Gran Jurado del Condado de Los Angeles
2021-2022
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
11 hallazgos
F1:
Complaint procedures regarding how to file a complaint against a department employee are available on the LAPD’s website.52 The Complaint Form used by the LAPD was last updated in July, 2012 (see APPENDIX B).
F2:
Since 2001, the Section 148.6 Advisement has not been printed or made available to civilians filing a complaint with the LAPD. 48 https://csm.ca.gov/history.php 49 https://csm.ca.gov/matters/00-TC-26/20.pdf 50 https://csm.ca.gov/matters/00-TC-26/5.pdf 51 https://csm.ca.gov/decisions/00tc24pg.pdf 52 https://www.lapdonline.org/information-on-how-to-file-a-complaint/ 119 7.2 California Civil Code 47.5 is not cited by either LAPD or LASD
F3:
Section 47.5 is cited to the public by other law enforcement agencies; the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department is an example.53 The Civil Grand Jury was unable to find any advisement regarding Section 47.5 contained anywhere within LAPD’s or LASD’s complaint process. 7.3 There is no general admonition cited or requested on Complaint Forms
F4:
There is no language contained in any part of LAPD’s or LASD’s Complaint Forms, or noted in the complaint process, that seeks to deter anyone from filing a knowingly false complaint. Some law enforcement agencies; the Orange County Sheriff’s Department for example,54 include an advisement on their complaint form stating: “By signing this form, I certify that the statements contained in it are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.” 7.4 Complaint Form and procedures need to be operational – LASD
F5:
The Department webpage containing the LASD Personnel Complaints Policy has not been operational since at least September 2021.55 It is unknown when that information might become available to the public again.56 7.5 Current Problems with LASD information and datasets – Handbook
F6:
The current Service Comment Report Handbook: Handling Public Complaints is seriously out of date with the copy furnished to the CGJ by the LASD dated June 23, 2011. Also, according to the LASD Discovery Unit, a revised and updated Handbook is expected to be published during the latter half of 2022. 7.6 Current problems with LASD information and datasets – complaint resolution categories need to be more compatible with California Codes
F7:
Under the CPC, the categories for complaint resolution are as follows: Sustained, Not-Sustained, Unfounded, and Exonerated. These categories do not match those used by LASD, which are: Conduct Appears Reasonable, Conduct Could Have Been Better, Conduct should Have Been Different, Exonerated, Pending, Resolved – Conflict Resolution, Service Only – Review Complete – No Further Action, Unable to Determine, Service Review Terminated. This lack of conformity makes it difficult to get an accurate depiction when comparing State and County complaint data. This is one of the issues the Federal Monitor is working to resolve beginning 53 https://www.riversidesheriff.org/663/Transparency 54 https://www.ocsheriff.gov/sites/ocsd/files/2021-10/Complaint%20Form-English.pdf 55 https://lasd.org/pdfjs/web/PublicComplaintsDT.pdf 56 https://lasd.org/public-complaint/; https://lasd.org/commendation complaint.html 120 with the Antelope Valley Sheriff’s area. Once completed and resolved it will then be expanded to the remaining areas of the LASD. 7.7 Current problems with LASD information and datasets – overlap
F8:
There is no consistent and easily understandable process for identifying the various resolution categories of complaints received by the LASD. This often leads to complaints being misclassified, or complaint classifications that don’t match with State of California definitions. 7.8 Both LAPD and LASD need more accurate data to truly reflect the cost incurred from processing and investigating knowingly false complaints.
F9:
The cost amounts that are recovered from the State of California via the SB 90 Mandated Costs Program are only a partial recovery of expenditures. Every cost item that can be recovered, should be recovered, inclusive of management expenditures to incidental costs. Currently, there isn’t a centralized methodology, database, or mechanism to document the total associated and/or recoverable costs of investigating knowingly false complaints. 7.9 Indirect Costs need to be more clearly defined and calculated
F10:
Recovery of costs through the SB 90 mandated program is limited. At the local level, every cost that is remotely connected to investigating and processing a knowingly false complaint needs to be identified and added to the cost recovery efforts. 7.10 LAPD and LASD do not provide financial assistance to officers and deputies bringing defamation actions.
F11:
Since there is currently no process in place for officers or deputies bringing an action for defamation under California Civil Code Section 47.5 to receive reimbursement for legal costs directly from their department, or as an employee benefit that would cover the cost of filing a legal action against the person making a knowingly false complaint, officers or deputies, due to litigation cost concerns, may be dissuaded from taking action, even if it has merit.
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
7 hallazgos
F10:
1 BACKGROUND OF THE DMH’S OPG: DMH Finding: The Committee learned that the rich history of the OPG’s office has had an excellent effect on the current services offered by the OPG. F10.2 BACKGROUND ON CLIMATE FOR CONSERVATORSHIP REFORM Finding: There are conservatorship reforms afoot in the County and California. The County needs to continue working on these reforms through the OPG and other County and City social service organizations such as WDACS, APS, PALA, as well as the DOA. F10.3 DATABASE: REPORTING CONSERVATORSHIP ABUSE PROBLEMS Finding: The Committee could find no comprehensive database in Los Angeles County that can be used to track conservatorships abuses and complaints across all senior services departments. F10.4 SENIOR SOCIAL SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS: Finding: There are not enough conservatorship advocacy and educational programs for the general public on how to spot conservatorship abuse from the OPG and other County and City social service organizations such as APS, WDACS, PALA, and DOA, to track conservatorship complaints and abuses. F10.5 LOS ANGELES COUNTY ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES (APS): ELDER ABUSE AND CONSERVATORSHIPS Finding: APS should initiate an outreach campaign to educate the public about conservatorship abuse. In addition, APS should also offer advocacy services to those who are conservatees and friends and family members of conservatees. F10.6 LOS ANGELES CITY DEPARTMENT OF AGING (DOA) Finding: DOA should initiate an outreach campaign to educate the public about conservatorship abuse. DOA should also offer advocacy services to those who are conservatees and friends and family members of conservatees.
F10.2:
BACKGROUND ON CLIMATE FOR CONSERVATORSHIP REFORM Finding: There are conservatorship reforms afoot in the County and California. The County needs to continue working on these reforms through the OPG and other County and City social service organizations such as WDACS, APS, PALA, as well as the DOA.
F10.3:
DATABASE: REPORTING CONSERVATORSHIP ABUSE PROBLEMS Finding: The Committee could find no comprehensive database in Los Angeles County that can be used to track conservatorships abuses and complaints across all senior services departments.
F10.4:
SENIOR SOCIAL SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS: Finding: There are not enough conservatorship advocacy and educational programs for the general public on how to spot conservatorship abuse from the OPG and other County and City social service organizations such as APS, WDACS, PALA, and DOA, to track conservatorship complaints and abuses.
F10.5:
LOS ANGELES COUNTY ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES (APS): ELDER ABUSE AND CONSERVATORSHIPS Finding: APS should initiate an outreach campaign to educate the public about conservatorship abuse. In addition, APS should also offer advocacy services to those who are conservatees and friends and family members of conservatees.
F10.6:
LOS ANGELES CITY DEPARTMENT OF AGING (DOA) Finding: DOA should initiate an outreach campaign to educate the public about conservatorship abuse. DOA should also offer advocacy services to those who are conservatees and friends and family members of conservatees. F 10.7 WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AND AGING COMMUNITY SERVICES (WDACS): Finding: With the newly created Aging and Community Services (ACS) under WDACS, the new executive director and the County have a perfect opportunity to help the community with education and advocacy for those who may be victims of conservatorship abuse. 168
F10.8:
BUDGET: FUNDING OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC GUARDIAN (OPG): Finding: Currently, the OPG’s budget needs additional funding by the County to continue to provide services. RECOMMMENDATIONS
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R10:
1 BACKGROUND OF THE MH’S OPG: DMH Recommendation: Continue to offer excellent service to clients through the Office of Public Guardian and review their procedures twice each year with the Board of Supervisors.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
11 hallazgos
F1:
F 11.1 - Further review into the initial application process by the City Personnel Department can better determine suitability of candidates.
F2:
F 11.2 – The fire personnel work schedule, consisting of a 24 hour shift, 9-10 days on in a calendar month, creates staff shortages in all of the fire stations, which necessitates the need for OT.
F3:
F 11.3 - Candidates with test scores of 90% or below on the oral interview are automatically rejected from the hiring process.
F4:
F 11.4 - Due to City Personnel Department staff shortages, recorded interviews are heard only when an applicant files a protest.
F5:
F 11.5 - The Oral Interview panel is made up of a current City Fire Captain and one Personnel Department proctor who are not anonymous. This could open the door for inappropriate communication between fire personnel and the interview panelist. This creates the opportunity for cronyism and/or nepotism.
F6:
F 11.6 - There is not a valid approval process that monitors the logging of OT hours.
F7:
F 11.7 - Applicants reveal their relationship with existing LAFD personnel early in the hiring process but after the initial application. 183
F8:
F 11.8 - Applications are being submitted to the Fire Chief for final potential job offers without redacting the identity of candidates who are related to current rank and file employees.
F9:
F 11.9 – There exists excessive OT expenditures in the LAFD sworn rank and file workforce.
F10:
F 11.10 – Current background checks conducted by LAFD can be improved by including a review of the candidate's social media, self-evaluation or polygraph tests.
F11:
F.11.11 – It is unknown whether the City Controller has conducted any analysis regarding the impact of OT hours on the LAFD pension fund.
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R11:
2, 11.6, 11.8, 11.9 DEPARTMENT LOS ANGELES CITY PERSONNEL R 11.1, 11.3, 11.4, 11.5, 11.7 LOS ANGELES CITY COUNCIL R 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 11.4, 11.5, 11.6, 11.7, PRESIDENT 11.8, 11.9 LOS ANGELES CITY CONTROLLER R 11.9 Committee Members: Vivian M. Ozuna, Chair Elzie H. Whitlow 185 186
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
5 hallazgos
F8.1:
The LACFD does not have enough money in their budget to adequately fund a fire camp training program that will actually help in fighting wildfires in LA County. Because of the expansion of the fire season, costs for the program have increased because of the manpower needed to fight fires year round.
F8.2:
The LACFD does not have enough manpower to adequately serve their LA County constituents in the event of a tragic wildfire.
F8.3:
The personnel needs of the LACFD changes from year to year depending on the wildfire season and needs to be adjusted accordingly on a case by case basis so the current personnel needs of the Department are met. California Prohibit Slavery and Involuntary Servitude Initiative (2022) - Ballotpedia 36 https://endslaveryincalifornia.org/faqs/ 37 Ibid 38Ibid 39 https://witnessla.com/motion-seeks-to-boost-job-opportunities-for-la-countys-inmate-fire-camp-workers/ 142
F8.4:
The fire camp program benefits both the LACFD and the prisoners. The LACFD gains trained prisoner firefighters who help the LACFD with manpower. The prisoner population gains life skills training.
F8.5:
The inability of the County to hire former inmates to seek employment as FSAs may contribute to the lack of manpower within LACFD.
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R8:
1 Keep and expand the prison camp program to help both the LACFD and prisoners who participate in this worthwhile program.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
2 hallazgos
F2:
We are using more water than we are replenishing.
F3:
Desalination Plants – there is only one in the County, which is located on Catalina Island, and only services itself. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are made in the hopes that steps will be taken to address the current challenges facing the County with respect to sustainable water supplies. • Recommendation 3.1 - Increasing education, and awareness through the media on adopting WaterSense products and help more people understand how to approach and address the issue of water conservancy. • Recommendation 3.2 – Support water measures and public financing to acquire more water supply and sources. Examples of measures: California Proposition 3 Water Infrastructure bill,43 and A.G. File No. 2021-014 (October 15, 2021).44 • Recommendation 3.3 – Consider proposals for and submitting a ballot measure to bring desalination plants into the County. California Proposition 3, Water Infrastructure and Watershed Conservation Bond Initiative (2018) - Ballotpedia 44 Water supply. [Ballot] (ca.gov) 62
Recomendaciones adicionales
3
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R1:
Recommendation 3.1 - Increasing education, and awareness through the media on adopting WaterSense products and help more people understand how to approach and address the issue of water conservancy.
R2:
Recommendation 3.2 – Support water measures and public financing to acquire more water supply and sources. Examples of measures: California Proposition 3 Water Infrastructure bill,43 and A.G. File No. 2021-014 (October 15, 2021).44
R3:
Recommendation 3.3 – Consider proposals for and submitting a ballot measure to bring desalination plants into the County. California Proposition 3, Water Infrastructure and Watershed Conservation Bond Initiative (2018) - Ballotpedia 44 Water supply. [Ballot] (ca.gov) 62
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
12 hallazgos
F1:
DRP has financial challenges in regard to the UAS/drone program. Sources of funding are not adequate to meet the operational needs of this program.
F2:
DRP currently charges a nominal fee to other agencies or departments in LA County for use of drones; there is no allocation in DRP’s line item budget specifically for drones/UAS for equipment and or additional drones.
F3:
When drones are being utilized in areas where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy, no written notification of drone activity is being posted.
F4:
DRP utilizes the Dodger Stadium parking lot for their drone training, except when there is a game or an event. Area used for training is a very small area of the parking lot and is inadequate and inconvenient for training purposes.
F5:
Future expansion includes the purchase of at least 4 additional drones by DRP.
F6:
Planners currently do not receive additional compensation for completing drone training.
F7:
If the site is zoned for animals, the planner will telephone the owner to find out what type of animals are contained on the property, but there is no written formal policy or check list for the staff.
F8:
There is no current BOS county-wide policy on drones.
F9:
New trainees for drones are taken to Dodger Stadium and complete at least two drone flights.
F10:
Currently only pictures are shown at a Commission’s meeting. Pictures are dated and DRP hopes in the future to show real time feeds for the Commission.
F11:
DRP wants to keep their drone program central to the County, since they created the program and have the expertise and equipment. Monies can be charged to the department to pay for the equipment they have purchased.
F12:
There is no written test for new drone trainees. Just a test to fly the drone completed two times. 39
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
2 hallazgos
F2:
We are using more water than we are replenishing.
F3:
Desalination Plants – there is only one in the County, which is located on Catalina Island, and only services itself. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are made in the hopes that steps will be taken to address the current challenges facing the County with respect to sustainable water supplies. • Recommendation 3.1 - Increasing education, and awareness through the media on adopting WaterSense products and help more people understand how to approach and address the issue of water conservancy. • Recommendation 3.2 – Support water measures and public financing to acquire more water supply and sources. Examples of measures: California Proposition 3 Water Infrastructure bill,43 and A.G. File No. 2021-014 (October 15, 2021).44 • Recommendation 3.3 – Consider proposals for and submitting a ballot measure to bring desalination plants into the County. California Proposition 3, Water Infrastructure and Watershed Conservation Bond Initiative (2018) - Ballotpedia 44 Water supply. [Ballot] (ca.gov) 62
Recomendaciones adicionales
3
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R1:
Recommendation 3.1 - Increasing education, and awareness through the media on adopting WaterSense products and help more people understand how to approach and address the issue of water conservancy.
R2:
Recommendation 3.2 – Support water measures and public financing to acquire more water supply and sources. Examples of measures: California Proposition 3 Water Infrastructure bill,43 and A.G. File No. 2021-014 (October 15, 2021).44
R3:
Recommendation 3.3 – Consider proposals for and submitting a ballot measure to bring desalination plants into the County. California Proposition 3, Water Infrastructure and Watershed Conservation Bond Initiative (2018) - Ballotpedia 44 Water supply. [Ballot] (ca.gov) 62
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
5 hallazgos
F1:
As CGJ committee members arrived at the ME-C facility on November 3, 2021, it appeared the facility did not have adequate parking, although, there is a parking structure to the right side of the street corner by the facility.
F2:
ME-C facility appears to lack a private room or person to assist grieving family members claiming or identifying decedents.
F3:
According to a staff member, there is no privacy for family claiming belongings. Personal belongings of decedents are visible in the storage room.
F4:
There is limited space inside the facility to house the various departments that are adjacent to the building.
F5:
Laboratory specimens sent out of state usually take up to 90 days or months for courts to receive a report. Inspection/Accreditation (memberclicks.net) 72 MEDICAL EXAMINER-CORONER FACILITY (Old Administration Building) MAIN LOBBY IN THE MEDICAL EXAMINER-CORONER FACILITY Photographs courtesy of Medical Examiner-Coroner Office 73 RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Designate a parking area in front or close to the facility for staff and family claiming or identifying a decedent. 4.2 Contract a Chaplain or Counselor to assist grieving family members in a private room at the facility. 4.3 Provide a storage room to include individualized compartments/drawers for decedent belongings. 4.4 Expand or move to a larger modern facility inclusive of compounds currently adjacent to the facility. 4.5 Supply laboratory equipment and staff necessary to analyze specimens that are sent out of state in order to expedite results needed for reports. 74
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
11 hallazgos
F1:
Complaint procedures regarding how to file a complaint against a department employee are available on the LAPD’s website.52 The Complaint Form used by the LAPD was last updated in July, 2012 (see APPENDIX B).
F2:
Since 2001, the Section 148.6 Advisement has not been printed or made available to civilians filing a complaint with the LAPD. 48 https://csm.ca.gov/history.php 49 https://csm.ca.gov/matters/00-TC-26/20.pdf 50 https://csm.ca.gov/matters/00-TC-26/5.pdf 51 https://csm.ca.gov/decisions/00tc24pg.pdf 52 https://www.lapdonline.org/information-on-how-to-file-a-complaint/ 119 7.2 California Civil Code 47.5 is not cited by either LAPD or LASD
F3:
Section 47.5 is cited to the public by other law enforcement agencies; the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department is an example.53 The Civil Grand Jury was unable to find any advisement regarding Section 47.5 contained anywhere within LAPD’s or LASD’s complaint process. 7.3 There is no general admonition cited or requested on Complaint Forms
F4:
There is no language contained in any part of LAPD’s or LASD’s Complaint Forms, or noted in the complaint process, that seeks to deter anyone from filing a knowingly false complaint. Some law enforcement agencies; the Orange County Sheriff’s Department for example,54 include an advisement on their complaint form stating: “By signing this form, I certify that the statements contained in it are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.” 7.4 Complaint Form and procedures need to be operational – LASD
F5:
The Department webpage containing the LASD Personnel Complaints Policy has not been operational since at least September 2021.55 It is unknown when that information might become available to the public again.56 7.5 Current Problems with LASD information and datasets – Handbook
F6:
The current Service Comment Report Handbook: Handling Public Complaints is seriously out of date with the copy furnished to the CGJ by the LASD dated June 23, 2011. Also, according to the LASD Discovery Unit, a revised and updated Handbook is expected to be published during the latter half of 2022. 7.6 Current problems with LASD information and datasets – complaint resolution categories need to be more compatible with California Codes
F7:
Under the CPC, the categories for complaint resolution are as follows: Sustained, Not-Sustained, Unfounded, and Exonerated. These categories do not match those used by LASD, which are: Conduct Appears Reasonable, Conduct Could Have Been Better, Conduct should Have Been Different, Exonerated, Pending, Resolved – Conflict Resolution, Service Only – Review Complete – No Further Action, Unable to Determine, Service Review Terminated. This lack of conformity makes it difficult to get an accurate depiction when comparing State and County complaint data. This is one of the issues the Federal Monitor is working to resolve beginning 53 https://www.riversidesheriff.org/663/Transparency 54 https://www.ocsheriff.gov/sites/ocsd/files/2021-10/Complaint%20Form-English.pdf 55 https://lasd.org/pdfjs/web/PublicComplaintsDT.pdf 56 https://lasd.org/public-complaint/; https://lasd.org/commendation complaint.html 120 with the Antelope Valley Sheriff’s area. Once completed and resolved it will then be expanded to the remaining areas of the LASD. 7.7 Current problems with LASD information and datasets – overlap
F8:
There is no consistent and easily understandable process for identifying the various resolution categories of complaints received by the LASD. This often leads to complaints being misclassified, or complaint classifications that don’t match with State of California definitions. 7.8 Both LAPD and LASD need more accurate data to truly reflect the cost incurred from processing and investigating knowingly false complaints.
F9:
The cost amounts that are recovered from the State of California via the SB 90 Mandated Costs Program are only a partial recovery of expenditures. Every cost item that can be recovered, should be recovered, inclusive of management expenditures to incidental costs. Currently, there isn’t a centralized methodology, database, or mechanism to document the total associated and/or recoverable costs of investigating knowingly false complaints. 7.9 Indirect Costs need to be more clearly defined and calculated
F10:
Recovery of costs through the SB 90 mandated program is limited. At the local level, every cost that is remotely connected to investigating and processing a knowingly false complaint needs to be identified and added to the cost recovery efforts. 7.10 LAPD and LASD do not provide financial assistance to officers and deputies bringing defamation actions.
F11:
Since there is currently no process in place for officers or deputies bringing an action for defamation under California Civil Code Section 47.5 to receive reimbursement for legal costs directly from their department, or as an employee benefit that would cover the cost of filing a legal action against the person making a knowingly false complaint, officers or deputies, due to litigation cost concerns, may be dissuaded from taking action, even if it has merit.
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
5 hallazgos
F8.1:
The LACFD does not have enough money in their budget to adequately fund a fire camp training program that will actually help in fighting wildfires in LA County. Because of the expansion of the fire season, costs for the program have increased because of the manpower needed to fight fires year round.
F8.2:
The LACFD does not have enough manpower to adequately serve their LA County constituents in the event of a tragic wildfire.
F8.3:
The personnel needs of the LACFD changes from year to year depending on the wildfire season and needs to be adjusted accordingly on a case by case basis so the current personnel needs of the Department are met. California Prohibit Slavery and Involuntary Servitude Initiative (2022) - Ballotpedia 36 https://endslaveryincalifornia.org/faqs/ 37 Ibid 38Ibid 39 https://witnessla.com/motion-seeks-to-boost-job-opportunities-for-la-countys-inmate-fire-camp-workers/ 142
F8.4:
The fire camp program benefits both the LACFD and the prisoners. The LACFD gains trained prisoner firefighters who help the LACFD with manpower. The prisoner population gains life skills training.
F8.5:
The inability of the County to hire former inmates to seek employment as FSAs may contribute to the lack of manpower within LACFD.
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R8:
1 Keep and expand the prison camp program to help both the LACFD and prisoners who participate in this worthwhile program.
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R8:
1, R8.2, R8.3, R8.4, R8.6 Chief Executive Officer-LA County
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
7 hallazgos
F10:
1 BACKGROUND OF THE DMH’S OPG: DMH Finding: The Committee learned that the rich history of the OPG’s office has had an excellent effect on the current services offered by the OPG. F10.2 BACKGROUND ON CLIMATE FOR CONSERVATORSHIP REFORM Finding: There are conservatorship reforms afoot in the County and California. The County needs to continue working on these reforms through the OPG and other County and City social service organizations such as WDACS, APS, PALA, as well as the DOA. F10.3 DATABASE: REPORTING CONSERVATORSHIP ABUSE PROBLEMS Finding: The Committee could find no comprehensive database in Los Angeles County that can be used to track conservatorships abuses and complaints across all senior services departments. F10.4 SENIOR SOCIAL SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS: Finding: There are not enough conservatorship advocacy and educational programs for the general public on how to spot conservatorship abuse from the OPG and other County and City social service organizations such as APS, WDACS, PALA, and DOA, to track conservatorship complaints and abuses. F10.5 LOS ANGELES COUNTY ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES (APS): ELDER ABUSE AND CONSERVATORSHIPS Finding: APS should initiate an outreach campaign to educate the public about conservatorship abuse. In addition, APS should also offer advocacy services to those who are conservatees and friends and family members of conservatees. F10.6 LOS ANGELES CITY DEPARTMENT OF AGING (DOA) Finding: DOA should initiate an outreach campaign to educate the public about conservatorship abuse. DOA should also offer advocacy services to those who are conservatees and friends and family members of conservatees.
F10.2:
BACKGROUND ON CLIMATE FOR CONSERVATORSHIP REFORM Finding: There are conservatorship reforms afoot in the County and California. The County needs to continue working on these reforms through the OPG and other County and City social service organizations such as WDACS, APS, PALA, as well as the DOA.
F10.3:
DATABASE: REPORTING CONSERVATORSHIP ABUSE PROBLEMS Finding: The Committee could find no comprehensive database in Los Angeles County that can be used to track conservatorships abuses and complaints across all senior services departments.
F10.4:
SENIOR SOCIAL SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS: Finding: There are not enough conservatorship advocacy and educational programs for the general public on how to spot conservatorship abuse from the OPG and other County and City social service organizations such as APS, WDACS, PALA, and DOA, to track conservatorship complaints and abuses.
F10.5:
LOS ANGELES COUNTY ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES (APS): ELDER ABUSE AND CONSERVATORSHIPS Finding: APS should initiate an outreach campaign to educate the public about conservatorship abuse. In addition, APS should also offer advocacy services to those who are conservatees and friends and family members of conservatees.
F10.6:
LOS ANGELES CITY DEPARTMENT OF AGING (DOA) Finding: DOA should initiate an outreach campaign to educate the public about conservatorship abuse. DOA should also offer advocacy services to those who are conservatees and friends and family members of conservatees. F 10.7 WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AND AGING COMMUNITY SERVICES (WDACS): Finding: With the newly created Aging and Community Services (ACS) under WDACS, the new executive director and the County have a perfect opportunity to help the community with education and advocacy for those who may be victims of conservatorship abuse. 168
F10.8:
BUDGET: FUNDING OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC GUARDIAN (OPG): Finding: Currently, the OPG’s budget needs additional funding by the County to continue to provide services. RECOMMMENDATIONS
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R10:
1 BACKGROUND OF THE MH’S OPG: DMH Recommendation: Continue to offer excellent service to clients through the Office of Public Guardian and review their procedures twice each year with the Board of Supervisors.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
11 hallazgos
F1:
F 11.1 - Further review into the initial application process by the City Personnel Department can better determine suitability of candidates.
F2:
F 11.2 – The fire personnel work schedule, consisting of a 24 hour shift, 9-10 days on in a calendar month, creates staff shortages in all of the fire stations, which necessitates the need for OT.
F3:
F 11.3 - Candidates with test scores of 90% or below on the oral interview are automatically rejected from the hiring process.
F4:
F 11.4 - Due to City Personnel Department staff shortages, recorded interviews are heard only when an applicant files a protest.
F5:
F 11.5 - The Oral Interview panel is made up of a current City Fire Captain and one Personnel Department proctor who are not anonymous. This could open the door for inappropriate communication between fire personnel and the interview panelist. This creates the opportunity for cronyism and/or nepotism.
F6:
F 11.6 - There is not a valid approval process that monitors the logging of OT hours.
F7:
F 11.7 - Applicants reveal their relationship with existing LAFD personnel early in the hiring process but after the initial application. 183
F8:
F 11.8 - Applications are being submitted to the Fire Chief for final potential job offers without redacting the identity of candidates who are related to current rank and file employees.
F9:
F 11.9 – There exists excessive OT expenditures in the LAFD sworn rank and file workforce.
F10:
F 11.10 – Current background checks conducted by LAFD can be improved by including a review of the candidate's social media, self-evaluation or polygraph tests.
F11:
F.11.11 – It is unknown whether the City Controller has conducted any analysis regarding the impact of OT hours on the LAFD pension fund.
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R11:
2, 11.6, 11.8, 11.9 DEPARTMENT LOS ANGELES CITY PERSONNEL R 11.1, 11.3, 11.4, 11.5, 11.7 LOS ANGELES CITY COUNCIL R 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 11.4, 11.5, 11.6, 11.7, PRESIDENT 11.8, 11.9 LOS ANGELES CITY CONTROLLER R 11.9 Committee Members: Vivian M. Ozuna, Chair Elzie H. Whitlow 185 186 187