Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Audits Workplan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Controller and Budget Analyst brief committee on audit priorities; supervisors ask for refined scopes
Summary
The Controller—s City Services Auditor and the Budget & Legislative Analyst Office presented their fiscal 2010–11 audit and work plans. Supervisors asked for coordination to avoid duplication, requested refined scopes on premium‑pay and assessor/advertising reviews, and asked the Budget Analyst to return with prioritization recommendations.
The Government Audit and Oversight Committee on Sept. 23 heard two briefing items on city audit work plans.
Peg Stevenson of the Controller—s City Services Auditor Division outlined the office—s planned audits for fiscal 2010–11, including performance audits of the MTA—s Sustainable Streets Division, ARRA (stimulus) funding audits, redevelopment agency audits (Western Addition and Bayview–Hunters Point), citywide cash transaction and payroll audits, and capital program reviews for projects such as San Francisco General Hospital and PUC water system improvements. Stevenson said the office operates under charter appendix F and draws approximately 0.2 percent from departmental funds, amounting to roughly $11.5 million in work and a staff of about 47.
Severin (Severn) Campbell of the Budget and Legislative Analyst Office presented that office—s remaining calendar‑year 2010 and 2011 schedule and said there were about 1,000 unassigned hours for 2010. Campbell provided a candidate list of audits and recommended supervisors prioritize at least three projects; topics discussed included premium‑pay practices and memorandum‑of‑understanding questions, small business reviews, aging‑in‑place, and early childhood care audits.
Supervisors expressed interest in combining and narrowing the scope of premium‑pay and MOU reviews to avoid duplicating analytic work already available from the Controller—s office. Staff agreed to return with refined scopes and additional materials on proposed revenue‑focused audits (assessor/recorder positions and citywide advertising contracts) for the committee to prioritize at a future meeting.
The committee continued further action on audit prioritization to a later meeting and thanked both offices for their coordination and presentations.
