SCO
City Lake Forest
Racial and Identity Profiling
Read the report at City Lake Forest ↗
CITY OF LAKE FOREST
Audit Report
RACIAL AND IDENTITY PROFILING PROGRAM
Chapter 466, Statutes of 2015;
and Chapter 328, Statutes of 2017
July 1, 2018, through June 30, 2024
M M. C
ALIA OHEN
C
ALIFORNIA
S
TATE
C
ONTROLLER
July 2025
MALIA M. COHEN
CALIFORNIA STATE CONTROLLER
July 8, 2025
CERTIFIED MAIL—RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Kevin Shirah, Director of Finance
City of Lake Forest
100 Civic Center Drive
Lake Forest, CA 92630
Dear Mr. Shirah:
The State Controller’s Office performed a review of costs claimed by the City of Lake Forest
(the city) for the legislatively mandated Racial and Identity Profiling Program (Chapter 466,
Statutes of 2015; and Chapter 328, Statutes of 2017) for the period of July 1, 2018, through
June 30, 2024. We conducted our review under the authority of Government Code
sections 12410, 17558.5, and 17561. Our review was limited to validating the claimed contract
services costs and hourly rates.
The city claimed $385,075 for costs of the mandated program. Our review found that $166,688 is
allowable and $218,387 is unallowable. The costs are unallowable because the city overstated its
contract hourly rates and the minutes claimed for each stop. The State paid the city $313,826.
This letter contains an adjustment to costs claimed by the city. If you disagree with the finding,
you may file an Incorrect Reduction Claim with the Commission on State Mandates
(Commission). Pursuant to section 1185.1(c) of the Commission’s regulations (Title 2, California
Code of Regulations), an Incorrect Reduction Claim challenging this adjustment must be filed
with the Commission no later than three years following the date of this report, regardless of
whether this report is subsequently supplemented, superseded, or otherwise amended. You may
obtain Incorrect Reduction Claim information on the Commission’s website at
www.csm.ca.gov/request-form.php.
MAILING ADDRESS P.O. Box 942850, Sacramento, CA 94250
SACRAMENTO 3301 C Street, Suite 700, Sacramento, CA 95816 | 916.324.8907
LOS ANGELES 901 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 200, Monterey Park, CA 91754 | 323.981.6802
Mr. Kevin Shirah
July 8, 2025
Page 2 of 2
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact Lisa Kurokawa, Chief,
Compliance Audits Bureau, by telephone at 916-327-3138, or email at lkurokawa@sco.ca.gov.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Original signed by
Kimberly A. Tarvin, CPA
Chief, Division of Audits
KAT/rs
Attachments:
Attachment 1—Summary of Program Costs
Attachment 2—Review Results
Copy: The Honorable Scott Voigts, Mayor
City of Lake Forest
Chris Hill, Principal Program Budget Analyst
Local Government Unit
California Department of Finance
Kaily Yap, Finance Budget Analyst
Local Government Unit
California Department of Finance
Darryl Mar, Manager
Local Reimbursements Section
State Controller’s Office
Everett Luc, Supervisor
Local Reimbursements Section
State Controller’s Office
MAILING ADDRESS P.O. Box 942850, Sacramento, CA 94250
SACRAMENTO 3301 C Street, Suite 700, Sacramento, CA 95816 | 916.324.8907
LOS ANGELES 901 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 200, Monterey Park, CA 91754 | 323.981.6802
City of Lake Forest Racial and Identity Profiling Program
Attachment 1—
Summary of Program Costs
July 1, 2018, through June 30, 2024
Page 1 of 3
J
D
T
RT
L
A
J
D
T
RT
L
A
J
D
T
L
A
C o s t E le m e n
u ly 1 , 2 0 1 8 , th r o u g h J u n e 3 0 , 2
ir e c t c o s ts :
C o n tr a c t s e r v ic e s :
T r a in p e a c e o ffic e r s a n d s u p
C o lle c t a n d r e p o r t d a ta
o ta l d ir e c t c o s ts
2 o u n d in g e r r o r
o ta l p r o g r a m c o s ts
3 e s s a m o u n t p a id b y th e S ta te
m o u n t p a id in e x c e s s o f a llo w a
u ly 1 , 2 0 1 9 , th r o u g h J u n e 3 0 , 2
ir e c t c o s ts :
C o n tr a c t s e r v ic e s :
C o lle c t a n d r e p o r t d a ta
o ta l d ir e c t c o s ts
2 o u n d in g e r r o r
o ta l p r o g r a m c o s ts
3 e s s a m o u n t p a id b y th e S ta te
m o u n t p a id in e x c e s s o f a llo w a
u ly 1 , 2 0 2 0 , th r o u g h J u n e 3 0 , 2
ir e c t c o s ts :
C o n tr a c t s e r v ic e s :
C o lle c t a n d r e p o r t d a ta
o ta l p r o g r a m c o s ts
3 e s s a m o u n t p a id b y th e S ta te
m o u n t p a id in e x c e s s o f a llo w a
ts
0 1
e r v
b le
0 2
b le
0 2
b le
9
is
c
0
c
1
c
o
o
o
o
r s
s ts
s ts
s ts
c
c
c
la
la
la
im
im
im
e
e
e
d
d
d
A c tu a l C o s ts
C la im e d
$ 4 ,2 0
3 8 ,0 6
4 2 ,2 7
(
$ 4 2 ,2 7
$ 3 8 ,0 9
3 8 ,0 9
(
$ 3 8 ,0 9
$ 6 9 ,6 3
$ 6 9 ,6 3
8
8
6
24
1
1
10
8
8
)
)
A llo w a b le
p e r R e v ie w
$ 3 ,4 4 6
1 5 ,5 8 5
1 9 ,0 3 1
-
1 9 ,0 3 1
( 4 2 ,2 7 4
$ ( 2 3 ,2 4 3
$ 1 6 ,2 0 3
1 6 ,2 0 3
-
1 6 ,2 0 3
( 3 8 ,0 9 0
$ ( 2 1 ,8 8 7
$ 3 0 ,0 2 9
3 0 ,0 2 9
( 6 9 ,6 3 8
$ ( 3 9 ,6 0 9
)
)
)
)
)
)
R e v ie w
1 A d ju s tm e n ts
$ ( 7 6 2
( 2 2 ,4 8 3
( 2 3 ,2 4 5
2
$ ( 2 3 ,2 4 3
$ ( 2 1 ,8 8 8
( 2 1 ,8 8 8
1
$ ( 2 1 ,8 8 7
$ ( 3 9 ,6 0 9
$ ( 3 9 ,6 0 9
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
City of Lake Forest Racial and Identity Profiling Program
Attachment 1 (continued)
Actual Costs Allowable Review
Cost Elements Claimed per Review Adjustments1
July 1, 2021, through June 30, 2022
Direct costs:
Contract services:
Collect and report data $ 1 06,163 $ 45,666 $ ( 60,497)
Total direct costs 1 06,163 45,666 ( 60,497)
Rounding error2 1 - ( 1)
Total program costs $ 1 06,164 45,666 $ ( 60,498)
Less amount paid by the State3 (106,164)
Amount paid in excess of allowable costs claimed $ (60,498)
July 1, 2022, through June 30, 2023
Direct costs:
Contract services:
Collect and report data $ 6 4,549 $ 28,030 $ ( 36,519)
Total direct costs 6 4,549 28,030 ( 36,519)
Rounding error2 (1) - 1
Total program costs $ 6 4,548 28,030 $ ( 36,518)
Less amount paid by the State3 (57,660)
Amount paid in excess of allowable costs claimed $ (29,630)
July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024
Direct costs:
Contract services:
Collect and report data $ 6 4,361 $ 27,729 $ ( 36,632)
Total program costs $ 6 4,361 27,729 $ ( 36,632)
Less amount paid by the State3 -
Allowable costs claimed less than amount paid $ 27,729
Page 2 of 3
City of Lake Forest Racial and Identity Profiling Program
Attachment 1 (continued)
Page 3 of 3
S
D
T
R
T
L
A
u m m a r y : J u ly 1
ir e c t c o s ts :
C o n tr a c t s e r v ic
o ta l d ir e c t c o s ts
2 o u n d in g e r r o r
o ta l p r o g r a m c o
e s s a m o u n t p a id
m o u n t p a id in e
C
, 2 0
e s :
s ts
b y
x c e
o s t E le m e n ts
1 8 , th r o u g h J u
3 th e S ta te
s s o f a llo w a b le
n e 3
c o s
0
ts
, 2 0
c la
2
im
4
e d
A c tu a l C o s ts
C la im e d
$ 3 8 5 ,0 7
3 8 5 ,0 7
(
$ 3 8 5 ,0 7
8
8
3
5
)
A llo w a b le
p e r R e v ie w
$ 1 6 6 ,6 8 8
1 6 6 ,6 8 8
-
1 6 6 ,6 8 8
( 3 1 3 ,8 2 6
$ ( 1 4 7 ,1 3 8
)
)
R e v ie w
1 A d ju s tm e n ts
$ ( 2 1 8 ,3 9 0
( 2 1 8 ,3 9 0
3
$ ( 2 1 8 ,3 8 7
)
)
)
______________________
1 See Attachment 2, Review Results.
2 We found rounding errors for fiscal year (FY) 2018-19, FY 2019-20, FY 2021-22, and FY 2022-23.
3 Payment information is current as of April 15, 2025.
City of Lake Forest Racial and Identity Profiling Program
Attachment 2—
Review Results
July 1, 2018, through June 30, 2024
BACKGROUND— Government Code (GC) section 12525.5, as added and amended by the
Statutes of 2015, Chapter 466 and Statutes 2017, Chapter 328; and
Title 11, California Code of Regulations, sections 999.224 through
999.229 established the state-mandated Racial and Identity Profiling
Program.
The program requires a local law enforcement agency that employs peace
officers—or that contracts for peace officers from another city or county
for police protection services—to electronically report to the Attorney
General, on an annual basis, data on all “stops” conducted within its
jurisdiction. For purposes of the program, “peace officer” does not include
probation officers and officers in custodial settings.
On May 22, 2020, the Commission on State Mandates found that GC
section 12525.5 constitutes a reimbursable state-mandated program,
beginning November 7, 2017, for local law enforcement agencies.
The Commission on State Mandates determined that each claimant is
allowed to claim and be reimbursed for the following activities identified
in the parameters and guidelines (Section IV., “Reimbursable Activities”):
A. One-Time Activities
1. One-time training per peace officer employee and supervisor
assigned to perform the reimbursable activities listed in
section IV.B. of these Parameters and Guidelines.
2. One-time installation and testing of software necessary to
comply with the state-mandated requirements for the collection
and reporting of data on all applicable stops.
B. Ongoing Activities
1. Identification of the peace officers required to report stops, and
maintenance of a system to match individual officers to their
Officer I.D. number. . . .
2. Collection and reporting data on all stops, as defined, conducted
by that agency’s peace officers for the preceding calendar year
in accordance with sections 999.226(a) and 999.227 of the
regulations. . . .
3. Electronic submission of data to DOJ and retention of stop data
collected. . . .
4. Audits and validation of data collected. . . .
5. For stop data collected, ensure that the name, address, social
security number, or other unique personally identifiable
information of the individual stopped, searched, or subjected to
property seizure, and the badge number or other unique
identifying information of the peace officer involved, is not
transmitted to the Attorney General in an open text field. . . .
Page 1 of 9
City of Lake Forest Racial and Identity Profiling Program
The parameters and guidelines describe the 16 types of stop data and all
applicable data elements, data fields, and narrative explanation fields that
peace officers must collect for every stop.
The following stops are not reportable:
• Interactions with passengers in a stopped vehicle who have not been
observed or suspected of violating the law;
• Stops made during public safety mass evacuations;
• Stops made during active shooter incidents;
• Stops resulting from routine security screenings to enter a building or
special event;
• Interactions during traffic control of vehicles due to a traffic accident
or emergency, crowd control requiring pedestrians to remain in a fixed
location for public-safety reasons, persons detained at residences so
that officers can check for proof of age while investigating underage
drinking, and checkpoints and roadblocks at which officers detain a
person as the result of regulatory activity that is general and not based
on individualized suspicion or personal characteristics;
• Interactions with a person who is subject to a warrant or search
condition at his or her residence;
• Interactions with a person who is subject to home detention or house
arrest;
• Stops in a custodial setting; and
• Stops that occur while an officer is off duty.
The program’s parameters and guidelines establish the state mandate and
define the reimbursement criteria. In compliance with GC section 17558,
the State Controller’s Office (SCO) issues the Mandated Cost Manual for
Local Agencies (Mandated Cost Manual) to assist local agencies in
claiming mandated program reimbursable costs.
FINDING— The City of Lake Forest (the city) claimed $385,075 in contract services
Overstated Racial costs for the Racial and Identity Profiling Program. We found that
and Identity $166,688 is allowable and $218,387 is unallowable. The costs are
Profiling Program unallowable because the city overstated its contract hourly rates and the
minutes claimed for each stop.
costs
We found that the city correctly classified claimed costs as contract
services costs because it contracted with the Orange County Sheriff-
Coroner’s Department (OCSD) for all of its law enforcement services
during the review period. The city also used the correct methodology to
calculate its contract services costs: it multiplied the number of stops
recorded by the time required to perform the reimbursable activities, then
multiplied the total by the hourly rates obtained from the city’s contracts
with the county for law enforcement services. OCSD based the hourly
Page 2 of 9
City of Lake Forest Racial and Identity Profiling Program
rates in its contracts on incurred costs for salaries, benefits, and additional
costs described as “Other Charges and Credits.”
The contract hourly rates were overstated because the city included in its
hourly rate calculations a contract overhead amount that was based on
unallowable indirect costs. The indirect costs are unallowable because
they are based on salary and wage costs that the city did not incur.
Additionally, the city claimed five minutes per stop for Activity B.2.
(collection and reporting data on all stops). OCSD has agreed that the
claim of five minutes for each stop was overstated and that 2.5 minutes per
stop is correct.
The following table summarizes the claimed, allowable, and review
adjustment amounts by fiscal year:
Page 3 of 9
2
2
2
2
2
2
F
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
T
is c a l
e a r
1 8 - 1 9
1 9 - 2 0
2 0 - 2 1
2 1 - 2 2
2 2 - 2 3
2 3 - 2 4
o t a ls
$
$
A m
C la
4
3
6
1 0
6
6
3 8
o
im
2
8
9
6
4
4
5
u n
e
,2
,0
,6
,1
,5
,3
,0
t
d
7
9
3
6
4
6
7
4
0
8
4
8
1
5
A m
A llo w
$ 1
1
3
4
2
2
$ 1 6
o
9
6
0
5
8
7
6
u n t
a b le
,0 3 1
,2 0 3
,0 2 9
,6 6 6
,0 3 0
,7 2 9
,6 8 8
A
$
$
R e
d ju
(
(
(
(
(
(
( 2
v
s
2
2
3
6
3
3
1
ie w
t m
3 ,2
1 ,8
9 ,6
0 ,4
6 ,5
6 ,6
8 ,3
e
4
8
0
9
1
3
8
n
3
7
9
8
8
2
7
t
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Contract Services Costs
The city contracted with the OCSD to perform all of its law enforcement
services during the review period. The “Police Services” page of the city’s
website states, in part:
Police Services for the City of Lake Forest are provided by contract with
the Orange County Sheriff's Department (OCSD).
The Sheriff’s Department is responsible for providing the protection of
citizens, the enforcement of laws, and crime prevention. Law
enforcement services include patrol, traffic enforcement, accident
analysis and investigation, parking enforcement, general and special
investigations, and the Community Support Unit.
The OCSD provided law enforcement services that included the
reimbursable activities claimed for the mandated program. The city
contracted with the OCSD for various staff positions each fiscal year and
paid the OCSD annual contract rates for each position. These positions
included, but were not limited to, Lieutenants, Investigators, Sheriffs and
Sergeants. No city staff member performed any of the reimbursable
activities under this program; therefore, the city did not incur salary and
related indirect costs. Furthermore, the city’s contract with Orange County
(the county) states that the county’s employees should not be considered
“in any manner” to be city employees.
City of Lake Forest Racial and Identity Profiling Program
We recalculated allowable contract services costs for the review period
based on the claimed number of stops reported and the revised time
increments to perform the reimbursable activities, multiplied by the
revised contract hourly rates.
Time Increments
The city computed its claimed costs based on OCSD officers conducting
stops at an average of five minutes per stop. An OCSD representative
explained that the five-minute average per stop was derived from a time
study conducted by the OCSD in 2021. However, we noted that the OCSD,
along with seven other law enforcement agencies in Southern California
and the California Highway Patrol, participated in a field test conducted
by the California Department of Justice in 2019 to assess the amount of
officer time required to complete a stop data collection form. The field test
is documented on pages 109 and 110 of the test claim for this mandated
program (test claim number 18-TC-02 filed by the City of San Diego on
June 14, 2019). The test claim included the field test results, which
documented that officers spent an average of 2.5 minutes per stop. We
asked the OCSD whether 2.5 minutes is an accurate reflection of time
spent by its officers to complete the reimbursable activity of collecting and
reporting stop data. The OCSD agreed that the 2.5 minute-per-stop
average from the field test is the correct average time to use for its officers
collecting and reporting stop data.
An OCSD representative explained that there was no documentation
supporting its 2021 time study. The representative also stated that the
county conducted another time study in October 2024, which showed that
officers averaged three minutes per stop. That time study was based on
36 stops, all of which were undated. In addition, the county had not
prepared a time study plan, nor did it explain how the stops were selected
or were representative of the entire population of stops. However, the
weaknesses of that particular time study are moot because time study
results cannot be applied retroactively.
Therefore, we adjusted the city’s claims to reflect an average time of
2.5 minutes for OCSD officers to conduct stops.
The following table shows the adjustments made to total hours spent on
the reimbursable activity of collecting and reporting stop data during the
review period:
Fiscal Stops Hours Hours Review
Year Claimed Claimed Allowable Adjustment
2018-19 2,165 180.42 90.21 (90.21)
2019-20 2,184 182.00 91.00 (91.00)
2020-21 3,937 328.08 164.04 (164.04)
2021-22 5,692 474.33 237.17 (237.16)
2022-23 3,408 284.00 142.00 (142.00)
2023-24 3,417 284.75 142.38 (142.37)
Page 4 of 9
City of Lake Forest Racial and Identity Profiling Program
Contract Hourly Rates
The city’s claims included copies of the law enforcement contracts that it
negotiated with the county for each year of the review period.
Attachment C, “Payment,” of the contract lists the authorized OCSD
staffing level for each year and the rates billed to the city for various OCSD
staff members.
We used this information to determine the contract hourly billing rates for
various employee classifications. We recalculated the contract hourly rates
for the Lieutenant, Investigator, Deputy Sheriff, and Sergeant
classifications using information from Attachment C. The city’s contracts
specify the cost of services provided, the quantity of each classification,
and the cost of services for each classification. For example, the city’s
contract for fiscal year (FY) 2023-24 indicates that four Sergeants (Patrol),
31 employees in the Deputy Sheriff II (Patrol) classification, and two
employees in the Deputy Sheriff II (Motorcycle) classification provided
law enforcement services for the city during the year, which included the
reimbursable activities.
The following table shows the base contract hourly rate calculation for
Deputy Sheriffs and Sergeants during FY 2023-24:
Annual
Level of Cost per Productive
Employee Annual Cost Service Employee Hours Hourly Rate
Classification [a] [b] [c] = [a]÷[b] [d] [e] = [c]÷[d]
Deputy Sheriff II (Patrol) $ 9,130,554 31 $ 294,534 1,800 $ 163.63
Deputy Sheriff II (Motorcycle) 598,792 2 299,396 1,800 166.33
Sergeant (Patrol) 1,419,412 4 354,853 1,800 197.14
We recalculated the contract hourly rates and determined that the city
properly used 1,800 annual productive hours for all OCSD employees in
its claims for all years of the review period, as specified in the SCO’s
Mandated Cost Manual.
The SCO’s Mandated Cost Manual also states that the cost of contract
services is allowable, and that those costs can be claimed using an hourly
billing rate. However, the SCO’s Mandated Cost Manual does not provide
specific guidance on how to calculate an hourly billing rate. Generally
speaking, an hourly rate for a specific employee classification is
determined by dividing the contract cost for an individual employee who
performs reimbursable activities by 1,800 annual productive hours.
However, this approach does not allow claimants to recover any additional
contract costs, such as administrative costs, that could be reimbursable.
We concluded that it was appropriate to allow the city to claim its other
costs, classified in Attachment C as “Other Charges and Credits,” as an
addition to the contract hourly rate for employee classifications included
in its contracts with the OCSD.
We calculated an administrative cost percentage for each fiscal year of the
review period based on the city’s contracts with the OCSD. To calculate
Page 5 of 9
City of Lake Forest Racial and Identity Profiling Program
the percentage, we divided the cost of the line item “Other Charges and
Credits” by the total contract cost.
The following table shows the allowable administrative cost percentage
that we calculated for each fiscal year of the review period:
Page 6 of 9
F is
2
2
2
2
2
2
c
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
1
1
2
2
2
2
l
8
9
0
1
2
3
Y
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
2
2
2
2
2
e
9
0
1
2
3
4
a r
A d m
P
A llo w a b
in is t r a t iv
e r c e n t a
1 4 . 4 6 %
1 5 . 7 9 %
1 4 . 3 6 %
1 4 . 4 2 %
1 6 . 0 4 %
1 8 . 2 2 %
le
e C
g e
o s t
As previously mentioned, we divided the cost of the “Other Charges and
Credits” line item by the total contract cost. The following table shows
how we made this calculation for FY 2023-24:
Cost Category Contract Amount
Other charges and credits $ 3,575,549
Divided by total contract amount 19,629,237
Administrative cost percentage 18.22%
Contract hourly rates for Deputies and Sergeants are as follows for
FY 2023-24:
H
$
C o n
o u r ly
[ a
1
1
1
t r a
R
]
6 3
6 6
9 7
c
a
. 6
. 3
. 1
t
t e
3
3
4
A d
P
m
e
1
1
1
in is t r a
r c e n t a
[ b ]
8 . 2 2 %
8 . 2 2 %
8 . 2 2 %
t
g
iv
e
e
[
R
c ]
e
=
v is e d H o u r
R a t e
[ a ] × [ 1 +
$ 1 9 3
1 9 6
2 3 3
ly
b
. 4
. 6
. 0
]
4
4
6
City of Lake Forest Racial and Identity Profiling Program
The following table summarizes the claimed hourly rates and allowable
contract hourly rates for each of the employee classifications—Deputy
Sheriff II (Patrol), Deputy Sheriff II (Motorcycle), Sergeant (Patrol),
Investigator, and Lieutenant—appearing in the city’s claims during the
review period, and the difference between those rates:
Page 7 of 9
D22
2
2
2
2
S
2
2
2
2
2
2
I
2
2
2
2
22
F is c a l
Y e a r
e p u ty S h
0 1 8 - 1 9
0 1 9 - 2 0
0 2 0 - 2 1
0 2 1 - 2 2
0 2 2 - 2 3
0 2 3 - 2 4
e r g e a n t (
0 1 8 - 1 9
0 1 9 - 2 0
0 2 0 - 2 1
0 2 1 - 2 2
0 2 2 - 2 3
0 2 3 - 2 4
n v e s tig a to
0 1 8 - 1 9
0 1 9 - 2 0
0 2 0 - 2 1
0 2 1 - 2 2
0 2 2 - 2 3
0 2 3 - 2 4
e
P
r
C la im e d
H o u r ly
R a te
r iff I I ( P a tr o l)
$ 2 0 9 .4 8
2 0 7 .8 1
2 1 0 .7 9
2 2 2 .3 7
2 2 5 .7 4
2 2 4 .5 0
a tr o l)
$ 2 5 4 .6 2
2 5 2 .1 5
2 5 5 .4 7
2 6 8 .3 5
2 7 2 .3 8
2 7 0 .4 8
$ 2 5 3 .3 4
n o t c la im e d
n o t c la im e d
n o t c la im e d
n o t c la im e d
n o t c la im e d
A llo w a b le
H o u r ly
R a te
$ 1 7 1 .5 2
1 7 6 .8 0
1 8 1 .7 9
1 9 1 .3 0
1 9 6 .0 6
1 9 3 .4 4
$ 2 0 8 .4 8
2 1 4 .5 2
2 2 0 .3 3
2 3 0 .8 5
2 3 6 .5 8
2 3 3 .0 6
$ 2 0 7 .4 3
-
-
-
-
-
`
R a te
D iffe r e n c e
$ ( 3 7 .9
( 3 1 .0
( 2 9 .0
( 3 1 .0
( 2 9 .6
( 3 1 .0
$ ( 4 6 .1
( 3 7 .6
( 3 5 .1
( 3 7 .5
( 3 5 .8
( 3 7 .4
$ ( 4 5 .9
-
-
-
-
-
61
0
7
8
6
4
3
4
0
0
2
1
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
D22
2
2
2
2
L
2
2
2
2
2
2
F is c a l
Y e a r
e p u ty S
0 1 8 - 1 9
0 1 9 - 2 0
0 2 0 - 2 1
0 2 1 - 2 2
0 2 2 - 2 3
0 2 3 - 2 4
ie u te n a n
0 1 8 - 1 9
0 1 9 - 2 0
0 2 0 - 2 1
0 2 1 - 2 2
0 2 2 - 2 3
0 2 3 - 2 4
h
t
e
C la im e d
H o u r ly
R a te
r iff I I ( M o to r
$ 2 1 3 .7 2
2 1 1 .7 4
2 1 4 .5 3
2 2 6 .1 8
2 2 9 .4 6
2 2 8 .2 1
$ 2 9 5 .6 3
n o t c la im e d
n o t c la im e d
n o t c la im e d
n o t c la im e d
n o t c la im e d
c y c le
A llo w a b le
H o u r ly
R a te
)$
1 7 4 .9 9
1 8 0 .1 5
1 8 5 .0 2
1 9 4 .5 8
1 9 9 .3 0
1 9 6 .6 4
$ 2 4 2 .0 7
-
-
-
-
-
R a te
D iffe r e n c e
$ ( 3 8 .7 3
$ ( 3 1 .5 9
$ ( 2 9 .5 1
$ ( 3 1 .6 0
$ ( 3 0 .1 6
$ ( 3 1 .5 7
$ ( 5 3 .5 6
-
-
-
-
-
))
)
)
)
)
)
The following table shows the calculation of the review adjustment for
FY 2023-24:
Claimed Average Claimed Allowable Allowable Allowable Review
Employee Hours Rate Costs Hours Rate Costs Adjustment
Classification [a] [b] c = [a] * [b] [d] = [a] ÷ 2 [e] f = [d] * [e] g = [f] - [c]
Deputy Sheriff II (Patrol) 260.34 $ 224.50 $ 58,446 130.17 $ 193.44 $ 25,180 $ (33,266)
Deputy Sheriff II (Motorcycle) 16.27 228.21 3,713 8.14 196.64 1,600 (2,113)
Sergeant (Patrol) 8.14 270.48 2,202 4.07 233.06 949 (1,253)
Totals $ 6 4,361 $ 27,729 $ (36,632)
Rounding Errors
We also found minor rounding errors, totaling $3, in the city’s claims
when we recalculated claimed costs using the contract cost computation
schedules provided. We recalculated claimed costs by multiplying the
claimed employee billing rates by the claimed labor hours. We
City of Lake Forest Racial and Identity Profiling Program
incorporated these adjustments into the allowable cost computations for
each year of the review period.
The following table summarizes the claimed and recalculated claimed
costs by activity by fiscal year.
Page 8 of 9
2
222
22
F is c a l
Y e a r
0 1 8 - 1 9
0 1 9 - 2 0
0 2 0 - 2 1
0 2 1 - 2 2
0 2 2 - 2 3
0 2 3 - 2 4
T o ta ls
A c tiv ity
A .1 .
C la im e d
[ a ]
$ 4 ,2 0 5
-
-
-
-
-
$ 4 ,2 0 5
A c tiv ity A .1 .
R e c a lc u la te d
[ b ]
$ 4 ,2 0 8
-
-
-
-
-
$ 4 ,2 0 8
D iffe r e n c e
[ c ] = [ b ] - [ a ]
$ 3
-
-
-
-
-
$ 3
A c tiv ity
B .2 .
C la im e d
[ d ]
$ 3 8 ,0 6
3 8 ,0 9
6 9 ,6 3
1 0 6 ,1 6
6 4 ,5 4
6 4 ,3 6
$ 3 8 0 ,8 7
9
084
81
0
A c tiv ity
R e c a lc u
[ e ]
$ 3 8
3 8
6 9
1 0 6
6 4
6 4
$ 3 8 0
B
la
,0
,0,6,1
,5,3
,8
.2 .
te d
6 8
9 1
3 8
6 3
4 9
6 1
7 0
D iffe r e n c e
[ f] = [ e ] - [ d ]
$ ( 1
1
-
( 1
1
-
$ -
)
)
T o ta l
D iffe r e n c e
[ g ] = [ c ] + [ f]
$ 2
1
-
( 1
1
-
$ 3
)
Contract Overhead Costs
When calculating its contract billing rates, the city included in its
computations an additional amount for contract overhead. That amount
was added to the contract hourly rate. The city based its contract overhead
amount on an Indirect Cost Rate Proposal for each fiscal year prepared for
the City of Lake Forest Sheriff, which does not exist as a person or as an
entity. The city’s claims included copies of its Indirect Cost Rate Proposals
for FY 2018-19 through FY 2023-24. The city calculated indirect cost
rates of 40.5% for FY 2018-19, 36.1% for FY 2019-20, 32.6% for
FY 2020-21, 33.0% for FY 2021-22, 27.9% for FY 2022-23, and 37.2%
for FY 2023-24. In addition, the city based its indirect cost rates on salaries
and wages—costs that it did not incur. Instead, the city incurred contract
services costs for its law enforcement activities. Substituting contract
services costs as salaries and wages costs is not consistent with generally
accepted accounting principles, nor is it consistent with the guidance
provided for indirect cost calculations listed in Section V.B. of the
parameters and guidelines or the federal cost principles contained in
Title 2, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 225, Appendices A and B.
Therefore, these rates are unallowable.
Criteria
Section I., “Status of County,” of the city’s contract for law enforcement
services states, in part:
COUNTY, its agents and employees, shall not be entitled to any rights
or privileges of CITY employees and shall not be considered in any
manner to be CITY employees.
Section IV., “Reimbursable Activities,” of the parameters and guidelines
begins:
To be eligible for mandated cost reimbursement for any fiscal year, only
actual costs may be claimed. Actual costs are those costs actually
City of Lake Forest Racial and Identity Profiling Program
incurred to implement the mandated activities. Actual costs must be
traceable and supported by source documents that show the validity of
such costs, when they were incurred, and their relationship to the
reimbursable activities. A source document is a document created at or
near the same time the actual cost was incurred for the event or activity
in question. Source documents may include, but are not limited to,
employee time records or time logs, sign-in sheet, invoices, and receipts.
Section V.A3., “Contracted Services,” of the parameters and guidelines
states:
Report the name of the contractor and services performed to implement
the reimbursable activities. If the contractor bills for time and materials,
report the number of hours spent on the activities and all costs charged.
If the contract is a fixed price, report the services that were performed
during the period covered by the reimbursement claim. If the contract
services are also used for purposes other than the reimbursable activities,
only the pro-rata portion of the services used to implement the
reimbursable activities can be claimed. Submit contract consultant and
attorney invoices with the claim and a description of the contract scope
of services.
Section V.B., “Indirect Cost Rates,” of the parameters and guidelines
states, in part:
Indirect costs are costs that are incurred for a common or joint purpose,
benefiting more than one program, and are not directly assigned to a
particular department or program without efforts disproportionate to the
result achieved. Indirect costs may include both: (1) overhead costs of
the unit performing the mandate; and (2) the costs of the central
government services distributed to the other departments based on a
systematic and rational basis through a cost allocation plan.
Compensation for indirect costs is eligible for reimbursement utilizing
the procedure provided in 2 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 225
(Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-87). Claimants
have the option of using 10 percent of direct labor, excluding fringe
benefits, or preparing an Indirect Cost Rate Proposal (ICRP) if the
indirect cost rate claimed exceeds 10 percent. . . .
The distribution base may be: (1) total direct costs (excluding capital
expenditures and other distorting items, such as pass-through funds,
major subcontracts, etc.); (2) direct salaries and wages; or (3) another
base which results in an equitable distribution. . . .
Recommendation
We recommend that the city:
• Adhere to the Racial and Identity Profiling Program’s parameters and
guidelines and the SCO’s Mandated Cost Manual when claiming
reimbursement for mandated costs; and
• Ensure that claimed costs include only eligible costs, are based on
actual costs, and are properly supported.
Page 9 of 9