2025–2026: from findings to follow-through

Will not implement in its entirety: directs IIA compliance, rejects GAGAS compliance and is removing GAGAS references from the manual.

Requires further analysis; IAD will remain within the Auditor-Controller, while the County will identify and mitigate conflicts and self-review threats.

Will analyze ACFR assignments during September–December 2026, consider reassignment beginning with the June 30, 2027 year-end process, and document independence safeguards.

Requires further analysis; Board will require an independence safeguards framework under IIA Standard 7.1.

Promises partial implementation: an IIA Standard 7.1 safeguards framework developed and in use by January 1, 2027; rejects GAGAS applicability.

Will require annual disclosure of independence threats and safeguards to the Finance Committee by January 1, 2027.

Promises partial implementation: communicate identified threats and safeguards to IOC by January 1, 2027, excluding GAGAS-related audits.

Will require annual Finance Committee review of independence, safeguards and impairments by January 1, 2027.

Declines quarterly IOC reporting, arguing standards impose no specific minimum number of engagements; Finance Committee will reorganize oversight.

Declines a new separate Audit Committee; will consolidate internal and external oversight within Finance Committee.

Declines proposed membership rules, citing collective expertise of committee members, County officials and external auditors.

Will develop an IAD charter by January 1, 2027.

States that the recommendation will be implemented.

Will implement a documented IIA risk-assessment methodology by April 1, 2027.

Will revise the manual and administrative bulletin for documented risk-based planning, submitting bulletin updates for County Administrator concurrence; completion by January 1, 2027.

Will require documented Board, oversight-committee and senior-leadership input by January 1, 2027.

States that the recommendation will be implemented.

States that the recommendation will be implemented.

Claims implementation because IAD has been directed to move to fiscal-year planning beginning FY2027–28.

States that the recommendation will be implemented.

Will adopt an ongoing quality program as part of IIA compliance, anticipated by December 1, 2027; excludes GAGAS.

Declines an external quality review as written until IIA standards have been followed for at least a year.

Will periodically distribute audit reports and management responses to Finance Committee as part of IIA compliance.

Will post charter and plan after Finance Committee approval and annually post completed IIA-compliant audit reports.

Requires analysis, arguing OIG already has authority under BART Act and May 2026 status report.

Requires analysis, citing existing authority and May 2026 review of management responses.

Implementation pending: proposed employee cooperation/records policy will go to Board after applicable labor-law analysis.

Implementation pending via a separate cooperation policy rather than an ECOC amendment, after labor-law analysis.

Will consider priority of incorporating ECOC during 2027 contract negotiations; says ECOC already applies to represented staff.

Implementation pending: proposed cooperation policy without supervisor approval will go to Board after labor-law analysis.

Claims OIG already maintains written procedures on representation rights and informs employees of those rights.

Will analyze need for an OIG charter after outcomes of other proposed policies are known.

Claims implemented and cites FY2026/27 Budget.

Claims implemented and cites FY2026/27 Budget.

Claims partial implementation through Yellow Brick Road and promises a comprehensive financial strategy addressing OPEB, IT and capital funding.

Not yet implemented; quarterly Finance Subcommittee meetings tentatively scheduled from September 2026.

Not yet implemented; promises road-plan discussion and CIP incorporation in spring 2027.

Not yet implemented; cites tentative quarterly Finance Subcommittee meetings from September 2026.

Will revise appeals policy and notices to state denial reasons, appeal rights and review procedures.

Declines duplicate attorney notices, citing access to counsel, staffing burden and possible end of representation.

Will publish aggregate denial/disqualification demographics through Transparency Portal while protecting privacy.

Declines publishing denial reasons because records may contain criminal-justice, medical or protected information.

Declines recidivism reporting because necessary cross-jurisdiction arrest, conviction and incarceration data are not maintained.

Declines separate program cost accounting because new allocation systems would consume resources without sufficient benefit.

Is developing iPad forms in English, Spanish and Mandarin with text-to-speech and electronic signatures.

Acknowledges the audit recommendation but leaves the policy choice to Board and questions additional value.

Says Board may choose an audit and should weigh expense and usefulness before directing reporting.

Will clarify future Quarterly Oversight Reports as including only Sheriff expenditures.

The response labelled R4 discusses publishing CAF denial/disqualification reasons, not a full detention-cost methodology.

Declines closing MCDF, citing lower-restriction dormitory custody, programming and housing flexibility.

Declines separate CAF cost reporting because allocating shared costs needs new methods and substantial staff resources.

Promises partial implementation through internal improvement work; cannot commit to an outside consultant by April 1, 2027.

Will not implement now because fines support LEMSA operations; remains under evaluation.

Claims implemented through continuous policy evaluation and local strategies; Triage to Alternate Destination remains in development.

A3 is evaluating non-EMS transport options and will complete a final recommendation by April 1, 2027.

Claims implemented through ongoing funding exploration for PES; notes fiscal constraints.

Will analyze Nurse Navigation expansion using outcomes, safety, resources and APOT impact; conclusions ready by November 21, 2026.

Will not redirect fines now because they support LEMSA; later allocations remain under evaluation.

Claims protocol update approved and finalized June 30, 2026.

Declines notification, citing Section 1797.120.6 and asserted lack of hospital-protocol review authority.

Declines hospital notification for the same asserted lack of statutory review authority.

By April 1, 2027 LEMSA will present reporting proposal to Emergency Medical Care Committee for an advised approach to Board reporting.

Will assess non-fare metrics and update Audit Committee by end of November 2026; challenges percentage metric and notes no document titled Long-Range Financial Plan.

Declines single-metric alignment framework, citing network frequency, connections, crowding, equity and operational constraints.

Will refine fiscal-impact reporting and update committee by end of November 2026; says O&M model is not sufficiently precise alone for near-term decisions.

Claims implemented through budgets, June 11 efficiency recommendations and July 20 service changes; further service-affecting strategies await measure outcome.

Claims implemented through June 11 approvals of revenue actions including fares, parking, fiber, BayPass and station partnerships.

Will evaluate bargaining flexibility and update committee by end of November 2026; says only ATU minimums affect about11% of workforce.

Claims tools and February 2 overtime reason codes implemented; video training planned by September 2026.

Workforce strategy work is underway through dashboards, leave reduction, overtime audits and FY2027 bargaining.

Will update ten-year Short Range Transit Plan starting fall 2026, with draft to MTC by May 2027; revenue integration depends on measure.

Will continue OIG updates until span-of-control/overtime actions complete; says two overtime items closed, three progressing through FY2027.

Claims functional reporting already exists; broader authority changes require District Act analysis; update by end of November 2026.

Further analysis needed on committee approval/resource powers and District Act; update by end of November 2026.

Will review charters/charts with committee, GM and District Secretary, propose revisions and update committee by end of November 2026.

Declines a separate communications policy and mandatory reporting at every meeting, citing May 2026 manual and IIA15.1.

Declines unrestricted full-report distribution, citing May 2026 manual and GAGAS9.57 disclosure-risk assessment.

Requires public-release risk/legal analysis and will update committee by end of November 2026.

Intends documented risk methodology by April 1, 2027 for FY2028 assessment.

Intends Board/committee input by April 1, 2027 for FY2028 risk assessment.

CFO, OIG and Procurement staff are drafting committee-charter revisions for committee review and recommendation to Board in January 2027.

Claims implemented because charter already requires biennial review, but promises updated code for January 2027 meeting.

Will undertake contingency planning alongside ENA, assessing design alternatives, managed retreat and state/regional partnerships.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Says internal audit is an inherent core responsibility of an auditor-controller’s office.

Disagrees, citing public-sector IIA guidance, the elected office’s independence from audited departments, and the claimed absence of GAGAS audits.

Partially disagrees, citing annual IOC review of prior activities and approval of the next audit plan.

Partially disagrees: accepts an unmitigated threat in appearance under IIA but rejects a GAGAS impairment because IAD does not conduct GAGAS audits.

Partially disagrees: accepts ACFR participation and management responsibility, but says staff are non-supervisory management under the Local 21 MOU.

Disagrees because IAD does not perform GAGAS audits; says the manual is being revised to remove GAGAS references.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Disagrees: the cited standards set no minimum meeting count; says current reporting and Single Audit and Measure X presentations supply oversight.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Partially disagrees: no formal proactive input process exists, but Board and executives have supplied requests incorporated into annual plans.

Partially disagrees: IOC reviews activities and approves plans; acknowledges highest-risk discussion could be more explicit.

Partially disagrees: IOC approves the next plan, followed by separate Board review and approval.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees and identifies June 2018 voter approval of Regional Measure 3 as establishing the OIG.

Agrees with clarification: existing statutory authority supports operations; MissionMark records five audits, 55 investigations and 172 recommendations as of May 2026.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees and lists committee/Board presentations, including January 14, 2021 Board and July 20, 2021 Audit Committee meetings.

Agrees; says OIG revised its own proposal after the 2021 presentation and discussed revisions with committees.

Partially disagrees while admitting no charter agenda item since August 2024; cites SB827 timing and April 16, 2026 cooperation/retaliation policy actions.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with clarification: Board/GM did not negotiate union objections; OIG was asked to hold discussions, not negotiations.

Partially disagrees: July 20, 2021 committee direction was to meet representatives, return with a revised charter and understand concerns, not negotiate.

Partially disagrees: management internally approved the charter; there is no formal adoption procedure or express union reference; cites July 18, 2025 presentation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with clarification: personal counsel sought GM concurrence; executive later supplied written answers; April 16, 2026 CFO statement recognized OIG authority.

Agrees with clarification: executive questioned retaliation jurisdiction; April 16, 2026 CFO statement later recognized that authority.

Partially disagrees: January 7 counsel letter said work would continue; some aspects paused, others continued; May 14 letter closed the investigation without sustained allegations.

Partially disagrees: charter is internally approved, does not expressly grant the stated power, but IA assesses responses in practice; quotes risk-reporting language.

Agrees with clarification: no separate Board policy, but cites District Act authority and May 2026 Status Update on Recommendations.

Partially disagrees: Board has not taken sole responsibility; both Board and OIG can assess implementation under the District Act.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Partially disagrees: CBAs govern employment terms while most rules sit in the separate Orange Book, which also applies to nonrepresented staff.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with a prompt about future budget-policy compliance, not the published F1 description of FY2025/26 budget characterization.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Partially disagrees because the Yellow Brick Road model updates long-term projections.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Partially disagrees: distinguishes unassigned fund balance from a separate $7.8 million General Reserve and cites a 25% reserve requirement.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Partially disagrees: original forecast showed deficits; updated Yellow Brick Road projects balance from FY2026/27.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Partially agrees and substitutes $6.2 million for $6.5 million, citing annual valuation measured June 30, 2024.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Partially disagrees with projected depletion: updated Yellow Brick Road reduces withdrawals below annual interest earnings.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with a paraphrase about non-road infrastructure, whereas published F20 concerns $60 million for public roads.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Partially disagrees while saying the form is being updated to cite Section 1203.017(g)(2) and will go to Board.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Disagrees but says attorneys are not notified by Sheriff and a long-standing court agreement provides for court notification.

Agrees with the finding without additional explanation.

Disagrees, citing participant notice and written/Inmate Request appeal routes under Section 1203.016(d)(2).

Partially disagrees: maintains race information since 2025, but not age, gender or residential address.