Amador County Grand Jury
2005-2006
Quick View
Full Details →
Additional Recommendations
12
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
State of California Review of Amador County Mental Health Plan.
R2:
Require the Director to supply his superior and the County a written plan to improve the working environment and effectiveness of ACMH. The plan should include how to implement the team building recommendations from the workshops into the day-to-day functioning of the Department. It should include a timeline and measurable goals. The plan should also be a part of the performance evaluation of the Director and be reviewed by his supervisor and the County Administration, and be included in the response to the Grand Jury. Response by Department Head: The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented by December 31, 2005. Although we have begun utilizing the recommendations from the workshops within the department, the director will be asked to expand on these efforts in a written plan of implementation. This plan will be given to his supervisor and County Administration and will be used to monitor progress toward improving the working environment within the department. Response by Board of Supervisors: This recommendation has not yet been implemented; however, County Administration is currently working with the Director of Health and Human Services to effectively transition to a Behavioral Health Agency. As part of this transition, Administration fully expects to seek the development of a strategic plan which would include the Mental Health Department. Development of this plan will commence once the new Behavioral Health Director position is filled which may be as early as Fall 05. 38 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report Verbatim 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report Addendum response by Health and Human Services Agency Director: Refer to the attached improvement plan submitted by the Mental Health. This plan is now in effect and will be used as a benchmark for current and future performance evaluations.
R3:
Such a plan should include, but not be limited to, quarterly meetings of ACMH employees (management and staff) with staff input into a published agenda. These meetings should address current issues and problems, problem solving, suggestions and/or exercises, goal-setting for the next time period, and recognition of good performances and successes from the previous time period. Response by Department Head: This recommendation has been implemented. All committees and meetings within the Mental Health Department have agendas and minutes and continue to meet on a regularly scheduled basis. These meetings do address current issues/problems, problem solving, suggestions, etc. Additionally, the HHS Director has conducted a SWOT analysis with all staff to look at the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for the department. A follow-up meeting will be held with staff by December 31, 2005 to determine our progress and challenges still facing us. We are currently working on placing all minutes of the committees and meetings in e-files available to all departmental staff. Successes are celebrated in addition to dealing with issues and/or problem solving. Additionally, a monthly newsletter is being published with input from all staff. This newsletter recognizes successes and achievements and serves to improve communication within the department and with the Agency Director. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors concurs with the Department Head's response.
R4:
If the goals in the plan are not being met, this should be reflected in the Director's performance evaluation. There should be a specific structure for ongoing evaluation, of the ACMH Director's management of the staff, by the Health and Human Services Agency and the County Administrative Office. 39 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report Verbatim 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report Response by Department Head: The recommendation has not been implemented, but will be completed no later than December 31, 2005. The Health and Human Services Agency Director and the Deputy CAO are currently conducting interviews with staff of the Mental Health Department to address issues, concerns and suggestions. Findings will be compiled into a report that will assist in establishing goals for the department and the Mental Health Director. Performance Evaluations are a tool utilized to monitor an individual's ongoing ability to perform his/her essential job functions. As required, the HHS Agency Director will continue to monitor the performance of the Mental Health Director, and will set expectations, goals, and corrective actions to be performed as deemed appropriate and as approved by the County Administrative Office. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors has implemented this recommendation across the organization. All departments are required to annually submit goals and conduct evaluations. Addendum response by Health and Human Services Agency Director: The HHS Agency Director and Deputy County Administrative Officer conducted interviews with a majority of staff from the Mental Health Department to determine how we are currently functioning and meeting their needs. Part of this process was to look at employee morale as well as how the Director is performing the essential functions of the job. A report was then prepared based upon these interviews and was given to the Board of Supervisors in Closed Session (because it dealt with personnel issues). The conclusions reached were shared with the Director only to the extent that they will be used to set over-all department as well as specific performance goals.
R5:
Supervisors should be responsible for keeping track of employee time and ensuring that rules regarding timekeeping are applied evenly to all staff. If supervisors cannot manage the appropriate monitoring of employees' work hours, ACMH should install and use a time-recording device to standardize the record keeping of employees' work time arrival and departure. Also this device should be used to record employee breaks, lunchtime, and other office departures. 40 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report Verbatim 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report Response by Department Head: This recommendation has been implemented. Keeping track of employee time was addressed in memos to all staff on October 8 and 28, 2004.The first memo was asking for cooperation from staff, and the second memo spelled out that we must be open and available for clients during clinic hours. Additionally, the subject of time was addressed at a staff meeting on October 28th, and supervisors are now managing and monitoring employees' work hours. Since the issuance of the second memo, tracking of time has not been an issue within the department. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors concurs with the Department Head's response.
R6:
Develop an informal grievance procedure for ACMH. The procedure should include, guidelines for how the grievances would be handled by the receiving person and what sort of response is required when an employee uses the informal process. Orient ACMH staff at all levels to this policy. Response by Department Head: This recommendation has not been implemented, but will be process for conflict resolution that could also be used as an informal grievance procedure. As the process is completed, it will be presented for discussion/comment in an all-staff meeting as well as in the department newsletter. Recommendations will then be put into place in a plan that will be covered with all staff. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors concurs with the Department Head's response Addendum Response by Health and Human Services Agency Director; Teach Team Building Committee has begun working on this item. However, the team invited the Deputy CAO to participate in our efforts and we are working on this for all county employees. There is a grievance procedure in the current MOU so we are now developing a “Conflict Resolution” process/procedure. As this will go beyond the department, it has not yet been completed. We anticipate that such a process/procedure will be in place by March, 2006 at the latest.
R7:
Identify a management team, to clarify supervisory roles, responsibilities and lines of communication. Publish this information for all staff and schedule management team meetings on a regular basis. Members of the management team should be chosen by position in the department. 41 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report Verbatim 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report Response by Department Head: This recommendation has not been completed, but will be in place by December 31, 2005. The Mental Health Department is merging with the Alcohol/Drug Prevention Department to become the Behavioral Health Services Division within the Health and Human Services Agency. A recruitment process is currently underway to hire a new Behavioral Health Director. Once this process is completed a management team will be established based upon job specifications. An organizational chart will then be published and presented to all staff with roles and responsibilities defined. The management team will meet on a regular basis, no less frequently than monthly, but more often if needed. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors concurs with the Department Head's response. Addendum response by Health and Human Services Agency Director: This recommendation has been completed in part (see attached information from the ACMH Director). Additionally, Social Entrepreneurs, Inc. has received a contract with the County to undertake a structural analysis of both the Mental Health and Alcohol/Drug Prevention Departments. This analysis will allow us to move towards combining the two departments into a Behavioral Health Division and will look at current job descriptions as well as make recommendations for changes in descriptions/duties. Once this is completed (March 2006) we will identify an ongoing Management Team, define their roles/responsibilities and publish this for all the staff.
R8:
Where appropriate, staff input should be solicited and considered when developing new policies and procedures. Response by Department Head: This recommendation has been implemented. The Mental Health Department utilizes a committee structure to develop new policies and procedures as appropriate unless they are a direct result of a change in Federal or State regulation. When these policies and/or procedures are completed, they are then presented at the next all-staff meeting after being distributed to all staff for preview. Staff then has the opportunity to express comments and/or concerns. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors concurs with the Department Head's response. 42 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report Verbatim 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report
R9:
Adhere to the personnel guidelines of the County and to County policy and the expectations (both the letter and the spirit of the law) of the Department regarding sexual harassment, ethnic, racial and religious tolerance, understanding and sensitivity, and workplace dress code and behavior (Review , MOU and County of Amador Policies and Procedures Manual-number 2-100 and 2-900 (see Appendices C & D) Note: these policies are currently being updated by County Administration). All employees must review the policies and expectations on a yearly (or sooner, if needed) basis and sign an agreement stating that they know the policies and will comply with them. This documentation should be placed in an employees' personnel files. Response by Department Head: This recommendation has not been implemented, but will be implemented by December 31.2005. Mental Health Departmental staff is expected to adhere to all County Policies and Procedures, and are further expected to review them yearly. We will implement a system by December 31, 2005 to ensure that this is completed in keeping with County policy and will place documentation in the employees' personnel files. Response by Board of Supervisors: While the Board concurs with the Department Head's response the Board adds the following. First, the Board notes that all new employees are required to review the County's anti-harassment policy, which is then acknowledged in writing. Secondly, County Administration currently provides harassment training on an annual basis. Each employee's participation is tracked and employees are required to attend trainings on a schedule that is determined by their job duties. Addendum response by Health and Human Services Agency Director: Please refer to the attached Policies/Procedures Follow-up with Employees and Review Affidavits. These were developed by our Compliance/Utilization Review staff and are being shared with all department employees. In accordance with the Grand Jury recommendations, a copy will be kept in each personnel file.
R10:
Management should foster an atmosphere of cultural sensitivity. Respect for diverse populations and cultures is important in the work place. The environment of the work place must be free of any intimidation, influence or distraction that interrupts the delivery and quality of the services provided to the citizens of Amador County. 43 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report Verbatim 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report Response by Department Head: This recommendation has been implemented. The Mental Health Department has an active Cultural Competency Committee whose charge it is to oversee that cultural diversity is acknowledged and respected. This committee meets no less than monthly. Issues then are brought up to the committee that indicates that something needs to be done to improve in this area can be brought up to the Agency Director and County Administration to ensure compliance. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors concurs with the Department Head's response.
R11:
Remove all posters, flyers, jokes, stories or other items that are inappropriate to be displayed or said in the workplace. Management must enforce this and set an example for employees to follow. Response by Department Head: This recommendation has been implemented. Management has taken action to see the workplace is free of all posters, flyers, jokes, stories or other materials that may foster ill will, distractions to completion of job tasks or an otherwise hostile work environment. Management does not condone inappropriate jokes, comments, mannerisms or behaviors. Management began to oversee all reading materials placed in the department for appropriateness and relevancy as soon as it was discovered that inappropriate materials were in the workplace. This is an important recommendation and is taken very seriously by department management. We will continue to enforce this area on an ongoing basis. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors concurs with the Department Head's response.
R12:
The Director of Health and Human Services should become more involved in ACMH, both on a regular basis and especially when there are unresolved personnel issues affecting morale and quality of service to the community. 44 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report Verbatim 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report Response by Department Head: This recommendation is implemented. The Health and Human Services Agency Director is more involved in the Mental Health Department, both on a regular basis and when there are unresolved issues that effect employee morale and services to the community. The HHS Director has begun attending all-staff meetings as well as some Team Building meetings and recently facilitated a SWOT analysis with staff for the needs and strengths of the department. See item #4 for additional involvement. The Mental Health Department is an integral piece of the Health and Human Services Agency, and the HHS Director will continue with her involvement on an ongoing basis. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors both concurs with the Department Head's response and also notes that County Administration finds it important to seek additional opportunities to communicate with Health and Human Services Agency departments. The County Administrative Officer is working with the Health and Human Services Agency Director to identify staff meeting opportunities for County Administration participation. These meetings are expected to commence in Fall 05. End: Verbatim 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report 45 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report 6.3.3 Responsible Agency, City, County Department or Special District Amador County Health and Human Services Agency Amador County Board of Supervisors 6.3.4 Jurisdiction, Justification, Penal Codes and or Laws California Penal Code Section 925, 933(c), 933.05 6.3.5 Findings of the 2005/2006 Grand Jury 1. The Amador County Grand Jury of 2005/2006 reports that interviews have been conducted with the Amador County Mental Health Department. Questions covered procedures; policies; cultural, ethnic, morale issues; and general requirements mandated by the County. Eighteen (18) current employees were interviewed with the only exceptions being personnel out on leave. 2. Since publication of the 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report, employee retention has increased from sixty-two (62) percent to ninety-five (95) percent. 3. Amador County Mental Health Department was ranked number two (2) out of fifty-eight (58) counties in the State, as reported by the State Managed Care Review Audit. This audit was performed by the California Department of Mental Health. Two hundred nine (209) of two hundred thirteen (213) items audited were in compliance. Many of the issues found by the 2004/2005 Grand Jury appear to no longer exist and the others are in the process of being corrected. 4. The 2005/2006 Grand Jury finds that issues reported have been satisfactorily resolved. The 2005/2006 Grand Jury commends the employees and management for their achievements. 6.3.6 Recommendations No further actions or recommendations required. 6.3.7 Pertinent References, Documents and Materials 1. State of California Review of Amador County Mental Health Plan. 2. Interviews with Staff and Management. 3. Web Site www.co.amador.ca.us/depts/mental 46 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report 6.4 City Of Plymouth 6.4.1 Introduction The 2004/2005 Amador Grand Jury elected to investigate a number of citizen complaints. Following is a synopsis of the actions taken and the responses from the City. 6.4.2 Background See the following 2004/2005 Grand Jury report sections referring to City of Plymouth. 47 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report Verbatim 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report
Quick View
Full Details →
Additional Recommendations
9
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The AWA continue to aggressively pursue solutions to reduce high levels of HAA5s occurring at the Buckhorn facility.
R2:
When agenda items of high interest to AWA customers are scheduled for AWA Board of Directors meetings, the agency issue a press release to encourage greater public participation. 1.2.7 Pertinent References, Documents and Materials
R3:
First Mace Meadow Water Association, Inc. letter of notification dated November 11, 2005 sent to its customers regarding HAA5 levels.
R4:
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ground Water & Drinking Water website available at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/
R5:
Local water quality reports and meeting agendas can be viewed at the Amador Water Agency website available at http://www.amadorwa.com/
R6:
The California Department of Water Resources website available at http://www.water.ca.gov/
R7:
State Water Resources Control Board website available at http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/
R8:
Scientific Facts on Water Disinfectants & Disinfectant by-products available at http://www.greenfacts.org/water-disinfectants/index.htm
R9:
Proposed changes to regulations on water quality and reporting are available at the California Department of Health Services website http://www.applications.dhs.ca.gov/regulations/searchRegulation.asp Select R-62-00, click on the SUBMIT button, and then select item 08 – Text of changes to proposed regulations. 5 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report Chapter Two Education Route 88, Pioneer Chapter 2 Education 2.1 Introduction The 2005-2006 Grand Jury elected to review and evaluate the Amador County School District (“ACUSD”). Previous Grand Jury Reports indicated deficiencies in various facets of the school district including transportation, safety, and building maintenance. Overall, the 2005/2006 Grand Jury is pleased to note that there have been improvements in these areas. 2.2 Background The 2003/2004 Grand Jury Final Report included several responses from the ACUSD that referred to items not addressed or completed. These issues were investigated by the 2005/2006 Grand Jury. 2.3 Responsible Agency, City, County Department or Special District Amador County Unified School District 2.4 Jurisdiction, Justification, Penal Codes and or Laws 78 Op. Atty Gen. Cal. California Penal Code Section 933.5 2.5 Facts
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
Progress is extremely slow or non-existent in meeting the agreed-to recommendations of the 2002/2003 Grand Jury. Response by Department Head: I agree that progress has been slow, but due to extenuating circumstances, such as changes in Department Heads of the Building Department. The hangar guidelines were necessary to resolve issues with regard to the regulation of hangar modifications, new lease agreements, Building Department issues, trailer, and airport security Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding
F2:
The "airport car" draft policy is severely lacking in several key areas that would protect the County from liability. Response by Department Head: I agree that the draft policy was lacking the recommendations of the Grand Jury regarding "key areas," however an "Airport Car Policy" was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on February 1, 2005. This policy was reviewed by County Counsel and our Risk Manager prior to the Board's action to approve it. The policy does not contain the Grand Jury's suggested "key areas" requirements for current registration and proof of insurance for "airport cars". Since State law already requires all vehicles to be registered with DMV and insured, staff feels a County requirement for the same would be a duplication of effort. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors disagrees with this finding based upon the information provided in the Department Head's response.
F3:
When follow up questions about a project's status were pursued (for example the Building Code violations at the trailer behind hangar #6) responses changed. They went from “We forgot about that” to “We're handling that with the Building Department” to “The trailer is being moved.” 22 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report Verbatim 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report This was a common response pattern about other issues, also. For example, we were told in September 2004 that debris and junk near hangar #6 were the responsibility of the tenant, who was supposedly moving out of state soon. As of April 2005 the trailer had not been moved, the Building Code violations still existed, and there is still the same amount (if not more) of debris and junk near hangar #6. Response by Department Head: I agree with the Grand Jury's finding and offer the following explanation. The confusion expressed by the Grand Jury members is partially due to the fact that there is a trailer and a motor home and both are sometimes referred to as RV's. This has been confusing to staff as well. The trailer is used for storage while the motor home is used as a residence. The Building Department's issues were with the motor home not the trailer. It is true that the debris and junk near hangar #6 is/was the responsibility of the tenant and he advised staff that he was moving it with him out of state. Again, the trailer was not the subject of any issues with the Building Department. The tenant has moved debris and "junk" aircraft out of the area. A twin-engine trailer which had been on a trailer for six months is now gone, along with many other items. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.
Additional Recommendations
10
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The Department Head agreed with the recommendation to develop procedures to document complaints. Listed below are time frames and/or dates for implementation of the 2004/2005 Grand Jury recommendation. Implementation: A new form was developed and implemented on July 7, 2005 This provides a formal record of complaint information; ACAC staff have also been instructed to ask if the reporting person would like to be contacted. ACAC officers have been instructed to contact the reporting people on all complaints regarding the form information. Sheriff’s Office Response to Recommendations
R2:
Rewrite the draft "airport car" policy to include requirements for current registration and proof of insurance. (Proof of insurance is to be kept on file by the Airport manager.) Response by Department Head: I disagree with the Grand Jury's recommendation to rewrite the draft "airport car" policy. An "Airport Car Policy" was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on February 1, 2005. This policy was reviewed by County Counsel and our Risk Manager prior to the Board's action to approve it. The policy does not contain requirements for current registration and proof of insurance for "airport cars" as State law already requires all vehicles to be registered with DMV and insured, and staff feels this would be an unnecessary duplication of effort. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors notes that the Department Head has indicated that this recommendation will not be implemented. The Board will ask the Department Head to schedule this issue for further discussion as part of an Airport Committee meeting this Fall. End: Verbatim 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report 26 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report 6.1.3 Responsible Agency Responsible agencies are the County General Services Administration and the County Board of Supervisors. 6.1.4 Jurisdiction, Justification, Penal Codes and or Laws California Penal Code Section 933.5. 6.1.5 Findings of the 2005/2006 Grand Jury 1. As noted in the past Grand Jury reports, debris and junk continue to be located near hangar #6. 2. The Board of Supervisors was to ask the GSA Director to schedule the airport car policy for further discussion at an airport committee meeting last fall. This has not appeared on any agenda. Current registration and proof of insurance are still not required. 3. As they agreed to do in their response to the 2004/2005 Grand Jury report, the General Services Administration has not inspected all hangars at the airport. Instead, GSA assigned this task to the Airport Manager. 4. The Airport committees’ “action plan” is to be commended. The status of many items has changed from “in process, ongoing, or future” to “complete, applied for, or Federal Aeronautics Administration reviewing”. 5. On June 14, 2005, the Board of Supervisors approved a caretaker agreement allowing a tenant to park and reside in a single recreational vehicle at the airport; two recreational vehicles remain. One is being used for residential purposes and the other is being refurbished. This is in direct violation of the agreement. 6. Numerous building permits for hangar modifications were finalized in April 2006; others are expected to be completed within 20-60 days.
R3:
ACUSD Meeting Minutes, Award mention
R4:
Final Progress Report, Pleasanton Unified School District, Independent Inspector
R5:
Work Orders for Ione and Plymouth Elementary Schools
R6:
Grand Jury Transportation Request/written communication
R7:
Daily Bus Inspection Report 7 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report
R8:
ACUSD/ACOE Transportation Daily Vehicle/Time Report
R9:
Chapter 4, School Buses, School Pupil Activity Buses, and General Public Paratransit Vehicles
R10:
Bus Maintenance & Safety Inspection form Interviews/Tours Conducted:
Quick View
Full Details →
Additional Recommendations
6
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
A copy of Westover Field Rules and Regulations (County code chapter 12.44) commonly known as “Airport Code,” shall be mailed to all airport hangar tenants. A cover letter should explain that in addition to the terms of lease agreements, all users are subject to the Airport Code.
R2:
Building inspectors and County code enforcement officers should perform an inspection of all airport hangars.
R3:
Provide copies of the Amador County Customer Service Survey form at the Airport Terminal building and the lobby of the GSA building.
R4:
Amador County shall hire a dedicated grants writer to aggressively seek funding for projects listed in the Airport Master Plan as well as provide support to other County departments that could benefit from available grants.
R5:
GSA Director shall schedule excess equipment auctions whenever the volume of surplus vehicles and equipment threaten to exceed the vehicle maintenance yard or warehouse capacity.
R6:
Increase hangar lease fees annually by the percentage provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics commonly known as the Cost of Living Index (“COL”). 1.1.8 Pertinent References, Documents and Materials
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F4:
High turnover results in lower quality patient care. It lowers productivity and quality of service to the community. Response by Department Head: Please refer to response for item #3. We are significantly increasing our level of service. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors partially agrees in that as a general management theory increased turnover can result in lower productivity and performance. In this situation, however, the Board notes that the only quantifiable factors for department performance provided to the Board are those noted in the Department Head's response to number three which would seemingly indicate that at a minimum productivity has increased at the same time as the increase in turnover.
F5:
High turnover contributes to a loss of continuity and interagency cooperation in addressing patient problems. In many cases, the needs of county mental health patients are best served by interagency cooperation and communication. Response by Department Head: We agree that high turnover contributes to a loss of continuity and interagency cooperation. We disagree that we are not involved with persons from other agencies as we continue to participate in interagency meetings and to collaborate with agencies and departments where mental health services are clearly an elemental part of the agenda. In fact, we have a meeting scheduled with representatives from the law enforcement community, the Board of Supervisors, Sutter Amador Hospital, the Mental Health Director and HHS Agency Director on August 25, 2005 to work on improving our communication and better service to our mutual clients. 35 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report Verbatim 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors concurs with the Department Head's response.
F6:
Since therapists work on-call hours, flextime schedules, and in off- site settings, ,time keeping in ACMH can be complicated. Response by Department Head: We agree that time keeping in the Mental Health Department can be complicated. We continue to look at ways to improve the ways in which we keep track of time, schedule client appointments and cover for staff who are away from the job site for a variety of reasons. Suggestions from staff are encouraged. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.
F7:
Team building cannot be accomplished with three sessions if there is no follow-up on a day-to-day basis. This follow-up should be done by ACMH management and emphasized on a daily basis with a plan to foster this "team building" environment. If taxpayer money is going to be spent on workshops, then the results of those workshops need to be implemented and fostered. Response by Department Head: We agree that team building cannot be accomplished with three sessions if there is no follow-up on a day-to-day basis. The workshops that were held were never approached as a series of three disconnected sessions. Following the first training a team building committee, made up of staff from all levels and categories within the department, began to meet weekly to address the day-to-day challenges of developing a sense of team within the department. They are continuing with these meetings, and have even developed a department newsletter. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.
F8:
An adverse work environment, such as reported by ACMH employees and former employees, exposes the County to potential litigation and the attendant expenses. Response by Department Head: We agree with this finding, and note that we have addressed any items that are potentially litigious, and continue to address others through contact with the Union, appropriate work place environment trainings and daily monitoring of issues. 36 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report Verbatim 2004/2005 Grand Jury Report Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors concurs with the Department Head's response.
F9:
The problems encountered in ACMH, have not been addressed by the Director of Health and Human Services. Response by Department Head: We disagree with this finding. Although Fact #17 indicates that five people went to the Director of the Health and Human Services Agency with some of the problems stated above and reported no resolution of the problems. There is not enough information to give a specific response. The Agency Director's records show that when staff has approached her with a problem, it has been investigated and handled. As some complaints have involved personnel issues, they cannot be shared with other staff. The HHS Director has met with Mental Health Department staff in the past and continues to do so. Staff has been advised that they can contact the Director at any time there is a problem to be addressed. Additionally, the Director meets with the Union leadership on a monthly basis and responds to issues for all HHS departments that are raised. Response by Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors disagrees with this finding. The Board recognizes that there are ongoing issues in the Mental Health Department which require resolution. The Board has found the Director of Health and Human Services to be extremely concerned and willing to embrace various techniques to better understand these issues and develop appropriate solutions.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
There should be ongoing training to improve supervisory, managerial and communications skills for the management of ACMH. If performance evaluations warrant it, additional training should be tailored to address specific issues or weaknesses. Examples of additional training might include communications skills and anger management. 37 2005/2006 Grand Jury Final Report