The schedule moved from March to January
What’s the Scoop With Broach examined the 2025–26 Kern County Grand Jury’s five-page Kern360 report. The jury says the Workday enterprise system was purchased at an initial cost of $33.6 million and that the Human Capital Management phase moved from March 2026 to January 31, 2027—about 10 months later—with another $3.6 million in cost.
That addition equals 10.7% of the stated initial price and lifts the two figures in the report to $37.2 million. The calculation is this newsroom’s comparison; the grand-jury report does not call $37.2 million a final all-in project cost, and other licensing, staffing or later-change costs could sit outside those two figures.
| Measure | Record | Newsroom calculation |
|---|---|---|
| Initial purchase | $33.6 million | Baseline |
| Added HCM cost | $3.6 million | 10.7% of baseline |
| HCM schedule | March 2026 to Jan. 31, 2027 | About 10 months later |
Training problems preceded the unfinished payroll phase
The jury says financial functions went live in June 2025, but inconsistent training and system errors frustrated departmental staff. Its interviews found the second, department-led phase of the train-the-trainer model was less successful because work duties and schedules conflicted. Supervisors said too much time passed between recorded lessons and actual use.
Payroll was not yet implemented when the jury reported. The county planned at least three error-free parallel payroll runs before launch, while an Auditor-Controller help desk supported roughly 8,500 personnel. The jury recommended documented mandatory accounting training, individualized training time, temporary help and another HCM analyst.
What is established—and what is not
The record establishes a disclosed delay, an added cost, June data-entry errors and the jury’s assessment that timelines were not being met. It does not establish that Workday caused every payment or purchasing problem, that the project will miss January 2027, or that all $3.6 million was avoidable.
The report also credits the county for acquiring a modern system to replace a roughly 50-year-old platform and describes financial training delivered by Guidehouse as successful in its first phase. That counterevidence matters: this is a rollout-accountability finding, not a conclusion that modernization itself was unwarranted.
Method and limitation
The newsroom transcribed the price, revised date, staffing scope and findings from the grand-jury report, calculated the percentage increase and calendar delay, and checked the report’s recommendation and response-deadline sections. No interview or firsthand system test was conducted.
The public report summarizes contracts and interviews but does not attach invoices, a full change-order ledger or the agencies’ later responses. Those records are needed to verify payments and whether the training recommendations were completed.