SENATE BILL REPORT
SHB 1121
As Reported By Senate Committee On:
Highways & Transportation, February 12, 2003
Title: An act relating to performance audits of transportation-related agencies.
Brief Description: Implementing performance audits of transportation-related agencies.
Sponsors: House Committee on Transportation (originally sponsored by Representatives Wallace, Clibborn, Murray, Romero, Hatfield, Kessler, Miloscia, Cooper, Simpson, Darneille, Lovick, Hunter, O'Brien, Veloria, Moeller, Eickmeyer, Hunt, Kenney, Schual-Berke, Fromhold, Conway, Wood, Linville, Berkey, Sullivan, McDermott, Haigh, Rockefeller, McCoy, Campbell, Upthegrove and Ruderman).
Brief History:
Committee Activity: Highways & Transportation: 2/12/03 [DPA].
Rules: 2/21/03 [GO].
SENATE COMMITTEE ON HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORTATION
Majority Report: Do pass as amended.
Signed by Senators Horn, Chair; Benton, Vice Chair; Swecker, Vice Chair; Esser, Finkbeiner, Haugen, Jacobsen; Kastama, Mulliken, Oke, Prentice and Spanel.
Staff: Greg Doss (786-7341)
Background: The State Auditor's Office regularly audits state and local government agencies. These fiscal audits focus on accounting controls and statutory compliance. Performance audits, on the other hand, focus on the operational effectiveness and efficiency of an organization or program. These audits are most typically conducted through the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) at the direction of the Legislature. Neither the State Auditor nor JLARC conduct regular scheduled performance audits of agencies.
Since 1991 there have been eight performance audits performed (seven since 1998) on the three major transportation-related agencies: Department of Licensing (DOL); Washington State Patrol (WSP); and the Department of Transportation (DOT). All of the performance audits had recommendations to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the agency and/or programs.
Most recently, there have been initiatives or referenda that required some form of performance auditing of transportation agencies. Referendum 51 contained provisions requiring a new citizen board to analyze and report on the expenditures and progress of new transportation projects that were to be funded with the new taxes proposed in that measure. Initiative 745 would have required (among other things) the State Auditor to conduct transportation performance audits. Proposed Initiative 257 would have required the State Auditor to conduct performance audits of all state agencies.
There is no current legal mandate for regular performance auditing of transportation-related agencies.
Summary of Amended Bill: The Transportation Performance Audit Board (TPAB) is created to direct a two step performance review and audit process. The TPAB consists of the majority and minority leaders of the House and Senate Transportation Committees, four citizens with expertise in delivering transportation services, one gubernatorial appointee and one ex-officio member. The citizen members are nominated by professional associations and appointed by the Governor for four-year terms. The ex-officio member is the State Legislative Auditor. The Legislative Transportation Committee (LTC) provides staff services to the TPAB.
Step 1. Performance Reviews: The TPAB develops schedules and methodology for conducting performance reviews of transportation agencies. Reviews of agency performance and outcome measures provide the TPAB with information necessary to determine if a full functional or performance audit is needed.
At the request of the TPAB, the Executive Committee of LTC may order the State Legislative Auditor to conduct a full functional or performance audit. To the greatest extent possible, the Legislative Auditor shall contract with the private sector for audit services. The Joint Legislative Audit Review Committee receives cost-reimbursement from LTC for audit services provided through contract.
Step 2. Performance Audits: If a functional or performance audit is warranted, the Legislative Auditor develops an audit scope under the direction of the TPAB. The Executive Committee of LTC must approve the audit scope. The audit scope may include nine specific elements: (1) identification of cost savings; (2) identification of services that can be reduced or eliminated; (3) identification of programs or services that can be transferred to the private sector; (4) analysis of gaps or overlaps in programs or services and recommendations to correct gaps or overlaps; (5) feasibility of pooling information technology systems within the department; (6) analysis of the roles and functions of the department, and recommendations to change or eliminate departmental roles or functions; (7) recommendations for statutory or regulatory changes that may be necessary for the department to properly carry out its functions; (8) analysis of departmental performance data, performance measures, and self-assessment systems; and (9) identification of best practices.
Amended Bill Compared to Original Bill: The striking amendment replaces SHB 1121 entirely (the striker is summarized above).
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Available.
Effective Date: Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.
Testimony For: The Department of Transportation welcomes performance audits. The general public feels that accountability is lacking, and these performance audits will help create greater accountability. Audit board members should not be current employees of the Department of Transportation.
Testimony Against: None.
Testified: Representative Deb Wallace; Kevin Shively, Transportation Choices Coalition.