Z. a. . .. . 05.24025 m_u_u_0_mZO< >r<>ImN mp TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary II. III. IV. Mandates Analysis Budget Process Analysis Opportunities Analysis EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The A&M team organized its review of the Department to coincide with the four interconnected key drivers of efficiency. Summary of Approach 1. Mandates: Reviewed the titles and statutes governing the Department and its divisions to determine if these align with the functions or services provided by each division within the Department. 2. Budget and Performance: Reviewed the Department’s current budget development process and assessed to what extent the Department utilizes performance measures to coincide with this process. 1. Opportunities: Identified opportunities for increasing the Department’s efficiency in meeting its mission; provided estimates for investment or cost savings related to those opportunities. Mandates Budget Opportunities Performance A thorough review of departmental mandates, budget process and performance measures is critical to determine opportunities for increased operational or financial efficiency. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The A&M team implemented the process below across each Department to document observations and develop recommendations for increased efficiency. Summary of ProcessAnalysis Approach to Mandates Step 1 Gather Information 1. Conduct research 2. Collect departmental data 3. Conduct interviews with division leads and staff Step 2 Document Observations Step 3 Develop Recommendations 1. Document key observations related to each division 1. Determine if legislative action is required to address the opportunity 2. Determine if observation provides an opportunity for increased efficiency 2. Document recommended process change and requirements 3. Estimate required investment and/or potential cost savings The A&M team applies its process and sub-steps across the Mandates, Budget and Opportunities Analyses, categorizing our findings as observations and recommendations. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 3 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A summary of our observations and recommendations are provided below and organized by report section. Summary of Findings Section Observations Recommendations 1. Mandates Analysis The majority of DAC lines of service (35 out of 40) align with a statute, only 1 of which is not aligned with the Department’s mission. Five lines of services do not align with a statute. The Department’s provision of child support services falls outside of the Department’s mission. Therefore, the Department should consider discontinuing this function. 2. Budget Process Analysis DAC provision of child support services falls outside of the Department’s mission. Performance-based budgeting: The Department should ensure that its strategic plan aligns with performance measures in addition to the strategic needs identified in the budget development process. 3. Opportunities Analysis The Department is responsible for supporting human resources, finance and operational functions of Oklahoma’s 27 District Attorneys and their offices. However there is limited capacity within DAC to effectively support standardization of financial and operational procedure across DA Districts. The Department and District Attorneys would benefit from investing in an additional budget analyst position as well as from the implementation of standardized fee collection and tracking processes across all DA Districts. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 4 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL OPPORTUNITIES A&M identified DAC cost savings and investment opportunities related to service delivery modernization, financial analytics, fee collection, and best practice dissemination. Summary of Recommendations 1. Invest in remote service delivery systems like remote support platforms and webinar based training services. 2. Hire an additional Budget Analyst. 3. Review fee collection processes and reduce uncollected fees. 4. Document and disseminate best practices associated with grant contract and financial management to other law enforcement agencies and grant partners. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 5 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL – INVESTMENT AND OPPORTUNITY A summary of preliminary estimates for recommendations that require investment and yield increased revenue capture provided below. Opportunity Investment Opportunity Net DAC should hire a budget analyst to enhance budget analytics and tracking provided to internal division staff and management. $100,000 --- -$100,000 DAC should review fee collection processes and reduce uncollected fees. $1,625,717 $6,502,870 $4,877,153 TOTAL $1,725,717 $6,502,870 $4,777,153 Executive Summary . Legislative Action Needed Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary II. III. IV. Mandates Analysis Budget Process Analysis Opportunities Analysis DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL MANDATES ANALYSIS ALVAREZ DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL MANDATES ANALYSIS A&M conducted a review of statutes related to the lines of service provided by the District Attorneys Council, following the process depicted below. Approach to Mandates Analysis Step 1 Reviewed 44 lines of service for the 6 Divisions within DAC Step 2 Is the line of service tied to a Mandatory Statute? Step 3 IF YES? Recommendations: 1. Amend 2. Repeal 3. No Change IF NO? Recommendations: 1. Consider Drafting Statute 2. Do Not Draft Statute The A&M Review Process identifies lines of service that fall outside the scope of the Department’s mission through a review of both lines of service definitions and their associated statutes. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 9 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL MANDATES ANALYSIS The A&M team found only 1 existing line of service currently in statute but which falls outside of the Department’s mission. Summary of Findings 1. The majority of DAC lines of service (35 out of 40) align with a statute. 2. Five lines of services do not align with a statute. Five of those lines of service are aligned with the Department’s mission. 3. DAC provision of child support services is in statute but falls outside of the Department’s mission. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 10 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL MANDATES ANALYSIS Executive Division Division Line of Service Definition of Line of Service Statute (YES/NO) Child Support Services DHS subcontracts with seven OK DA offices to collect delinquent child support payments. NO Consider repeal of Statute. Line of service falls outside the Department's mission. DAC Governing Council The DAC Governing Council meets monthly and is responsible for reviewing and approving the DAC annual report to the legislature. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Resource Prosecutor The Resource Prosecutor provides training and support for DA Offices. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Traffic Safety Prosecutor The Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor is responsible for training highway safety employees on traffic safety issues. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Action in Place - Do Not Recommend Drafting Statute Line of service falls outside the Department's mission. Uninsured Vehicle Enforcement DAC is responsible for implementing programs to enforce uninsured vehicle laws. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Executive Division Statute Action Recommended Reason Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 11 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL MANDATES ANALYSIS Federal Grants Division Division Federal Grants Division Line of Service Definition of Line of Service Statute (YES/NO) Statute Action Recommended Reason Justice Assistance Grant The Justice Assistance Grant provides Oklahoma w ith funding for multiple criminal justice areas including crime victim and w itness initiatives, behavioral programs and crisis intervention teams. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Justice Assistance Grant - Local law Enforcement The Justice Assistance Grant provides Oklahoma w ith funding for multiple criminal justice areas including local law enforcement and crime prevention and education. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. National Criminal History Improvement The National Criminal History Improvement Program provides funding to improve the quality, timeliness and immediate accessibility of criminal history records and related information. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Paul Coverdell Forensic Science Improvement Act The National Forensic Science Improvement Act provides funding to improve the quality and timeliness of forensic science and medical examiner and coroner services. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. National Instant Background Check Act Record Improvement Projects The National Instant Criminal Background Check Act Record Improvement Program provides funding to improve the completeness, automation and transmittal of records to state and federal systems. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 12 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL MANDATES ANALYSIS Federal Grants Division Division Federal Grants Division Line of Service Definition of Line of Service Statute (YES/NO) Statute Action Recommended Residential Substance Abuse Program The Residential Substance Abuse Treatment for State Prisoners Program provides funding for the development and implementation of substance abuse treatment programs in state, local and tribal correctional and detention facilities. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Rural Sexual Assault, Domestic Violence, Dating Violence and Stalking Assistance Program This program provides funding to address and prevent sexual assault, domestic/dating violence, and stalking in rural communities. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. S.T.O.P. Violence Against Women Act Grant This program provides funding to promote a coordinated, multidisciplinary approach to improving the criminal justice system’s response to violent crimes against w omen. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Sex Offender Registration Notification Act This program provides funding to protect children/adults from sexual exploitation and violent crime, prevent child abuse and child pornography, and promote Internet safety. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Sexual Assault Services Program Grant This program provides funding for the provision of direct intervention and related assistance for victims of sexual assault. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Project Safe Neighborhoods Grant This program funds law enforcement, community partnerships, and strategic enforcement efforts to tackle violent criminals in the most violent areas in Oklahoma. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Reason Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 13 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL MANDATES ANALYSIS Federal Grants and Finance Division Division Federal Grants Division Finance Division Line of Service Definition of Line of Service Statute (YES/NO) Statute Action Recommended Financial and Performance Metrics Analysis The DAC conducts statistical analysis required for grant reporting. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Accounting and Financial Reporting The Finance Division is responsible for routine accounting and financial reporting for the DA executive office as well as the funding allocated to the 27 DA districts. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Administration of the District Attorneys Council Revolving Fund DAC administers this discretionary fund established to collect state generated revenue dedicated to the DAC. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Budget Development and Oversight The Finance Division is responsible for budget development and oversight for the DA executive office as well as the funding allocated to the 27 DA districts. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. District Attorney Office Financial Passthrough DAC serves as a fiscal intermediary betw een the state and 27 DA district offices. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Insurance DAC oversees health insurance open enrollment for the DA executive office as well as the funding allocated to the 27 DA districts. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Payroll and Human Resources The Finance Division is responsible for the administration of DA executive payroll and all payroll functions for the 27 DA districts and associated employees. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Reason Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 14 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL MANDATES ANALYSIS Information Technology and Training & Outreach Division Division Information Technology Division Training & Outreach Division Line of Service Definition of Line of Service Statute (YES/NO) Statute Action Recommended Database Maintenance DAC IT provides database maintenance services to 25 out of 27 DA districts. NO No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Hardware Purchasing DAC IT provides hardware purchasing support to 25 out of 27 DA districts. NO No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. IT Support Services DAC IT provides support services to 25 out of 27 DA districts and the DAC executive office. NO No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Software Licensing Support DAC IT provides software licensing support to 25 out of 27 DA districts. NO No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Conference and Event Planning DAC hosts continuing education and training events for OK DA offices. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Coordinated Community Response DAC coordinates response teams to support local DA offices with domestic violence and sexual assault cases. NO No Action in Place - Do Not Recommend Drafting Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Reason Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 15 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL MANDATES ANALYSIS Training & Outreach Division Division Training & Outreach Division Line of Service Definition of Line of Service Financial and Performance Metrics Analysis DAC conducts statistical analysis required for grant reporting. Prosecutorial Continuing Education DAC provides for the education, training and coordination of technical efforts of all state prosecutors. Training and Curriculum Development Statute (YES/NO) Statute Action Recommended Reason YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. DAC provides for the education, training and coordination of technical efforts of all state prosecutors. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. VOCA Training DAC provides training on VOCA projects and their implementation to local entities. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Juvenile Training DAC received a grant in September 2018 to administer training to DA Districts on issues regarding juveniles. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Outreach and Publications DAC publishes a monthly newsletter to communicate upcoming training opportunities and job announcements to the 27 DA Districts. NO No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 16 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL MANDATES ANALYSIS Victims Services Division Division Victims Services Division Line of Service Definition of Line of Service Statute (YES/NO) Statute Action Recommended Administration of Crime Victims Compensation Fund DAC Victim Services conducts victim compensation assessments and pays associated claims. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Administration of the Crime Victims Compensation Revolving Fund DAC administers this fund established for the payment and restitution of crime victims in Oklahoma. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Administration of the Sexual Assault Examination Fund DAC administers this fund established for the financing of sexual assault examinations in Oklahoma. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Financial and Performance Metrics Analysis DAC conducts statistical analysis required for grant reporting. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Victim Services Training DAC provides training and support for local DA employees working on Victim Services programs. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Reason Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 17 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL MANDATES ANALYSIS Victims Services Division Division Victims Services Division Line of Service Definition of Line of Service Statute (YES/NO) Statute Action Recommended Crime Victims Compensation Board DAC oversees and administers funding associated with crime victims compensation. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute. Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Sexual Assault and Restitution Recovery DAC requests restitution reimbursement on awarded sexual assault claims in order to support ongoing assistance to victims. YES No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Victims of Crime Act Grant This program provides funding for crime victim services programs. YES (FEDERAL GRANT) No Change Recommended to the Statute Statute reflects a line of service that currently aligns with the Department's mission. Reason Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 18 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary II. III. IV. Mandates Analysis Budget Process Analysis Opportunities Analysis BUDGET PROCESS ANALYSIS ALVAREZ BUDGET PREPARATION AND MONITORING A&M recommends that budget preparation and monitoring coincide with the annual budget cycle. Overview 2. It is important to continue monthly budget to actual reporting (as outlined on the next slide) throughout the budget cycle. Departments undergo various levels of budget preparation within the cycle as detailed in the observations and recommendations section of this report. 2. Next Budget Request Due 1. Fiscal Year Begins 5. Budget Enacted Annual Budget Cycle Fall 3. Summer Budget preparation should begin at the beginning of the fiscal year (FY) to ensure the following steps are incorporated prior to sending to OMES for review: • Analysis of previous FY’s expenditures • Stakeholder engagement • Strategic planning • Review of performance measures by Division Spring 1. Figure 1. Annual Budget Cycle 3. OMES Review 4. Budget Request to Chambers Winter Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 21 OVERVIEW OF PERFORMANCE-BASED BUDGETING A&M recommends that each department adopt performance-based budgeting (PBB), a strategy to improve budgeting and ensure that tax dollars are spent efficiently and effectively. Budget Strategies Description Incremental (IB) The traditional approach to governmental budgeting where the current year’s budget becomes the basis for the next year’s spending plan, and the majority of the organization’s analytical and political attention focuses on how to modify this year’s spending plan based on revenues anticipated in the next year. An incremental approach is workable, if suboptimal, in periods of reasonably stable expenditure and revenue growth because the current level of expenditures can be funded with relatively little controversy. In budget-constrained environments, does not provide a prioritized view of the Department’s budget needs that is tied to mission or outcomes. 2. Zero-based (ZBB) Budget built from the ground up, starting from zero. ZBB promises to move the organization away from incremental budgeting, where last year’s budget is the starting point. Instead, the starting point becomes zero, with the implication that past patterns of spending are no longer taken as a given. In theory, the organization’s entire budget needs to be justified and approved, rather than just the incremental change from the prior year. Requires rigorous analysis to complete budget development every cycle without tying the request to the Department’s mission or outcomes. 3. Requires Departments to estimate the funding Performance levels needed to meet prioritized outcomes -based (PBB) tied to the Department’s mission. Enables budget decision making that is tied to performance and workload drivers such that cuts or increases in the budget can be measured in terms of outcomes that are trying to be achieved. Requires commitment and coordination across the Department, the Executive Budget Office, and Legislature. # 1. National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) brief: 1 Government Finance Officers Association: 1, 2, 3 Benefits Drawbacks Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 22 OVERVIEW OF PERFORMANCE-BASED BUDGETING A&M recommends that each Department adopt performance-based budgeting (PBB), a strategy to improve budgeting and ensure that tax dollars are spent efficiently and effectively. Characteristics Outcomes 1. Incorporates a long-term perspective; 1. The development of organizational goals; 2. Establishes linkages to broad organizational goals; 2. Establishment of policies and plans to achieve these goals; and 3. Focuses budget decisions on results and outcomes; 3. Allocation of resources through the budget process that are consistent with goals, policies, and plans. 4. Involves and promotes effective communication with stakeholders; and 5. Provides incentives to government management and employees. Performance-based budgeting focuses more on outcomes than traditional budgeting. National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) brief: 1 Government Finance Officers Association: 1 Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 23 STEPS TO IMPLEMENT Performance-based budgeting is a strategy to improve budgeting and ensure that tax dollars are spent efficiently and effectively. # Step Description 1. Adopt legislation supporting performance-based budgeting Research shows that when there is a law supporting performance budgeting, there is stronger support and smoother implementation (e.g. State agencies are directed to develop strategic plans for their agency which are then included in the budget process). 2. Incorporate strategic plans developed by the Department Agency strategic plans should be included in the budget process. For example, the strategic plan should describe an agency’s goals and how proposed resource allocations contribute to the accomplishment of those goals. 3. Develop and deploy Department performance measures The quality of the measures produced have an important impact on whether performance budgeting works. If the state develops a program inventory, it can begin to develop measures for its programs. An executive order could be used to define a measurement system needed to support a performance budgeting approach while the state takes the time to develop a thorough and thoughtful law supporting performance budgeting. 4. Develop implementation plan for performance-based budgeting The legislative statute shouldn’t define the precise details of a performance budgeting process. These details will need to be designed by administrators. The development of a performance measurement statute will help define some of the features of the process. 5. Consider developing statewide goals and priorities It is more practical to set goals and plans for each agency than it is for the state government as a whole. However, the absence of statewide goals limits the potential benefit of a performance budgeting system. This is because if there are no statewide goals, there is no context to judge the relative merit of one program versus another across state agencies. Government Finance Officers Association: 1 Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 24 CHALLENGES State agencies face challenges in effectively implementing performance-based budgeting. Challenges Solutions 1. Data collection is critical to successfully implementing performancebased budgeting; availability and quality of data across Department programs often requires investment to improve before a PBB process can be put in place. 1. The legislature and Department need to align on required technology investment(s) to establish a technology platform and processes that will capture and ensure quality of data. 2. Departments need to develop strategic plans and performance measures to align with budget development; these are time-intensive exercises for which budget officers do not have the authority to coordinate. 2. Stakeholders across the Department, executive administration, and legislature need to align on the Department’s strategic plan and its incorporation into the budget request in order for a PBB process to succeed. 3. Many state governmental departments that have adopted PBB do not see the benefits in continuing the process year over year; state legislatures who have mandated this process do not necessarily tie it to budget decisions. 3. The legislature must commit to incorporating the principals of a PBB into the budget review process and clearly tie decisions driving allocation of funding across Departments and their divisions to this process. PEW Research: 1 NCLS: 1 Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 25 BIG PICTURE The budget process should align with a clear view of what services each division is mandated to deliver and include a review of performance measures for these services. This is exactly the scope of the APAC statement of work. Summary 1. The budget development process should always provide an opportunity for the Department to review their organization’s mandates and prioritize the needs of each Division to meet those mandates; PBB is designed to do just that. 2. Further, Divisions should utilize the budget development process as an opportunity to tie historical expenditures and requested funding to their state performance measures and outcomes. 3. All stakeholders responsible for driving the budget development process (the Department’s budget and Divisional leadership, the executive budget office, the Legislature) must weigh opportunities for additional investment and/or cost savings measures against the performance measures of the Department. Mandates Budget Opportunities Performance Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 26 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL Summary of Observations and Recommendations of the Budget Process Category Organization and Staffing Observation The Department should ensure that its strategic plan aligns with performance measures in addition to the strategic operational needs currently identified in the budget development process. Budget development and monitoring are conducted by the Budget and Finance team and overseen by the director of this unit. Budget Development The Department practices incremental budgeting by collecting requests from each District Attorney office and the DAC divisions. Strategic priorities for the District Attorney offices are set at the District Attorney level and are set for DAC by the DAC Governing Council. Budget Monitoring The Budget Director conducts monthly budget reporting at the DAC division level and supports the District Attorney offices payroll and human resources budgeting on a monthly basis. The Department should ensure that its strategic plan aligns with performance measures in addition to the strategic needs identified in the budget development process. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 27 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary II. III. IV. Mandates Analysis Budget Process Analysis Opportunities Analysis DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL OPPORTUNITIES ALVAREZ A&M RECOMMENDATIONS DEVELOPMENT A&M is following an iterative process for developing recommendation opportunities for the District Attorneys Council. Recommendations Development Process • Formulate Observations and Begin Conducting Analyses. • Include analysis on Mandates, Budget Process, and Other Areas for Improvement. • Issue Data Requests and Conduct Interviews with Department Directors. • Ensure Data is Provided at the Program or Division Level. CURRENT STATUS • Review Draft Recommendations and supporting Analysis with Departments. • Incorporate feedback and changes as appropriate. 1. Gather Inputs 2. Conduct Analysis 4. Review Recommendations 3. Develop Recommendations District Attorneys Council Divisions: • Executive • Finance • Federal Grant Management • Information Technology • Training & Outreach • Victims Crime Services • Review with DAC division leads. • Gather feedback and revise accordingly. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 30 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL OPPORTUNITIES A&M identified DAC cost savings and investment opportunities related to service delivery modernization, financial analytics, fee collection, and best practice dissemination. Summary of Recommendations 1. Invest in remote service delivery systems like remote support platforms and webinar based training services. 2. Hire an additional Budget Analyst. 1. Review fee collection processes and reduce uncollected fees. 2. Document and disseminate best practices associated with grant contract and financial management to other law enforcement agencies and grant partners. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 31 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL – INVESTMENT AND OPPORTUNITY A summary of preliminary estimates for recommendations that require investment and yield increased revenue capture provided below. Opportunity Investment Opportunity Net DAC should hire a budget analyst to enhance budget analytics and tracking provided to internal division staff and management. $100,000 --- -$100,000 DAC should review fee collection processes and reduce uncollected fees. $1,625,717 $6,502,870 $4,877,153 TOTAL $1,725,717 $6,502,870 $4,777,153 Executive Summary . Legislative Action Needed Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 32 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL OPPORTUNITIES Executive Division, Federal Grant Management, and Finance Division Executive Division Function Observations Recommendations Child Support 20 DA Districts have opted out of serving as subcontractors to provide child support collection services to DHS. Eliminate child support services from DA office lines of service. The line of service is not within scope of the DA office mission. See mandates analysis. Fee Collection DA Offices do not have clear enough visibility into tracking and managing the recovery of uncollected fees. Review the fee collection process to reduce uncollected funds. Consider options that include coordinating across the DAs with a collections agency (possibly the collector of last resort), or outlining training opportunities to ensure best practices are in place and that there is an ability to report and compare collected vs. uncollected fees by district. Contract Timelines DAC Federal Grants division revised its contracts to align with grant terms vs. state fiscal years. This practice reduces amount of staff time spent on annual contract development and approval. Minimize time spent on administrative oversight related to subgrantee contracting by extending all grant contract start and end dates to the full term of the grant. Grant Management DAC state agency level subgrantees struggle to spend federal funding. If a subgrantee does not spend its grant dollars, it can put DAC’s ability to receive the same amount of funding the next grant cycle at risk. DAC grant management team should offer training to state agency level subgrantees on DAC best practices for efficient fiscal and operational planning to support timely spend down of federal dollars. Budget Management The DAC annual budgeting process is manually intensive and creates a burden of work that is greater than one finance staff person. Indirect Cost Rate DAC does not have an approved indirect cost rate for its federal grants. Federal Grant Management Finance Utilize enhanced analytical modules within PeopleSoft to standardize and automate budget tracking and management. Hire a budget analyst to enhance budget analytics and tracking support provided to DAC Division staff. Submit and receive approval for a minimum 10% indirect cost rate for all federal grants administered by the Victims Services Division. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 33 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION DEVELOPMENT A&M has highlighted efficient processes (in orange) from DAC’s Federal Grants Division that can be applied to grant management in other departments and divisions. Key Observations (from left to right) • There is a process for spending down oldest funding first. • FGD uses a shared timeline for PeopleSoft and OKGrants configuration to award subgrantee funding. • FGD creates subgrantee specific activity codes to allow grantee level budget tracking. • FGD has defined invoice data variables and an established deadline for invoice submission with grantees. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 34 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL OPPORTUNITIES Information Technology, Training and Outreach Division Function Observations Recommendations DAC has received an exemption from OMES to provide IT services to DA Districts. DA Districts request a level of support that is above what OMES provides to state agencies. Information Technology Information Technology Services DA Offices use data management platforms that are slow and operated by the state Supreme Court. IT Personnel travel to offices to provide IT support that could be provided remotely. Identify and certify local POCs that can assist with basic IT functions and invest in a CITRIX IT platform. Renegotiate SLAs with DA offices to clarify role and responsibility of DAC IT department. The scope of the DAC IT Division service level agreements with the DA Offices is broad and puts DAC IT at risk for defining requests for support as in or out of scope. Training and Outreach Training and Outreach Services Training and Outreach is a core function of DAC services as outlined in statute. DAC was originally established to be a training and outreach support system for Oklahoma District Attorneys. DAC Training and Outreach Division does not have formal partnerships with the state Attorney General's Office or the National District Attorneys Association. Partner with the Attorney General’s office and National District Attorneys Association to reduce costs related to DAC hosted training conferences. DAC Training and Outreach Division hosts and funds associated travel costs for statewide DA training events. Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 35 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL UNCOLLECTED FEE ANALYSIS The A&M team conducted an analysis of uncollected fee data in thirteen DA Districts to estimate decreasing outstanding obligations owed to the state through a contract with a collection agency. Data Observations Observations: • Districts Currently Tracking Uncollected Fees DA Districts Counties All Oklahoma DA Districts are capable of tracking uncollected fees; however, only 13 districts use the JustWare financial module allowing DAC to track uncollected fees. • Data on uncollected fees is carried over each fiscal year. • The cumulative amount of uncollected fees across districts using the JustWare financial module FY18 was $56,362,044.89. • Excluding fees paid in the last 90 days, the FY18 total for uncollected fees is $50,763,946.24. • Excluding fees assessed prior to 2010, the FY18 total is $32,514,354.54. • Data does not include Oklahoma or Tulsa county uncollected fee data. 13 14 District 3 District 5 District 6 District 8 District 10 District 11 District 12 District 15 District 18 District 19 District 21 District 25 District 27 Greer, Harmon, Kiowa, Jackson, & Tillman Comanche & Cotton Caddo, Grady, Jefferson & Stephens Kay & Noble Osage & Pawnee Nowata & Washington Craig, Mayes & Rogers Muskogee Haskell & Pittsburg Atoka, Bryan & Coal Cleveland, Garvin & McClain McIntosh & Okmulgee Adair, Cherokee, Sequoyah & Wagoner 36 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL UNCOLLECTED FEE ANALYSIS DAC expressed concerns related to pursuing a collection strategy for these funds. DAC Concerns - It is unclear why people have not paid fees. These individuals could chose not to pay, may be incarcerated, live out of state, or may be unaware of options to establish a payment plan. - If a collection strategy is implemented, then a methodology is needed to prevent collection action against offenders who are actively paying on fees. - DAC is concerned that unscrupulous collection vendors and practices would result in ruined credit or additional hardship for offenders. - DAC is not currently generating reports on uncollected balances by district. DAC could work with the Finance Coordinator(s) in each districts to implement this process. - DAC does have the authority to implement the JustWare system in all DA districts and therefore may not be able to estimate uncollected fee amounts for the 14 DA Districts currently not using JustWare. DAC has explored the capability of the 14 districts not using JustWare to estim ate uncollected fees. DAC does not have confidence in the accuracy of the data stored in the system used by those 14 districts. - The DA Offices believe they are in the best position to conduct direct outreach to individuals. They believe individuals are more likely to pay a fee if the outreach comes from the DA directly. - The DA Offices have requested DAC create a training plan to support enhanced efforts to increase collection of outstanding fees. 37 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL UNCOLLECTED FEE ANALYSIS Several states and local municipalities have engaged collection agencies to support their efforts to generate revenue associated with uncollected court fees. Collection Effort Considerations • The following states have entered into either statewide or local agreements with collection agencies: Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Oregon. • Credit Collection Partners, MSB Services, and Harris & Harris LTD are three agencies providing collection support to counties in Illinois. • Recommendations from county officials on how to run a successful collection effort include the following: • Do not try to collect on all fees. Establish a statute of limitations on uncollected fees and only implement collection efforts for those fees that have been assessed within a reasonable time frame. • Ensure the data used to determine uncollected fees is reliable and recent. • Hire a reputable collection agency. 38 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL UNCOLLECTED FEE ANALYSIS Based on initial analysis, DAC can generate $4.9 million in new revenue if the council pursues an initiative to decrease uncollected fees. Approach to Estimate Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Calculate total uncollected fees for all 13 Districts by summing the value of total uncollected FY18 fees and excluding fees assessed prior to 2010 and those with an associated payment in the last ninety days. . Assume the collection agency will collect a minimum of 20% of the total amount of uncollected fees. Assume the collection agency will keep 25% of the total fees they collect. $32,514,354.54 $6,502,870.91 $1,625,717.73 Step 4 Calculate the difference between the amount collected and the collection agency’s payment. $4,877,153.18 39 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL UNCOLLECTED FEE ANALYSIS The total amount of all uncollected fees documented in JustWare for the below districts is $56,362,044. DAC Estimated Generated Revenue by District District / FY Year Total Uncollected Fees Expected Collection from Vendor (20%) Pay Out to Collections Vendor (25%) DAC Estimated Generated Revenue 3 / FY 2018 $1,458,055.79 $291,611.16 $72,902.79 $218,708.37 5 / FY 2018 $10,923,005.23 $2,184,601.05 $546,150.26 $1,638,450.78 6 / FY 2018 $8,319,051.15 $1,663,810.23 $415,952.56 $1,247,857.67 8 / FY 2018 $2,991,279.10 $598,255.82 $149,563.96 $448,691.87 10 / FY 2018 $2,185,721.63 $437,144.33 $109,286.08 $327,858.24 11 / FY 2018 $913,220.60 $182,644.12 $45,661.03 $136,983.09 12 / FY 2018 $3,679,870.99 $735,974.20 $183,993.55 $551,980.65 15 / FY 2018 $3,639,312.99 $727,862.60 $181,965.65 $545,896.95 18 / FY 2018 $4,009,738.09 $801,947.62 $200,486.90 $601,460.71 19 / FY 2018 $1,325,528.96 $265,105.79 $66,276.45 $198,829.34 21 / FY 2018 $7,695,490.31 $1,539,098.06 $384,774.52 $1,154,323.55 25 / FY 2018 $1,637,606.98 $327,521.40 $81,880.35 $245,641.05 27 / FY 2018 $7,584,163.07 $1,516,832.61 $379,208.15 $1,137,624.46 TOTAL $56,362,044.89 $11,272,408.98 $2,818,102.24 $8,454,306.73 40 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL UNCOLLECTED FEE ANALYSIS DAC conducted a revised analysis of FY18 uncollected fees by district and removed all fees that have received a payment in the last 90 days, bringing the total down from $56,362,044 to $50,763,946. Revised DAC Estimated Generated Revenue by District District / FY Year Total Uncollected Fees Expected Collection from Vendor (20%) Pay Out to Collections Vendor (25%) DAC Estimated Generated Revenue 3 / FY 2018 $1,161,981.07 $232,396.21 $58,099.05 $174,297.16 5 / FY 2018 $10,415,500.70 $2,083,100.14 $520,775.04 $1,562,325.11 6 / FY 2018 $7,810,568.03 $1,562,113.61 $390,528.40 $1,171,585.20 8 / FY 2018 $2,488,578.54 $497,715.71 $124,428.93 $373,286.78 10 / FY 2018 $1,771,555.62 $354,311.12 $88,577.78 $265,733.34 11 / FY 2018 $775,073.11 $155,014.62 $38,753.66 $116,260.97 12 / FY 2018 $3,161,478.69 $632,295.74 $158,073.93 $474,221.80 15 / FY 2018 $3,213,082.16 $642,616.43 $160,654.11 $481,962.32 18 / FY 2018 $3,748,178.79 $749,635.76 $187,408.94 $562,226.82 19 / FY 2018 $1,059,764.92 $211,952.98 $52,988.25 $158,964.74 21 / FY 2018 $7,040,687.05 $1,408,137.41 $352,034.35 $1,056,103.06 25 / FY 2018 $1,382,498.39 $276,499.68 $69,124.92 $207,374.76 27 / FY 2018 $6,734,999.17 $1,346,999.83 $336,749.96 $1,010,249.88 TOTAL $50,763,946.24 $10,152,789.25 $2,538,197.31 $7,614,591.94 41 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS COUNCIL UNCOLLECTED FEE ANALYSIS DAC further refined the initial analysis of FY18 uncollected fees by calculating fees assessed since 2010. The last DA District to convert to JustWare did so in 2009. Therefore, fee data since 2010 is more reliable since it is entered into JustWare as it is assessed. The revised total uncollected fee amount across these thirteen districts is $32,514,354. Revised DAC Estimated Generated Revenue by District District / FY Year Total Uncollected Fees Expected Collection from Vendor (20%) Pay Out to Collections Vendor (25%) DAC Estimated Generated Revenue 3 / FY 2018 $1,127,502.48 $225,500.50 $56,375.12 $169,125.37 5 / FY 2018 $3,761,449.23 $752,289.85 $188,072.46 $564,217.38 6 / FY 2018 $4,420,370.98 $884,074.20 $221,018.55 $663,055.65 8 / FY 2018 $2,200,429.27 $440,085.85 $110,021.46 $330,064.39 10 / FY 2018 $1,717,678.22 $343,535.64 $85,883.91 $257,651.73 11 / FY 2018 $723,698.72 $144,739.74 $36,184.94 $108,554.81 12 / FY 2018 $3,152,083.69 $630,416.74 $157,604.18 $472,812.55 15 / FY 2018 $2,394,753.24 $478,950.65 $119,737.66 $359,212.99 18 / FY 2018 $2,216,537.49 $443,307.50 $110,826.87 $332,480.62 19 / FY 2018 $1,050,765.92 $210,153.18 $52,538.30 $157,614.89 21 / FY 2018 $4,130,053.56 $826,010.71 $206,502.68 $619,508.03 25 / FY 2018 $1,296,785.06 $259,357.01 $64,839.25 $194,517.76 27 / FY 2018 $4,322,246.68 $864,449.34 $216,112.33 $648,337.00 TOTAL $32,514,354.54 $6,502,870.91 $1,625,717.73 $4,877,153.18 42 FEE COLLECTION PROCESS (NOT RESTITUTION) *+10% court clerk added **+15% court added ( added 2, 3 years back) Paid by offender TWO SYSTEMS *Only for cases managed by court clerks Fees divvied up by courts Trending toward OKSCN consolidation 3rd party manager at 77 District Court level (ondemand court records (ODCR)) OKSCN ODCR Managed by admin co of SC OFFENDER PAYMENT PROCESS DA OFFICE (prosecutorial fees directly from offender to DA) COURT CLERK DOC (when offender is in DOC custody) Monthly payments to DAC Informal ranking process Fee collection process (court is #1, then assortment of EB fees) 77 DA offices (27 elected DAs) Judge orders fees (991, misdemeanors, supervision fees, VCA fees, etc.) Fess goes to the 77 COURT CLERKS (each county has one) DAC Other agencies collection process DOC (supervision fees only) OR DA (supervision fees) (minority of fees) OR DA (991) OR Deposited directly to Victim Comp Revolving Fund Small portion transferred to DAC administration Unable to assess missing fees automatic fees SYSTEM/DATA GAP Supreme Court Network – no aggregate view, only case-by-case Executive Summary . Mandates Analysis . . Budget Process Opportunities Analysis Analysis 43 Alvarez & Marsal Holdings, LLC. All rights reserved. ALVAREZ & MARSAL®, ® and A&M® are trademarks of Alvarez & Marsal Holdings, LLC. © Copyright 2018