Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Audit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City auditors report clean CAFR, targeted single‑audit findings; controller rolls out performance scorecards
Summary
External auditors issued unmodified opinions on the city's 2015–16 comprehensive annual financial report but reported qualified single‑audit findings tied to several federal grants; the Controller's office presented new online performance scorecards and a benchmarking report to help track city programs.
External auditors and the Controller's office presented audit results and day‑to‑day performance metrics to the Government Accountability and Oversight Committee on May 17.
Independent auditors (KPMG and MGO) reported that the city's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for fiscal year 2015–16 received unmodified (clean) opinions. The single‑audit — which examines federal grant compliance — produced qualified opinions on two programs and identified several findings, including procurement documentation for a fire department grant, a HOME program loan that exceeded federal per‑unit subsidy limits (later repaid), and reporting errors for HUD grants; auditors said departments have notified grantors and implemented corrective actions.
KPMG auditors also reported IT control weaknesses at the Municipal Transportation Agency related to timekeeping system access and change management; the MTA agreed to remediate the issues and auditors said follow‑up testing is underway.
Controller's office staff then reviewed the office's new public performance tools: an updated biannual performance report, eight policy area scorecards online (sfgov.org/scorecards) that display measures, targets and indicator colors, and a first citywide benchmarking report comparing San Francisco with 15 peer jurisdictions on measures such as pavement condition, emergency response, air quality and housing costs.
Controller staff highlighted measures of immediate public interest: pothole response times, a park maintenance scorecard available by park, 9‑1‑1 response rate targets, Muni reliability (gaps and bunching), and Vision Zero fatality trends. The controller's benchmarking found an improving Pavement Condition Index and noted San Francisco compares favorably on several measures but also identified areas for improvement.
The committee filed the reports and asked departments to continue corrective actions on the audit findings. Supervisors noted the single‑audit findings as material but said many were tied to one‑time procedural lapses and commended departments for remedial steps.
What happens next: Auditors will continue remediation testing; departments with findings will pursue corrective actions; the Controller's scorecards will be updated regularly and used to support future hearings and budget discussions.
