Quantity of complaints, but i want to talk about the quality or value of those complaints. Since the inception, the Whistleblower Program has been plagued by minor complaints. The 20102011 civil grand jury found that 36 were true whistleblower complaints alleging fraud, waste, and abuse. Then the Whistleblower Program developed a Risk Assessment policy that was designed to triage the complaints and sort them out into low, medium, or high risk complaints. For example, the medium risk cases involved potential losses of 10,000 to 50,000 or they implicate a mid level manager. The medium and high risk cases are not represented in the whistleblower reports. Instead, we get a preponder remembers of cases of low level employees who use Work Computers for personal business, who leave work early, or show up late, who gamble or sleep on the job, or who smoke in city cars and park them inappropriately. Preventing these abuses is worthwhile, but wheres the beef . We dont hear about the big money vi
Youre on it because thats the beauty of this new system. I wish you the best of luck ruling that out. I hope that eventually the difference in what the community identifies and what you knew about should get smaller overnight. Absolutely. Thats the idea. Yes. Thank you. Any other comments . Thank you. Any Public Comments . Seeing none. No Public Comment, we will move on to item number 5. Presentation from the city Service Auditor regarding the Whistleblower Program. These on report of the whistleblower and possible action by the committee in response to such presentation and report. Good morning chair chu, members of the committee, acting director of audits, civil citys auditor. Im here with that oversees the Whistleblower Program. In 2019, we provided you with the status of our fy18. Were here to give you the full fiscal year update on our whistleblower activities, efforts, and initiatives. We want to thank the liaison for our Whistleblower Program, chivan and peter, to give them an u
Good morning Committee Members, im dr. Derek kerr, a whistleblower. An audit of the program is a good idea but it should not be a peer review audit. That would just buy into the biases and weaknesses that all Whistleblower Programs have. It would be important to get to an whistleblower advocacy organization, such as the Government Accountability project in washington d. C. One of the consultants could advise to the standards that a Whistleblower Program should have to meet the needs of the whistleblowers in the public. It needs to be an independent audit and not by the same folks. We heard a lot about the rising quantity of complaints, but i want to talk about the quality or value of those complaints. Since the inception, the Whistleblower Program has been plagued by minor complaints. The 20102011 civil grand jury found that 36 were true whistleblower complaints alleging fraud, waste, and abuse. Then the Whistleblower Program developed a Risk Assessment policy that was designed to tria
Since the inception, the Whistleblower Program has been plagued by minor complaints. The 20102011 civil grand jury found that 36 were true whistleblower complaints alleging fraud, waste, and abuse. Then the Whistleblower Program developed a Risk Assessment policy that was designed to triage the complaints and sort them out into low, medium, or high risk complaints. For example, the medium risk cases involved potential losses of 10,000 to 50,000 or they implicate a mid level manager. The medium and high risk cases are not represented in the whistleblower reports. Instead, we get a preponder remembers of cases of low level employees who use Work Computers for personal business, who leave work early, or show up late, who gamble or sleep on the job, or who smoke in city cars and park them inappropriately. Preventing these abuses is worthwhile, but wheres the beef . We dont hear about the big money violations or mid to high level official misconduct. Why not . If the Whistleblower Program d
Whistleblower complaints alleging fraud, waste, and abuse. Then the Whistleblower Program developed a Risk Assessment policy that was designed to triage the complaints and sort them out into low, medium, or high risk complaints. For example, the medium risk cases involved potential losses of 10,000 to 50,000 or they implicate a mid level manager. The medium and high risk cases are not represented in the whistleblower reports. Instead, we get a preponder remembers of cases of low level employees who use Work Computers for personal business, who leave work early, or show up late, who gamble or sleep on the job, or who smoke in city cars and park them inappropriately. Preventing these abuses is worthwhile, but wheres the beef . We dont hear about the big money violations or mid to high level official misconduct. Why not . If the Whistleblower Program does not receive such complaints, they should know why. If the Whistleblower Program refers such complaints elsewhere, they should know how