COMPLIANCE REVIEW REPORT

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION

Compliance Review Unit State Personnel Board January 26, 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction	1
Executive Summary	1
Background	2
Scope and Methodology	3
Findings and Recommendations	4
Examinations	4
Appointments	7
Equal Employment Opportunity	19
Personal Services Contracts	22
Mandated Training	23
Department Response	27
SPB Reply	27

INTRODUCTION

Established by the California Constitution, the State Personnel Board (the SPB or Board) is charged with enforcing and administering the civil service statutes, prescribing probationary periods and classifications, adopting regulations, and reviewing disciplinary actions and merit-related appeals. The SPB oversees the merit-based recruitment and selection process for the hiring of over 200,000 state employees. These employees provide critical services to the people of California, including but not limited to, protecting life and property, managing emergency operations, providing education, promoting the public health, and preserving the environment. The SPB provides direction to departments through the Board’s decisions, rules, policies, and consultation.

Pursuant to Government Code section 18661, the SPB’s Compliance Review Unit (CRU) conducts compliance reviews of appointing authorities’ personnel practices in five areas: examinations, appointments, equal employment opportunity (EEO), personal services contracts (PSC’s), and mandated training, to ensure compliance with civil service laws and board regulations. The purpose of these reviews is to ensure state agencies are in compliance with merit related laws, rules, and policies and to identify and share best practices identified during the reviews. The SPB conducts these reviews on a three-year cycle.

The CRU may also conduct special investigations in response to a specific request or when the SPB obtains information suggesting a potential merit-related violation.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The CRU conducted a routine compliance review of California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) personnel practices in the areas of examinations, appointments, EEO, and PSC’s from September 15, 2016, through February 15, 2017, and mandated training from April 15, 2015, through April 15, 2017. The following table summarizes the compliance review findings.

Area	Finding	Severity	
Examinations	Examinations Complied with Civil Service Laws and Board Rules	In Compliance	
Appointments	Equal Employment Opportunity Questionnaires Were Not Separated from Applications	Very Serious	
Appointments	Probationary Evaluations Were Not Provided for All Appointments Reviewed	Serious	

Area	Finding	Severity	
Equal Employment Opportunity	A Written Upward Mobility Plan Has Not Been Established	Very Serious	
Equal Employment Opportunity	Equal Employment Opportunity Officer Does Not Report Directly to the Head of the Agency	Very Serious	
Personal Services Contracts	Personal Services Contracts Complied with Procedural Requirements	In Compliance	
Mandated Training	Ethics Training Was Not Provided for All Filers	Very Serious	
Mandated Training	Supervisory Training Was Not Provided for All Supervisors	Very Serious	
Mandated Training	Sexual Harassment Prevention Training Was Not Provided for All Supervisors	Very Serious	

A color-coded system is used to identify the severity of the violations as follows:

•	Red = Very Serious
•	Orange = Serious
•	Yellow = Non-serious or Technical
•	Green = In Compliance

BACKGROUND

The CDCR protects the public from crime and victimization, upholding values in service, leadership, integrity, accountability, respect, trust, and collaboration. The mission of the CDCR is to enhance public safety through safe and secure incarceration of offenders, effective parole supervision, and rehabilitative strategies to successfully reintegrate offenders into our communities.

The CDCR employs civil servants who work in a variety of divisions and offices including Administration, Board of Parole Hearings, Offices of the Secretary, Adult Institutions, and Juvenile Facilities. Examples of employment classifications within the CDCR include Correctional Officers, Parole Agents, and Administrative staff. Throughout California, there are 35 adult institutions and four juvenile facilities ranging from minimum to maximum security custody. The CDCR currently has approximately 60,000 employees, of which approximately 35,000 are Peace Officers.

SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

The scope of the compliance review was limited to reviewing the CDCR examinations, appointments, EEO program, and PSC’s from September 15, 2016, through February 15, 2017, and mandated training from April 15, 2015, through April 15, 2017. The primary objective of the review was to determine if the CDCR personnel practices, policies, and procedures complied with state civil service laws and board regulations, and to recommend corrective action where deficiencies were identified.

A cross-section of the CDCR examinations and appointments were selected for review to ensure that samples of various examinations and appointment types, classifications, and levels were reviewed. The CRU examined the documentation that the CDCR provided, which included examination plans, examination bulletins, job analyses, 511b’s, scoring results, notice of personnel action (NOPA) forms, vacancy postings, application screening criteria, hiring interview rating criteria, certification lists, transfer movement worksheets, employment history records, correspondence, and probation reports.

The review of the CDCR EEO program included examining written EEO policies and procedures; the EEO Officer’s role, duties, and reporting relationship; the internal discrimination complaint process; the upward mobility program; the reasonable accommodation program; the discrimination complaint process; and the Disability Advisory Committee (DAC).

CDCR PSC’s were also reviewed.1 It was beyond the scope of the compliance review to make conclusions as to whether CDCR justifications for the contracts were legally sufficient. The review was limited to whether CDCR practices, policies, and procedures relative to PSC’s complied with procedural requirements.

In addition, the CDCR mandated training program was reviewed to ensure all employees required to file statements of economic interest were provided ethics training, and that all supervisors were provided supervisory and sexual harassment prevention training within statutory timelines.

1If an employee organization requests the SPB to review any personal services contract during the SPB compliance review period or prior to the completion of the final compliance review report, the SPB will not audit the contract. Instead, the SPB will review the contract pursuant to its statutory and regulatory process. In this instance, none of the reviewed PSC’s were challenged.

On December 19, 2017, an exit conference was held with the CDCR to explain and discuss the CRU’s initial findings and recommendations. The CRU received and carefully reviewed the CDCR written response on January 19, 2018, which is attached to this final compliance review report.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Examinations

Examinations to establish an eligible list must be competitive and of such character as fairly to test and determine the qualifications, fitness, and ability of competitors to perform the duties of the class of position for which he or she seeks appointment. (Gov. Code, § 18930.) Examinations may be assembled or unassembled, written or oral, or in the form of a demonstration of skills, or any combination of those tests. (Ibid.) The Board establishes minimum qualifications for determining the fitness and qualifications of employees for each class of position and for applicants for examinations. (Gov. Code,
§ 18931.) Within a reasonable time before the scheduled date for the examination, the designated appointing power shall announce or advertise the examination for the establishment of eligible lists. (Gov. Code, § 18933, subd. (a).) the advertisement shall contain such information as the date and place of the examination and the nature of the minimum qualifications. (Ibid.) Every applicant for examination shall file an application in the office of the department or a designated appointing power as directed by the examination announcement. (Gov. Code, § 18934.) Generally, the final earned rating of each person competing in any examination is to be determined by the weighted average of the earned ratings on all phases of the examination. (Gov. Code, § 18936.) Each competitor shall be notified in writing of the results of the examination when the employment list resulting from the examination is established. (Gov. Code, § 18938.5.)

During the period under review, the CDCR conducted 70 examinations. The CRU reviewed 23 of those examinations, which are listed below:

Classification	Exam Type	Exam Components	Final File Date	No. of Apps	
Associate Director, Budget Management Branch, Division of Administrative Services	Career Executive Assignment (CEA)	Statement of Qualifications (SOQ)2	
7/15/2016	
7	
	
2	In a statement of qualifications (SOQ’s) examination, applicants submit a written summary of their qualifications and experience related to a published list of desired qualifications. Raters, typically subject matter experts, evaluate the responses according to a predetermined rating scale designed to assess their ability to perform in a job classification, assign scores and rank the competitors in a list.
2	
Classification	Exam Type	Exam Components	Final File Date	No. of Apps	
Casework Specialist, Youth Authority	
Open	Training and Experience (T&E)3	
11/4/2016	
48	
Chief Deputy Administrator, Correctional Program, CEA	
CEA	
SOQ	
6/30/2016	
30	
Chief Deputy Administrator, Correctional Program, CEA	
CEA	
SOQ	
1/7/2016	
30	
Chief Deputy Administrator, Correctional Program, CEA	
CEA	
SOQ	
Continuous	
12	
Chief Deputy Administrator, Correctional Program, CEA	
CEA	
SOQ	
Until Filled	
30	
Chief, Office of Workforce Planning, Human Resources	
CEA	
SOQ	
12/28/2016	
4	
Correctional Case Records Administrator	Departmental Promotional	Qualification Appraisal Panel4	
9/30/2016	
58	
Correctional Case Records Analyst	Departmental Promotional	Written5	
10/28/2016	
459	
Deputy Director, Human Resources, CEA	
CEA	
SOQ	
10/24/2016	
6	
Native American Spiritual Leader	
Open	Education and Experience 6	
Continuous	
7	

3	The training and experience (T&E) examination is administered either online or in writing, and asks the applicant to answer multiple-choice questions about his or her level of training and/or experience performing certain tasks typically performed by those in this classification. Responses yield point values.
4 The qualification appraisal panel (QAP) interview is the oral component of an examination whereby
competitors appear before a panel of two or more evaluators. Candidates are rated and ranked against one another based on an assessment of their ability to perform in a job classification.
5	A written examination is a testing procedure in which candidates’ job-related knowledge and skills are
assessed through the use of a variety of item formats. Written examinations are either objectively scored or subjectively scored.
6	In an education and experience examination, one or more raters reviews the applicants’ Standard 678
application forms, and scores and ranks them according to a predetermined rating scale that may include years of relevant higher education, professional licenses or certifications, and/or years of relevant work experience.

Classification	Exam Type	Exam Components	Final File Date	No. of Apps	
Office of the Ombudsman, CEA	
CEA	
SOQ	
10/21/2015	
32	

Prison Canteen Manager I/II	
Open	
T&E	
12/16/2016	
210	

School Psychologist	
Open	
T&E	
Continuous	
0	
Special Assistant to the Undersecretary, Administration & Offender Services, CEA	
CEA	
SOQ	
10/14/2016	
14	
Special Assistant to the Undersecretary, Operations, CEA	
CEA	
SOQ	
11/2/2016	
9	
Vocational Instructor, Autobody and Fender Repair	
Open	
T&E	
Continuous	
10	
Vocational Instructor, Building Maintenance	
Open	
T&E	
Continuous	
6	
Vocational Instructor, Computer and Related Technologies	
Open	
T&E	
Continuous	
15	
Vocational Instructor, Culinary Arts	
Open	T&E	
Continuous	
2	
Vocational Instructor, Masonry	
Open	
T&E	
Continuous	
1	
Vocational Instructor, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Repair	
Open	
T&E	
Continuous	
4	
Water and Sewage Plant Supervisor	
Open	
T&E	
Continuous	
11	

FINDING NO. 1 – Examinations Complied with Civil Service Laws and Board Rules

The CRU reviewed two departmental promotional, 10 CEA, and 11 open examinations, which the CDCR administered in order to create eligible lists from which to make appointments. The CDCR published and distributed examination bulletins containing the required information for all examinations. Applications received by the CDCR were accepted prior to the final filing date and were thereafter properly assessed to determine whether applicants met the minimum qualifications for admittance to the examinations. The CDCR notified applicants as to whether they qualified to take the examination, and those applicants who met the minimum qualifications were also notified about the next phase of the examination process. After all phases of the examination process were completed, the score of each competitor was computed, and a list of eligible candidates was established. The examination results listed the names of all successful competitors arranged in order of the score received by rank. Competitors were then notified of their final scores.

The CRU found no deficiencies in the examinations that the CDCR conducted during the compliance review period. Accordingly, the CDCR fulfilled its responsibilities to administer those examinations in compliance with civil service laws and board rules.
Appointments

In all cases not excepted or exempted by Article VII of the California Constitution, the appointing power must fill positions by appointment, including cases of transfers, reinstatements, promotions, and demotions in strict accordance with the Civil Service Act and Board rules. (Gov. Code, § 19050.) Appointments made from eligible lists, by way of transfer, or by way of reinstatement, must be made on the basis of merit and fitness, which requires consideration of each individual’s job-related qualifications for a position, including his or her knowledge, skills, abilities, experience, and physical and mental fitness. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 250, subd. (a).)

During the compliance review period, the CDCR made 5,031 appointments. The CRU reviewed 251 of those appointments, which are listed below:

Classification	Appointment Type	Tenure	Time Base	No. of Appts	
Administrative Law Judge II, Board of Parole Hearings	
List Appointment	
Permanent	
Full Time	
1	

Classification	Appointment Type	Tenure	Time Base	No. of Appts	
Assistant Chief Counsel	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	3	
Assistant Correctional Food Manager	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	4	
Assistant Correctional Food Manager	List Appointment	Limited Term	Full Time	1	
Associate Governmental Program Analyst	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	3	
Associate Governmental Program Analyst	List Appointment	Limited Term	Full Time	1	
Captain (Adult Institution)	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Captain (Adult Institution)	List Appointment	Limited Term	Full Time	1	
Catholic Chaplain	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Chief of Mobile Equipment Operations	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Community Resources Manager, Correctional Institution	
List Appointment	
Permanent	
Full Time	
2	
Construction Supervisor III, Correctional Facility	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Correctional Business Manager I	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	4	
Correctional Business Manager I	List Appointment	Limited Term	Full Time	1	
Correctional Business Manager II, Department of Corrections	
List Appointment	
Permanent	
Full Time	
1	
Correctional Case Records Manager	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Correctional Lieutenant	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	4	
Correctional Officer	List Appointment	Permanent	Intermittent	1	
Correctional Plant Manager I	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Correctional Plant Supervisor	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Correctional Sergeant	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	6	
Correctional Sergeant	List Appointment	Limited Term	Full Time	2	

Classification	Appointment Type	Tenure	Time Base	No. of Appts	
Departmental Construction and Maintenance Supervisor	
List Appointment	
Permanent	
Full Time	
1	
Electronics Technician	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Hazardous Materials Specialist	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Labor Relations Manager I	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Legal Secretary	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	3	
Office Assistant (General)	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	3	
Office Services Supervisor I (Typing)	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Parole Administrator I, Adult Parole	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Parole Agent II, Adult Parole (Specialist)	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	7	
Parole Agent II, Adult Parole (Supervisor)	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Parole Agent II, Adult Parole (Supervisor)	List Appointment	Limited Term	Full Time	1	
Personnel Supervisor II	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	4	
Personnel Supervisor II	List Appointment	Limited Term	Full Time	2	
Plumber II	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Prison Canteen Manager I	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Project Director III	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Protestant Chaplain	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Senior Accounting Officer (Supervisor)	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	4	
Senior Architect	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Senior Information Systems Analyst	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Senior Librarian, Correctional Facility	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	4	
Senior Management Auditor	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Senior Special Agent	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Special Agent in Charge, Department of Corrections	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Special Agent, Department of Corrections	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	5	

Classification	Appointment Type	Tenure	Time Base	No. of Appts	
Staff Services Analyst (General)	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	3	
Staff Services Analyst (General)	List Appointment	Limited Term	Full Time	1	
Staff Services Manager I	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	3	
Staff Services Manager I	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Staff Services Manager II (Supervisory)	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	4	
Supervisor of Academic Instruction, Correctional Facility	
List Appointment	
Permanent	
Full Time	
4	
Systems Software Specialist I (Technical)	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Systems Software Specialist II (Supervisory)	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Systems Software Specialist III (Technical)	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Teaching Assistant, Correctional Facility	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Television Specialist	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Vocational Instructor (Computer and Related Technologies) (Correctional Facility)	
List Appointment	
Permanent	
Full Time	
1	
Vocational Instructor (Office Services and Related Technologies) (Correctional Facility)	
List Appointment	
Permanent	
Full Time	
2	
Vocational Instructor (Office Services and Related Technologies) (Correctional Facility)	
List Appointment	
Limited Term	
Full Time	
1	
Vocational Instructor (Small Engine Repair)	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Water and Sewage Plant, Supervisor	List Appointment	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Accounting Officer (Specialist)	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Associate Estimator of Building Construction	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Associate Hazardous Materials Specialist	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	

Classification	Appointment Type	Tenure	Time Base	No. of Appts	
Attorney IV	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Correctional Administrator, Department of Corrections	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	3	
Correctional Officer	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Correctional Plant Manager II	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Electrician II	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Heavy Equipment Mechanic, Correctional Facility	Mandatory Reinstatement	
Permanent	
Full Time	
1	
Locksmith I	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Native American Spiritual Leader	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Parole Service Associate	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Parole Service Associate	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Personnel Supervisor I	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Property Controller II	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Staff Services Manager II (Supervisory)	Mandatory Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Teacher, Emotionally Learning/Handicapped, Correctional Facility	Mandatory Reinstatement	
Permanent	
Full Time	
2	
Vocational Instructor, Auto Body and Fender Repair, Correctional Facility	Mandatory Reinstatement	
Permanent	
Full Time	
2	
Case Records Technician	Permissive Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Chief Engineer I (Correctional Facility)	Permissive Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Correctional Counselor I	Permissive Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Correctional Counselor I	Permissive Reinstatement	Limited Term	Full Time	1	

Classification	Appointment Type	Tenure	Time Base	No. of Appts	
Materials and Stores Supervisor I, Correctional Facility	Permissive Reinstatement	
Permanent	
Full Time	
2	
Materials and Stores Supervisor I, Correctional Facility	Permissive Reinstatement	Limited Term	
Full Time	
1	
Office Technician (Typing)	Permissive Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Self-Help Sponsor (Part- Time)	Permissive Reinstatement	Limited Term	Intermittent	1	
Staff Services Analyst (General)	Permissive Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Staff Services Manager I	Permissive Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Substitute Academic Teacher	Permissive Reinstatement	Temporary	Intermittent	1	
Teacher, Elementary - Multiple Subjects, Correctional Facility	Permissive Reinstatement	
Permanent	
Full Time	
1	
Teacher, High School - General Education, Correctional Facility	Permissive Reinstatement	
Permanent	
Full Time	
1	
Teaching Assistant, Correctional Facility	Permissive Reinstatement	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Vocational Instructor, Auto Mechanics, Correctional Facility	Permissive Reinstatement	
Permanent	
Full Time	
1	
Vocational Instructor, Office Services and Related Technologies, Correctional Facility	
Permissive Reinstatement	
Permanent	
Full Time	
1	
Associate Governmental Program Analyst	Retired Annuitant	Limited Term	Intermittent	1	
Skilled Trades Journeyperson, Casual Employment, Laborer	Retired Annuitant	Limited Term	
Intermittent	
1	
Special Consultant	Retired Annuitant	Limited Term	Intermittent	1	

Seasonal Clerk	TAU (Temporary Authorization Utilization)	
Temporary	
Intermittent	
4	
Self-Help Sponsor	TAU	Temporary	Intermittent	5	

Classification	Appointment Type	Tenure	Time Base	No. of Appts	
Skill Trades Apprentice, Casual Employment, Plumber	
TAU	
Temporary	
Intermittent	
2	
Skill Trades Journeyperson, Casual Employment, Metal Trades	
TAU	
Temporary	
Intermittent	
3	
Skill Trades Journeyperson, Casual Employment, Plasterer	
TAU	
Temporary	
Intermittent	
1	
Skill Trades Journeyperson, Casual Employment, Steamfitter	
TAU	
Temporary	
Intermittent	
1	
Skill Trades Supervisor, Casual Employment, Laborer	
TAU	
Temporary	
Intermittent	
3	
Student Assistant	TAU	Temporary	Intermittent	3	
Substitute Academic Teacher	TAU	Temporary	Intermittent	5	
Office Assistant (Typing)	TAU - LEAP	Temporary	Full Time	1	
Office Technician (Typing)	TAU - LEAP	Temporary	Full Time	4	
Administrative Law Judge I, Board of Parole Hearings	
Transfer	
Permanent	
Full Time	
2	
Associate Accounting Analyst	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Associate Governmental Program Analyst	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Associate Personnel Analyst	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Business Service Officer I (Specialist)	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Case Records Technician	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Correctional Administrator, Department of Corrections	Transfer	Limited Term	Full Time	1	
Correctional Counselor II (Specialist)	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Correctional Counselor III	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Correctional Officer	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	6	
Fire Captain, Correctional Institution	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	

Classification	Appointment Type	Tenure	Time Base	No. of Appts	
Groundskeeper	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Library Technical Assistant (Safety)	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Locksmith I (Correctional Facility)	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Office Assistant (General)	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Parole Agent II, Adult Parole (Specialist)	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Parole Service Associate	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Plumber II, Correctional Facility	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Prison Canteen Manager II	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Program Technician II	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	
Self-Help Sponsor (Part- Time)	Transfer	Limited Term	Intermittent	2	
Special Agent, Department of Corrections	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	2	
Staff Services Analyst (General)	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	6	
Staff Services Analyst (General)	Transfer	Limited Term	Full Time	1	
Stationary Engineer	Transfer	Temporary	Intermittent	1	
Supervising Correctional Cook, Department of Corrections	
Transfer	
Permanent	
Full Time	
1	
Supervising Groundskeeper II, Correctional Facility	
Transfer	
Permanent	
Full Time	
1	
Vocational Instructor, Building Maintenance, Correctional Facility	
Transfer	
Permanent	
Full Time	
1	
Vocational Instructor, Office Services and Related Technologies, Correctional Facility	
Transfer	
Permanent	
Full Time	
1	
Water and Sewage Plant Supervisor	Transfer	Permanent	Full Time	1	

For each of the 130 list appointments the CDCR properly advertised the job vacancies, sent out contact letters, screened applications, interviewed candidates, and cleared  the

certification lists for SROA and reemployment, and conducted background and reference checks as appropriate.
The CDCR made 23 appointments via mandatory reinstatement. A state agency is required to reinstate an employee to his or her former position if the employee is (1) terminated from a temporary or limited-term appointment by either the employee or the appointing power; (2) rejected during probation; or (3) demoted from a managerial position. (Gov. Code, § 19140.5.) The following conditions, however, must apply: the employee accepted the appointment without a break in continuity of service and the reinstatement is requested within ten working days after the effective date of the termination. (Ibid.) The CDCR complied with the rules and laws governing mandatory reinstatements.

The CRU reviewed three retired annuitant appointments. The individuals submitted their applications and were eligible to be hired as retired annuitants, not to exceed 960 hours in a fiscal year.

The CRU reviewed 32 TAU appointments. When there is no employment list from which a position maybe filled, the appointing power, with the consent of the department, may fill the position by temporary appointment. (Gov. Code, §19058.) No person may serve in one or more positions under temporary appointment longer than nine months in a 12 consecutive month period. The CDCR complied with the rules and laws governing TAU appointments.

The CRU reviewed 46 CDCR appointments made via transfer and 17 appointments made via permissive reinstatement. A transfer of an employee from a position under one appointing power to a position under another appointing power may be made if the transfer is to a position in the same class or in another class with substantially the same salary range and designated as appropriate by the Executive Officer. (Cal. Code Reg., tit. 2, § 425.) The CDCR verified the eligibility of each candidate to their appointed class.

However, the CDCR failed to remove the EEO questionnaires from applications on 144 occasions as described in finding two. Additionally, the CDCR did not provide probation evaluations for all appointments reviewed as described in finding three.

FINDING NO. 2 – Equal Employment Opportunity Questionnaires Were Not Separated from Applications

Summary:	The CDCR did not separate 144 EEO questionnaires from their respective applications.

Criteria:	Government Code section 19704 makes it unlawful  for a hiring department to require or permit any notation or entry to be made on any application indicating or in any way suggesting or pertaining to any protected category listed in Government Code section 12940, subdivision (a) (e.g., a person's race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status). Applicants for employment in state civil service are asked to provide voluntarily ethnic data about themselves where such data is determined by the California Department of Human Resources (CalHR) to be necessary to an assessment of the ethnic and sex fairness of the selection process and to the planning and monitoring of affirmative action efforts. (Gov. Code, § 19705.) The EEO questionnaire of the state application form (STD. 678) states, “This questionnaire will be separated from the application prior to the examination and will not be used in any employment decisions.”

Severity:	Very  Serious. The applicants’ protected classes were visible, subjecting the agency to potential liability.

Cause:	The CDCR states that due to the high volume of applications received and human error, EEO questionnaires were inadvertently not removed from 144 (4.6 percent) of the approximately 3,100 applications reviewed during the audit period.

Action:	It is recommended that within 60 days of the Executive Officer’s approval of these findings and recommendations, the CDCR submit to the CRU a written corrective action plan that the department will implement to ensure that EEO questionnaires are separated from all applications. Copies of any relevant documentation should be included with the plan.

FINDING NO. 3 – Probationary Evaluations Were Not Provided for All Appointments Reviewed

Summary:	The CDCR did not provide 25 probationary reports of performance for 23 of the 251 appointments reviewed by the CRU, as reflected in the table below.

Classification	
Appointment Type	Number of Appointments Missing Probation Reports	Total Number of Missing Probation Reports	
Assistant Chief Counsel	List Appointment	1	1	
Associate Governmental Program Analyst	Transfer	1	1	
Business Service Officer I (Specialist)	Transfer	1	1	
Community Resources Manager, Correctional Institution	
List Appointment	
1	
1	
Correctional Counselor I	Transfer	1	1	
Correctional Sergeant	List Appointment	1	1	
Electronics Technician	List Appointment	1	2	
Legal Secretary	List Appointment	1	1	
Office Assistant (General)	Transfer	1	1	
Office Services Supervisor I (Typing)	List Appointment	1	1	
Parole Agent II, Adult Parole (Specialist)	List Appointment	2	2	
Parole Agent II, Adult Parole (Supervisor)	List Appointment	2	2	
Protestant Chaplain	List Appointment	1	1	
Senior Special Agent, Department of Corrections	
List Appointment	
1	
1	
Staff Services Manager I	List Appointment	1	1	
Supervising Groundskeeper II, Correctional Facility	
Transfer	
1	
1	
Teaching Assistant, Correctional Facility	List Appointment	1	2	

Classification	
Appointment Type	Number of Appointments Missing Probation Reports	Total Number of Missing Probation Reports	
Television Specialist	List Appointment	2	2	
Vocational Instructor, Building Maintenance, Correctional Facility	
Transfer	
1	
1	
Water and Sewage Plant Supervisor	List Appointment	1	1	
Total	23	25	

Criteria:	The service of a probationary period is required when an employee enters in the state civil service by permanent appointment from an employment list. (Gov. Code, § 19171.) During the probationary period, the appointing power shall evaluate the work and efficiency of a probationer in the manner and at such periods as CalHR may require. (Gov. Code § 19172.) CalHR’s regulatory scheme provides that “a report of the probationer’s performance shall be made to the employee at sufficiently frequent intervals to keep the employee adequately informed of progress on the job.” (Code Reg., tit. 2, § 599.795.) Specifically, a written appraisal of performance shall be made to CalHR within 10 days after the end of each one-third portion of the probationary period. (Ibid.) The Board’s record retention rules require that appointing powers retain all probationary reports. (Code Reg., titl. 2, § 26, subd. (a)(3).)

Severity:	Serious. The probationary period is the final step in the selection process to ensure that the individual selected can successfully perform the full scope of their job duties. Failing to use the probationary period to assist an employee in improving his or her performance or terminating the appointment upon determination that the appointment is not a good job/person match is unfair to the employee and serves to erode the quality of state government.

Cause:	The CDCR states that they do not have a central tracking system to monitor the completion of probationary reports; however, they are currently reviewing options to create an electronic central system of record.

Action:	It is recommended that within 60 days of the Executive Officer’s approval of these findings and recommendations, the CDCR submit to the CRU a written corrective action plan that addresses the corrections the department will implement to ensure conformity with the probationary requirements of Government Code section 19172. Copies of any relevant documentation should be included with the plan.

Equal Employment Opportunity

Each state agency is responsible for an effective EEO program. (Gov. Code, § 19790.) The appointing power for each state agency has the major responsibility for monitoring the effectiveness of its EEO program. (Gov. Code, § 19794.) To that end, the appointing power must issue a policy statement committed to EEO; issue procedures for filing, processing, and resolving discrimination complaints; issue procedures for providing equal upward mobility and promotional opportunities; and cooperate with the California Department of Human Resources by providing access to all required files, documents and data. (Ibid.) In addition, the appointing power must appoint, at the managerial level, an EEO Officer, who shall report directly to, and be under the supervision of, the director of the department to develop, implement, coordinate, and monitor the department’s EEO program. (Gov. Code, § 19795.)

Because the EEO Officer investigates and ensures proper handling of discrimination, sexual harassment and other employee complaints, the position requires separation from the regular chain of command, as well as regular and unencumbered access to the head of the organization.

Each state agency must establish a separate committee of employees who are individuals with a disability, or who have an interest in disability issues, to advise the head of the agency on issues of concern to employees with disabilities. (Gov. Code, § 19795, subd. (b)(1).) The department must invite all employees to serve on the committee and take appropriate steps to ensure that the final committee is comprised of members who have disabilities or who have an interest in disability issues. (Gov.  Code,
§ 19795, subd. (b)(2).)

The CRU reviewed the CDCR EEO program that was in effect during the compliance review period.

FINDING NO. 4 –   A Written Upward Mobility Plan Has Not Been Established

Summary:	The CDCR did not have a written upward mobility plan at the time of the compliance review.

Criteria:	Each appointing authority shall develop and maintain a written upward mobility plan as specified in the SPB “Guidelines for Administering Departmental Upward Mobility Employment Programs,” revised July 25, 2000.

The plan shall include: (a) A policy statement regarding the appointing authority's commitment to providing equal upward mobility opportunity for its employees in low-paying occupations. (b) A description of the components of its program consistent with Government Code section 19401, how employees may access the program, and where information about the program may be obtained. (c) The roles and responsibilities of the employee, the employee's supervisor, the coordinator, the personnel office, the training office, and the equal employment opportunity office regarding the mobility program. (d) Criteria for selecting employees in low-paying occupations to participate in the upward mobility efforts described in Government Code section 19401. (e) The number of employees in classifications in low-paying occupations used by the appointing authority; career ladders, bridging classes, and entry technical, professional, and administrative classes targeted for upward mobility; and planned upward mobility examinations. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 599.983.)

Severity:	Serious. The department did not have a plan to ensure it has an effective upward mobility program to develop and advance employees in low-paying occupations.

Cause:	The CDCR states that during the audit period their Upward Mobility Unit did not have a central database and the unit was decentralized.

Action:	It is recommended that within 60 days of the Executive Officer’s approval, the CDCR must submit to the CRU a written corrective action plan that the department will implement to ensure conformity

with upward mobility requirements of Government Code section 19401. Copies of any relevant documentation should be included with the plan.

FINDING NO. 5 – Equal Employment Opportunity Officer Does Not Report Directly to the Head of the Agency

Summary:	The CDCR EEO Officer is supervised by the Deputy Director of the Office of Internal Affairs, which is three reporting levels below the Secretary of CDCR. The CDCR’s DOM Chapter 3, Article 1 provides that “the Chief of the Civil Rights Office shall serve as the department’s EEO Officer. As needed, the Chief, CRO reports to the CDCR Secretary on matters related to EEO.” While the CDCR DOM provides that the EEO Officer reports to the Secretary on EEO matters, our review revealed limited communications between the Secretary and EEO Officer during the compliance review period.

Criteria:	The appointing power must appoint, at the managerial level, an EEO Officer, who shall report directly to, and be under the supervision of, the director of the department to develop, implement, coordinate, and monitor the department’s EEO program. (Gov. Code, § 19795.)

Severity:	Very Serious. Not only is the EEO Officer not directly supervised by the Secretary, but there was no meaningful reporting relationship on EEO matters. To have an effective EEO program, the head of the organization must be actively involved.

Cause:	According to the CDCR and the Department Operations Manual, Chapter 3, Article 1, the EEO Officer reports to the CDCR Secretary on matters related to EEO “as needed”, however the CDCR did not have a formalized process or structure to ensure that the Secretary is informed of and engaged on EEO matters affecting the organization. As a result, the compliance review revealed only one direct contact between the EEO Officer and the Secretary within a three-year period. While it is reasonable to have the EEO Officer reporting to a lower level manager on operational matters in

an organization the size of CDCR, there should be direct reporting to the Secretary on EEO matters.

Action:	It is recommended that within 120 days of the Executive Officer’s approval of these findings and recommendations, the CDCR submit to the CRU written verification of a formal structure that ensures that the EEO Officer directly reports to the Secretary on EEO matters in order to ensure conformity with the requirements of Government Code section 19795.

Personal Services Contracts

A PSC includes any contract, requisition, or purchase order under which labor or personal services is a significant, separately identifiable element, and the business or person performing the services is an independent contractor that does not have status as an employee of the State. (Cal. Code Reg., tit. 2, § 547.59.) The California Constitution has an implied civil service mandate limiting the state’s authority to contract with private entities to perform services the state has historically or customarily performed. Government Code section 19130, subdivision (a), however, codifies exceptions to the civil service mandate where PSC’s achieve cost savings for the state. PSC’s that are of a type enumerated in subdivision (b) of Government Code section 19130 are also permissible. Subdivision (b) contracts include private contracts for a new state function, services that are not available within state service, services that are incidental to a contract for the purchase or lease of real or personal property, and services that are of an urgent, temporary, or occasional nature.

For cost-savings PSC’s, a state agency is required to notify SPB of its intent to execute such a contract. (Gov. Code, § 19131.) For subdivision (b) contracts, the SPB reviews the adequacy of the proposed or executed contract at the request of an employee organization representing state employees. (Gov. Code, § 19132.)

During the compliance review period, the CDCR had one PSC that was in effect and subject to the Department of General Services (DGS) approval, and thus our procedural review. The CRU reviewed one contract, which is listed below:

Vendor	Services	Contract Dates	Contract Amount	Justification Identified?	
Downey Brand, LLP	Legal Consultant	7/1/2016 to
6/30/2019	$193,765	Yes	

FINDING NO. 6 – Personal Services Contracts Complied with Procedural Requirements

When a state agency requests approval from the DGS for a subdivision (b) contract, the agency must include with its contract transmittal a written justification that includes specific and detailed factual information that demonstrates how the contract meets one or more conditions specified in Government Code section 19131, subdivision (b). (Cal. Code Reg., tit. 2, § 547.60.)

It was beyond the scope of the review to make conclusions as to whether the CDCR justification for the contract was legally sufficient. The CDCR provided specific and detailed factual information in the written justification as to how the contract met at least one condition set forth in Government Code section 19131, subdivision (b). Accordingly, the CDCR PSC complied with civil service laws and board rules.
Mandated Training

Each member, officer, or designated employee of a state agency who is required to file a statement of economic interest (referred to as “filers”) because of the position he or she holds with the agency is required to take an orientation course on the relevant ethics statutes and regulations that govern the official conduct of state officials. (Gov. Code, §§ 11146 & 11146.1.) State agencies are required to offer filers the orientation course on a semi-annual basis. (Gov. Code, § 11146.1.) New filers must be trained within six months of appointment and at least once during each consecutive period of two calendar years, commencing on the first odd-numbered year thereafter. (Gov. Code, § 11146.3.)

Upon the initial appointment of any employee designated in a supervisory position, the employee shall be provided a minimum of 80 hours of training, as prescribed by the CalHR. (Gov. Code, § 19995.4, subd. (b).) The training addresses such topics as the role of the supervisor, techniques of supervision, performance standards, and sexual harassment and abusive conduct prevention. (Gov. Code, §§ 12950.1, subds. (a), (b), & (c), & 19995.4, subd. (b).) The training must be successfully completed within the term of the employee’s probationary period or within six months of the initial appointment, unless it is demonstrated that to do so creates additional costs or that the training cannot be completed during this time period due to limited availability of supervisory training courses. (Gov. Code, § 19995.4, subd. (c).) As to the sexual harassment and abusive-conduct prevention component, the training must thereafter be provided to supervisors once every two years. (Gov. Code, § 12950.1.)

Within 12 months of the initial appointment of an employee to a management or CEA position, the employee shall be provided leadership training and development, as prescribed by CalHR. (Gov. Code, § 19995.4, subds. (d) & (e).) For management employees the training must be a minimum of 40 hours and for CEAs the training must be a minimum of 20 hours. (Ibid.) Thereafter, for both categories of appointment, the employee must be provided a minimum of 20 hours of leadership training on a biannual basis. (Ibid.)

The Board may conduct reviews of any appointing power’s personnel practices to ensure compliance with civil service laws and Board regulations. (Gov. Code, § 18661, subd. (a).) In particular, the Board may audit personnel practices related to such matters as selection and examination procedures, appointments, promotions, the management of probationary periods, and any other area related to the operation of the merit principle in state civil service. (Ibid.) Accordingly, the CRU reviews documents and records related to training that appointing powers are required by the afore-cited laws to provide its employees.

The CRU reviewed the CDCR’s mandated training program that was in effect during the compliance review period.

FINDING NO. 7 –   Ethics Training Was Not Provided for All Filers

Summary:	The CDCR did not provide ethics training to 3,326 of 3,504 existing filers. In addition, the CDCR did not provide ethics training to 430 of 734 new filers within six months of their appointment.

Criteria:	New filers must be provided ethics training within six months of appointment. Existing filers must be trained at least once during each consecutive period of two calendar years commencing on the first odd-numbered year thereafter. (Gov. Code, § 11146.3, subd. (b).)

Severity:	Very Serious. The department does not ensure that its filers are aware of prohibitions related to their official position and influence.

Cause:	The CDCR states that they send direction annually to all Conflict of Interest (COI) filers notifying them of their responsibility to complete ethics training. However, they do not currently have a written

directive to training coordinators, COI liaisons, or personnel offices outlining responsibilities to track and upload into CDCR’s training tracking system.

Action:	The CDCR must take appropriate steps to ensure that filers are provided ethics training within the time periods prescribed. It is therefore recommended that no later than 60 days after the SPB’s Executive Officer’s approval of these findings and recommendations, the CDCR must submit a written corrective action plan to ensure compliance with ethics training mandates. Copies of any relevant documentation should be included with the plan.

FINDING NO. 8 – Supervisory Training Was Not Provided for All Supervisors

Summary:	The CDCR did not provide basic supervisory training to 323 of 1,333 new supervisors within twelve months of appointment.

Criteria:	Each department must provide its new supervisors a minimum of
80 hours of supervisory training within the probationary period. Upon completion of the initial training, supervisory employees shall receive a minimum 20 hours of leadership training biannually. (Gov. Code, § 19995.4, subd. (b) and (c.).)

Upon initial appointment of an employee to a managerial position, each employee must receive 40 hours of leadership training within 12 months of appointment. Thereafter, the employee shall receive a minimum of 20 hours of leadership training biannually. (Gov. Code,
§ 19995.4, subd. (d).)

Upon initial appointment of an employee to a CEA position, each employee must receive 20 hours of leadership training within 12 months of appointment. Thereafter, the employee shall receive a minimum of 20 hours of leadership training biannually. (Gov. Code,
§ 19995.4, subd. (e).)

Severity:	Very  Serious.  The department does not ensure its leaders are properly trained. Without proper training, leaders may not properly carry out their leadership roles, including managing employees.

Cause:	The CDCR states that the majority of the supervisors found to be out of compliance were Correctional Sergeants, who had a vacancy rate of approximately 26 percent during the SPB audit period. This vacancy ratio prevented institutions from being able to send staff to basic supervisory training as it would have caused unfunded overtime and staffing shortages. Compounding this problem was the rate at which appointments occurred within the department, as well as the training unit’s workload capacity, class size, and staffing restrictions.

Action:	The CDCR must take appropriate steps to ensure that new supervisors are provided supervisory training within twelve months of appointment. It is therefore recommended that no later than 60 days after the SPB’s Executive Officer’s approval of these findings and recommendations, the CDCR must submit a written corrective action plan to ensure compliance with basic supervisory training mandates. Copies of any relevant documentation should be included with the plan.

FINDING NO. 9 – Sexual Harassment Prevention Training Was Not Provided for All Supervisors

Summary:	The CDCR did not provide sexual harassment prevention training to 101 of 1,333 new supervisors within six months of their appointment. In addition, the CDCR did not provide sexual harassment prevention training to 581 of 7,395 existing supervisors every two years.

Criteria:	Each department must provide its supervisors two hours of sexual harassment prevention training every two years. New supervisors must be provided sexual harassment prevention training within six months of appointment. (Gov. Code, § 12950.1, subd. (a).)

Severity:	Very Serious.  The department does not ensure its new supervisors are properly trained to respond to sexual harassment or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature. This limits the

department’s ability to retain a quality workforce, impacts employee morale and productivity, and subjects the department to litigation.

Cause:	The CDCR states that the last coordinated supervisory training occurred in 2016, at which time all supervisors who were not on long-term sick leave or otherwise exempt received the mandatory training. However, during the audit period, CDCR had numerous new supervisors that had not yet received the training.

Action:	The CDCR must take appropriate steps to ensure that its supervisors are provided sexual harassment prevention training within the time periods prescribed. It is therefore recommended that no later than 60 days after the SPB’s Executive Officer’s approval of these findings and recommendations, the CDCR must submit a written corrective action plan to ensure compliance with sexual harassment prevention training mandates. Copies of any relevant documentation should be included with the plan.

DEPARTMENTAL RESPONSE

The CDCR’s response is attached as Attachment 1.

SPB REPLY

Based upon the CDCR’s written response, the CDCR will comply with the CRU recommendations and findings and provide the CRU with an action plan.

It is further recommended that the CDCR comply with the afore-state recommendations within 60 days of the Executive Officer’s approval and submit to the CRU a written report of compliance.

Attachment 1

Ms. Suzanne M. Ambrose, Executive Officer Page2

Finding 4:  A Written Upward Mobility Plan Has Not Been Established

CDCR has centralized and relocated its Upward Mobility Unit (UMU) to a more effective functional area within the Office of Training and Professional Development. Since its centralization, the UMU completed a departmental guide for the Upward Mobility Program and is currently in the process of establishing a database and selection process to handle applications to the program.

Finding 5: Equal Employment Opportunity Officer Does Not Report Directly to the Head of Agency

The CDCR Chief of Civil Rights Operations (CRO) also serves as the Department's EEO Officer. The SPB's report asse1ts the Chief CRO reports to the Deputy Director, Office of Internal Affairs (OIA), and does not report directly to the Secretary CDCR. For clarification, the Chief CRO has a dual reporting relationship to the Deputy Director OIA and the CDCR Secretary. Specifically, the Chief reports directly to the Deputy Director OIA regarding the day-to-day operations of the CRO Unit. In addition, Department Operations Manual (DOM) Chapter 3, Article I states that the Chief of Civil Rights shall "serve as the Department's EEO Officer. As needed, the Chief, CRO reports to the CDCR Secretary on matters related to EEO." This policy allows the EEO Officer to go outside the chain of command and have regular unencumbered access to the CDCR Secretary regarding EEO issues, as they deem necessary.

Additionally, per Government Code (GC) l 9795(b) the CDCR Secretary established the CDCR Disability Advisory Committee (DAC) (see attached), which is responsible for ensuring compliance with State and Federal mandates that prohibit discrimination against qualified persons with disabilities. The Chief CRO serves in an oversight and advisory capacity on CDCR's DAC, and further serves as the liaison to the CDCR Secretary per the DAC bylaws. The Chief CRO is also responsible for preparing and submitting the annual Workforce Analysis Report to the CDCR Secretary (see attached), which ensures compliance with GC 19795 and 19797. The DOM Section 31140.6 vests authority to initiate and conduct investigations of employee misconduct from the CDCR Secretary directly to the Deputy Director OIA. This authority makes the Deputy Director OIA the highest-level decision maker, outside of the CDCR Secretary, with regards to initiating and conducting investigations into employee misconduct. The CRO has a direct relationship with the OIA function of investigating violations of Department policy and the law, as defined in the California Penal Code and in the DOM. In an agency the size and scope of CDCR, it is not practical or feasible for a direct reporting relationship to the Secretary for the day-to-day operational functions. Moreover, this reporting structure was in place during SPB’s last compliance review of CDCR completed in 2013, which concluded that the CDCR EEO program properly complied with civil service laws and regulations.

The CRO Chief has the ability to report directly to the CDCR Secretary as established by policy, practice, and law. CDCR recognizes the importance of ongoing communication between the Secretary and the CRO concerning EEO matters, and will ensure that regularly scheduled meetings occur on a bi-monthly basis with additional meetings held as necessary, as determined by the CRO. CDCR has updated the organizational chart and duty statement of the CRO to accurately reflect the reporting relationship the CRO Chief has with the CDCR Secretary (see attached).

Finding 7:  Ethics Training Was Not Provided for All Filers

CDCR sends direction annually to all Conflict of Interest (COI) filers notifying them of their responsibility to complete ethics training. However, CDCR does not currently have written directive to training coordinators, COI liaisons, or personnel offices outlining responsibilities to track and upload into

Ms. Suzanne M. Ambrose, Executive Officer Page 3

CDCR's training tracking system. Therefore, COI filers may have taken the training, but with the transition to the new automated tracking system not all training dates were entered into this system during the time of the audit. CDCR has found an additional 688 training dates not previously provided to SPB (see attached). Clear directions will be provided in future filing years to ensure employee compliance with the training requirements.

Finding 8:  Supervisory Training Was Not Provided for All Supervisors

The majority of the supervisors found to be out of compliance were Correctional Sergeants. CDCR had a Correctional Sergeant vacancy rate of approximately 26 percent during the SPB audit period. This vacancy ratio prevented institutions from being able to send staff to Basic Supervision Training as it would have caused unfunded overtime and staffing shortages. Compounding this problem was the rate at which appointments occurred within the Department and our training unit's workload capacity. CDCR averages 120 to 140 appointments to supervisory positions per month but the Department's training capacity is only 80 to 100 employees per month due to class size and staffing restriction s which then extends the training wait list. The Department' s practice of deploying Basic Supervision training to both custody and non-custody personnel means the high number of Correctional Sergeants on the backlog would also impact the ability of non-custody staff to receive training in a timely manner. However, in the last year, CDCR hired new management and staff dedicated to training promotional employees as soon as possible.

Finding 9: Sexual Harassment Prevention Training Was Not Provided for All Supervisors

CDCR recognizes the importance of the Sexual Harassment Training and currently ensures sexual harassment training is provided to all supervisors every two years. The last coordinated supervisory training occurred in 2016. At that time, all supervisors who were not on long-term sick leave or otherwise exempt received the mandatory training. However, during the audit period, CDCR had numerous new supervisors that had not yet received the training.

CDCR would like to thank SPB for their work and will address the specific recommendations in the 60- day corrective action plan.  If you have further questions, please contact me at (916) 323-6001.

ersecretary, Administration and Offender Services Attachments
cc:		Katherine Minnich, Deputy Director, Human Resources Joseph Galvan, Deputy Director, Office of Internal Affairs
Stacy Lopez, Deputy Director, Peace Officer Selection and Employee Development