County Celebrates Cost-Cutting, but Some Question Its Figures : Government: Officials say they saved taxpayers $253 million in last year. They admit, though, that estimates submitted by program managers were accepted at face value.

Under the glare of popping flashbulbs Tuesday, Los Angeles County officials beamed for the cameras, claiming to have saved taxpayers a whopping $253 million by cutting costs during the last fiscal year, more than four times what was saved the year before.

Officials of the county’s Productivity and Quality Commission sponsored the brief celebration at the Hall of Administration to mark what they called a banner year of cutting government waste, encouraging innovation and improving services.

There seems little doubt that some of the programs--such as consolidating courts in Santa Monica--have reduced costs from last year’s $13.7-billion budget.

But on closer examination, even some commission members questioned some of the claimed savings.

For instance:

* The Department of Health Services estimates that it earned an extra $10 million in revenue through more efficient Medi-Cal billing at Harbor/UCLA Medical Center. But the commission failed to note that the department lost $24 million at some of its other hospitals because of delays in Medi-Cal billing caused by the collapse of an expensive computer system.

* The Department of Public Works estimated that 451 homeowners in Malibu and the San Gabriel Valley could save $50 million over the next three to four storm seasons if they heeded the department’s advice and took steps to reduce erosion of fire-ravaged hillsides. Although the Post-Burn Mudflow Protective Advice Program may indeed reduce property damage and prevent the loss of lives, “I wondered myself about whether it is really a direct cost savings to the county,” said Virginia Bortin, the commission’s executive director. Nonetheless, the $50 million was added to the tally of savings.

* The Department of Community and Senior Citizens Services helped land a $20-million federal grant for homeless programs that the commission counted as part of the savings. But not only is the money to be shared with the city of Los Angeles, the county probably would not have spent that much on such programs had the grant been denied.

County officials acknowledged that some of the alleged savings may be questionable.

The commission accepted at face value the estimates submitted by 184 program managers. “We probably should have proved those numbers first,” said Robert M. Hertzberg, an attorney who sits on the 17-member commission.

Even so, their annual effort to recognize programs that cut costs and improve services is still worthwhile, officials said.

“It has spinoff value,” said County Administrative Officer Sally R. Reed, who has urged the county to be more fiscally responsible since she was hired a year ago. “The more positive attention you give to those kinds of efforts, the more county departments are going to be that way.”

Health Services Director Robert C. Gates said, “If you always balance the gains against the losses, and say no one deserves recognition, you’ve eliminated the incentive for people to make improvements.”

Massive state budget cutbacks have forced the county to save more during the 1993-94 fiscal year, which ended in July, than in each of the past seven years since the commission has kept track of such data, Bortin said. “Departments were under the knife,” she said.

But Supervisor Gloria Molina, a frequent critic of the county’s fiscal policies, suggested that much more needs to be done.

“There are good things that go on; you can’t dismiss those things,” she said. “But whether we’re more efficient now? I don’t know whether that’s a claim we get to make yet.”

The steps the county took to save taxpayers’ money or improve public services include:

*Installing better computer systems in the Department of Mental Health and Administratively Unified Courts that reduced the county’s costs by $3.9 million.

* Consolidating the Santa Monica Municipal and Superior courts, avoiding the need for a new $56-million courthouse.

* Using volunteer attorneys in Glendale Superior Court to resolve civil cases. The program saved about $1.9 million in court costs.

* Reducing illness or injury claims in several departments--including the County Administrative Office, where a wellness program was projected to save more than $2 million annually, and in the Public Works Department, where a safety program saved $4.3 million.

* Establishing a county team to investigate financial abuse of the elderly.

Counting the Savings Los Angeles County officias praise cost-cutting programs that have saved taxpayers $253 million for the 1993-94 fiscal year. Closer examination raises some questions about county arithmetic. *

The Good Department: Courts Program: Consolidate Santa Monica municipal and superior courts. Estimated savings / revenue: $48 million Explanation: Avoids need for new $56-million courthouse. *

Department: Public Works Program: Impove worker safety Estimated savings / revenue: $4.3 million Explanation: Reduces illness and injury claims through improved training and inspections *

Department: Beaches and Harbors Program: Surf hotline Estimated savings / revenue: $13,000 Explanation: Six-month revenues from county-run 900 phone line giving surf and weather conditions. *

The Questionable *

Department: Health Services Program: More efficient Medi-Cal billing Estimated savings / revenue: $10 million Explanation: Department lost another $24 million in billing snafus at other hospitals. *

Department: Public Works Program: Mudflow protection Estimated savings / revenue: $50 million over four years Explanation: Workers visited burn areas to teach residents how to protect against mudslides. Savings based on assumption tha 451 homes would be damaged in mudslides. *

Department: Community and Senior Citizens Services Program: Homeless Estimated savings / revenue: $20 million Explanation: Received federal grant; no county money saved. Source: Los Angeles County Productivity and Quality Commission