When an audit is completed and a report is issued, auditees must provide the State Auditor with information regarding their progress in implementing recommendations from our reports at three intervals from the release of the report: 60 days, six months, and one year. Additionally, Senate Bill 1452 (Chapter 452, Statutes of 2006), requires auditees who have not implemented recommendations after one year, to report to us and to the Legislature why they have not implemented them or to state when they intend to implement them. Below, is a listing of each recommendation the State Auditor made in the report referenced and a link to the most recent response from the auditee addressing their progress in implementing the recommendation and the State Auditor's assessment of auditee's response based on our review of the supporting documentation.
|Recommendations to Legislature|
To improve management of large and complex infrastructure projects, the Legislature should enact legislation requiring agencies to publicly report significant changes in the cost or schedule of such projects if they are expected to exceed their established budgets by 10 percent or schedules by 12 months.
|Recommendations to Water Resources, Department of|
To better manage large infrastructure projects, DWR should develop and implement a project-reporting policy requiring its management staff to document and justify decisions to proceed with such projects if they are expected to exceed their established budgets by 10 percent or schedules by 12 months. DWR should make these documented decisions and justifications publicly available and submit them to the Resources Agency for review and approval.
To ensure it makes appropriate use of its growing surplus revenue balance, DWR should develop a detailed plan describing how it intends to use these funds.
To fully comply with state contracting law, DWR should ensure that it competitively selects architectural and engineering consultants based on demonstrated competence and professional qualifications. In addition, DWR should document in the contract file its evaluation of the competence and professional qualifications of all contractors and any subcontractors that are added to the contract subsequent to the competitive selection process.
To ensure that only qualified subcontractor are added to contracts after the initial award is made, DWR should make sure that contractors select their own subcontractors and that DWR subsequently approves the selection after it verifies their qualifications.
DWR should ensure that it retains adequate documentation in its contract files to support that contract prices are fair and reasonable and all deliverables are received.
To ensure that DWR manages WaterFix in an effective manner, DWR should compete both the economic analysis and financial analysis for WaterFix and make the analyses publicly available as soon as possible.
In order to prepare for the potential approval of WaterFix and to ensure that the project is managed properly during the design and construction phase, DWR should do the following: develop an appropriate governance structure so that it is prepared to oversee the design and construction of WaterFix in the event it is ultimately approved.
In order to prepare for the potential approval of WaterFix and to ensure that the project is managed properly during the design and construction phase, DWR should do the following: develop and update when necessary the associated program management plan for the design and construction phase of the project.