Controller Finds Major Documentation Gaps in SFPD’s SF SAFE Grant; SFPD, OEWD to Pursue Follow-up

A controller's office assessment released this month found widespread documentation gaps in invoices submitted by the nonprofit SF SAFE under a grant with the San Francisco Police Department, and the committee agreed to pause further questioning until ongoing criminal inquiries proceed.

The audit team, led by Mark Dela Rosa of the controller's office, said the assessment reviewed a nine-month sample (July 2022–March 2023) and also conducted a higher-level review of 2018–2023 records. The report says the grant term ran from July 2018 through March 2023 with a not-to-exceed amount of about $5.3 million. The controller’s team reported that approximately $3.8 million — about 72% of the total reimbursements in that period — lacked adequate supporting documentation in city records and vendor files available to auditors.

Selena Wong, senior auditor who worked on the memo, told the committee the sampled $910,000 included roughly $79,000 of expenditures she characterized as ineligible or excessive. She gave examples from the sample period that auditors flagged: about $36,000 on gift boxes (roughly $150 each) distributed at community events, about $21,000 on parking (including recurring monthly spaces and valet charges), roughly $12,000 on limousine services and lodging tied to a training event, ride-hailing charges that included trips between a former executive director’s home and the airport and trips outside California, and roughly $1,300 in personal or office items she said were inconsistent with the grant agreement.

The controller's office recommended the Police Department review all invoices under the grant to determine whether any reimbursed amounts are unallowable and to recover funds as appropriate. Mark Dela Rosa said the audits division will follow up on corrective actions within six months of the memo’s issuance.

SFPD officials told the committee they take any possible misuse of public funds seriously and have moved to investigate internally. Diana Rocha, director of policy and public affairs for SFPD, said Chief Scott directed an internal review and asked the former CFO to look into documentation and subcontractor payments. Patrick Leung, former SFPD CFO, described chronic understaffing in the department’s fiscal team during his tenure and several practical limits to conducting annual monitoring visits during the COVID period. Leung said SFPD has requested general-ledger transactions accompany invoices going forward and that some retrospective review of 2018–2022 records was performed.

The Office of Economic and Workforce Development (OEWD) also told the committee it has active and prior grants involving SF SAFE and became aware of subcontractor nonpayment and other flags in late fall. OEWD staff said its prior commercial-corridor grant totaled about $1,000,000 and that the agency is administering a mission-ambassador services grant (OEWD stated a figure on the record that was discussed in committee testimony). OEWD said it is working with SFPD and the city attorney to determine next steps and to try to ensure subcontractors get paid.

Multiple public commenters — including subcontractor representatives, advocacy groups and community organizations — urged rapid city action to ensure employees and subcontractors are paid and called for independent oversight.

Because the San Francisco District Attorney’s office has opened a criminal investigation, President Aaron Peskin asked the committee to limit questions that could jeopardize the probe; the committee agreed to continue the item to the call of the chair so auditors and city staff can pursue follow-up and so the matter can return for a fuller review.

Next steps: the controller’s office will follow up on its recommendation within six months, SFPD said it will continue its internal review and may terminate the contract if the SF SAFE board does not provide requested documentation, and OEWD said it will pursue fiscal monitoring and joint information requests with SFPD and the city attorney. The committee set the item to return at the chair’s call.