Agency Responses to Audit Recommendations
|Previous Audit Recommendations||Agency Updates as of May 2021|
|Audit Report||ID||Recommendation||Current Status||Description of Current Status|
|Kansas Department of Corrections|
|Juvenile Justice Reforms: Evaluating the Effects of Senate Bill 367 (2020)||1||The Kansas Department of Corrections (KDOC) and the Office of Judicial Administration (OJA) should both develop complete datasets of juvenile offenders under their supervision or custody.||Have Implemented||
KDOC continues to make every effort in obtaining data from jurisdictions and continues to report these results to JJOC.
KDOC has deployed a new data system as of 4/19/2021.
|2||Once both datasets are in place, KDOC and OJA need to cooperate to reach an agreement on how to share, stage, and analyze their agencies’ data so the state can have a comprehensive dataset of its juvenile offenders.||Have Implemented||KDOC has approved an MOU and is with OJA for approval.||3||The Kansas Department of Corrections should develop a process to ensure judicial districts are using reinvestment grant funds on appropriate programs.||Have Implemented||KDOC has established a process as outlined in the Financial Rules, Guidelines, and Reporting Instructions for Adult Community Corrections and Juvenile Services. In addition, additional requirements are outlined in the request for proposals. KDOC reviews the grant recipient’s workbooks on a quarterly basis. A fiscal audit schedule is utilized for further monitoring.|
|Office of Judicial Administration|
|Juvenile Justice Reforms: Evaluating the Effects of Senate Bill 367 (2020)||1||The Kansas Department of Corrections (KDOC) and the Office of Judicial Administration (OJA) should both develop complete datasets of juvenile offenders under their supervision or custody.||Have Implemented||OJA expects to launch Tyler Supervision in the 8th and 21st judicial districts in August 2021. Based on the current timeline, OJA anticipates having Tyler Supervision fully implemented by the beginning of FY2024.||2||Once both datasets are in place, KDOC and OJA need to cooperate to reach an agreement on how to share, stage, and analyze their agencies’ data so the state can have a comprehensive dataset of its juvenile offenders.||Have Implemented||The MOU is being reviewed by KDOC and OJA. It is close to being fully executed.|
|Kansas Department of Administration|
|State Surplus Property: Evaluating Opportunities to Generate Revenue from State Owned Land and Buildings (2019)||1||The Department of Administration should work with officials from the Adjutant General’s Department, the Department of Corrections, and the Kansas Commission on Veterans Affairs to determine if they agree that the four properties we identified are surplus and if they should be sold.||Have Implemented||The Department of Administration has spoken with other agencies, and there was no interest in selling identified properties.||2||The Department of Administration should develop criteria for identifying surplus real property and make existing guidance for selling surplus real property available to state agencies to use. They should also develop a process for periodically reviewing state owned real property to identify surplus property.||Have Implemented||DofA has developed the steps to identify and dispose of surplus property. Furthermore, DofA will reach out to state agencies every five years to determine if the agencies have an interest in selling any property they have deemed surplus.|
|Kansas Department of Commerce|
|Kansas Department of Commerce: Evaluating the Department’s Administration of the Job Creation Program Fund (2019)||1||The Department of Commerce should establish criteria it will use to evaluate job creation fund awards and a process for determining how much money it will award.||Have Implemented||
Commerce evaluated JCF awards based on the economic impact to the community, county, region and state of each business recruitment/business growth project. Economic impact was based on the number of new/retained jobs, salaries and wages of those jobs, and the new capital investment created by each project. Commerce also evaluates the competition from other states for each project. Commerce also evaluates how the state’s JCF investment leverages local incentives in partnership with local units of government.
Commerce continues to evaluate projects as stated above but Commerce also utilizes an internal committee inclusive of the Secretary, the Deputy Secretary, Legal Counsel and Business Development Director to ensure the worthiness of a JCF award and that those awards are aligned with statute.
|2||The Department of Commerce should verify that the data companies submit related to award requirements is accurate.||Have Implemented||
Companies awarded JCF file annual reports that include job creation. Commerce compares those reported numbers against data available from the KDOL to ensure accuracy and proper oversight. The annual reports also provide evidence of purchase orders, invoices and receipt that verify the capital investment made by the company. Companies sign a contract with the State of Kansas/Commerce in which they attest, under penalty of law, that their reporting accurately reflects their job creation, payroll and capital investment. Commerce does not have the staff resources to visit each company to verify information contained in the annual reports. Much of the verification process outlined in this response was omitted in the LPA audit.
Commerce continues the verification process outlined above and believes it is more than adequate to assure companies are delivering on the contractual obligations for job creation, payroll and capital investment. The fact that Commerce has deployed clawbacks when metrics and expectations are not met is further evidence that the verification system is working.
|3||The Department of Commerce should include all elements in its annual report required by state law and seek out any legislative guidance it needs to understand those requirements.||Have Implemented||
Commerce reports to the Legislature annually via regularly scheduled testimony provided to the Senate Commerce Committee, Senate Ways & Means Committee, House Commerce/Economic Development/Labor Committee, House Appropriations Committee, House Rural Revitalization Committee and other Committees as requested. Commerce also appears before Interim Committees as requested to provide agency information, reports and program information. Commerce publishes an annual written report that covers aggregate program information.
Commerce has deployed a new public-facing program award database that is published on our website and updated to ensure it is current. This database includes awards from all our programs once those awards have a signed contract and the information shared is no longer considered proprietary and confidential. You can find the transparency database by following this link. Further Commerce is re-formatting our published annual report to ensure it is a comprehensive review of programs and incentive awards. This annual report will be made available electronically to Legislators and the general public in the fourth quarter of each calendar year.
|The Kansas Creative Arts Industries Commission: Measuring its Economic Impact (2020)||1||Commission officials should research what impact data to collect from their programs, provide clear guidance for all metrics and data collected, and develop a process to verify reported results to ensure data collected is consistent and reliable.||In Progress||KCAIC is restarting its strategic planning process after pausing for the pandemic. KCAIC has reached out to local economic research consultants, including the Center for Economic Development and Business Research at WSU, to include economic impact evaluation into this process and to analyze traditional economic indicators in relation to the particulars of the creative industry sector. KCAIC may also engage cultural impact experts to provide a more wholistic and integrated approach to evaluation in this field.|
|Department of Education|
|K-12 Education: Evaluating At-Risk Student Counts, Weights, and Expenditures (2019)||1||The department should ensure that any guidance they provide to the districts reflects current state law.||Have Implemented||Guidance documents are updated to reflect current state law.||2||The department should establish a process to determine that any identified programs and practices are evidence-based and for at-risk students.||Have Implemented||Web site has been updated with the list of evidence based best practices for districts to spend state at-risk aid. School district expenditures are monitored annually by approving the Local Consolidated Plan.|
|State Board of Education|
|K-12 Education: Evaluating At-Risk Student Counts, Weights, and Expenditures (2019)||3||The board should more thoroughly oversee the process for identifying at-risk programs and practices.||Have Implemented||The State Board of Education regularly monitors school district practices and compliance data through the Annual Report as well as systems’ accreditation reviews.|