Governance Gaps: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''This Page is not reading for proofreading.''' | |||
This page will summarize the results of ACV's assessment of governance gaps. | This page will summarize the results of ACV's assessment of governance gaps. | ||
You are here: <u>Governance Gaps</u>: '''Governance Gaps''' | You are here: <u>Governance Gaps</u>: '''Governance Gaps''' | ||
----After learning about Governance Gaps additional supporting details are available from the following web pages: | |||
After learning about Governance Gaps additional supporting details are available from the following web pages: | |||
* Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; --[[Governance Analysis]] | * Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; --[[Governance Analysis]] | ||
* Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; --[[Heat Maps]] | * Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; --[[Heat Maps]] | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
# Heatmaps for Jamie's examples need to be created. | # Heatmaps for Jamie's examples need to be created. | ||
# A comparison of Independent Examples and Jamie's examples needs to be created to arrive at our findings. | # A comparison of Independent Examples and Jamie's examples needs to be created to arrive at our findings. | ||
==== Add the Judges Decision Somewhere ==== | |||
Maricopa County leadership and legal team gained a favorable ruling by the Arizona Superior Court for Maricopa County by claiming Arizona Revised Statutes do not require the documentation Jamie requested. | |||
Contrary to the Maricopa County's Philosophy of only documenting what is required by law, the Government Accountability Office acknowledges that Federal Laws and Regulations do not adequately specify documentation requirements. Hence, the Green Book defines in general terms the '''documentation requirements''' which is '''required for all departments and agencies''' under the executive branch of the Federal Government. | |||
By the Judge's ruling, citizens are effectively prevented from acquiring the necessary information to prove wrongdoing by a County in a judicial setting. The Judge's ruling substantiates a governance gap with respect to documentation requirements for the internal controls within Maricopa County. | |||
Latest revision as of 11:08, 11 September 2026
This Page is not reading for proofreading.
This page will summarize the results of ACV's assessment of governance gaps.
You are here: Governance Gaps: Governance Gaps
After learning about Governance Gaps additional supporting details are available from the following web pages:
- Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; --Governance Analysis
- Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; --Heat Maps
- Governance Gaps; Governance Gaps; --Interesting Takeaways
TO BE DEVELOPED- Note to Proofreaders
- Jamie's examples need to be completed.
- Heatmaps for Jamie's examples need to be created.
- A comparison of Independent Examples and Jamie's examples needs to be created to arrive at our findings.
Add the Judges Decision Somewhere
Maricopa County leadership and legal team gained a favorable ruling by the Arizona Superior Court for Maricopa County by claiming Arizona Revised Statutes do not require the documentation Jamie requested.
Contrary to the Maricopa County's Philosophy of only documenting what is required by law, the Government Accountability Office acknowledges that Federal Laws and Regulations do not adequately specify documentation requirements. Hence, the Green Book defines in general terms the documentation requirements which is required for all departments and agencies under the executive branch of the Federal Government.
By the Judge's ruling, citizens are effectively prevented from acquiring the necessary information to prove wrongdoing by a County in a judicial setting. The Judge's ruling substantiates a governance gap with respect to documentation requirements for the internal controls within Maricopa County.
