Report 2020-030 Recommendation 6 Responses

Report 2020-030: The State Bar of California: It Is Not Effectively Managing Its System for Investigating and Disciplining Attorneys Who Abuse the Public Trust (Release Date: April 2021)

Recommendation #6 To: Bar of California, State

To determine if the changes to its discipline process have been effective and to help it identify problems in specific phases of its process before they affect the backlog, the State Bar should implement methods to monitor its enforcement process performance, including comparing the trial counsel staff 's performance against its benchmarks.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2022

After review and evaluation, the State Bar is in the process of modifying and updating the benchmark report to improve the monitoring of investigative performance.

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

We look forward to reviewing the State Bar's progress in establishing and tracking the measures of its performance. However, the State Bar stated it established benchmarks in 2020, and one and a half years have elapsed since we made this recommendation that the State Bar track it performance against those benchmarks. Thus, we encourage the State Bar to approach this task with a measure of urgency.

1-Year Agency Response

The State Bar has developed a weekly operational report to monitor whether OCTC team members accomplish investigative tasks consistent with interim case processing benchmarks. The benchmarks encourage the prompt disposition of attorney discipline matters as a whole and assist OCTC management in identifying problems in specific phases of its process so that they can be addressed before they affect the backlog. The benchmarks are based on case priority (P1, higher priority cases, and P3, lower priority cases) and are tied to interim steps common to many investigations. Examples of benchmarks and their time frames include: interview the complainant (20 days for P1 and 30 days for P3 cases; issue subpoenas and demands for documents (30 days for P1 and 40 days for P3 cases); and contact the respondent (30 days for P1 and 40 days for P3 cases). The starting point for each timeframe is the date assigned to the current investigator (less any abated time). The State Bar will continue to review, evaluate, and modify the benchmarks and time frames in the weekly operational report as appropriate.

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

The State Bar did not substantiate that it performs this analysis on a regular basis as a method of monitoring performance.

6-Month Agency Response

Staff in the Office of Research & Institutional Accountability have produced draft reports of benchmarks to the Office of Chief Trial Counsel and have been reviewing these to ensure the reliability and validity of the data. These benchmarks will be provided after they have been finalized.

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

We look forward to reviewing the State Bar's progress in establishing and tracking measures of its performance.

60-Day Agency Response

Staff in the Office of Research and Institutional Accountability will begin developing an evaluation plan in the fall of 2021 and begin executing that plan in early 2022. The evaluation plan will require an analysis of management and operational reports to allow us to implement the plan effectively; as a result, we expect preliminary results to be available in the spring of 2022.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

The State Bar has not yet taken any action toward implementing this recommendation.

All Recommendations in 2020-030

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.