check reviews. Instead, the procedures provide direction on processing administrative action information from other departments. To reach full implementation, Social Services should direct its analysts to review the available administrative action information whenever they are processing a background check.

60-Day Agency Response

All analysts were informed of the requirement to include a review administrative action information. The Department will have final procedures requiring exemption analysts to review this information as part of background check review process by May 31, 2017.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #10 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that Social Services evaluates the risk individuals may pose to vulnerable populations in its licensed care facilities as quickly as possible, by July 2017 Social Services should establish time frames for staff to evaluate individuals who are present in their facilities and who have received administrative actions from other departments. In addition, it should monitor and follow up with the appropriate staff regarding the status of their assessments of these individuals and their final decisions.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From March 2022

Effective January 2021, the Caregiver Background Check Bureau (CBCB) was renamed to Care Provider Management Bureau (CPMB).

Department of Social Services (CDSS), Department of Health Care Services, Emergency Medical Services Authority, Department of Aging, and Department of Public Health are sharing administrative action information by utilizing the Administrative Action Records System (AARS).

CDSS, CPMB contracted with a third party, Innovative Architects LLC to update and implement a National Background Check (NBC) software solution (Guardian) to replace the legacy CBC system. As part of Guardian solution, a bidirectional application programming interface (API) between the new data system and the Administrative Action Records System (AARS) which continually reviews all actions received from other Departments. All new applications in the new data system are checked against AARS and any actions discovered on individuals present in CDSS facilities will be reviewed daily for possible further action by CDSS.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

CDSS has not provided evidence that it is monitoring its administrative action review process to ensure it happens in a timely manner.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2020

CDSS, Department of Health Care Services, Emergency Medical Services Authority, Department of Aging, and Department of Public Health are sharing administrative action information by utilizing the Administrative Action Records System (AARS).

However, the ability to use the data electronically is not yet functional. CDSS has contracted with a vendor and is developing a bidirectional application programming interface (API) between a new data system and the Administrative Action Records System (AARS) which will continually review all actions received from other departments. All new applications in the new data system will be checked against AARS and any actions discovered on individuals present in CDSS facilities will be reviewed daily for possible further action by CDSS.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2019

Emailed to CSA.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

The response that Social Services sent to us by email is below verbatim. Our assessment continues to be that this recommendation is partially implemented.

Social Services' Response:

Department of Social Services (CDSS), Department of Health Care Services, Emergency Medical Services Authority, Department of Aging, and Department of Public Health are sharing administrative action information by utilizing the Administrative Action Records System (AARS). When individuals seeking associations to CDSS facilities are identified as having Administrative Actions (AA) with other Departments, the cases are flagged and reviewed by an analyst dedicated solely to this function. All cases identified through AA flags are logged separately in an excel spreadsheet with final decisions on if the individual is eligible or not to go through the CDSS process for requesting an exemption. If they are deemed eligible to go through the process, the case is assigned to an exemption analyst and is processed in the same way as any other exemption case.

Management review and legal consultation are performed and required throughout the process to ensure compliance with applicable processes. Documentation of these reviews and consultations are captured in logs and in Triages stored in the CBC data system. The logs for AAs and petitions for reinstatement are reviewed twice monthly by the manager of the unit as well as the CBC Bureau Chief as part of monthly production meetings. If a case is eligible to seek an exemption, the case is no longer monitored specific to having had an AA. It is considered a standard exemption case and is monitored as such. All case processing is tracked in the CBC data system and analyzed monthly utilizing Power BI software. Case processing metrics are reviewed weekly by Universal Case Processing Managers and monthly with the CBC Bureau Chief as part of the monthly production meetings.

The manual processes for identifying AA's across departments and the manual maintenance of excel logs and spreadsheets for tracking decisions on cases with AA's is targeted to be replaced with a more efficient, timely electronic solution in 2020. CDSS has contracted with a vendor and is developing a bidirectional application programming interface (API) between a new data system and the Administrative Action Records System (AARS) which will continually review all actions received from other departments. Any actions discovered on individuals present in licensed facilities will be reviewed for possible further action by CDSS. All management and Legal reviews will be electronically captured through e-signatures, and data specific to cases with AAs will be able to be generated.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2018

CDSS receives a manual log from the Department of Health Care Services, Department of Aging, Department of Public Health, and the Emergency Medical Services Authority. The log contains a listing of administrative actions processed on an individual. A reconciliation is made against the Caregiver Background Check (CBC) System to identify any cases that need action by the California Department of Social Services (CDSS). Cases requiring action are processed by obtaining either conduct or conviction information. Based on the applicant information received from other departments, CDSS performs the appropriate background check process.

A management review and legal consultation is performed and required throughout the process to ensure compliance with applicable processes. Additionally, to ensure timeliness, management and Legal sign-off on the final recommendation. Lastly, to ensure timeliness, management monitors the process.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services did not provide evidence that it monitors this process to ensure that it is timely.

1-Year Agency Response

The Department has developed a process and updated its procedures to ensure that timelines are being met or, in cases where timelines are exceeded, the cases are prioritized by severity of conduct to eliminate potential risk to the health and safety of clients in care. (Attachment 3)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services has not yet demonstrated that it is following up with staff about the timeliness of their assessments of individuals who have received administrative actions from other departments.

6-Month Agency Response

The Department has developed a process and tool for monitoring the timeframes set forth in the Interagency Exchange Procedures (see Attachments A and B).

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

The documentation Social Services provided to demonstrate that it is monitoring itself against the time frames in its administrative action exchange procedures shows the department is tracking the progress of cases, but not that it is measuring itself against the time frames or that it is following up in cases where it appears the department may have exceeded the time frames.

60-Day Agency Response

These procedures require a review of other departments' administrative actions and request for information from the other departments within five days. Once all information is received, the analyst will conduct a triage and review with Legal, make the determination, and obtain necessary management and Legal review within 20 days. The process and tool for monitoring these cases is included in the response to Recommendation 8 below - monitoring of exemption cases. Additionally, we have identified the recommended changes to be made to the Evaluator Manual. (See Attachment 1.)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services has established time frames for how quickly staff must review information about administrative actions that is provided by other departments. When such actions are based on conviction information, Social Services' procedures indicate that it will follow its exemption processing time frames. It has also established a time frame for resolving cases that do not involve convictions (conduct related cases). However, it has not demonstrated that it is monitoring conduct related cases to ensure that the time frames it has established are being met.

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To better ensure the safety of clients in licensed facilities, the Legislature should amend state law to require that Social Services receive state and federal RAP sheets for individuals before allowing them access to licensed facilities.

Description of Legislative Action

As of March 14, 2022, the Legislature has not taken action to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

As of March 14, 2021, the Legislature has not taken action to address this specific recommendation.

AB 1796 (Levine, 2019) would have, in part, prohibited Social Services from granting a criminal record clearance or from granting an exemption, as specified in current law, until it received an individual's complete state and federal criminal history information from the Department of Justice. This bill was substantially amended to address a different subject.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

AB 1796 (Levine) would, in part, prohibit Social Services from granting a criminal record clearance or from granting an exemption, as specified in current law, until it receives an individual's complete state and federal criminal history information from the Department of Justice. As of March 2020, this bill was pending in the Senate.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

The Legislature has not taken any action to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

Legislation has not been introduced to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

Legislation has not been introduced to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To better ensure the safety of clients in licensed facilities, the Legislature should amend state law to expand the list of nonexemptible crimes to include the eight crimes we identified and any other crimes it deems appropriate.

Description of Legislative Action

As of March 14, 2022, the Legislature has not taken action to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

As of March 14, 2021, the Legislature has not taken action to address this specific recommendation.

AB 2229 (Flora, 2020) would have enumerated additional crimes that prohibit Social Services from authorizing an individual from working or otherwise being present in licensed facilities, including, among other crimes, procuring another person for the purpose of prostitution. The bill additionally would have required Social Services to examine and review whether the inclusion of additional specified crimes in those provisions would be appropriate, and to report its findings to the Legislature on or before January 1, 2022. This bill died in the Assembly.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

AB 2229 (Flora) would enumerate additional crimes that prohibit Social Services from authorizing an individual from working or otherwise being present at these facilities, including, among other crimes, procuring another person for the purpose of prostitution. The bill would additionally require Social Services to examine and review whether the inclusion of additional specified crimes in those provisions would be appropriate, and to report its findings to the Legislature on or before January 1, 2022.

AB 367 (Flora, 2019) also would have enumerated additional crimes for which Social Services would be required to prohibit an individual from being licensed. This bill died in the Assembly.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

Assembly Bill 367 would enumerate additional crimes for which Social Services would be prohibited from authorizing individuals who have been convicted of certain crimes from working or otherwise being present at a community care facility, a residential care facility for persons with a chronic, life-threatening illness, a residential care facility for the elderly, or a child daycare facility.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

Assembly Bill 1914 (Flora), introduced on January 23, 2018, would enumerate additional crimes that prohibit the Department of Social Services from authorizing an individual from working or otherwise being present at a community care facility.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

Legislation has not been introduced to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation #13 To: Social Services, Department of

To comply with state law and better protect vulnerable populations in California's licensed care facilities, Social Services should immediately change its policy to require that its exemption analysts evaluate all infraction convictions, other than minor traffic violations, before granting exemptions to individuals. If Social Services believes it is not feasible to evaluate all of these convictions, it should report to the Legislature by June 2017 how it ensures that vulnerable populations are not at risk and should request that the Legislature change the law to eliminate infraction convictions as a crime category that Social Services must evaluate in order to grant an exemption.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2020

The Department's will not implement this recommendation, and recommends the issue be closed. The current process focuses on evaluating more serious risks, such as misdemeanor conviction, felony convictions, and serious arrests as more serious than an infraction, and the Department believes that it is neither feasible nor effective to include a review of thousands of additional infractions.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement

As was the case at previous response intervals, Social Services states its belief that it is neither feasible nor effective at this time to include a review of infraction convictions. As we indicate in our report, infraction convictions are a type of conviction that state law requires Social Services to review unless the conviction is for a minor traffic violation. We also identify in our report that infraction convictions can sometimes be for crimes such as theft, selling liquor to a minor, and leaving a child under six years of age in a vehicle without supervision. Therefore, we stand by our recommendation. If Social Services believes it is not feasible to evaluate all of these convictions, it should follow our recommendation and issue a report to the Legislature describing how it ensures vulnerable populations are not at risk and requesting that the Legislature change the law to eliminate infraction convictions as a crime category that Social Services must evaluate in order to grant an exemption.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2019

The Department's current process focuses on evaluating more serious risks, such as misdemeanor conviction, felony convictions, and serious arrests as more serious than an infraction, and the Department believes that it is neither feasible nor effective at this time to include a review of thousands of additional infractions.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement

As was the case at previous response intervals, Social Services states its belief that it is neither feasible nor effective at this time to include a review of infraction convictions. As we indicate in our report, infraction convictions are a type of conviction that state law requires Social Services to review unless the conviction is for a minor traffic violation. We also identify in our report that infraction convictions can sometimes be for crimes such as theft, selling liquor to a minor, and leaving a child under six years of age in a vehicle without supervision. Therefore, we stand by our recommendation. If Social Services believes it is not feasible to evaluate all of these convictions, it should follow our recommendation and issue a report to the Legislature describing how it ensures vulnerable populations are not at risk and requesting that the Legislature change the law to eliminate infraction convictions as a crime category that Social Services must evaluate in order to grant an exemption.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2018

The Department's current process focuses on evaluating more serious risks, such as misdemeanor conviction, felony convictions, and serious arrests as more serious than an infraction, and the Department believes that it is neither feasible nor effective at this time to include a review of thousands of additional infractions.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement

As was the case at previous response intervals, Social Services states its belief that it is neither feasible nor effective at this time to include a review of infraction convictions. As we indicate in our report, infraction convictions are a type of conviction that state law requires Social Services to review unless the conviction is for a minor traffic violation. We also identify in our report that infraction convictions can sometimes be for crimes such as theft, selling liquor to a minor, and leaving a child under six years of age in a vehicle without supervision. Therefore, we stand by our recommendation. If Social Services believes it is not feasible to evaluate all of these convictions, it should follow our recommendation and issue a report to the Legislature describing how it ensures vulnerable populations are not at risk and requesting that the Legislature change the law to eliminate infraction convictions as a crime category that Social Services must evaluate in order to grant an exemption.

1-Year Agency Response

The Department's current process focuses on evaluating more serious risks, such as misdemeanor conviction, felony convictions, and serious arrests as more serious than an infraction, and the Department believes that it is neither feasible nor effective at this time to include a review of thousands of additional infractions.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Will Not Implement

As we discussed at both the 60-day and six-month response period, Social Services states its belief that it is neither feasible nor effective at this time to include a review of infraction convictions. As we indicate in our report, infraction convictions are a type of conviction that state law requires Social Services to review unless the conviction is for a minor traffic violation. We also identify in our report that infraction convictions can sometimes be for crimes such as theft, selling liquor to a minor, and leaving a child under six years of age in a vehicle without supervision. Therefore, we stand by our recommendation. If Social Services believes it is not feasible to evaluate all of these convictions, it should follow our recommendation and issue a report to the Legislature describing how it ensures vulnerable populations are not at risk and requesting that the Legislature change the law to eliminate infraction convictions as a crime category that Social Services must evaluate in order to grant an exemption.

6-Month Agency Response

Remains Not Implemented/Disagree with Recommendation. The Department's current process focuses on evaluating more serious risks posed by criminal offenders, and the Department believes that it is neither feasible nor effective at this time to include a review of thousands of additional infractions.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Will Not Implement

As we discussed at the 60-day response period, Social Services states its belief that its process focuses on evaluating more serious risks and that it is not feasible nor effective to review infraction convictions. As we indicated in our report, infraction convictions are a type of conviction that state law requires Social Services to review unless the conviction is for a minor traffic violation. We also reported that infraction convictions can sometimes be for crimes such as theft, selling liquor to a minor, and leaving a child under six years of age in a vehicle without supervision. Therefore, we stand by our recommendation. If Social Services believes it is not feasible to evaluate all of these convictions, it should follow our recommendation and issue a report to the Legislature describing how it ensures vulnerable populations are not at risk and requesting that the Legislature change the law to eliminate infraction convictions as a crime category that Social Services must evaluate in order to grant an exemption.

60-Day Agency Response

The Department's current process focuses on evaluating more serious risks posed by criminal offenders, and the Department believes that it is neither feasible nor effective at this time to include a review of thousands of additional infractions.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Will Not Implement

Social Services states its belief that its process focuses on evaluating more serious risks and that it is not feasible nor effective to review infraction convictions. As we indicated in our report, infraction convictions are a type of conviction that state law requires Social Services to review unless the conviction is for a minor traffic violation. We also reported that infraction convictions can sometimes be for crimes such as theft, selling liquor to a minor, and leaving a child under six years of age in a vehicle without supervision. Therefore, we stand by our recommendation. If Social Services believes it is not feasible to evaluate all of these convictions, it should follow our recommendation and issue a report to the Legislature describing how it ensures vulnerable populations are not at risk and requesting that the Legislature change the law to eliminate infraction convictions as a crime category that Social Services must evaluate in order to grant an exemption.

Recommendation #14 To: Social Services, Department of

To comply with state regulations and its policies, the CBCB should immediately ensure that its background check case files support its exemption decisions by including complete decision summaries and all required supporting documents. Also, it should immediately update its exemption-needed letter to identify all of the documents its policies require exemption analysts to evaluate when deciding whether to grant an exemption. The letter should also eliminate requests for documents that Social Services does not believe can be used if the applicant obtains them, such as law enforcement reports.

1-Year Agency Response

The Department has updated the criminal record exemption letters to remove the requests for arrest reports. The letters have also been modified to request proof of restitution, documentation that shows successful completion of formal probation, and criminal history self-disclosure forms from individuals requesting exemptions on their own. (Attachment 4)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

The Department has implemented a quality assurance process, described above, to verify case files are complete and support the decisions made by the exemption analysts. The Department has updated the criminal record exemption letters to remove the requests for arrest reports (Attachment D).

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services has removed the request for law enforcement reports from its exemption-needed letter. However, its letter still does not request additional documents that the department's policies require it to evaluate when deciding whether to grant an exemption. Specifically, the letter does not request proof of restitution, documentation that shows successful completion of formal probation, or criminal history self-disclosure forms from individuals requesting exemptions on their own.

60-Day Agency Response

The Department has implemented a policy requiring the Caregiver Background Check Bureau (CBCB) managers to conduct a random sampling of analysts' files to ensure a complete decision summary and all supporting documents are present and support the decision. This sampling will include cases where final decisions have not been issued as well as completed cases. If management finds through these reviews that case files are not complete, the findings will be reviewed with the analysts and if necessary, re-training will occur. As appropriate, any missing documentation will be obtained. The Department has also implemented a tracking log for managers to document outcome of these reviews. The Department has also revised its criminal record exemption letters to remove requests for arrest reports.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services demonstrated that it is reviewing the content of the background check case files its analysts assemble. However, it has not provided evidence that its exemption-needed letter has been revised to include all items that its exemption analysts are required to review and eliminate the request for law enforcement reports.

Recommendation #15 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that its exemption analysts are receiving information that Social Services believes is necessary and relevant to make exemption decisions, Social Services should immediately revise its policy to require that exemption analysts obtain law enforcement reports on behalf of individuals who seek exemptions.

60-Day Agency Response

Effective February 16, 2017 the Department began ordering arrest reports for all individuals seeking an exemption. The Criminal Background Check Bureau staff were notified of this change via an All Staff Memo. By May 2017 the Department will also have revised the exemption letters to improve and clarify understanding of what is required to submit a complete exemption request. (See Attachment 2.)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Fully Implemented

Recommendation #16 To: Social Services, Department of

Until the Legislature requires that Social Services receive both California and federal criminal history information before issuing a clearance or processing an exemption, to better protect vulnerable populations, Social Services should immediately revise its policy to require its regional offices to obtain all self-disclosure forms for individuals who submit fingerprints to Justice as part of an application to be present in a licensed facility. The regional offices should then forward to the CBCB all self-disclosure forms that identify a conviction.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From March 2022

CDSS, CPMB contracted with vendor, Innovative Architects LLC to update and implement a National Background Check (NBC) software solution (Guardian) to replace the legacy CBC system. The Guardian application supports document imaging, a web portal for constituent self-service, automated performance metrics reports and modern work-in-process queue. This allows self-disclosure statements to be collected directly from applicants as part of the automated application form or gives applicants the option to upload the form into a self-service portal using a document imaging feature.

The Guardian solution also includes updates to the Department of Justice (DOJ) interface to include State and Federal Record of Arrests and Prosecutions (RAP) sheets and Child Abuse Central Index (CACI) responses. All information from DOJ, including both California and federal criminal history, is received and evaluated prior to a clearance or exemption being issued by the Guardian system. Thus, the discretion to issue a clearance prior to receipt of an FBI response, which the legislature conditioned upon receiving a signed statement regarding prior convictions, is not currently being utilized by CPMB.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Resolved

As CDSS described, it now requires receipt of both the state and federal background check results before making a clearance decision. Accordingly, the department has found a sufficient manner to address the concerns we identified in our audit. We consider this issue resolved.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2020

The Department has contracted with a vendor to develop a new data system which will create a web-based portal for both applicants and licensees to communicate directly with the Department. The applicant web-based portal will include required data fields for criminal self-disclosure information, replacing the current self-disclosure form. A screen shot from testing environment of new data system will be submitted to CSA electronically.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2019

The Department has contracted with a vendor to develop a new data system which will create a web-based portal for both applicants and licensees to communicate directly with the Department. The applicant web-based portal will include required data fields for criminal self-disclosure information, replacing the current self-disclosure form. Regional offices and Caregiver Background Check Bureau (CBCB) staff will have electronic access to the self-disclosure information, creating efficiencies and streamlining the background check process.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

1-Year Agency Response

The Department continues to work on developing an automated system or web portal for individuals/licensees to upload the self-disclosure form. This automated process will ensure the most expeditious clearance for individuals with no criminal history. In addition, a Provider Information Notice (PIN) has been sent to all providers to remind them of their responsibility to send to the Regional Office any Criminal Record Statement (LIC 508) that is checked "yes". A Regional Office Memo (ROM) has been sent to all programs and Regional Office staff to remind them to forward all "yes" LIC 508s to CBCB. (Attachment 5)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Pending

6-Month Agency Response

The Department has drafted a Provider Information Notice (PIN) to reinforce the existing requirement that all self-disclosure forms must be on file with the licensee. The PIN is expected to be released November 2017. The Department continues work to develop an automated system or web-portal for the individuals/licensees to upload the self-disclosure information. This automated process will ensure the most expeditious clearance for individuals with no criminal history.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

The Department is issuing a Provider Information Notice to reinforce the existing requirement that all self-disclosure forms must be on file with the licensee, and that any time an individual has indicated there is criminal history that form must be provided to the department prior to the individual being present in the facility. Further management and staff in regional offices will be provided clear written guidance for processing self-disclosure information.

The Department will develop an automated system or web-portal for the individuals/licensees to upload the self-disclosure information, similar to the process used to apply for the Home Care Services Registry. This automated process will ensure the most expeditious clearance for individuals with no criminal history.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #17 To: Social Services, Department of

Until the Legislature requires that Social Services receive both California and federal criminal history information before issuing a clearance or processing an exemption, to better protect vulnerable populations, Social Services should immediately change its practice of allowing individuals who have not submitted a self-disclosure form to Social Services to have access to licensed facilities, thus reflecting the requirements of state law. In addition, the CBCB should develop a process to ensure that individuals cannot receive a clearance or an exemption without the CBCB first receiving both California and federal criminal history information if a regional office does not have a self-disclosure form for the individual.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From March 2022

CDSS, CPMB contracted with vendor, Innovative Architects LLC to update and implement a National Background Check (NBC) software solution (Guardian) to replace the legacy CBC system. The Guardian application supports document imaging, a web portal for constituent self-service, automated performance metrics reports and modern work-in-process queue. This allows self-disclosure as part of the automated application form or the option to upload the form into a self-service portal using a document imaging feature.

The Guardian solution also includes updates to the Department of Justice (DOJ) interface to include State and Federal Record of Arrests and Prosecutions (RAP) sheets and Child Abuse Central Index (CACI) responses. All information from DOJ, including both California and federal criminal history, is received and evaluated prior to a clearance or exemption being issued by the Guardian system. Thus, the discretion to issue a clearance prior to receipt of an FBI response, which the legislature conditioned upon receiving a signed statement regarding prior convictions, is not currently being utilized by CPMB.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Resolved

As CDSS described, it now requires receipt of both the state and federal background check results before making a clearance decision. Accordingly, the department has found a sufficient manner to address the concerns we identified in our audit. We consider this issue resolved.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2020

Proposed regulatory change has been introduced to eliminate the self-disclosure form requirement during the exemption process. Additionally, the Department has contracted with a vendor to develop a new data system which will create a web-based portal for both applicants and licensees to communicate directly with the Department. The applicant web-based portal will include required data fields for criminal self-disclosure information, replacing the current self-disclosure form. The new data system is currently in development to require receipt of both California and federal criminal history information prior to issuance of a clearance or exemption. A screen shot from testing environment of new data system will be submitted to CSA via email

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2019

A new data system will replace the LIC 508 and will require all applicants to complete mandatory data fields specific to self-disclosure of criminal histories before the Department issues a clearance or exemption. The new data system will require receipt of both California and federal criminal history information prior to issuance of a clearance or exemption.

The Department has proposed regulatory change to eliminate the self-disclosure form requirement during the exemption process. Additionally, the Department has contracted with a vendor to develop a new data system which will create a web-based portal for both applicants and licensees to communicate directly with the Department.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

1-Year Agency Response

To ensure individuals who have not submitted a LIC 508 do not have access to clients in care, the Department sent a PIN on March 7, 2018 to all providers noticing them of the requirement to obtain all LIC 508s and submit any LIC 508 that indicates any criminal conviction(s) to the Regional Office. With the revision of the Department's exemption letters, LIC 508s are required before an exemption is granted. The Department currently reviews both California and Federal criminal history information when granting an exemption or clearance.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Pending

The process Social Services describes does not fully address the recommendation. As we describe in our report, the process of providers submitting only self-disclosure forms that indicate convictions presumes that if Social Services does not have an individual's self-disclosure form, the form indicated no convictions. Social Services provided no evidence that it waits to receive both the California and federal criminal history before granting a clearance or exemption.

6-Month Agency Response

See response to Recommendation 16.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

The Department is issuing a Provider Information Notice to reinforce the existing requirement that all self-disclosure forms must be on file with the licensee, and that any time an individual has indicated there is criminal history that form must be provided to the department prior to the individual being present in the facility. Further management and staff in regional offices will be provided clear written guidance for processing self-disclosure information.

The Department will develop an automated system or web-portal for the individuals/licensees to upload the self-disclosure information, similar to the process used to apply for the Home Care Services Registry. This automated process will ensure the most expeditious clearance for individuals with no criminal history.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #18 To: Justice, Department of

To ensure that Social Services receives criminal history information within 14 days of receiving an individual's fingerprint information, as state law requires, by July 2017 Justice should analyze its process, including delayed transmissions, implement changes to address problems it identifies, and regularly measure itself against the requirement to determine whether it is meeting its statutory requirement.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From March 2019

The DOJ has analyzed its processes, including delays in fingerprint information transmissions, and implemented both procedural and system changes to meet the statutory mandate requiring the DOJ to send criminal history information to Social Services within 14 days of receipt of an individual's fingerprint information. Processing improvements that shows an improvement in the DOJ's delivery response times to the Social Services were demonstrated in a summary report provided to the CSA, the "12-month Response to 2016-126 Stat Comparison," included as an attachment.

Primary procedural and system changes implemented included the introduction of a manual review of incoming transactions to triage those criminal histories that were complete and those that contained one or more entry that required research. The manual review of criminal history records to identify "open arrests" was automated March 7, 2019. Past system changes included identification of criminal history record information that appeared in both the California and FBI responses, and flagging transactions based on the type of transaction and length of time it was in the system. Examples demonstrating the flagged transactions, e.g., far left asterisk ('*') and highlighted in red, are included with our report. Other processing enhancements implemented, are internal system process changes that are not visible on a user interface.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented

Justice also reported separately to the Legislature that it was committed to evaluations of its timeliness. We agree that, provided Justice monitors its success rate in meeting the 14-day deadline, it has fully addressed our recommendation.

1-Year Agency Response

The DOJ analyzed its processes, including delayed fingerprint information transmissions, and implemented changes to meet the statutory mandate requiring the DOJ to send criminal history information to Social Services within 14 days of receipt of an individual's fingerprint information. As recommended, the DOJ has evaluated current response times, presented in the "12-month Response to 2016-126 Stat Comparison," to ensure its compliance.

With process and system changes implemented, the delivery of criminal record background-check responses to the Social Services has greatly improved. However, due to resource constraints, there are times when a response to Social Services may be delayed, given that there are certain manual activities cannot be automated, specifically, the evaluation of the contents of an individual criminal history record to determine what information on the criminal history record can/cannot be disseminated pursuant to statute.

Nonetheless, DOJ will continue to assess its manual and automated processes, make system enhancements, and monitor process improvement efforts to ensure Social Services requests for criminal history information are sent within 14 days of receiving an individual's fingerprint information, as state law requires.

The DOJ is committed to its ongoing process improvement efforts, e.g., evaluation of internal workloads, automated systems, and evaluation of processing times, to deliver responses in a timely and consistent manner as mandated by law.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

As it discusses in its response, Justice has provided evidence that its response time to Social Services following receipt of fingerprint information has improved. However, Justice has not provided evidence substantiating the system and process changes that it described in its response.

6-Month Agency Response

The DOJ is further reviewing and restructuring its manual processes to minimize delays and ensure a consistent 14-day timeline. In addition, the DOJ is evaluating opportunities to enhance automated processes as well. Most recently, a change was implemented to notify staff when transactions are in the system for longer than seven days.

The DOJ is working to resource and implement the recommendations offered by the CSA, specifically to assess processes, implement changes, and monitor to ensure responses to CDSS criminal record check requests are provided within the statutorily required 14-days.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

In this initial 60-day period, the DOJ has restructured some of its manual processes to minimize processing delays. The DOJ continues to analyze, not only internal manual processes, but also its automated transaction processing systems and business unit staffing levels to ensure the DOJ is able to respond to the CDSS within the mandated 14 days consistently. The DOJ has also begun discussions with DOJ technical staff regarding system enhancements, and has begun assessing workload statistics to determine the appropriate staffing levels in order to meet the processing requirements.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #19 To: Justice, Department of

To ensure that it has complete disposition information, Justice should coordinate with the Judicial Council at least once a year to share information about court reporting gaps and to determine the need to distribute additional information to courts about reporting requirements and the manner in which to report. In addition, Justice should reconvene its advisory committee and meet on a regular basis to discuss, at a minimum, improving the frequency and timeliness with which courts report dispositions to Justice and law enforcement agencies report arrest information to Justice.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From March 2022

As previously reported:

- In 2017, the DOJ reconvened the Attorney General's Advisory Committee on Criminal History Record Improvement, pursuant to Penal Code 13100.1 and meets twice a year to discuss improving the frequency, accuracy, and completeness with which criminal justice agencies are reporting arrest and disposition data to the DOJ.

- The DOJ and JCC established a monthly collaboration meeting to discuss court reporting gaps and to determine the need to distribute additional information to courts about reporting requirements and the manner in which to report.

- The DOJ and JCC regularly collaborate on disposition improvement activities aided by federal grant funding that is available to states.

- The DOJ provides counties with a detailed open arrest report which county law enforcement agencies, prosecuting agencies, and courts review to determine which county agency has the reporting responsibility for dispositions to the DOJ.

In addition, DOJ has now developed an annual statewide disposition gap statistical report that has been shared with the JCC, and will be updated annually. This report will include statistical disposition gap data by county and will be used to support the ongoing DOJ and JCC collaboration meetings.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From April 2021

In addition to what has been previously reported, the DOJ determined that it will not be possible to report information specific to court disposition reporting gaps to the JCC and courts on a quarterly basis. The DOJ does not have visibility into the criminal justice process at the county level to know who will eventually report the disposition to the DOJ. Dispositions may be reported to the DOJ by the law enforcement agency, the prosecuting agency, or the courts; because of this the DOJ does not have data related to the court's unreported dispositions. Law enforcement agencies and courts are mandated to report dispositions to the DOJ, however they are not mandated to provide status updates to the DOJ nor is there a mandate for prosecuting agencies to report disposition data to the DOJ. This issue has been the subject of proposed legislation to mandate more reporting to the DOJ, but to date there are no such mandates. The DOJ will continue to provide county level open arrest reports to counties and let agencies determine the best entity within the county to report available disposition data back to the DOJ.

The DOJ will continue ongoing collaborations with the JCC that are focused on sharing information related to improving processes and technology interfaces that have been the most beneficial for providing services to the courts. Most recently, the DOJ and JCC received a federal grant whereby the DOJ will reimburse the JCC for consultant contract services for Superior Courts to adopt the National Information Exchange Model (NIEM) standardized data exchange interface; industry-standard data exchange methods that are standardized, scalable, and sustainable.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

As we indicated in our audit report, Justice is aware of a disposition reporting gap and Justice's response to this recommendation acknowledges such a gap exists. Justice has not explained why it would not be able to identify the extent of this gap by court and report that information. Accordingly, this recommendation remains partially implemented.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2020

Pursuant to California Penal Code section 13100.1, the Attorney General's Advisory Committee meetings were reconvened on September 26, 2017 and continue biannually. The DOJ considers it has implemented this point of the CSA recommendation.

With respect to coordinating with the Judicial Council and sharing information about court reporting gaps, the DOJ continues to work with the Judicial Council (JCC) to discuss disposition reporting gaps and electronic disposition reporting improvements. The DOJ is also statutorily mandated to work with the courts to obtain disposition information. To that end, the DOJ has established recurring conference calls and meetings with the JCC to collaborate on getting more complete disposition information as well as continued outreach meetings with the courts.

The Judicial Council has also been made aware that the DOJ posts quarterly listings of open arrests by county on the California Law Enforcement Website (CLEW) and that they are not entitled to the detailed open arrest reports. As such, the DOJ is developing a supplementary summary report that will be shared with the Judicial Council and the courts on a quarterly basis, as well as posted on the CLEW.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From March 2020

Attorney General's (AG) Advisory Committee continues to meet routinely, discussing the challenges of California criminal justice agencies. Meeting agendas and minutes are posted on the AG's website; https://oag.ca.gov/meetings/145145 and https://oag.ca.gov/meetings/150337 meeting held on March 12 and September 18, 2019, respectively.

The DOJ continues to post quarterly listings of open arrests by county on the California Law Enforcement Website (CLEW) that criminal justice agencies can access securely. While the Judicial Council is not entitled to access the detailed reports of open arrests, they are aware of the postings. The DOJ is developing a supplementary summary report to post on the CLEW that will also be shared quarterly with the Judicial Council. In addition, the DOJ continues interacting with the Judicial Council (JCC) via conference calls, working groups, and meetings to discuss electronic disposition reporting. Past year activities include: (1) Conference calls with the JCC and courts and other groups to discuss electronic disposition reporting and alternatives, including: (i) California Tyler Users Group (CATUG) CRIMINAL TRAFFIC WORKING GROUP; and (ii) California criminal justice agencies; calls hosted by the Police Chiefs and Sheriffs Data Sharing Task Force; (2) Collaboration with the JCC and San Joaquin and Santa Clara courts to test updated web services for implementations of electronic disposition reporting; and (3) Meetings/workshops attended with the JCC, including: (i) Police Chiefs and Sheriffs Data Sharing Task Force quarterly meetings discussing data exchanges, legislation, and policies; (ii) CATUG DOJ Training session, hosted by the JCC, discussing electronic disposition reporting to the DOJ; (iii) California Courts Association New Law Workshop discussing the impact of new laws on courts and disposition reporting alternatives; and (iv) 2020 Annual JCC Law Advisory Committee Meeting discussing electronic disposition reporting to the DOJ.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2019

Pursuant to California Penal Code section 13100.1, the Attorney General's Advisory Committee reconvened on September 26, 2017. Meeting agendas and minutes are posted on the Attorney General's website at https://oag.ca.gov/advisory_panels/chri.

Each quarter, the DOJ posts a listing of open arrests by county on a California Law Enforcement Website (CLEW) that criminal justice agencies can access. Each file is encrypted and passphrase protected, and the passphrase only given to the respective criminal justice agency in the county. The Judicial Council is aware of the quarterly posting of the open arrest listings.

In addition to the advisory committee meetings and postings of open arrests, the DOJ participates in other technical meetings and bi-weekly conference calls, hosted by the California Police Chiefs' Association and the California State Sheriffs' Association Information Technology Data Sharing Taskforce, to discuss challenges affecting criminal history. The Judicial Council actively participates on these calls too.

The DOJ continues to engage with the Judicial Council, exploring opportunities related to the collection of disposition information. Recently, the DOJ entered into an Interagency Agreement with the Judicial Council, whereby grant funds will be used to reimburse the Judicial Council for consultant contract services for Superior Court system enhancements to facilitate the electronic submission of criminal history data to the DOJ.

Because the Judicial Council has a limited role in providing disposition information to the DOJ, the DOJ works directly with local law enforcement agencies, District Attorney Offices, and courts to obtain disposition information.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

As it indicates in its response, Justice has entered an interagency agreement with the Judicial Council to improve superior court disposition reporting. This is a positive step towards closing the criminal history reporting gaps that we found during our review. However, sharing information about the extent of the reporting gap, as we recommended, is a critical element of knowing whether the reporting problem is decreasing. Until Justice demonstrates that it is regularly sharing information about the reporting gap with Judicial Council, we will continue to assess this recommendation as partially implemented.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From March 2019

Pursuant to California Penal Code section 13100.1, the Attorney General's Advisory Committee reconvened on September 26, 2017. Comprised of fifteen representatives, which includes the Judicial Council, various criminal justice associations, and state government agencies, the committee agenda generally addresses concerns, presents solutions, and discusses the challenges of California criminal justice agencies. Reconvening every six months, the most recent meeting was held March 12, 2019. Agendas and minutes for each meeting are posted on the Attorney General's website at https://oag.ca.gov/advisory_panels/chri. As demonstrated in the March 12, 2019 agenda, included with our report, the DOJ led a discussion on resolving court reporting gaps, specifically, open arrests, otherwise known as arrests missing disposition information.

In addition to the advisory committee meetings, the DOJ posts a listing of open arrests by county quarterly. Criminal justice agencies have access to the file that is posted on a California Law Enforcement Website (CLEW). Each file is encrypted and passphrase protected, and the passphrase only given out to a criminal justice agency in the county. The Judicial Council, as well as the courts, are aware of the reports and how to access them.

In addition to the advisory committee meetings, the DOJ participates in other technical meetings and bi-weekly conference calls, hosted by the California Police Chiefs' Association and the California State Sheriffs' Association Information Technology Data Sharing Taskforce, to discuss challenges affecting criminal history. The Judicial Council regularly participates on every call. As an example, the February 2019 California Technical User Group Meeting (CA TUG) focused on issues related to electronic disposition submission.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

To fully address our recommendation, Justice must demonstrate that it is regularly sharing information about reporting gaps with the Judicial Council. It claims to have done so in its response, but it did not provide any documentation to support its claim.

1-Year Agency Response

Pursuant to California Penal Code section 13100.1, the Attorney General's Advisory Committee reconvened on September 26, 2017 with fifteen representatives representing the Judicial Council, various criminal justice associations, and state government agencies.

Following an overview of the criminal justice services provided by the DOJ, the committee spent time discussing the challenges of California criminal justice agencies who asked that the DOJ take a more active leadership role in developing standards-based solutions and well-defined exchanges. The DOJ agreed. The meeting concluded with a consensus to hold the meetings bi-annually. Future committee meetings will further identify concerns and solutions for better sharing of information. The next meeting is March 15, 2018, in which the DOJ will provide a status of current activities and upcoming enhancements to electronic disposition reporting.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

Justice has met initially with its Advisory Committee to discuss reporting gaps related to criminal history information. To fully address our recommendation, Justice must demonstrate that it is regularly sharing information about reporting gaps with the Judicial Council.

6-Month Agency Response

The Attorney General's Advisory Committee will reconvene on September 26, 2017 at 10 a.m. Committee participants include representatives from the California Police Chiefs Association, California Peace Officers Association, California State Sheriff's Association, Judicial Council of California, California District Attorneys Association, California Court Clerks' Association, Chief Probation Officers' Of California, Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, California Highway Patrol, Senate Committee on Rules, Speaker of Assembly, Office of Emergency Services, and the Director of Finance. The agenda for the meeting is included with this response.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

Letters soliciting representatives from various criminal justice organizations, including the Judicial Council, to participate in the Attorney General's Advisory Committee were mailed, requesting responses back by the end of April 2017. This committee will focus on data standardization and the frequency and timeliness that criminal record information is reported to the DOJ. The DOJ anticipates the next committee meeting will be held in September 2017.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #20 To: Justice, Department of

To ensure that it is receiving all arrest information from law enforcement agencies, at a minimum, Justice should consider trends in the number of arrest reports each law enforcement agency sends it and the number of reports that it might expect to receive from an agency given the agency's size, location, and reporting history. Whenever Justice identifies a law enforcement agency that it determines may not be reporting all required information, it should request that the agency forward all required arrest information.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2019

California Penal Code sections 13151 and 11115 obligates courts and local enforcement agencies, respectively, to report arrests and dispositions to the DOJ. The DOJ has no responsibility to ensure that courts and local enforcement agencies comply with their reporting obligations. Nor does the DOJ have the resources required to assess the information it is receiving to formulate trends that could help determine what the DOJ should expect to receive from an agency given the agency size, location, and reporting history. Based on existing resources, the only means DOJ has to accommodate the recommendations is to continue its outreach/messaging efforts regarding disposition reporting obligations.

The DOJ remains engaged with the Legislature and criminal justice reform community on issues of missing criminal record information. On April 30, 2019, Asm. Bonta sent a letter to the Budget Committee Chairs requesting funding to enhance criminal records systems and met with the DOJ, Judicial Council, Californians for Safety and Justice, the San Francisco District Attorney's Office, and Code for America. In response to his letter, the DOJ sent Asm. Bonta a plan to modernize the criminal history system and followed up by submitting a Budget Change Proposal for the planning and analysis to begin to modernize its criminal history related processes and technologies.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement

We continue to believe that Justice should implement our recommendation, which would likely increase the availability of criminal history information. However, Justice has indicated that it will not implement our recommendation.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From March 2019

California Penal Code sections 13151 and 11115 obligates courts and local enforcement agencies (LEAs), respectively, to report arrests and dispositions to DOJ. As previously mentioned, DOJ has no responsibility to ensure that courts and LEAs agencies comply with their reporting obligations. The DOJ is required to collect, compile, and disseminate that information, but does not have any practical means of ensuring that courts and LEAs report arrests and (complete) dispositions on a timely basis. Nor does the DOJ have the resources required to assess the information it is receiving to formulate trends that could help determine what DOJ should expect to receive from an agency given the agency size, location, and reporting history, as the CSA has recommended. Based on existing resources, the only means DOJ has to accommodate the recommendations offered by the CSA is to continue its outreach/messaging efforts regarding disposition reporting obligations, pursuant to statute. If DOJ was mandated to ensure that courts and local law enforcement agencies were complying with their reporting obligations, the DOJ would require additional resources.

Moreover, the DOJ is open to any statewide reforms that would improve compliance system-wide and, as previously discussed, already works with the Judicial Council and the LEA community to improve the flow of information, provide local training sessions, participate at statewide and regional training and technology conferences and seminars, and providing technical support to electronic disposition reporting agencies.

The DOJ will continue its efforts to reach out to the criminal justice community more quickly by exploring opportunities with other criminal justice association conference and committee venues. The DOJ also remains diligent in its pursuit of options to collect disposition information electronically and remains supportive of all statewide reforms or efforts to identify agency noncompliance with state law.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement

We continue to believe that Justice should implement our recommendation, which would likely increase the availability of criminal history information. However, Justice has indicated that it will not implement our recommendation.

1-Year Agency Response

The DOJ maintains its position that it has no obligation to ensure that courts and local enforcement agencies comply with their reporting obligations, nor does the DOJ have any practical means or resources to ensure courts and local enforcement agencies submit reports of arrests and dispositions as required by statute. The only means DOJ has to accommodate the recommendations offered by the CSA is to continue its outreach/messaging efforts regarding disposition reporting obligations, pursuant to statute.

The DOJ is committed to remaining engaged with the courts and local law enforcement agencies, to assist them in meeting their reporting obligations through local training sessions, participation at statewide and regional training and technology conferences and seminars, and providing technical support to electronic disposition reporting agencies.

In November 2017, the DOJ provided training to over 100 records supervisors at the 2017 CLEARS-California Law Enforcement Association of Records Supervisors, Inc.- Annual Training Technology Seminar. The training was well received, with requests for more information-sharing meetings in future. The DOJ will continue its efforts to reach the criminal justice community more quickly by exploring opportunities with other criminal justice association conference and committee venues. The DOJ also remains diligent in its pursuit of options to collect disposition information electronically and remains supportive of all statewide reforms or efforts to identify agency noncompliance with state law.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Pending

Justice repeats its perspective that it is not responsible for ensuring that courts and local enforcement agencies comply with their reporting obligations. Justice also indicates that it is beginning to take other actions to reach out to other agencies on this issue. However, Justice has not provided evidence that substantiates its claims.

6-Month Agency Response

As indicated in the DOJ's initial audit response, the DOJ is not charged with enforcing arrest and disposition-reporting requirements imposed on the courts and local enforcement agencies, nor does it have a program or resources or any practical means of ensuring that the courts and local enforcement agencies report arrests and dispositions in a timely manner. However, the DOJ is continuing to explore options to collect disposition information electronically and remains supportive of all statewide reforms or efforts to identify agency noncompliance with state law.

The only means DOJ has to assist in this effort is by providing outreach/messaging regarding disposition reporting obligations, pursuant to statute, with the focus on training and supporting agencies that utilize the DOJ's electronic disposition reporting services. The DOJ is leveraging its' partnerships with criminal justice association conference and committee venues to reach the criminal justice community more quickly. For example, in November 2017, the DOJ will host two sessions on disposition reporting at the California Law Enforcement Association of Record Supervisors (CLEARS) 44th Annual Training and Technology Seminar.

The DOJ is working to resource and implement the recommendations offered by the CSA, specifically a more complete criminal history repository including staff to provide internal/external training and staff to support electronic disposition reporting agencies.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

As indicated in the DOJ's initial audit response, the DOJ is not charged with enforcing arrest and disposition-reporting requirements imposed on the courts and local enforcement agencies, nor does it have a program or resources or any practical means of ensuring that the courts and local enforcement agencies report arrests and dispositions in a timely manner. However, the DOJ has been exploring options to collect disposition information electronically, specifically a new on-line function by which an agency could submit "cite and release" information electronically, and remains willing to participate in any statewide reforms or efforts to identify agency noncompliance with state law.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Justice repeats its perspective that it is not responsible for ensuring that courts and local enforcement agencies comply with their reporting obligations. However, as we stated in our original report, Justice is the only entity that is aware of the extent to which courts and law enforcement agencies statewide are reporting and the timeliness of their reporting. Therefore, we continue to believe that Justice needs to participate in any effort to identify noncompliance with state law and remind entities that may not be reporting, or may not be promptly reporting, about their obligations. We look forward to hearing more from Justice in subsequent responses to this recommendation about how it is identifying gaps in the criminal history information it collects and following up with law enforcement agencies to ensure they forward all applicable information.

Recommendation #21 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that Social Services processes criminal history reviews as quickly as possible so that delays do not impede individuals whose presence in a licensed facility would pose no risk, by July 2017 the department should establish formal time frames and monitor the stages of the exemption process. At a minimum, Social Services should establish time frames for notifying individuals and facilities that a criminal history exemption is required, evaluating information it receives, and making decisions on exemptions. As part of monitoring, Social Services should identify when cases become backlogged and work to swiftly conclude those exemption reviews. In addition, if it determines that its staffing levels are insufficient to meet its time frames, it should seek additional resources.

1-Year Agency Response

CDSS has developed a plan to reduce and monitor case processing times. This includes authorized use of overtime hours and bi-weekly reviews of inventory reports. CBCB has reduced the timeframes of each step of the exemption process. (Attachment 6)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

Social Services has provided evidence that it has reduced its average case processing time. We evaluate Social Services progress in addressing backlogged cases under Recommendation 23.

6-Month Agency Response

The Department has developed timeframes for each step of the exemption process (Attachment E) that are monitored by their managers (Attachment G). This process has resulted in a reduction of the previously backlogged cases, reduced current processing timeframes and provides "triggers" for managers and analysts of cases approaching the 120 days. Additionally, the Department is developing an electronic dashboard to be used by the CBCB managers to monitor case progress.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services provided evidence that it has monitored case processing times. Although at the time of its 60-day response the department had identified backlogged cases and mentions in this response that the backlog has been reduced, it provided no documentation showing the reduced backlog. We look forward to reviewing such documentation when the department provides its one-year response to this recommendation.

60-Day Agency Response

The Department has developed timeframes for each step of the exemption process. A Caregiver Background Check Bureau All Staff Memo has been issued and an all-staff meeting was held on April 28, 2017 to provide the training to Bureau staff. The exemption analysts are required to send exemption letters to the individuals and licensees within ten days from the date of receipt of the criminal history information from the Department of Justice. Upon receipt of all exemption information, the analyst will make a determination and obtain necessary management and Legal review within 20 days. The Department has completed the identification of cases open over 120 days and is currently working to alleviate the backlog by December 2017. CBCB managers are monitoring workflow to ensure cases nearing 120 days are processed timely. Additionally, the Department is developing a dashboard to be used by the CBCB managers to monitor case progress. (See Attachment 3.)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services has established time frames for the steps in its exemption process. It has also identified cases that have been open for more than 120 days and has made final conclusions about some of those cases. We look forward to assessing the effect that Social Services' ongoing monitoring of exemption case time frames has on its backlogged cases as part of its six-month response.

Recommendation #22 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that Social Services processes legal actions as quickly as possible so that delays do not impede individuals whose presence in a licensed facility would pose no risk, by July 2017 the department should establish formal time frames and monitor the stages of the legal process. At a minimum, Social Services should establish time frames for assigning cases to attorneys. Further, it should regularly monitor itself against the 120-day time frame for serving an accusation after the Legal Division receives a case.

1-Year Agency Response

CDSS has established time frames and monitoring actions that have resulted in substantial implementation of the recommended corrective action plan.

The Department continues monitoring the 120-day timeline by regularly holding Open Case Status conferences with its attorneys and analysts. Over the past year, CDSS has seen a marked reduction in the number of cases filed beyond the 120-day timeline. In January 2017, the Open Case Status report identified 246 cases filed past the 120-day timeline. A year later, the number of cases filed past the 120-day timeline has been reduced to just 28 cases. This improvement occurred at the same time that the Department realized a 55% increase in case referrals from the Community Care Licensing Division and Caregiver Background Check Bureau, and a 45% increase in cases proceeding to hearing.

In addition to holding Open Case Status conferences, Legal management regularly takes other actions that include holding regular meetings to review policies and procedures, maintaining assignment tracking logs, CBCB tracking logs and case assignment and closure spot check logs. (See Attachments 7 through 13.)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

Although Social Services initially indicated that this recommendation was not fully implemented, through follow-up discussion and review of documentation of its monitoring efforts, we determined that Social Services has fully addressed our recommendation. Specifically, it has established formal time frames for processing cases through the stages of the legal process and has established and is using monitoring tools to track its performance against these time frames.

6-Month Agency Response

Legal Management continues monitoring the 120-day timeline by regularly holding Open Case Status Conferences. As of April 2017, the Legal Division has reduced the number of late filing by more than half. In addition, the Department has developed policies and procedures to implement and monitor the 120-day timeline. The polices can be grouped into three phases: case intake and assignment, review and evidence collection, case development and drafting and approval and service of pleading. Cases are assigned to attorneys within 15 business days of receipt in Legal. Each phase has been assigned its own timeline so that the department can better monitor and isolate any inefficiencies. Management regularly monitors process including regular meetings with individuals to review work progress, use of assignment tracking logs and random spot checks.

The Department originally anticipated eliminating the backlog no later than November 2017. However, there has been a sharp increase in the number of cases being referred to the Legal Division for administrative action due to the implementation of new programs. It is expected that this will impact the 120-day timeline for filing actions. (See Attachments U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA and AB.)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

As it describes, Social Services has established time frames within which key actions should occur in a case. We look forward to reviewing documentation that the department is performing the monitoring actions it describes as part of the department's one-year response.

60-Day Agency Response

As of March 1, 2017, Social Services has established formal timelines requiring legal actions to be served within 120 days from receipt of the case in the Legal Division. Legal management will regularly monitor the 120-day timeline. The developed procedures clearly set forth expectations and require that if the timeframe is exceeded, staff shall notify his or her supervisor. In addition, the reason for missing the timeline must be documented in the case file and Open Case Status report. This process also requires managers to meet and review staff caseload progress on a quarterly basis and prepare a report summary for review by the Senior Assistant Chief Counsel. If an attorney has an unserved case on the Open Case Status report that is older than 120-days, the attorney and manager will develop a drafting plan. The manager will schedule monthly follow-up meetings with the attorney to monitor the case progress.

Social Service anticipates eliminating its case backlog and being able to file cases within the 120-day timeline no later than November 2017.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Social Services indicates that it has implemented, as of March 2017, a 120-day time frame for serving legal actions from the time a case is received by the Legal Division. However, this time frame already existed at the time of our audit.

Recommendation #23 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that it can accurately monitor its pending cases, by May 2017 Social Services should develop a work plan to identify and address its exemption process backlog by September 2017. At a minimum, the work plan should include reviewing the cases its database identifies as open without activity 150 days after receiving a RAP sheet and closing the cases in its database where Social Services already performed its final exemption decision action.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2018

The Caregiver Background Check Bureau (CBCB) has reduced its backlog of open cases that have had no activity within 150 days of receiving a RAP to 160 cases. This represents only 2 percent of CBCB's overall open cases of 7,457. CBCB continues its monitoring efforts by generating internal reports from the CBC system, which can only be generated by individual Analysts as the CBC System does not have the capability to generate a consolidated report. Refer to the Tickle reports attached.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented

If the case processing statistics are as Social Services represents in its response, then we agree that this recommendation is fully implemented. However, we are unable to fully validate this response without performing onsite follow-up work.

1-Year Agency Response

In order to reduce the backlog, the Department has developed a work which includes monitoring open cases on a bi-weekly basis using inventory reports and has authorized and used overtime hours. As a result, the Department has reduced the timeframes for each step to ensure timely process.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services has demonstrated that it has established a tickler system for identifying backlogged cases. However, the department has not provided a report showing the total number of cases that were backlogged (open for more than 150 days) as of the time of its response. During our audit, we found that more than 2,500 cases were open for longer than 150 days as of June 30, 2016. To demonstrate full implementation, Social Services should submit evidence that it has significantly reduced the number of backlogged cases.

6-Month Agency Response

See 60-day response to Recommendation 21.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

Social Services' response to recommendation 21 states that it has developed time frames for its exemption process. However, the department has not provided a work plan to address its backlog nor provided documentation to demonstrate how many cases remain in its backlog.

60-Day Agency Response

The Department has developed a monitoring process that will identify and address overdue cases, including those currently open over 120 days without activity. The Community Care Licensing Division recently began receiving the raw data from the CBC Database and is developing dashboards for the managers and analysts to use to monitor their case work. These dashboards will allow both management and analysts to easily identify aging cases. The dashboards will also be utilized to develop the reports to the Deputy Director noted in the response to Recommendation 11.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

In its response, Social Services refers to recommendation 11. This number is different than the numbers assigned to recommendations on our website. Social Services is referring to the recommendation that we have numbered 21.

Recommendation #24 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that Social Services processes arrest-only cases as quickly as possible, it should immediately follow its arrest-only and investigation policies, and monitor against those time frames for the various stages of the process.

1-Year Agency Response

The Department maintains a tracking log documenting the procedures are successful and effective in meeting and processing timelines. The Department consistently follows detailed procedural steps for its Arrest Only and investigative procedures. The Department management enters dates and monitors timeframes utilizing the Arrest Only tracking log. (Attachment 14)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

The Caregiver Background Check Bureau continues to track and review arrest cases (see Attachments H, I and J) and provide ongoing training to staff as needed. On September 20, 2017, the Investigations Branch trained staff on updated procedures for researching arrest cases. A pilot of the new procedures began October 2, 2017 with an evaluation of effectiveness scheduled to occur in January 2018.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

60-Day Agency Response

The Caregiver Background Check Bureau has developed a monitoring tool and is utilizing this to track and review arrest cases including the preliminary review of the RAP. The Arrest Unit received additional verbal direction and instruction to adhere to existing procedures. This verbal direction was followed up with formal training on April 20th as noted in the response to Recommendation 20.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services is monitoring its arrest only cases against its established processing time frames. We look forward to reviewing whether Social Services' monitoring efforts are resulting in faster processing of arrest only cases as part of its six-month response.

Recommendation #25 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that its regional offices consistently verify that excluded individuals are no longer present at licensed facilities, at a minimum, Social Services should immediately revise its policy to require that regional offices conduct site visits after it issues exclusion orders. In addition, it should formalize the verification process it develops in its procedures, train all regional offices, and monitor compliance with the process.

1-Year Agency Response

The Department implemented a process to ensure that excluded individuals are no longer present at licensed facilities through a Regional Office Memo (ROM) - "Serving Immediate Exclusion Orders". Staff were trained on the process and procedures for documentation in April 2017. Attached is the Confirmation of Removal log that is utilized to track and monitor ongoing exclusions. (Attachment 15)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

The Department implemented a process to ensure that excluded individuals are no longer present at licensed facilities through Regional Office Memo "Serving Immediate Exclusion Orders." Staff were trained on this memo in April 2017 (see prior Attachment 4 and Attachment M).

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services has not yet provided evidence that it is monitoring the implementation of the guidance on an ongoing basis. We look forward to reviewing the additional steps Social Services is taking as part of its one year response.

60-Day Agency Response

The Department implemented a process to ensure that excluded individuals are no longer present at licensed facilities through Regional Office Memo "Serving Immediate Exclusion Orders." Staff were trained on this memo in April 2017. (See Attachment 4.)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services has distributed a new procedures document that outlines the steps that staff at regional offices must take to verify that excluded individuals are not present in licensed facilities. However, it has not yet provided evidence that it trained staff on this new guidance or that it is monitoring the implementation of the guidance on an ongoing basis. We look forward to reviewing the additional steps Social Services is taking as part of its six-month response.

Recommendation #26 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that regional offices pursue legal actions in a timely manner, by July 2017 Social Services' headquarters should identify a resource—such as a unit—to monitor and follow up with the regional offices regarding the status of their legal actions related to substantiated address matches of registered sex offenders at licensed facilities.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From March 2022

CDSS, CPMB implemented a new automation system (Guardian) that has an automated quality control (QC) component. Guardian interfaces with the Administrative Action Records System (AARS) daily. Any action taken by a Regional Office, including legal action related to registered sex offenders is automatically flagged and routed to the Registry Research unit for review and immediate action.

In addition, since the November 2018 response, the Investigations Branch (IB) has moved to an electronic process. Upon Supervising Special Investigator's (SSI) review and signature of approval, the SSI will scan and email the completed Investigative Report, including attachments and cover sheet, to the Regional Office (RO), noting in the Subject line "Findings, Case Number, Case Name" and marking high priority. Within the email and scanned documents, the SSI is to print the 'read receipt' as acknowledgement that the RO has read and received the completed RSO case.

As a reminder, since the inception of the RSO project in 2011, there have been no appeals of exclusion orders. Therefore, no additional legal action has been warranted because the exclusion action becomes final if the respondent does not appeal.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

Social Services has not provided documentation showing that it is tracking legal actions related to registered sex offenders.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2020

The Department has contracted with a vendor to develop a new data system which will have an automated quality control (QC) component. The new system will interface with the Administrative Action Records System (AARS) daily. Any action taken by a Regional Office, including legal action related to registered sex offenders will be automatically flagged and routed to the Registry Research unit for review and immediate action. A screen shot from testing environment of new data system will be submitted to CSA via email.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2019

The Department has contracted with a vendor to develop a new data system which will have an automated quality control (QC) component. The new system will interface with the Administrative Action Records System (AARS) daily. Any action taken by a Regional Office will be identified and routed to the QC unit for review and immediate action.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2018

CDSS' current process related to registered sex offenders is documented within the Investigations Branch (IB). The process includes:

- Upon Supervising Special Investigator's review and signature of approval of the completed Investigative Report, the Special Investigator Assistant (SIA) makes a copy of the Investigative Report, including attachments, and mails it to the Regional Office (RO). A bright orange cover sheet is used to identify the case as an Registered Sex Offender (RSO).

- The RO Regional Manager or designated person completes the cover sheet, including signature and date the LIC 9099 was delivered, and returns it to the Investigations Branch (IB) within three business days from the date the LIC 9099 was delivered.

- If the investigation is substantiated, the RO identifies what type of action will be taken with the Licensee and the RSO.

- If an exclusion order (exclusion letter) is served and the Registered Sex Offender appeals the exclusion order, the RO completes a Statement of Facts (SOF) within 3 business days of receiving notice from CDSS Legal that the RSO appealed the exclusion order.

- If a Temporary Suspension Order (TSO) is warranted, the RO immediately prepares a SOF.

- If a Notice of Defense (NOD) is returned, Legal obtains applicable court records (judgment of conviction) to prove conviction(s) requiring registration as an RSO.

- Legal emails IB the disposition of the case.

Since the inception of the RSO project in 2011, there have been no appeals of exclusion orders. Therefore, no additional legal action has been warranted because the exclusion action becomes final.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

Social Services has not provided documentation showing that it is tracking legal actions related to registered sex offenders. During our audit, we identified two instances in which there was a substantiated match of a registered sex offender's address and a licensed facility, but headquarters was unaware of the status of associated legal actions. In one of those cases, the legal action was the revocation of a license to operate a facility, not the exclusion of the registered sex offender. Regardless, to demonstrate full implementation, Social Services must demonstrate that it has a process in place by which it would know about and be updated on all pertinent legal actions taken by regional offices in cases related to registered sex offenders whose addresses match to those of licensed facilities.

1-Year Agency Response

Since the inception of the Registered Sex Offender (RSO) project in 2011, there have been no appeals of exclusion orders. Therefore, legal action has not been warranted because the exclusion action becomes final.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Pending

Social Services has not provided documentation showing that it is tracking legal actions related to registered sex offenders. During our audit, we identified two instances in which there was a substantiated match of a registered sex offender's address and a licensed facility, but headquarters was unaware of the status of associated legal actions. In one of those cases, the legal action was the revocation of a license to operate a facility, not the exclusion of the registered sex offender. Regardless, to demonstrate full implementation, Social Services must demonstrate that it has a process in place by which it would know about and be updated on all pertinent legal actions taken by regional offices in cases related to registered sex offenders whose addresses match to those of licensed facilities.

6-Month Agency Response

Further analysis of this issue has determined that a Statement of Facts required for legal actions is only necessary if the RSO appeals (see prior Attachment 5 and Attachment K). Follow-up tracking on RSO legal actions and reporting to the Deputy Director is provided if any RSO appeals are received.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

Social Services has not provided documentation showing that it is tracking registered sex offender legal action information. During our audit, we identified two instances in which regional offices were not progressing with legal action in cases where a substantiated match had occurred and the headquarters office was unaware that these actions were not moving forward. We look forward to reviewing evidence that Social Services is tracking the status of legal actions related to substantiated address matches of registered sex offenders at its one-year response.

60-Day Agency Response

The Department has developed a tool that provides a uniform process to track the status of Registered Sex Offenders by the Program Administrators. Beginning July 2017, the Deputy Director will receive regular reports on the status of Registered Sex Offenders. (See Attachment 5.)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #27 To: Social Services, Department of

The CBCB should update its procedures manual so that it is a centralized document staff are able to use for the most up-to-date guidance in performing their duties. In addition, it should update the CBCB-specific policies and combine them into a centralized document.

1-Year Agency Response

The Department has compiled CBCB-specific policies in a centralized location. A Desk Manual was created and provided to all analysts. A signed acknowledgement receipt of the Desk Manual is required and was retained for all relevant staff. (Signed receipt - Attachment 16). A copy of the Desk Manual has also been provided to CSA.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

The Department has updated the procedures manual (Triage writing guidelines, questions and answer resource tool, and sample triage document) and made it available to all staff via SharePoint. (See Attachments N and O).

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services has compiled CBCB-specific policies in a centralized location. It has not provided to us documentation of an updated procedures manual.

60-Day Agency Response

The Department is actively working to combine procedures located in the Caregiver Background Check Bureau's SharePoint site into centralized documents to ensure thorough, clear, and complete procedures are available for all staff.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Social Services did not provide an update regarding its progress in implementing the first part of our recommendation to update its procedures manual. We look forward to hearing more about its progress in its six-month response to this recommendation.

Recommendation #28 To: Social Services, Department of

To ensure that its procedures are consistent and clear, Social Services should update its arrest-only case procedures and document its process for addressing subsequent arrest-only cases.

1-Year Agency Response

The Arrest Only unit has updated its procedures for addressing subsequent arrest only cases. (Attachment 17) The staff have been provided training on the updated procedures. (Attachment 18)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

In October 2016, the Investigations Branch fully implemented procedure changes to include information related to subsequent arrest-only cases (see Attachments H, Arrest Only Process, P, Training Tracker, and T, Special Investigator Assistant Staff Meeting Agenda).

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

As we explain in our report, our concern was that Social Services had not yet documented its process for handling subsequent arrest-only cases. We agree that the department has implemented new procedures related to these cases. However, as we explain in our report, the assistant chief of the CBCB agreed that there were slight differences to how subsequent arrest-only cases are handled when compared to initial arrest only cases and therefore it would be beneficial to document the process for subsequent arrest-only cases. We look forward to reviewing documentation, such as a flow chart, that shows the subsequent arrest-only case process.

Recommendation #29 To: Social Services, Department of

The CBCB should follow its new schedule for its refresher training sessions on the exemption process and continue to offer sessions as managers or staff identify a need.

1-Year Agency Response

The refresher training schedule has been modified to reflect the recent statutory changes. The training schedule displays the initial schedule and the revised schedule for 2017-2018, as well as the future scheduled trainings for all CBCB staff. Also included are the PowerPoint presentation slides and sign-in sheets for the trainings that have been conducted since the last audit response. (Attachments 19 and 20)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

The Caregiver Background Check Bureau has scheduled Refresher trainings (see Attachment Q). Three refresher training sessions have occurred: Intake Refresher Training on February 17, 2017, Arrest Only Process Refresher training on April 13, 2017, and Triage Training on May 17, 2017 (see Attachments R and S). Full Exemption Analyst Training was also provided for new analysts on May 8, 2017 (see Attachment S).

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services provided its schedule for refresher training, and in its previous response it provided evidence of its Intake Refresher training. However, the department did not provide documentation of the additional refresher training sessions it states it has provided.

60-Day Agency Response

The Caregiver Background Check Bureau has conducted two refresher training sessions: Intake Refresher Training on February 17, 2017, and the Arrest Process on April 13, 2017. Scheduled future trainings include: TrustLine/Home Care/Administrator Certification on June 15, 2017; Additional Information/Arrest Report and Court Document Requests on August 10, 2017; Laws and Regulations on October 12, 2017; and Triage Training on December 14, 2017. Full Exemption Analyst Training for new analysts begins on May 9, 2017 and will be conducted twice a year.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Partially Implemented

Social Services has provided intake refresher training as it describes. We look forward to reviewing its continued implementation of its training schedule as part of its six-month response to our recommendation.

Recommendation #30 To: Social Services, Department of

The CBCB's arrest-only unit should develop and periodically conduct trainings on the aspects of the arrest-only process for which its analysts have not yet received training.

1-Year Agency Response

Staff have been provided training on the updated procedures. (Attachment 18) Periodic training will be provided on an ongoing basis as processes are updated.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

The Department is conducting training for existing staff in the Arrest Unit on the Arrest Only Processes. The first training occurred on April 20, 2017, as referenced in the six-month response to Recommendation 24 (see Attachment H). The ongoing training with the Arrest Only Unit will cover all aspects of the Arrest Only Process including details on how to process all aspects of Arrest Only cases. Furthermore, quality assurance reviews conducted by management are being used to identify any staff specific training needs. In addition, the Department has implemented training on Arrest Only procedures that will be given to all new CBCB employees.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

As we described in our assessment of Social Services' 60-day response to this recommendation, the April 2017 training that Social Services refers to in its response is a training it had already provided its staff during our audit and is a training we specifically comment on in our report. The remainder of Social Services' response indicates it has not yet provided additional training on the arrest-only process. We look forward to reviewing its progress in offering additional training when Social Services submits its one-year response.

60-Day Agency Response

The Department will be conducting training for existing staff in the Arrest Unit twice yearly. The first training occurred on April 20, 2017. This training will also be provided to new unit staff at the time of hire.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Social Services provided evidence that it conducted a training on April 20, 2017. However, the training materials were identical to those provided to us during the audit and correspond to the training that Social Services offered to its staff in September 2016; a training that we already acknowledged in our audit report. Specifically, we stated that this training provided an overview of the arrest-only process, but offered minimal guidance to the arrest-only analysts on how to process cases. To fully implement this recommendation, Social Services must determine what areas of its arrest only process its staff have not yet received training in, develop a schedule for training in those areas, and provide the scheduled training.

Recommendation #31 To: Social Services, Department of

The CBCB should implement its planned changes for ensuring that files in the file room are in the appropriate place and filed correctly.

1-Year Agency Response

Additional shelving was installed in the file room which houses all case files that are appropriately filed. As of April 2017, the CBCB has directed one existing Office Technician to be the designated File Clerk to ensure the case files are appropriately tracked in and out of the file room. The Department is updating the duty statement for this position. We have issued a memo to confirm the procedures for the file room. (Attachment 21)

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

Additional shelving was installed in the file room which houses all case files that are appropriately filed (see Attachment S). As of April 2017, the Caregiver Background Check Bureau has redirected one existing Office Technician to be the designated File Clerk to ensure the case files are appropriately tracked in and out of file room.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

The CBCB has made the physical modifications to its file room. However, it did not submit evidence that it has designated a single office technician to be a file clerk responsible for filing cases appropriately.

All Recommendations in 2016-126

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.