CSA
Recommendations
Read the report at California State Auditor ↗
California Department
of Public Health
It Has Missed Opportunities to Collect
and Report Sexual Orientation and
Gender Identity Data
April 2023
REPORT 2022‑102
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200 | Sacramento | CA | 95814
916.445.0255 | TTY 916.445.0033
For complaints of state employee misconduct,
contact us through the Whistleblower Hotline:
1.800.952.5665
Don’t want to miss any of our reports? Subscribe to our email list at auditor.ca.gov
For questions regarding the contents of this report, please contact our Public Affairs Office at 916.445.0255
This report is also available online at www.auditor.ca.gov | Alternative format reports available upon request | Permission is granted to reproduce reports
Grant Parks State Auditor
April 27, 2023
2022‑102
The Governor of California
President pro Tempore of the Senate
Speaker of the Assembly
State Capitol
Sacramento, California 95814
Dear Governor and Legislative Leaders:
As directed by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, my office conducted an audit of the
California Department of Public Health’s (Public Health) role in collecting, reporting, and using
sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data. We determined that Public Health has
been slow to adopt and enforce standardized guidelines to ensure the consistent collection and
reporting of SOGI data, which has limited its ability to identify and address health disparities
among those in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning population.
Public Health collects health-related demographic data using a variety of reporting forms,
questionnaires, and surveys (forms), but the department has not had clear and consistent
policies regarding how such forms should collect SOGI data. Of the 129 forms we reviewed, 105
were exempt from the requirement to collect SOGI data but were not prohibited from doing
so, and only 17 of the remaining 24 forms collect complete SOGI data. The lack of consistent
SOGI data collection procedures, and ultimately the low number of Public Health forms that
currently collect SOGI data, indicate that changes to state law may be warranted to compel
more consistent and useful SOGI data collection practices.
Public Health also has a limited ability to analyze and use the SOGI data that it does collect
to implement and deliver critical services. It is unable to collect or export SOGI data for the
majority of reportable communicable diseases in California because it has not resolved technical
barriers that limit its electronic communicable disease surveillance system from collecting
SOGI data. Instead of resolving the technical issues, the department plans to replace its current
system with a new surveillance system in 2025. Finally, local health jurisdictions and health care
providers reported that they needed guidance from Public Health regarding the collection of
SOGI information and standardized SOGI definitions. However, Public Health has not provided
them with such guidelines, training, or resources.
Respectfully submitted,
GRANT PARKS
California State Auditor
621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200 | Sacramento, CA 95814 | 916.445.0255 | 916.327.0019 fax | www.auditor.ca.gov
iv CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Selected Abbreviations Used in This Report
CalREDIE California Reportable Disease Information Exchange
CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Department Operations Improvement Team Subcommittee on Demographic
DOIT Subcommittee
Data Collection
ECR electronic case reporting
LGBTQ lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning
SOGI sexual orientation and gender identity
STD sexually transmitted diseases
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR v
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
Contents
Summary 1
Recommendations 5
Introduction 7
Audit Results
Public Health Collects SOGI Data in Only a Small Portion of the
Forms It Uses to Gather Demographic Data 13
Unresolved Technical Issues Prevent SOGI Data Collection and Analysis 17
Public Health Has Performed Little Analysis of or Reporting on
the SOGI Data It Does Collect 22
Local Health Jurisdictions and Health Care Providers Need SOGI
Data Collection Guidelines and Training 23
Other Areas We Reviewed 27
Appendix A
Results of Our Survey of Local Health Jurisdictions 31
Appendix B
Results of Our Survey of Health Care Providers 33
Appendix C
Scope and Methodology 35
Response to the Audit
California Department of Public Health 39
vi CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 1
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
Summary
Audit Highlights …
Results in Brief
Our audit of Public Health’s role in
The California Department of Public Health (Public Health) has been collecting, reporting, and using sexual
slow to adopt and enforce standardized definitions, guidelines, and orientation and gender identity (SOGI)
training to ensure the consistent collection, analysis, and reporting of data highlighted the following:
demographic data that details sexual orientation and gender identity
(SOGI). As a result, the department and its branches, units, sections, » The California Department of Public
programs, and divisions (branches) have limited ability to identify and Health (Public Health) has been slow
address health disparities that exist among those in the lesbian, gay, to adopt and enforce standardized
bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning (LGBTQ) population. definitions, guidelines, and training
The Legislature has said that it is in the best interests of the State to to ensure the consistent collection,
understand the full diversity of its residents and to collect accurate analysis, and reporting of demographic
data to effectively implement and deliver critical services. Recent data that details sexual orientation and
studies have found that consistent SOGI data collection and analysis gender identity (SOGI).
allow organizations and agencies to identify groups within the LGBTQ
population that are disproportionately underserved and to direct • As result, Public Health has limited
specific outreach and services to those groups. Beginning no later than its ability to identify and address
July 2018, state law required certain state departments, including Public health disparities among those
Health, to collect and report voluntarily provided self-identification in the lesbian, gay, bisexual,
about SOGI when they collect ancestry or ethnic origin information. transgender, and queer or
Although Public Health made some initial efforts to implement the law questioning (LGBTQ) population.
by developing departmentwide guidance, it has not ensured that its
various branches have consistently collected or reported SOGI data as » Public Health collects SOGI data on
state law intends. only a small portion of the forms it
uses to gather demographic data.
Public Health collects health-related demographic data using a variety
of reporting forms, questionnaires, and surveys, and we refer to these • Of the 129 forms we reviewed,
data collection methods as forms. The forms we reviewed covered a 105 were exempt, but not
wide range of topics, from communicable diseases, such as foodborne prohibited, from collecting SOGI
illnesses and sexually transmitted diseases, to vaping-related chemical data. Most of these forms were
exposures and healthy eating. We identified 129 Public Health forms exempt because the data is
that collect ancestry or ethnic origin information and therefore may collected by a third party, such
be required by law to collect SOGI data. However, after we informed as a local health jurisdiction.
Public Health that its branches were not collecting SOGI data for most of This exemption severely limits
these forms, Public Health clarified its position on the particular forms the amount of SOGI data the
required to collect SOGI data, asserting that 105 of the 129 forms fall department is required to collect.
under exemptions from the law that requires SOGI data collection. One
exemption in state law permits, but does not require, Public Health to • Lack of clear and consistent policies
collect SOGI when the information is collected by a third-party entity, and procedures have also hindered
such as a local health jurisdiction or health care provider. Most of the the department’s collection of SOGI
forms that Public Health asserts are exempt from state law fall under this data. Of the remaining 24 forms
third-party exemption. This exemption severely limits the amount of required to collect SOGI data, only
SOGI data the department is required to collect and analyze. 17 do so in a complete manner.
The remaining 24 forms are required by law to collect SOGI data, yet
seven do not collect complete SOGI data because of a lack of clear continued on next page . . .
and consistent policies regarding SOGI data. Public Health created
2 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
» Public Health’s system for collecting guidance on the questions and responses that its forms should use to
and reporting data on communicable collect SOGI data, and the department initially stated that adherence to
diseases, CalREDIE, is inadequate for this guidance was mandatory. However, when we presented the initial
collecting and reporting SOGI data. results of our audit, Public Health then explained that its guidance was
not mandatory and that Public Health forms could comply with state
• Because of resource and technical law in collecting SOGI without complying with the department’s own
limitations, Public Health cannot guidance. Even so, absent any other criteria, we found it reasonable to
export the SOGI data it collects use the departmentwide guidance to determine whether Public Health’s
for over 100 of the 128 reportable forms were collecting complete SOGI data.
disease conditions in CalREDIE.
We also found that Public Health’s system for collecting and reporting
• Three of the largest local health data on communicable diseases is inadequate for collecting and reporting
jurisdictions in the State— SOGI data. In 2010 Public Health created the California Reportable
the counties of Los Angeles, Disease Information Exchange (CalREDIE), a statewide database and
San Francisco, and San Diego— surveillance system for reporting communicable diseases. Laboratories,
do not use CalREDIE to report health care providers, and local health jurisdictions use CalREDIE to
certain diseases. report communicable diseases to Public Health, and in fact, Public Health
has said that laboratories report most new communicable disease cases in
• Instead of resolving the technical CalREDIE. However, state law does not require laboratories to collect and
issues, the department plans to report SOGI data to Public Health when reporting certain diseases, and
replace its current system with a even if such a requirement existed, it is unlikely that laboratories would
new surveillance system in 2025. be able to report much SOGI data because laboratories rarely interact
directly with patients and do not have the opportunity to solicit SOGI
» Public Health has only made SOGI information from them. In 2022 Public Health launched a new reporting
data available to the public from 17 of method to facilitate the transfer of data from health care providers directly
the forms we reviewed, and it has not to Public Health. However, this new reporting method is only limited
reported directly to the Legislature to cases of COVID-19 and is unable to report SOGI data to CalREDIE
any SOGI data from the forms because of technological barriers.
we reviewed.
Further, three local health jurisdictions in the State—the counties of
» Despite their critical role in collecting Los Angeles, San Francisco, and San Diego—do not use CalREDIE
SOGI information, Public Health has for some of their communicable disease reporting. Although those
not provided guidelines, training, or local health jurisdictions use other methods of data transfers to
resources to local health jurisdictions report communicable disease, we found in our review that Public
or health care providers regarding Health was not receiving SOGI data from all of these local health
definitions for collecting SOGI jurisdictions. Finally, because of resource and technical limitations,
information or for recommended Public Health can export from CalREDIE the SOGI data for only 27
questions and response fields. of the 128 reportable disease conditions that CalREDIE tracks and is
therefore limited in its ability to analyze and use the data in the system.
Because Public Health has begun the process to replace CalREDIE, the
department has not dedicated the resources to update CalREDIE.
Subject to certain limitations, Public Health has a legal requirement to
report to the Legislature the SOGI data it collects and to make that data
available to the public. However, Public Health has only made SOGI data
from 17 of the forms we reviewed available to the public, and it has not
reported directly to the Legislature any SOGI data related to these forms.
Public Health’s technical limitations prevent its branches from efficiently
extracting and analyzing the SOGI data Public Health has collected,
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 3
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
and Public Health’s branches explain that the insufficient amount and
quality of SOGI data that they do receive prevents their analysis and
reporting. Nevertheless, Public Health has not taken the necessary
steps to improve its SOGI data collection processes, despite having the
authorization to do so. For example, Public Health is permitted, but not
required, to collect SOGI data when the data is collected by third-party
entities. When surveyed, the local health jurisdictions and health care
providers indicated that they needed guidelines from Public Health
regarding the collection of SOGI information and standardized SOGI
definitions. However, Public Health provides no guidelines, training, or
resources to local health jurisdictions or health care providers regarding
recommended questions and response fields or definitions for collecting
SOGI information.
Agency Comments
Public Health generally agreed with the findings and recommendations
in our report and indicated that it will work to improve its efforts in
this area.
4 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 5
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
Recommendations
The following are the recommendations we made as a result of our audit.
Descriptions of the findings and conclusions that led to these recommendations can
be found in the Audit Results section of this report.
Legislature
To ensure that Public Health’s branches use the SOGI data it collects to identify and
address disparities in health outcomes, and to provide Public Health with an efficient
mechanism to fulfill its current reporting requirements, the Legislature should
require Public Health to provide an annual report to the public and to the Legislature
that includes descriptions of the following:
• Public Health’s efforts to collect, analyze, and report SOGI data, including a
comprehensive list of forms that are required to collect SOGI data, the level of
compliance with SOGI data requirements for those forms, the forms exempt from
these requirements, and the reasons for such exemptions.
• The status of any improvement or replacement of CalREDIE—Public Health’s
database used for statewide reporting of communicable diseases.
• The outcomes of data analyses that Public Health has performed or has allowed
other qualified researchers to perform using the SOGI data it has collected.
• The steps Public Health has taken or has caused to be taken to improve services or
program outcomes for underserved LGBTQ populations.
• Until fully implemented, the progress Public Health has made in implementing
recommendations from this audit report.
To ensure that Public Health collects sufficient data to effectively implement and
deliver critical services, the Legislature should amend the SOGI data collection law
to require Public Health to collect SOGI data from third-party entities, including
local health jurisdictions, on any forms or electronic data systems unless prohibited
by federal or state law.
The Legislature should amend state law to allow voluntarily provided sexual
orientation and gender identity data to be included with the immunization data that
is reported to Public Health.
6 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Public Health
To consistently collect accurate SOGI data, Public Health should do the following:
• Standardize its definitions and provide guidance on how its forms should ask
questions related to sexual orientation and gender identity, guidance on the
minimum categories or response options to be collected, and guidelines on how to
aggregate and report responses.
• Complete and implement the goals of its 2022 SOGI workgroup.
• Periodically identify all of its forms and review whether the forms are required to
collect SOGI data or whether a statutory exemption applies.
• Develop and implement procedures to review and approve its branches’ SOGI
data collection processes, including a review of branches’ reasons for not
collecting SOGI data.
Public Health should develop a process to verify that all local health jurisdictions that
do not use CalREDIE are reporting SOGI data to Public Health and are complying
with SOGI data reporting requirements by October 2023.
Public Health should develop an action plan to ensure that CalREDIE users
and Public Health programs can extract SOGI data for all of the reportable disease
conditions currently in CalREDIE by October 2023.
Public Health should work with local health jurisdictions and the future vendor of
the new surveillance system by October 2023 to ensure that the system will be able to
receive SOGI data from local health jurisdictions, and be able to extract and report
SOGI data for all reportable disease conditions.
To ensure that its programs are using SOGI data to identify and address disparities
in health outcomes, and to provide required information to the Legislature, Public
Health should require regular reports from its branches that collect SOGI data; these
reports should include the branches’ efforts to record and report SOGI data, the
outcomes of their SOGI data analyses, and the steps they have taken to improve their
services or program outcomes for underrepresented populations.
To improve Public Health’s ability to collect SOGI data, it should make the following
available to local health jurisdictions and health care providers:
• A standardized definition, wording, and format of SOGI data questions and
response fields.
• Direction for soliciting SOGI information and education in the importance of
doing so.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 7
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
Introduction
Background
In 2016 the National Institutes of Health
designated sexual and gender minorities as CDC Definitions for Sexual Orientation and
a health disparity population, which means a Gender Identity Terminology
population that disproportionately experiences
differences in health outcomes that are often Sexual Orientation: A person’s sexual and emotional
attraction to another person and the behavior and social
preventable. According to the Public Policy
affiliation that may result from this attraction.
Institute of California, approximately 9 percent
of adults in California, or 2.7 million people, Gender Identity: An individual’s sense of self as man,
identified in 2022 as lesbian, gay, bisexual or woman, transgender, or other.
transgender, which the text box defines. In 2015
Gender Expression: How an individual chooses to present
the State enacted a law requiring certain state
their gender to others through physical appearance and
agencies to collect and report sexual orientation behaviors, such as style of hair or dress, voice, or movement.
and gender identity (SOGI) data under specified
LGBTQ: Acronym that refers to those who identify as lesbian,
conditions. As a state department focused on
gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning.
improving health outcomes and decreasing
health disparities in California, the California Lesbian: A woman who is primarily attracted to other women.
Department of Public Health (Public Health)—
Gay: A person who is attracted primarily to members of the
the focus of this particular audit—is subject to same gender, often used to describe men who are attracted
this state law requiring SOGI data collection primarily to other men.
and reporting.
Bisexual: A person who is attracted to both people of their
own gender and other genders.
Health Disparities Among Those in the Transgender: An individual whose current gender identity
LGBTQ Population differs from the sex they were assigned at birth.
Queer: An umbrella term sometimes used to refer to the
Although SOGI data is not yet widely entire LGBTQ community.
available to perform health outcome analyses,
Questioning: A person still discovering his or her or their
some studies have already established that
sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression.
individuals who identify as lesbian, gay,
Cisgender: An individual whose current gender identity is
bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning
the same as the sex they were assigned at birth.
(LGBTQ) face significantly higher risks of
a variety of health problems, including the Heterosexual or Straight: A man who is primarily attracted
leading causes of death in California in 2020: to women or a woman who is primarily attracted to men.
cancer, heart disease, and COVID-19. For
Source: CDC.
example, the American Association for Cancer
Research highlighted a study that analyzed
data from the National Health Interview
Survey from 2013 through 2016 and found that gay men had greater than 50 percent
increased odds of a reported cancer diagnosis, and bisexual women had 70 percent
increased odds of a reported cancer diagnosis, when compared to their respective
heterosexual counterparts.1
1 American Association for Cancer Research, AACR Conference Examines Cancer Disparities in the LGBTQ Population,
January 26, 2021, <https://www.aacr.org/blog/2021/01/26/aacr-conference-examines-cancer-disparities-in-the-lgbtq-
population>, accessed on December 29, 2022.
8 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Likewise, the American Heart Association reported in 2020 that adults in the
LGBTQ population experience worse cardiovascular health relative to their cisgender
heterosexual peers.2 Significantly, this report noted that current studies are limited
because they rely on self-reported data from population-based surveys, so they do not
capture the sociocultural and clinical factors relevant to understand the population’s
cardiovascular health. Further, a 2021 study from the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC) found that adults in the LGBTQ population experience a
high prevalence of several health conditions that have been associated with severe
COVID-19, such as cancer, kidney or heart disease, breathing issues, obesity, diabetes,
hypertension, and stroke.3 The CDC study also acknowledged that COVID-19
surveillance systems have not captured SOGI data and that doing so would improve
knowledge about disparities in infection and adverse outcomes that could have
informed a more equitable response to the pandemic.
The Potential Benefits of Collecting and Analyzing SOGI Data
Several recent efforts demonstrate that collecting and analyzing SOGI data can help
identify and understand the health and other disparities that people who identify
as LGBTQ face and can offer direction to public health officials working to resolve
these disparities. The UCLA Williams Institute has performed studies regarding the
LGBTQ population using SOGI data from the California Health Interview Survey—
an annual survey based on interviews, conducted continuously throughout the year,
of approximately 20,000 California households—which has included SOGI data
since 2015. Using surveys from 2015 through 2017, one UCLA Williams Institute
study found that one in seven Californians who identify as gay or lesbian delayed
or went without the prescription medications they needed, a higher incidence than
the one-in-ten rate found in the heterosexual population.4 The study noted that
the California Health Interview Survey asks respondents why they delayed or went
without medical care in general, and that individuals who identified as lesbian, gay,
or bisexual were more likely to report the main reason as “cost, lack of insurance, and
other insurance reasons.”
Analyzing SOGI data also allowed the nonprofit organization WestEd to delve
deeper into the mental health disparities of students in the LGBTQ population.5
WestEd used the California Healthy Kids Survey to analyze the relationship between
students’ sexual orientation, gender identity, experiences of bullying and harassment,
emotional well-being, and school climate in academic years 2017–19. The study
2 Billy A Caceres et al, Assessing and Addressing Cardiovascular Health in LGBTQ Adults: A Scientific Statement From the
American Heart Association, Circulation, October 2020, <doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000914>.
3 Kevin C. Heslin, PhD; Jeffrey E. Hall, PhD; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Sexual Orientation Disparities in
Risk Factors for Adverse COVID-19-Related Outcomes, by Race/Ethnicity—Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, United
States, 2017-19; Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Vol.5, No.5, February 5, 2021; accessed on December 28, 2022,
<http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7005a1>.
4 Brad Sears and Kerith Conron, LGBT People & Access to Prescription Medications, The Williams Institute, December 2018,
accessed on December 2022, < https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/LGBT-Access-Prescription-
Meds-Dec-2018.pdf>.
5 T. Hanson et al., Understanding the Experiences of LGBTQ Students in California, WestEd, San Francisco, CA, 2019; accessed
on December 28, 2022 from < https://www.wested.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Understanding-Experience-of-
LGBTQ-Students-in-California.pdf>.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 9
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
found that students in the LGBTQ population lack strong school supports, such as
opportunities for meaningful participation, promotion of parental involvement, and
caring adult relationships, and that their greater exposure to violence and harassment
may account for the disparities in their mental health, school engagement, and
academic performance when compared with their heterosexual cisgender peers.
These findings could help target services that will significantly reduce the challenges
that these students face.
In addition to academic and nonprofit organizations’ efforts to identify and address
the challenges that people in the LGBTQ population face, some government entities
have also worked to address some of these concerns through the evaluation of SOGI
data. The San Francisco Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing has
gathered substantial SOGI data and has implemented LGBTQ-targeted initiatives.
These initiatives have led to a 33 percent increase, from the previous year, in LGBTQ
households accessing permanent housing solutions. Public Health’s Office of AIDS
has also used SOGI data to identify vulnerable populations, and as a result, Public
Health has implemented the PrEP/PEP Navigator Project to provide direct services
to people in these specific priority populations, including transgender women.
Navigator Projects allow physicians, health educators, and outreach workers to
collaborate in identifying and addressing barriers to successful treatment.
Public Health’s Efforts to Implement State Law Requiring the Collection and Reporting
of SOGI Data
The Legislature has acknowledged the need
to collect accurate SOGI data to understand, Exemptions to SOGI Data Collection
report, and apply that data for the enhancement
and improvement of public services. Public Health may, but is not required, to collect
Accordingly, in 2015 state law required certain SOGI demographic data under any of the following
circumstances:
state agencies to collect and report voluntarily
provided SOGI information when they collect • When demographic data collection categories are
demographic data directly or by contract pursuant to and defined by a federal program or survey.
regarding the ancestry or ethnic origin of
• When demographic data is collected by other entities,
Californians. For Public Health, this collection
including the following:
was to begin no later than July 2018, and the
– State offices, departments, and agencies not required to
text box lists exemptions to this requirement.
collect SOGI data.
State law also requires that any electronic tool
that a county, city, or district health officer – Third-party entities, including, but not limited to, private
uses to report cases of certain communicable employers who provide aggregated data to a state
diseases to Public Health include the capacity department.
to collect and report any SOGI data it receives
– Surveys administered by third-party entities and where
from health care providers. Public Health is not the sole funder.
Source: State law.
Public Health further requires health care
providers and local health jurisdictions to report
SOGI data when reporting on certain diseases
or conditions, as Figure 1 demonstrates. Specifically, Public Health’s regulation
requires that health care providers report to the local health officer for the jurisdiction
10 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Figure 1
Roles and Responsibilities in the Collection and Distribution of Key Demographic Information When
Reporting Certain Diseases or Conditions
Health Care
Provider
Patients
A health professional, such as a
physician or registered nurse,
who provides direct medical
Demographic
information care and diagnoses patients.
Reports on Certain
Diseases or Conditions
Local Health California has 61 local
health jurisdictions—
Jurisdiction one in each of California’s
58 counties and one in
A unit of local government that
three cities.*
carries out some responsibility
for the health of the residents of
its jurisdiction.
May interact with patients to
investigate and control the
spread of a reported disease,
condition, or outbreak.
Public Health
Source: State law, CDC, Public Health.
* The cities of Berkeley, Long Beach, and Pasadena have local health jurisdictions.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 11
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
where the patient resides certain demographic information about the patient, including
the following: the name of the disease or condition, the date of onset and diagnosis, and
the patient’s Social Security number, race, ethnicity, current gender identity, sex assigned
at birth, and sexual orientation, if known. Further, Public Health requires every local
health officer to report to Public Health both a summary report regarding the weekly
number of cases and an individual case or outbreak report of a listed disease. In general,
the individual case report must contain SOGI information.
Public Health collects demographic data
Public Health’s SOGI Questions
to fulfill its mission to advance the health
and Response Fields
and well-being of California’s diverse people
and communities. Public Health’s almost
What sex were you assigned at birth on
4,000 employees work in 20 centers, divided
your original birth certificate?
into branches, units, sections, programs,
and divisions (branches) that implement Male
numerous programs related to health
Female
and well-being, such as disease education
Unknown
and prevention, food safety, vital records
management, and oversight and licensing of
health care facilities and laboratories. Public
How do you describe yourself?
Health gathers demographic data from many
sources, including local health jurisdictions, Male
laboratories, health care providers, and Female
contractors, using a variety of reporting forms,
Female-to-Male (FTM)/Transgender Male/Trans Man
questionnaires, and surveys; we refer to these
data collection methods as forms. Male-to-Female (MTF)/Transgender Female/Trans Woman
Genderqueer, neither exclusively male nor female
In response to the state law requiring changes
Additional gender category or other,
to the collection and reporting of demographic
please specify_________________________________
information, including the collection of
voluntarily provided SOGI information, Public Choose not to disclose
Health’s Department Operations Improvement
Team Subcommittee on Demographic Data
Do you consider yourself to be…?
Collection (DOIT subcommittee) began
meeting in 2016. Its purpose was to identify Lesbian, gay, or homosexual
and address operational issues, to develop a
Straight or heterosexual
common approach and solution across Public
Health, and to coordinate the implementation Bisexual
of this additional demographic data collection.
Something else, please describe
In 2017 the DOIT subcommittee provided
Don’t know
guidelines for SOGI questions and response
fields to collect data, as the text box shows. Choose not to disclose
The DOIT subcommittee delegated the
responsibility to Public Health’s individual
Source: Public Health’s DOIT subcommittee.
branches to complete the implementation of
the SOGI questions and response fields on the
department’s many forms. However, in 2022
Public Health concluded that its implementation had not been sufficient, and it formed
another internal workgroup to better implement state law in its collection of SOGI data.
12 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 13
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
Audit Results
Public Health Collects SOGI Data in Only a Small Portion of the Forms It Uses to Gather
Demographic Data
Public Health has the opportunity to collect SOGI data that can be used to potentially
improve health outcomes for California’s LGBTQ population. However, because of
state law exemptions that in many circumstances permit Public Health to collect
SOGI data but do not require it to do so, and because of inconsistent SOGI data
collection policies or processes, Public Health often does not collect SOGI data
on the forms that already collect ancestry and ethnic origin data. We identified
129 forms that collect ancestry or ethnic origin information and therefore may
be required by law to collect SOGI data. However, 105 of the 129 forms fall under
exemptions from the law requiring SOGI data collection. As a result, only 24 of the
129 forms were required by state law to collect SOGI data. Of these 24 forms, seven
do not collect complete SOGI data because Public Health lacks clear and consistent
policies regarding SOGI data collection. This lack of consistent SOGI data collection
procedures, and ultimately the low number of Public Health forms that actually
collect SOGI data, show that changes to state law may be warranted to compel more
robust SOGI data collection practices.
Public Health’s Lack of Consistent SOGI Data Policies and Procedures Has Hindered Its
Ability to Collect SOGI Data
Public Health has not ensured that some forms required to collect SOGI data
contain the questions necessary to do so, in part because it lacks clear and
consistent policies regarding collecting such data. State law requires that Public
Health collect voluntarily provided SOGI data in the course of collecting ancestry
and ethnic origin data, and the law was drafted to give Public Health the flexibility
to implement its overall goal. As Figure 2 shows, we identified 129 Public Health
forms that collect ancestry or ethnic origin data, of which only 24 are required to
collect SOGI data, according to Public Health. The 129 forms we reviewed covered
a wide range of topics, from communicable diseases, such as foodborne illness and
sexually transmitted diseases, to vaping-related chemical exposures and healthy
eating for children. Such forms, created and updated by Public Health, reach a broad
cross-section of the State’s residents.
Of the 24 forms that are required to collect SOGI data, seven do not collect complete
SOGI data, as Figure 2 shows. Since the state law requiring SOGI data collection
does not dictate the exact questions or responses that are required to collect SOGI
data, we turned to Public Health’s internal efforts to define complete SOGI data. In
May 2017, Public Health’s DOIT subcommittee issued guidance that proposed three
specific questions and response fields when collecting SOGI data, in order to have a
common approach across the department. Although Public Health’s director’s office
stated in December 2022 that this guidance was mandatory, the department later
asserted that the guidance was not mandatory and that forms may comply with law
even if they do not ask all three questions. This example demonstrates Public Health’s
lack of clarity and consistency in its SOGI data collection approach.
14 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Figure 2
Most of Public Health’s Forms May, But Are Not Required to, Collect SOGI Data
105 24
Public Health forms are Public Health forms are
exempt from collecting required to collect SOGI data
SOGI data by state law
7Collect only partial
129 or no SOGI data*
Public Health
forms that collect
90Exempt because a demographic data 17 Collect complete
third party, such as a SOGI data*
local health jurisdiction
or a health care provider,
collects the data
15 Exempt because a federal
program defines the guidelines
for demographic data collection
Source: State law and Public Health guidelines and documentation provided by Public Health.
* We determined that to collect SOGI data, the forms must comply with state law and include the DOIT subcommittee’s
three questions: sex assigned at birth, sexual orientation, and gender identity.
Nevertheless, in the absence of clear and consistent requirements from Public Health,
we determined that the DOIT subcommittee’s guidance was reasonable for assessing
whether a form is collecting complete SOGI data. Of the 24 forms required by law
to collect SOGI data, seven forms do not include all three of the subcommittee’s
SOGI questions. According to the chief deputy director of operations, Public Health
has not yet developed a departmentwide policy or guidelines for how it will collect
SOGI data. Instead, the department relies on each of its centers to implement the
recommendations of the subcommittee and relies on the individual programs to
monitor compliance with state law. Without a departmentwide policy, and without
monitoring compliance with that policy, Public Health cannot ensure consistent
compliance with the law or ensure the consistent collection of SOGI data.
Public Health’s regulations generally require that case report forms, which collect
additional demographic and disease-specific information from individuals experiencing
certain infectious diseases, collect SOGI data. These case report forms comprise 75 of
the 129 forms we reviewed in the course of this audit. In October 2022, and again
in February 2023, Public Health’s legal counsel affirmed to us that the department’s
regulations required these case report forms to collect SOGI data.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 15
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
Accordingly, we had initially determined that nearly all the case report forms
we reviewed did not comply with Public Health’s regulations. However, when we
presented this list of forms to Public Health in February 2023, the department
clarified its position to assert that only one form, the Confidential Morbidity Report
Form, was required to collect SOGI information to comply with the department’s
regulations. The Confidential Morbidity Report does request demographic
information, including complete SOGI information, and health care providers
complete it when dealing with cases of certain diseases or conditions. According
to the assistant chief legal counsel, Public Health does not believe that additional
information, including SOGI information, needs to duplicate the demographic
identification information already captured on the Confidential Morbidity Report.
However, we found that the Confidential Morbidity Report did not consistently
gather SOGI data. Specifically, we reviewed 100 electronic case files reports and
found only 17 instances that included complete SOGI data. As a result, Public
Health’s reliance solely on the Confidential Morbidity Report to collect SOGI
data limits the amount of SOGI data available to Public Health, and the additional
case report forms—as discussed further in the next section—offer additional
opportunities to collect SOGI information about individuals.
Public Health has begun to take steps to standardize its SOGI data collection through
a new committee and a proposed reorganization. In 2022 Public Health determined
that, despite the efforts of its DOIT subcommittee, there was still no consensus on
how to collect SOGI data, so it created the SOGI data standardization workgroup
(SOGI Workgroup) in February 2022. The SOGI Workgroup has three goals:
• To develop a document and data dictionary of best practices for collecting SOGI
data, including direction about the wording of SOGI questions and response fields.
• To document best practices for displaying SOGI data.
• To develop a reference document detailing SOGI data standards for organizations
outside of Public Health, including local health jurisdictions.
Although the SOGI Workgroup is reviewing a preliminary recommendation
related to its first goal, Public Health does not have a time frame for completing
or implementing these recommendations or for addressing the remaining two
goals. Additionally, Public Health informed us that it was in the early stages of
a restructure that would allow its Center for Health Statistics and Informatics
to oversee a temporary task force that will focus on SOGI data collection
and reporting across the department. However, Public Health could provide
neither a clear timeline for the restructure nor any specifics about the goals and
responsibilities of this task force. Completing the efforts of the SOGI Workgroup,
even without the proposed new task force, would likely result in more and better
SOGI data collection and reporting.
16 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Exemptions in State Law Limit the Collection of SOGI Data
The state law exempting Public Health from collecting SOGI data when the data
is collected by third parties permits Public Health to forgo additional opportunities to
collect SOGI data and limits the amount of SOGI data the department is required
to collect and analyze. According to Public Health, 15 of the 105 forms are exempt from
collecting SOGI data because a federal program defines the guidelines for demographic
data collection in those forms. The remaining 90 forms are exempt because a third
party, such as a local health jurisdiction or a health care provider, collects the data,
even though Public Health is responsible for creating and providing these forms. In
fact, such forms as the California Cancer Registry, the Adult HIV/AIDS Case Report
Form, and most infectious disease case report forms are all examples of forms that
neither solicit nor are required to solicit SOGI information because the data is collected
by local health jurisdictions or health care providers, as Figure 3 shows. According to
several legislative analyses of the bill requiring SOGI data collection, the legislation was
drafted to give the department flexibility in implementing its overall goal, authorizing
Public Health to take necessary steps to expand its data collection. However, Public
Health includes two critical categories of data collectors—health care providers and
local health jurisdictions—under the “third-party” exemption, effectively applying the
SOGI data collection requirements only to Public Health itself. Thus, while Public
Health is permitted, but not required, to pursue many additional ways of obtaining
SOGI data, in general it is not doing so.
Figure 3
State Law Does Not Require Public Health to Collect SOGI Data When the Data Is Collected by
Third‑Party Entities
Examples of Public Health
Examples of Public Health forms
forms that are required to
that are not required to solicit
solicit SOGI information
SOGI information because the
because it is directly collected
information is collected by:
from individuals by:
Local Health Jurisdictions* o r Health Care Providers* Public Health o r Public Health Contractors
Some forms NOT required to solicit SOGI data include: Some forms required to solicit SOGI data include:
• California Cancer Registry • Youth Marijuana Survey
• HIV/AIDS Intake Form • Adult Role Models Community Needs Survey
• COVID-19 Border Survey • Online California Adult Tobacco Survey
• Other Infectious Diseases Case Report Forms, including: • Delayed Registration of Birth Form
— Hepatitis
— Anthrax
Source: State Law, and Public Health policy.
* The state law requiring Public Health to collect SOGI data in the course of collecting ancestry or ethnic origin data permits, but
does not require, it to collect SOGI data when the data is collected by third parties, such as local health jurisdictions and health
care providers.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 17
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
Public Health has asserted that existing regulations do not require that the additional
case report forms it created to collect disease-specific information also collect
SOGI data. As we note above, Public Health has developed 75 case report forms that
supplement the Confidential Morbidity Report, obtain additional information on
specific diseases, and request demographic information. According to Public Health,
the Confidential Morbidity Report is sufficient to meet its regulatory reporting
requirements and therefore there are no statutory or regulatory requirements for the
case report forms to collect SOGI data.
Nevertheless, these case report forms offer an important, additional opportunity to
collect SOGI data. As indicated earlier, we found that the Confidential Morbidity
Reports that health care providers complete do not consistently contain SOGI
information. Further, the local health jurisdictions of Sacramento County, Contra
Costa County, and the city of Pasadena stated that they use additional case report
forms when performing contact tracing and other follow-up with individuals.
Moreover, the chief of the Policy and Viral Hepatitis Section at the Sexually
Transmitted Diseases Control Branch (STD Control Branch) confirmed that
these “supplemental” forms may be used to guide the questions that local health
jurisdictions and health care providers ask when interacting with individuals
and patients. Of the 54 local health jurisdictions that responded to our survey,
50 indicated that they collected SOGI information during contact tracing for
communicable diseases or other follow-up with individuals. In contrast, only 36 of
54 local health jurisdictions responded that the SOGI information they collect was
received from health care providers.
Public Health’s reliance on the third-party exemption to assert that many of its forms
do not need to collect SOGI data suggests that the exemption may be too broad.
While it is sensible to continue to exclude programs from collecting SOGI data when
federal requirements limit such collection, the third-party exemption gives Public
Health an opportunity to forgo collecting SOGI data from the very entities central
to obtaining the data. Thus, until Public Health is required to include SOGI data on
its forms that collect other demographic data, regardless of who is using the form,
Public Health will continue to miss opportunities to obtain complete SOGI data.
Unresolved Technical Issues Prevent SOGI Data Collection and Analysis
Public Health is unable to collect SOGI data for the majority of reportable
communicable diseases in California because it has not resolved technical barriers
that limit its electronic communicable disease surveillance system, the California
Reportable Disease Information Exchange (CalREDIE), from collecting SOGI data.
However, Public Health is currently also unable to analyze or extract complete
SOGI data from that system, as Figure 4 shows. Public Health has not completed
updates to the system, impeding its ability to analyze or report on health outcome
disparities in the State’s LGBTQ population.
18 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Figure 4
CalREDIE’s Technical Limitations Prevent Laboratories From Reporting SOGI Data and Prevent
Users From Accessing SOGI Data for Most Communicable Diseases
Laboratories Public Health*
Health care providers
CalREDIE
Local health jurisdictions Local health jurisdictions*
Able to submit complete SOGI data
Partially able to extract complete SOGI data
Unable to submit complete SOGI data
Source: Public Health staff and auditor analysis of Public Health website and documentation provided by Public Health.
* Public Health and local health jurisdictions cannot access SOGI data for approximately 79 percent of the communicable
diseases reported to CalREDIE.
Public Health implemented CalREDIE as a statewide database for electronic disease
reporting and surveillance in 2010. Public Health makes CalREDIE available for local
health jurisdictions, health care providers, and laboratories to provide information
on cases of reportable diseases. Beginning in 2020, state law required that electronic
reporting tools that county, city, or district health officers use to report cases of
certain communicable diseases to Public Health should be able to collect and report
SOGI data. Public Health updated CalREDIE in 2020 to allow the database to
collect SOGI information. However, data protocols and other factors limit Public
Health’s ability to collect SOGI data from other systems.
Laboratories Are Not Required to Submit SOGI Data to Public Health and Are Unable to Do So
According to Public Health, laboratories generate nearly all new case reports in
CalREDIE, but there are limitations to the demographic data that laboratories are
able to provide. Although test requisitions that accompany specimens submitted
for laboratory tests for certain diseases or conditions must include certain
demographic information, such as gender and race, they are not required to contain
SOGI information. In addition, although laboratories are required to include
certain demographic information, including the patient’s gender and race, when
reporting cases of certain diseases to the local health jurisdiction and Public Health,
laboratories are not required to report SOGI information in those instances. Further,
even if laboratories were to receive SOGI information from health care providers,
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 19
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
they would be unable to report that data to Public Health because laboratories
electronically transmit information to Public Health through CalREDIE using an
international data standard called Health Level 7 (HL7). HL7 does not currently
contain a standard for transmitting SOGI data.
For example, although Public Health worked with COVID-19 testing sites to use a
registration form that includes SOGI questions, the data collected from those forms
is not readily available to the department. Specifically, Public Health contracted
with technology vendors to create online registration forms for patients to use when
requesting COVID-19 tests from the community-based testing sites, and Public
Health requires the community-based testing sites that it sponsors to use the online
registration forms. The registration forms ask patients for identification information
such as name, date of birth, and contact information, and demographic information
such as race, ethnicity, and SOGI information, including questions about sex at
birth, gender identity, and sexual orientation. However, Public Health is unable
to automatically receive SOGI data from COVID-19 tests because all laboratories,
including community-based drive-through sites, use HL7. As a result, when we
requested reports to demonstrate the demographic data that the COVID-19 testing
sites had collected, Public Health said it would need to ask its vendors for the data.
Thus, while it has access to the data, it does not maintain it at Public Health.
Although there is a temporary solution to communicating SOGI data through
HL7, neither Public Health nor laboratories are ready to use it. In June 2022, HL7
International—the organization that develops the HL7 standard—published a
short-term solution that would allow laboratories to transfer SOGI data. However,
according to CalREDIE’s program manager, Public Health does not plan to adopt this
short-term solution because it is incompatible with CalREDIE’s current structure. The
program manager explained that because Public Health plans to launch a new disease
surveillance system that will replace CalREDIE in 2025, the department does not want
to invest time and resources in updates to CalREDIE as it prepares to decommission it.
Furthermore, laboratories are not necessarily in a position to adopt the short-term
solution. We spoke with three laboratories—a public health laboratory for a local
health jurisdiction, a private laboratory that does business in California, and a
private laboratory that does business across the nation. All three cited the need for
significant investments of time and money to reconfigure their systems to obtain
SOGI data. They also noted that laboratories rarely interact directly with the patient
and that the most direct route for Public Health to receive data would be from the
health care providers who directly communicate with the patient.
Public Health has recently instituted a new process to give health care providers
a more direct means of reporting cases to Public Health, but the new process also
uses HL7. In August 2022, Public Health launched electronic case reporting (ECR)
for health care providers to report cases of COVID-19. ECR automatically generates
a case report and sends it to CalREDIE from the patient’s electronic health record.
Public Health intends for ECR to replace paper-based methods of reporting from
health care providers. According to the chief of the CalREDIE Surveillance Section,
COVID-19 is the only reportable disease that ECR currently reports to CalREDIE as
of February 2023.
20 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
The chief further confirmed that Public Health is currently in the process of
developing a timeline for including additional reportable disease conditions to ECR.
However, ECR uses a version of the HL7 standard that is specific to ECR but does
not have the capacity to transmit complete SOGI data. In July 2022, HL7 published
a newer version of the HL7 standard for trial use that would allow ECR to transmit
data on gender identity and sex assigned at birth, but not sexual orientation. This
means that even if Public Health were to update CalREDIE to the newer HL7
standard, it would still be unable to receive data on sexual orientation through
ECR. According to the chief of the CalREDIE Surveillance Section, the lack of
an HL7 standard for transmitting complete SOGI data prevents CalREDIE from
collecting complete SOGI data from ECR, and Public Health has no plans to develop
a solution to the technological issue because HL7 is the industry standard for health
data exchange.
The lack of a complete HL7 SOGI standard is likely to remain a roadblock to the
collection of SOGI data from laboratories or electronic health records for at least
the next several years. Because HL7 is an international standard broadly used for
electronic laboratory and case reporting, it is unlikely that Public Health will be able
to abandon its use in favor of an alternative. According to the chief of the CalREDIE
Stakeholder Support section, Public Health will continue to need to use HL7 to
communicate with laboratories and electronic health records, even when it adopts its
new surveillance system. Thus, it is even more imperative that Public Health avail
itself of every opportunity to collect SOGI data outside of those two pipelines if
it is to collect sufficient SOGI data to be usable. In particular, Public Health must
ensure that its forms include SOGI data to allow health care providers and local
health jurisdictions additional opportunities to collect and report SOGI data.
Some Local Health Jurisdictions Do Not Submit Data to Public Health Using CalREDIE
CalREDIE has additional system incompatibilities with other local health
jurisdictions’ data systems that limit the department’s ability to access statewide
SOGI data on communicable diseases. Public Health requires health care providers
to report information on cases or suspected cases of certain diseases or conditions—
such as anthrax, syphilis, and Lyme disease—to their local health officers, including
SOGI information, if known. Public Health also requires local health officers to
report information on certain diseases to Public Health, including SOGI information.
Local health officers at 58 of the State’s 61 local health jurisdictions report cases of
all notifiable communicable diseases to Public Health using CalREDIE. According
to the program manager of CalREDIE, the remaining three jurisdictions do not use
CalREDIE in some cases:
• Los Angeles County does not use CalREDIE to report infectious diseases or some
sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).
• San Francisco County does not use CalREDIE to report some STDs.
• San Diego County does not use CalREDIE to report infectious diseases.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 21
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
A CalREDIE program manager explained that these three local health jurisdictions’
data systems should exchange data with CalREDIE but that the counties lack the
resources required to implement and maintain a data exchange. Public Health
instructs local health jurisdictions that do not use CalREDIE to submit case reports
to the department electronically or to send hard copy case report forms. The
department manually consolidates the local health jurisdictions’ data with CalREDIE
data, which is a time-consuming process. For example, according to the chief of the
Data Processing and Informatics Section for Public Health’s COVID/MPX response
team, the process to consolidate case information for just one disease condition,
COVID-19, takes Public Health approximately 24 staff hours per week. Because
of the manual process that Public Health must undertake to produce a statewide
review for communicable diseases, the department does not have immediate
access to information about communicable diseases for Los Angeles, San Diego, or
San Francisco counties—three counties that together account for approximately
36 percent of the State’s population, according to the 2020 U.S. Census.
As a result of the data exchange problems, local health jurisdictions are not supplying
Public Health with complete SOGI data. Despite the assertion from Public Health’s
assistant chief counsel that local health jurisdictions that do not use CalREDIE are
fulfilling their regulatory reporting requirements, we found that Public Health did
not receive the SOGI data from some local health jurisdictions. For example, the
STD Control Branch at Public Health does not receive complete SOGI information
from Los Angeles or San Francisco counties for any cases of STDs. According to the
chief of the Policy and Viral Hepatitis Prevention section at the STD Control Branch,
the branch does not receive SOGI data from those counties because of a formatting
issue in the data transfer. The chief further confirmed the branch has not resolved
the technological issues preventing SOGI reporting because of multiple factors,
including competing priorities such as Mpox epidemiology and surveillance.
Public Health Programs Cannot Readily Access SOGI Data Contained in CalREDIE
Public Health programs access data exports and reports from CalREDIE using
the Data Distribution Portal (data portal), a web-based system to help users access
data reports. According to the CalREDIE program manager, CalREDIE staff must
manually update the data portal for each disease condition to extract complete SOGI
data. As of February 2023, CalREDIE staff have updated only 27 of the 128 reportable
disease conditions in the data portal to enable the system to extract complete SOGI
data for those conditions. This means that Public Health cannot extract complete
SOGI information for more than 100 communicable diseases—including anthrax,
malaria, and Zika virus. This also means that Public Health programs are unable
to access SOGI information for most of the disease conditions they oversee. For
example, the Infectious Diseases Branch oversees approximately 50 communicable
diseases listed in regulation yet cannot extract SOGI data for each of those diseases.
In fact, the Infectious Diseases Branch could not even tell us the number of diseases
for which it is able to extract SOGI data. According to the chief of the CalREDIE
Stakeholder Support Section, Public Health lacks the time and resources to update
22 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
records for all diseases. However, the CalREDIE program manager added that it has
prioritized updating the data portal for disease conditions that are current public
health concerns, such as COVID-19 and Mpox.
Although Public Health has acknowledged the technical shortcomings of CalREDIE,
CalREDIE’s program manager confirmed that the department has not prioritized the
time or resources to resolve the technical issues because some issues are impossible
to resolve. This is because of the system’s design and because the department plans
to retire CalREDIE and replace it with a new surveillance system, the Future Disease
Surveillance System (surveillance system), in October 2025. As of January 2023,
the California Health and Human Services Agency and California Department of
Technology have approved the first stage of Public Health’s proposal to develop
the new surveillance system. Public Health plans to start the procurement process
to select a vendor to build the new system in May 2023 and should complete the
procurement process in October 2023. Public Health estimates that the total cost
of the new system will be about $168 million. CalREDIE’s program manager said
Public Health plans to work with all local health jurisdictions for input on the
new system in order to address the technological challenges that currently exist
between CalREDIE and the local health jurisdictions that do not use CalREDIE to
report all communicable diseases. When the system is complete, it will allow Public
Health to have timely access to all local health jurisdictions’ information on cases of
reportable communicable diseases, including SOGI information, according to the
chief of the CalREDIE Stakeholder Support section; however, completion is at least
two years away.
Public Health Has Performed Little Analysis of or Reporting on the SOGI Data It
Does Collect
State law requiring Public Health to collect SOGI data in the course of collecting
ancestry or ethnic origin data also requires Public Health to report the SOGI data to
the Legislature and make it available to the public, except for data that would permit
identification of individuals or would result in statistical unreliability. Yet Public
Health has made SOGI data available to the public from only 17 of the forms we
reviewed, and it has not directly reported any SOGI data related to these forms to
the Legislature. Additionally, Public Health has only performed internal analyses
of SOGI data for four of the forms that we reviewed. Public Health’s technical
limitations prevent its branches from efficiently extracting and analyzing the
SOGI data Public Health has collected, and its branches explain that they have not
performed analysis or reporting of SOGI data because they lack a sufficient amount
of SOGI data to report. For example, the Occupational Health Branch said that it
would like to perform analysis using SOGI data but that it had not received enough
data to perform quality analysis. Nevertheless, Public Health can do more, including
maintaining a functioning electronic reporting system, to ensure that it receives a
sufficient amount of quality SOGI data to analyze and report.
Although Public Health is both analyzing and publishing SOGI data from four of its
forms, it has not reported any of this data directly to the Legislature. Three of these
forms belong to the California Tobacco Control Branch, which collects SOGI data
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 23
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
on several of its surveys. For example, the California Tobacco Control Branch funded
a UCLA study that analyzed and reported SOGI data collected from its California
Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander and LGBTQ Tobacco Survey. The analysis
found that adults in the LGBTQ population reported higher exposure to secondhand
tobacco smoke than the California adult population as a whole. This analysis,
demonstrating how SOGI data can be used to identify specific disparities, may also
contribute to the efforts to address those disparities. In fact, the chief of the Tobacco
Control Branch stated that its analysis could be used to inform future projects and be
part of presentations at conferences or in academic journals. Although the California
Tobacco Control Branch makes SOGI data available to the public, it has not reported
this data to the Legislature.
In contrast to conditions at Public Health, the city and county of San Francisco
has taken significant steps to collect, analyze, use, and report on SOGI data. In
2016 San Francisco amended its administrative code to require certain departments
and contractors that provide health care and social services to collect and record
data concerning the sexual orientation and gender identity of the clients they
serve, and further, require the covered departments to analyze and report to the
city administrator the SOGI data that it collects, including SOGI data collected
by contract or through grantees. To comply with this requirement, San Francisco
departments—including the San Francisco Department of Public Health (SFDPH)—
publish annual reports on their collection of SOGI data. For example, reports from
the San Francisco Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing (SFHSH)
include updates on efforts to record and report SOGI data due to COVID-19, the
outcomes of SOGI data analysis, and the impact of initiatives to increase the LGBTQ
populations’ access to services. SFHSH’s most recent annual report noted that its
collection of SOGI data allowed it to identify disadvantaged LGBTQ groups and
increase LGBTQ outreach and participation in its services.
Local Health Jurisdictions and Health Care Providers Need SOGI Data Collection
Guidelines and Training
Public Health requires local health jurisdictions and health care providers to include
SOGI information when reporting certain diseases or conditions, such as tetanus
or syphilis. Despite the fact that local health jurisdictions and health care providers
are responsible for collecting the data for the majority of Public Health’s forms,
Public Health’s Director’s Office acknowledged that the department has not provided
departmentwide guidelines to local health jurisdictions or to health care providers
on standardized language for SOGI questions and answers, on how to solicit SOGI
information, or on the importance of collecting SOGI information.
In fact, some local health jurisdictions specifically cited a need for more guidelines
and training. We surveyed the 61 local health jurisdictions regarding their SOGI
data collection processes, and 54 (89 percent) completed the survey.6 Approximately
one-third of local health jurisdictions responding to our survey had not received
6 Appendix A includes a summary of responses to selected survey questions.
24 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
guidelines or training from any federal, state, or local entity on SOGI data collection.
In its survey response, the city of Berkeley suggested that Public Health should
provide more outreach and training to both local health jurisdictions and health
care providers, including support on how to standardize SOGI questions across all
programs and departments. San Bernardino County said that allowing local health
jurisdictions to develop their own SOGI questions and response fields produces
inconsistency and confusion, and makes the data difficult to reconcile among
different datasets. Without direction from Public Health, local health jurisdictions
are unlikely to produce consistent and usable data. Nearly three-quarters of the
local health jurisdictions responding to our survey noted that they do not have a
standard set of questions, answers, or consistent language that they used across
programs to collect SOGI data.
Similarly, Public Health has not provided health care providers with the guidelines
and training they need. We conducted a survey of more than 1,900 CalREDIE
users—primarily health care providers—regarding their challenges in collecting and
reporting SOGI data. While only 119 (6 percent) responded, in our judgment the
responses bear reporting. Only 11 of the responding health care providers replied that
they had received guidelines from Public Health regarding SOGI data collection.7
Further, 44 of the health care providers’ responses indicated that they would benefit
from Public Health training and guidelines on SOGI data collection. For instance,
several health care providers asked that Public Health provide training that explains
the importance of collecting this information and how to ask patients these
questions. In contrast, 16 of the health care providers responded that reporting SOGI
information of patients was not relevant for communicable diseases. An infection
control practitioner and a registered nurse said that they do not collect SOGI data
for persons with communicable diseases because it is not relevant. One physician
expressed concerns that collecting this information promotes discrimination. These
health care providers’ responses also demonstrate the need for Public Health to
provide education on the significance of SOGI data collection and its benefit
to patients.
Finally, some responders reported reluctance within their communities to asking
questions related to sexual orientation and gender identity. For example, in our
survey of local health jurisdictions, Calaveras and Sutter counties explained that
they are rural communities where there is often sensitivity around answering
questions regarding gender identity and sexual orientation. Likewise, Shasta County
reports that its community is socially conservative, so asking SOGI questions is
taboo and incites fear, confusion, and disagreement. Calaveras County noted that
race and ethnicity are often easily identifiable for individuals but that new concepts
related to SOGI require careful education when asking these questions of clients.
Similarly, Sutter County replied that its community is more reluctant to share SOGI
information than information about race and ethnicity. Likewise, Shasta County said
that SOGI data is more stigmatizing than race and ethnicity data and that clients
have greater fears in sharing that information. Although education and training will
not overcome social perceptions overnight, it is nevertheless critical to help make
7 Appendix B includes a summary of responses to selected survey questions.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 25
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
those who are asking the questions—both public health officials and health care
providers—more comfortable with doing so and more knowledgeable about the value
of such questions, and in turn make patients feel comfortable providing SOGI data.
By not providing consistent guidelines and training to local health jurisdictions
and health care providers, Public Health misses opportunities to ensure that SOGI
data is collected effectively or appropriately. There is training available from other
entities such as the CDC and the SFDPH that Public Health could use as a starting
point for developing its own. Additionally, given that Public Health has issued
regulations for reportable communicable diseases requiring local health jurisdictions
and health care providers to report complete SOGI data, it should do more to
facilitate that reporting requirement.
Please refer to the section beginning on page 5 to find the recommendations that
we have made as a result of these audit findings.
We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards and under the authority vested in the California
State Auditor by Government Code section 8543 et seq. Those standards require that
we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide
a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on the audit objectives.
We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings
and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Respectfully submitted,
GRANT PARKS
California State Auditor
April 27, 2023
Staff: John Lewis, MPA, CIA, Audit Principal
Ralph M. Flynn
Aren Knighton, MPA
Maria Cecilia White, MPPA, CFE
Christopher P. Bellows
Robert J. Evans
Sunny Yan
Legal Counsel: David King
26 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 27
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
Other Areas We Reviewed
To address the audit objectives approved by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee
(Audit Committee), we also reviewed Public Health’s efforts to collect SOGI data
from the administration of the COVID-19 vaccines and to engage in contracts for
services. Additionally, we contacted other state entities in California to learn about
their efforts to collect SOGI data but did not draw conclusions about the quality
of their efforts because we did not audit them.
State Law Does Not Require Public Health to Collect SOGI Data Related to Immunizations
Public Health is not collecting SOGI data for the administration of vaccines—
including the COVID-19 vaccine—because state law does not require it. State
law allows local health officers, in conjunction with Public Health, to operate an
immunization information system. Public Health’s California Immunization Registry
(immunization registry) is its statewide computerized immunization information
system for California residents that health care providers can access online to
track patient immunization records. However, state law specifies the demographic
information that must be reported to Public Health—including the patient’s name,
gender, and birth date—and the law does not include reporting SOGI data.
However, recent changes to state law expanded the demographic data that must be
reported to Public Health. Specifically, beginning January 2023, health care providers
and others must report an individual’s race and ethnicity to Public Health. According
to the author of the bill creating this requirement, the lack of race and ethnicity data
fields puts health officials at a disadvantage in targeting resources to communities
that need them the most, and these changes will bolster data submissions to
support health equity and accuracy. As we discussed in the Introduction, there are
similar benefits to analyzing SOGI data to determine whether certain populations
are experiencing health disparities. According to a section chief in Public Health’s
Immunization Branch, the immunization registry is capable of storing SOGI data
should the law require it.
Including SOGI data in the immunization registry may decrease the information
that patients are willing to share but could improve Public Health’s ability to
identify health disparities. For example, state law allows certain individuals and
groups—including health care providers, health plans, schools, childcare centers,
and foster care agencies—to use the registry to check the immunization status of
the individuals that they serve and determine which immunizations are due, among
other purposes. However, according to the chief of Public Health’s Immunization
Branch, individuals might be less likely to allow access to their immunization records
and might hesitate to share other demographic information with the immunization
registry if they have concerns about answering SOGI questions. Nevertheless,
without collecting SOGI data, Public Health will be unable to fully measure whether
there are immunization-related health disparities among certain populations. Public
Health could include SOGI data as voluntary data elements in the immunization
registry for patients to provide.
28 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
The Public Health Contracts We Reviewed Were Appropriate
The Legislature also requested that we identify the number of entities who
contract with Public Health and are required to collect SOGI data, as well as the
methodologies used to negotiate these contracts. Public Health identified more
than 350 entities under contract that collected demographic data and should collect
SOGI data. We reviewed a selection of 10 contracts and found that Public Health
appropriately entered into those contracts.
Public Health contracts with local health jurisdictions and other entities to perform
services; to research, develop, and implement educational campaigns; and to create
and administer surveys, among other activities. Our selection of contracts to review
included contracts with local health jurisdictions to implement HIV/AIDS programs,
and contracts to develop and lead educational campaigns for gambling and cannabis
use, among others. Public Health used interagency agreements with the University
of California or with California State University; cooperative agreements with a
local government entity or nonprofit organizations; and standard agreements with
enrollment sites—such as nonprofit organizations, clinics, or medical providers
that provide local AIDS services—to enter into contracts. For example, the Women,
Infants and Children program uses a standard agreement to contract with local
governments or private nonprofit organizations to provide direct services at the
local level. In addition, Public Health engaged in an emergency contract related to
COVID-19 disease investigators.
Public Health used competitive bidding practices for three of the 10 contracts we
reviewed. The remaining seven all used other appropriate procurement instruments
and processes. Because of the scope of work, which often requires many established
local governments or local medical providers to implement public health programs
at the local level, we would expect Public Health to use cooperative agreements with
standardized language to simplify requirements, eliminate unnecessary paperwork,
and ensure fiscal accountability, as state law allows.
The Legislature also requested that we evaluate Public Health’s monitoring of
the SOGI data its contractors collect and the methods Public Health uses to
communicate changes in law relating to SOGI data collection. Managers of multiple
Public Health branches explained that Public Health is involved in the final approval
of the forms that contractors use to collect demographic information, so it has the
opportunity to ensure that the forms comply with current state law without having
separate processes to communicate changes in law relating to SOGI data collection.
As we noted earlier, Public Health often does not collect SOGI data on the forms that
already collect ancestry and ethnic origin data. However, we determined that this
issue is not related to its contracting decisions or processes, but is rather the result of
decisions and inconsistencies already described in the Audit Results.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 29
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
Some Other State Entities Are Collecting SOGI Data
To identify potential best practices, we reached out to other state entities that state
law specified should collect SOGI data. State law requires 11 state entities, including
Public Health, to collect voluntarily provided self-identification information about
SOGI in the course of collecting demographic data regarding the ancestry or ethnic
origin of Californians. We have listed those
entities in the text box. We contacted each of
the remaining 10 entities and determined that State Entities Required, Under Certain
seven collect complete SOGI data, one collects Conditions, to Collect SOGI Data
gender identity data but not sexual orientation
1. California Department of Public Health
data, and two stated that they do not collect
SOGI data. Because we did not audit these 2. California Department of Health Care Services
entities, we cannot draw conclusions about 3. California Department of Social Services
the quality of their efforts or whether the
4. California Department of Aging
three entities not collecting complete SOGI
5. California Department of Education and the
data should have been doing so, but we were
Superintendent of Public Instruction, with the
informed by their efforts.
exception of the California Longitudinal Pupil
Achievement Data System
The California Department on Aging’s (Aging)
6. Commission on Teacher Credentialing
efforts serve as a potential best practice.
Despite recognizing that there is no new 7. Civil Rights Department
funding available for developing training or 8. California Labor and Workforce Development Agency
updating local data management systems,
9. Department of Industrial Relations
Aging coordinated with local agencies and their
10. Employment Training Panel
data system vendors to develop and implement
standard SOGI questions statewide. Similar to 11. Employment Development Department, with the
exception of the Unemployment Insurance Program
Public Health’s collecting data from local health
jurisdictions, Aging collects data from 33 local Source: State law.
Area Agencies on Aging (local agencies). In
response to state law requiring it to collect
SOGI data, Aging established a workgroup
with a selection of local agencies to develop standard questions for all local agencies
to use, to develop training, and to work with data management providers to update
their local data collection systems to collect SOGI data. In addition, because the
local agencies used six different data system providers, Aging notified the data
system providers of the need to modify their systems and provided them with the
standard questions to add. Further, the workgroup identified the need for statewide
and local training to conduct training specific to LGBTQ emerging issues and
training in respectfully asking the new SOGI questions. To inform the other local
agencies of the changes, Aging issued a program memo summarizing the reasons
for the changes and offering instruction for implementing the changes. Likewise, we
make recommendations to Public Health to improve its collection of SOGI data by
standardizing definitions and providing guidance.
30 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 31
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
Appendix A
Results of Our Survey of Local Health Jurisdictions
The Audit Committee requested that we assess Public Health’s role in collecting,
reporting, and using SOGI data. To gain an understanding of the challenges that
local health jurisdictions experience, we surveyed the local health jurisdictions.
We notified the local health jurisdictions about this survey by email and collected
their electronic responses. Of the 61 local health jurisdictions that we surveyed,
54 (89 percent) completed the survey. In Table A we present aggregated responses
to selected questions.
Table A
Local Health Jurisdictions’ Responses to Selected Questions From Our Survey
PERCENTAGE OF RESPONSES
QUESTIONS YES NO
Questions regarding collection of sexual orientation and gender identity information
Does your local health jurisdiction collect information on sexual 98% 2%
orientation for the individuals participating in its programs and services?
Does your local health jurisdiction currently have a standardized set of 26 74
questions, answers, and language that is used across all programs to
collect sexual orientation data?
Does your local health jurisdiction collect information on gender identity 94 6
for the individuals participating in its programs and services?
Does your local health jurisdiction currently have a standardized set of 26 74
questions, answers, and language that is used across all programs to
collect gender identity data?
Does your local health jurisdiction collect SOGI data for reportable 91 9
communicable diseases, as required by Title 17 of the California Code of
Regulations?
Does your local health jurisdiction collect SOGI data when collecting data 76 24
about COVID-19 cases?
Percentage of local health jurisdictions identifying Public 44%
Health as an entity that has provided guidance or training
regarding SOGI data collection to it.
continued on next page . . .
32 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
PERCENTAGE OF
Questions regarding improvements to Public Health’s guidance RESPONSES
What can the California Department of Public Health do to improve its guidance in terms of method, quality,
and sufficiency for collecting, reporting, and using SOGI data?*
Increase guidance or training 72%
Standardize SOGI definitions, language, or questions 35
Increase or clarify SOGI data requirements 20
Clarify the purpose of SOGI data for local health jurisdictions, 17
health care providers, and the public
Reach out to providers 13
Source: Auditor’s survey of local health jurisdictions.
Note: We surveyed 61 local health jurisdictions and 54 (89 percent) completed the survey.
* We analyzed the local health jurisdictions’ comments to identify common themes and we list some of those themes here.
We invited the respondents to our survey to provide written comments to give
context to selected answers, although only some opted to do so. In the survey, we
asked questions about the local health jurisdictions’ methods for collecting and
reporting SOGI data and about what Public Health can do to improve its directions.
Most of the local health jurisdictions responded that they do collect sexual
orientation and gender identity information for the individuals participating in their
programs and services. However, only about a quarter of them use standardized
questions, answers, or language across all their programs. Comments about
improving Public Health’s guidelines generally focused on a need for more training
and for standardized SOGI questions and response field definitions. Local health
jurisdictions specifically requested standard definitions and tools for collecting
SOGI information, and they identified challenges to educating their communities
on the importance and purpose of asking for SOGI information. Some local health
jurisdictions expressed frustration with using multiple systems for storing data
rather than having a central information exchange. Several local health jurisdictions
stated that Public Health could assist with SOGI data collection and reporting by
encouraging health care providers and laboratories to include SOGI data in medical
systems reports. The results of the survey suggest that Public Health could improve
its directions and guidance to local health jurisdictions and provide training.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 33
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
Appendix B
Results of Our Survey of Health Care Providers
The Audit Committee requested that we assess Public Health’s role in collecting,
reporting, and using SOGI data. To gain an understanding of the challenges
that health care providers experience, we surveyed CalREDIE users identified by
Public Health as using its CalREDIE system since July 2021. We notified these
CalREDIE users about this survey by email and collected their electronic responses.
Of the 1,901 CalREDIE users that we surveyed, 160 (8 percent) responded. We
excluded 41 responses for not coming from health care providers. In Table B
we present aggregated responses from the remaining 119 survey respondents to
selected questions.
Table B
Health Care Providers’ Responses to Selected Questions From Our Survey
PERCENTAGE OF
QUESTIONS RESPONSES IDENTIFYING
EACH AS BARRIER
What are the barriers to collecting complete SOGI data on communicable disease?
Individuals are reluctant to provide SOGI information when asked 39%
There is no standard definition or guidance on which information should be 31
collected when requesting information about a person’s sexual orientation or
gender identity
There are no standard questions or guidance on which questions to ask to 28
obtain a person’s SOGI information
SOGI information is not relevant to report 18
You or your staff are reluctant to solicit SOGI information 11
PERCENTAGE OF
RESPONSES
Has your local health jurisdiction provided any guidance or YES NO/UNSURE
training regarding SOGI data collection to you?
12% 88%
Has another entity provided any guidance or training regarding PERCENTAGE OF
SOGI data collection to you? RESPONSES
I have not received any guidance regarding SOGI data collection 41%
California Department of Public Health 13
Not sure 25
continued on next page . . .
34 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Percentage of open-ended responses indicating that health care 52%
providers would benefit from Public Health providing guidance or
training about collecting and reporting SOGI data.
Has the California Department of Public Health provided you with PERCENTAGE OF
a standardized set of questions, answers, or language that is used RESPONSES
to collect the following from patients?
YES NO/UNSURE
Sexual orientation 35% 65%
Gender identity 28 72
Source: Auditor’s survey of health care providers.
Note: We surveyed 1,901 CalREDIE users and 160 responded. We excluded 41 responses for not being health care providers. In
this table we present aggregated responses from the remaining 119 survey respondents to selected questions. Some questions
did not receive a 100 percent response rate, and these figures reflect only the responses for each question.
We invited the respondents to our survey to provide written comments to give
context to selected answers, although only some opted to do so. In the survey, we
asked questions regarding the barriers to collecting SOGI data, the different methods
health care providers use to collect SOGI data, and the guidance that providers have
received regarding SOGI data collection. More than half of respondents said that
they either did not receive or were unaware of whether they had received information
from Public Health on standardized questions and answers for collecting SOGI
information. Further, the health care providers who said that they had received
standardized information from Public Health were more likely to collect SOGI
information than health care providers who said that they had not. In addition, some
health care providers were unaware of reporting requirements for communicable
diseases and the reasons for collecting SOGI information or otherwise said that
SOGI is not relevant to collect. Further, one health care provider expressed concerns
that collecting SOGI information is discriminatory. The results of the survey suggest
that without more guidelines from Public Health, there will continue to be confusion
about the purposes and benefits of collecting and reporting SOGI data from local
health care providers, and Public Health will be unable to obtain full participation
from these individuals to collect and report SOGI information.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 35
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
Appendix C
Scope and Methodology
The Audit Committee directed the California State Auditor to conduct an audit
of Public Health regarding its role in collecting, reporting, and using SOGI data.
Table C lists the objectives that the Audit Committee approved and the methods we
used to address them.
Table C
Audit Objectives and the Methods Used to Address Them
AUDIT OBJECTIVE METHOD
1 Review and evaluate the law, rules, Reviewed and evaluated laws and regulations related to Public Health, SOGI data collection for
and regulations significant to the local health jurisdictions, laboratories, and health care providers.
audit objectives.
2 Identify the programs within Public • Interviewed key personnel at Public Health and reviewed documentation to identify the
Health that are actively collecting SOGI programs that are collecting demographic data and therefore may be required to collect
data and determine the following: SOGI data.
a. The process each program used – Public Health programs collect SOGI data in many ways, including intake forms, surveys,
to establish data collection and electronic databases, and some programs collect SOGI data using multiple forms or
methodologies. surveys. As a result, we focused our review on the forms, surveys, or electronic databases
Public Health used to collect demographic data.
b. The extent to which the programs
have different methodologies for • Reviewed the forms used by Public Health to collect demographic data to determine which are
collecting and tracking the data. required to collect SOGI data.
c. Public Health’s compliance – Analyzed those forms to determine whether they complied with law and other relevant criteria.
with AB 959, including its use of
SOGI data. – Interviewed key Public Health officials and reviewed relevant documentation to determine
whether Public Health tracked, monitored, or published SOGI data from the forms that
d. The extent to which each program
collect SOGI data.
performs monitoring to ensure
the appropriateness of the • Interviewed key personnel at Public Health and reviewed documentation to identify any
data collection. departmentwide guidance or initiatives to standardize SOGI data collection.
3 Identify the following information • Interviewed key personnel at Public Health and reviewed documentation for the forms in
regarding entities whose contracts Objective 2 that collect SOGI data. Requested Public Health to identify any contractors it
with Public Health require collecting engaged with to collect demographic information through these forms.
SOGI data:
• Reviewed a selection of 10 contracts to determine the methodologies used to enter into those
a. The total number of contracted contracts and requested Public Health provide information on any processes it used to monitor
entities. SOGI data collected by the contracted entities and to communicate changes in law.
b. To the extent possible, the
methodologies Public Health used to
negotiate these contracts.
c. Whether Public Health established
and followed specific processes
to monitor the data collected by
these entities.
d. The methods by which Public Health
communicates changes in law
relating to SOGI data collection.
continued on next page . . .
36 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
AUDIT OBJECTIVE METHOD
4 Determine the following information • Reviewed documentation to identify and review any departmentwide regulations, polices, and
regarding health care providers and procedures to ensure and facilitate the solicitation of SOGI data from health care providers
laboratories: and laboratories.
a. Identify the procedures that Public • Interviewed key personnel at Public Health to identify barriers the State experiences when
Health has in place to ensure and attempting to collect SOGI data.
facilitate the solicitation of SOGI
data from health care providers • Conducted a survey of health care providers that input data into CalREDIE to identify barriers
and laboratories. in collecting and reporting SOGI data to Public Health.
b. Identify the barriers that the State • Conducted a survey of the local health jurisdictions in the State to identify barriers in collecting
experiences when attempting to and reporting SOGI data to Public Health.
collect SOGI data from health care
• Interviewed key personnel at Public Health and local health jurisdictions and reviewed
providers and laboratories.
documentation and data files to identify limitations or deficiencies in CalREDIE’s SOGI data
c. Identify the current limitations collection and reporting abilities.
or deficiencies related to SOGI
data collection within electronic
disease reporting systems used
by both health care providers and
laboratories and determine how
these systems can be improved.
5 Identify the following information • For a selection of forms collecting SOGI data, identified and evaluated the methods through
regarding health care providers which Public Health provides guidance to health care providers and assists them in reporting
collecting SOGI data from patients with SOGI data.
reportable communicable diseases:
• As part of the survey of health care providers noted in Objective 4, solicited feedback on the
a. The measures Public Health has challenges that exist to collecting SOGI data, the different methods used to collect SOGI data,
taken to ensure that all health and what Public Health should do to assist health care providers.
care providers are collecting and
reporting SOGI data in compliance • Our office did not identify any provision of state law requiring providers to ask patients for
with SB 932 and how these measures their SOGI information. We discuss the methods of how health care providers report SOGI data
can be improved. in our response to Objective 2 above.
b. To the extent possible, the different
methods used to collect SOGI
data and how these methods can
be improved.
6 Review and assess the processes • Reviewed the requirements for health care providers to report SOGI data to laboratories to
by which Public Health interacts identify any shortcomings.
with laboratories that receive SOGI
• Interviewed key personnel at Public Health and reviewed documentation to identify barriers in
data from health care providers
laboratories’ reporting SOGI data to Public Health and identify potential solutions.
and determine whether there are
challenges in those interactions related • Interviewed staff at selected laboratories to determine what barriers exist to collecting and
to the collection of data and, if so, reporting SOGI data.
determine how these challenges can
be addressed.
7 Review and assess the processes by • Interviewed key personnel at Public Health and reviewed documentation to assess the extent
which Public Health interacts with to which Public Health interacts with community-based COVID-19 testing sites.
drive-through or pop-up COVID-19
• Reviewed the contracts Public Health has with its vendors for COVID-19 data collection as well
testing sites that collect SOGI data
as the forms used by those vendors to collect SOGI data to identify any challenges in data
and determine whether there are
collection.
challenges in those interactions related
to the collection of data and, if so,
determine how these challenges can
be addressed.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 37
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
AUDIT OBJECTIVE METHOD
8 Determine the extent to which Public • Interviewed key personnel at Public Health and reviewed relevant documentation regarding
Health provides uniform guidance the lack of departmentwide guidance to local health jurisdictions, laboratories, and
to local county health departments, contractors.
laboratories, and contractors regarding
• Surveyed the 61 local health jurisdictions and interviewed key personnel at some local health
the collection of SOGI data, including
jurisdictions to identify best practices for SOGI data collection practices and guidance.
whether specific guidance is provided
to laboratories regarding action to • Reviewed guidance for SOGI data collection published by other entities, including the CDC to
take after they receive SOGI data identify best practices.
from health care providers. Identify
the reasons for any lack of guidance.
Further, identify examples of unified
guidance that sources outside of Public
Health use that could become a model
for the entities that the law requires to
collect SOGI data.
9 Determine whether any efforts are Reviewed relevant laws and interviewed key personnel to evaluate the requirements for collecting
being made to collect SOGI data for the SOGI data for the administration of vaccines.
administration of the COVID-19 vaccine.
If no efforts have been taken, determine
the reasons why.
10 Review and evaluate the following: Surveyed the 61 local health jurisdictions regarding common challenges to collecting SOGI data
and whether they had similar challenges to collecting data on race and ethnicity. We also surveyed
a. The collection of SOGI data
the local health jurisdictions to identify differences in collecting SOGI data in urban and rural areas.
compared to the collection of data
on race and ethnicity to determine
whether similar difficulties exist.
b. The collection of SOGI data in
rural areas compared to the
collection of SOGI data in urban
areas to determine whether major
differences exist.
11 Determine whether any Public Health • Reviewed state law and identified the 11 state entities, including Public Health, which must
programs or other state agencies comply with SOGI data collection requirements.
are conducting SOGI data collection
• Contacted the 10 other state entities that state law named related to SOGI data to determine the
particularly well. Further, identify any
extent to which they implemented the requirements in state law and identify best practices.
local jurisdictions that report SOGI data
to Public Health particularly well and • Interviewed key personnel at most of the departments that were collecting SOGI data and
determine whether other entities that reviewed documentation to identify best practices.
collect these data could adopt these
best practices. • Interviewed staff at some local health jurisdictions to learn about their experiences with Public
Health’s guidelines.
12 To the extent possible, review and • Obtained and reviewed data reports from a selection of Public Health programs that collected
compare SOGI data retained before SOGI data prior to 2015.
and after the passage of AB 959 to
• Our analysis identified few Public Health programs that collected SOGI data prior to 2015. Of those
determine if a quantifiable difference
programs, we found limited changes when compared to current SOGI data collection processes.
can be identified.
This further corroborated our concerns related to Public Health’s lack of departmentwide guidance
for SOGI data collection and Public Health’s lack of analysis of SOGI data.
13 Review and assess any other issues that No other issues identified.
are significant to the audit.
Source: Audit workpapers.
38 CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
April 2023 | Report 2022-102
Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only.
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 39
Report 2022-102 | April 2023
State of California—Health and Human Services Agency
California Department of Public Health
Tomás J. Aragón, MD, DrPH GAVIN NEWSOM
Director and State Public Health Officer Governor
April 7, 2023
Grant Parks
California State Auditor
621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Mr. Parks:
The California Department of Public Health (Public Health) thanks the California State Auditor
for its draft audit report on sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data collection titled
“The California Department of Public Health: It Has Not Collected and Reported Sexual
Orientation and Gender Identity Data as State Law Intended.”
We believe in the importance of collecting SOGI data to identify disparities and acting to change
inequities in California’s health systems. Best practices related to SOGI data collection are
evolving. Public Health will continue to strive to achieve and improve compliance in our data
collection efforts and overall use of data to advance health equity in California.
We acknowledge and appreciate the insights shared in the audit report. Public Health will both
work to improve our own efforts, as well as support local health jurisdictions and health care
providers to collect this data. Although Public Health substantially complied with AB 959
provisions, implemented SOGI questions in the Confidential Morbidity report, and updated
CalREDIE to receive data from local health jurisdictions, we acknowledge that the report
highlights areas that go beyond the requirements of the law. We commit to reviewing the
recommendations proposed by the Auditor and look forward to reporting our progress 60 days,
6 months, and one year from the final report release.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the audit. If you have any questions, please
contact Mónica Vázquez, Deputy Director, Office of Compliance, at (916) 306-2251.
Sincerely,
Tomás J. Aragón, MD, DrPH
Director and State Public Health Officer
CDPH Director’s Office, MS 0500 ● P.O. Box 997377 ● Sacramento, CA 95899-7377
(916) 558-1700 ● (916) 558-1762 FAX
Internet Address: www.cdph.ca.gov