San Mateo County to tweak buying practices

San Mateo County will refine its buying practices following a recent civil grand jury report that found the Procurement Division lacks experienced leadership and does not follow best practices.

The July report, “Review of the County of San Mateo’s Procurement of Goods,” also found that the county’s Procurement Division failed to follow 21 recommendations made by the 2003-04 San Mateo Civil Grand Jury and the 2009 Operational Review by the Controller’s Office.

The report also questioned whether a new effort to improve how the county buys its goods will be meaningful since most of the recommendations made previously were never implemented despite the Procurement Division agreeing to do so.

The county’s expenditures for goods and services was $299.8 million for fiscal year 2013-14, according to the report.

It spent $45.9 million that year on just goods but county officials were unable to give the grand jury a clear answer to the question during its investigation. Some said it was $56 million while others said it was $87 million to $100 million.

Exactly how much was spent on goods came into question because the county lacks an accounting system to clearly segregate amounts paid for services from amounts paid for goods, according to the grand jury report.

The civil grand jury investigation also found that the Procurement Division lost key personnel in recent years and that there is no training for new buyers.

The county has already dedicated a new manager to the division full-time since the grand jury released its report, according to a report by County Manager John Maltbie to the Board of Supervisors.

In January 2015, the County Manager’s Office formed a “Purchasing Compliance Committee” to begin to address the issues related to the procurement of goods.

The committee will develop best-practice procedures for purchasing that all county departments will follow, according to Maltbie’s report.

The county essentially agrees with all of the grand jury’s recent recommendations to improve purchasing although it responds that a full-time procurement specialist was in place during past reviews and failed to implement the previous recommendations.

The county is also implementing a new financial accounting system that should make managing procurement more efficient.

October 8, 2015

The Daily Journal

By Journal Staff