Two reports presented to the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors on Jan. 24 showed the county was properly spending federal grant money, though the reports weren’t without critique.
One report, published by the county’s auditor-controller, is an annual assessment required by various state, federal, and local agencies. The other is an independent report of an audit conducted by Brown Armstrong, an accounting firm with offices throughout California.
Both reports audited the county’s compliance with laws when spending federal grants within the fiscal year that ended in June 2016.
“In our opinion, the county complied, in all material respects, with the types of compliance requirements,” the Brown Armstrong report stated.
The auditor-controller’s report—which also tracked state grant funds—found that many of the county’s departments were “low-risk,” meaning there was a low dollar amount of loss.
At the supervisor’s meeting, 5th District Supervisor Steve Lavagnino said he couldn’t be happier.
“We are now a low risk county rather than a high risk county,” he said, adding that it’s the first time the county has been deemed “clean” since he became a supervisor in 2010.
The auditor-controller’s report did note some issues, however.
Several departments were either in the “yellow” or “red,” indicating some breakdown in compliance or “widespread violation of law,” respectively, according to the county’s report.
For instance, the Public Works Department charged $136,700 in negative interest to the road fund during fiscal years 2004-2005, 2005-2006, and 2007-2008. These charges aren’t considered road or road-related expenditures, the report noted, and the department reimbursed the funds in April 2016.
The Sheriff’s Office, which was monitored by a Santa Barbara County grand jury, was in the “yellow” in terms of intake screening.
The audit report found there weren’t adequate oversight methods in place ensuring that staff with Corizon Health—which is contracted with the county to provide inmate health care—followed proper procedures, among other issues. Corrective action included making adequate oversight a provision in future contracts, according to the report.
According to the county report, there appeared to be a breakdown within the Department of Behavioral Wellness when it came to complying with federal regulations involving psychiatric health facilities.
Specifically, the report found that county facilities failed to ensure the safety of patients and properly administer and account for drugs. Also, a survey found that the director of nursing doesn’t have a master’s degree in psychiatric or mental health nursing.
Copies of the reports can be viewed online as an attachment to the Board of Supervisors Jan. 24 meeting agenda under the A-2 and A-3 items at countyofsb.org/ceo/csbtv/media.sbc.
This article appears in Jan 26 – Feb 2, 2017.