Use either the form or links on the side to filter the list of publications. Browse other LAO products using the links at the bottom of the sidebar.
4,626 Publications Found
May 3, 2012 - Presented to Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on Education
May 2, 2012 - Presented to: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Health and Human Services Hon. Holly J. Mitchell, Chair
May 2, 2012 - This report summarizes findings from our third annual finance survey of California public school districts. Survey responses indicate that districts have experienced notable changes as a result of recent budget reductions, including a smaller workforce, larger class sizes, shorter school years, and less extensive programmatic offerings. Given the slow pace at which the economy is recovering, combined with uncertainty over the outcome of the November election, school districts indicate they are planning for additional reductions in 2012-13. Given these findings, we recommend the Legislature take immediate actions to assist districts in managing their fiscal challenges in 2012-13, as well as initiate long-term improvements to the K-12 funding and accountability systems.
May 1, 2012 - Presented to: Assembly Health Committee, Hon. William W. Monning, Chair and Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee, Hon. Henry T. Perea, Chair
April 30, 2012 - The FI$Cal project recently completed a procurement and selected the vendor who will build FI$Cal, the state's single, fully integrated financial information system. Project staff has submitted several documents to the Legislature, including a special project report that updates the project plans, a report to the legislature that includes information on the procurement, and a budget request for $89 million ($54 million General Fund) and 86 new positions in order to begin the first year of system development. This report (24 pages): (1) provides an extensive background on the project; (2) describes the innovative procurement process that state staff conducted to secure vendor services to build the FI$Cal system, including information on the procurement results; (3) reviews the FI$Cal project plans as explained in project documents; and (4) analyzes features of the project’s proposed plans and offers recommendations to the Legislature as it considers the budget request and the future of the system. Based upon our analysis of the proposed plans and review of project status, we believe that the benefits of proceeding with FI$Cal development at this time outweigh the costs of the project. In addition to the inherent benefits derived from having a modern, fully integrated financial information system for the state, proceeding with FI$Cal would also avoid substantial costs associated with replacing various individual financial management systems over the next several years. However, we recognize the tight budget times requiring the Legislature to make difficult decisions regarding programmatic reductions. Therefore, should the Legislature wish to proceed with the project, we offer alternative funding options that reduce the state’s reliance on General Fund monies to pay for the project in the short term. These options include the state's GS $Mart loan program, vendor financing, and advanced payments from the special funds for the first few years of system development. Additionally, we point out ways the project’s change management and staffing plans to implement FI$Cal statewide could be improved to reduce risk and maximize project benefits.
April 30, 2012 - This report provides an overview and assessment of the state's comprehensive system for monitoring the fiscal condition of school districts. Under this system, County Offices of Education review the fiscal condition of school districts at several points during the year and provide additional support for districts showing signs of fiscal distress. In the most serious case—when a district no longer appears able to meet its financial obligations—the state provides the district with an emergency loan and assumes administrative control. Our review indicates that the oversight system has been effective in preserving school district fiscal health and preventing districts from requiring an emergency loan. Most notably, during the more than 20 years the new system has been in effect, 8 districts have received emergency state loans whereas 26 districts required such loans in the 12 years prior to the new system. Additionally, the number of districts experiencing fiscal distress has increased in tight budget times, but without a corresponding increase in the number of emergency loans required. This suggests the system’s structure of support and intervention is serving a critical early warning function—allowing districts to get the help they need while fiscal problems tend to be smaller and more manageable. Given its effectiveness, we recommend preserving the existing system, as it has shown to be a vital tool for fostering the ongoing fiscal well-being of districts.
April 26, 2012 - Presented to Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 On Education
April 25, 2012 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
April 24, 2012 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
April 20, 2012 - We reviewed the proposed Memorandum of Understanding for Bargaining Units 12 (Craft and Maintenance), 16 (Physicians, Dentists, and Podiatrists), 18 (Psychiatric Technicians), and 19 (Health and Social Services/Professionals). If adopted, the MOUs would result in modest increases in state costs for employee compensation.
April 19, 2012 - In 2006, after finding that California had failed to provide a constitutional level of medical care to its inmates, a federal court appointed a Receiver to take over the direct management and operation of the state's inmate medical care program from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). Since that time, the current and prior Receiver have taken a variety of actions to revamp CDCR's medical program. In this report, we (1) provide a status report on the Receiver’s actions, (2) describe how these actions have impacted inmate medical care spending and outcomes, (3) discuss the experiences of other states that have faced problems similar to California’s in delivering inmate medical care, and (4) provide recommendations for delivering a constitutional level of inmate medical care in the most cost-effective manner as possible in the long run. These recommendations include establishing an independent oversight board, taking steps to address current operational efficiencies to bring state expenditures to a more sustainable level, and establishing a pilot project to contract for medical care services.
April 17, 2012 - In April 2012, the California High-Speed Rail Authority (HSRA) released its most recent business plan, estimating the cost of constructing the first phase of the high-speed train project at $68 billion. However, the HSRA has secured only about $9 billion in voter approved bond funds and $3.5 billion in federal funds. The revised business plan also makes significant changes from prior plans, such as proposing to integrate high-speed rail with other passenger rail systems, constructing the southern portion of the system first, assuming lower construction costs, and using “cap-and-trade” auction revenues if additional federal funds fail to materialize. Consistent with the HSRA's revised business plan, the Governor’s budget plan for 2012-13 requests $5.9 billion to continue the high-speed rail project--$2.6 billion in state bond funds matched with $3.3 billion in federal funds to begin construction in the Central Valley. In addition, about $800 million is requested to make improvements to existing passenger rail services and about $250 million to complete preliminary design work and environmental reviews for various sections of the project. In this brief report, we find that HSRA has not provided sufficient detail and justification to the Legislature regarding its plan to build a high-speed train system. Specifically, funding for the project remains highly speculative and important details have not been sorted out. We recommend the Legislature not approve the Governor’s various budget proposals to provide additional funding for the project. However, we do recommend that some minimal funding be provided to continue planning efforts that are currently underway.
April 13, 2012 - Over the last four years, the judicial branch has experienced various one–time and ongoing budget reductions as the state has faced large budget shortfalls. The Governor's 2012–13 budget continues the ongoing reduction to the branch, provides the Judicial Council with full authority to implement the reduction among branch entities, and proposes increasing civil fees to generate $50 million in new revenues to help the branch address their reduction. To the extent the Legislature approves the Governor's proposal, ongoing solutions should be identified and implemented in 2012–13, particularly since recent transfers and loans from branch special funds have greatly reduced the fund balances available as a potential budget solution. Specifically, we recommend the Legislature reject the Governor's proposed budget bill language authorizing the Judicial Council to allocate the reductions, adopt specific actions to achieve ongoing savings in the judicial branch, and require that the judicial branch submit a report on potential operational efficiencies.
April 13, 2012 - Presented to Joint Conference Committee on Public Employee Pensions, Hon. Warren T. furutani, Chair, and Hon. Gloria negrete McLeod, Chair
April 12, 2012 - Presented to Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 On Education