Orange County Grand Jury

2022-2023

7 reports

From the annual report
The consolidated year-end volume. The individual investigations it contains are listed separately below.
📑 Year-End Report
View the full annual report (PDF)
The full consolidated volume; individual reports are listed below.
Individual reports (7)
Findings & Recommendations 11 findings
F1: Funding to combat human sex trafficking is both inconsistent and insufficient, resulting in less participation in the OCHTTF by law enforcement agencies.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1: By June 30, 2024, the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange should secure a stable source of annual funding to incentivize all city law enforcement agencies in Orange County to participate with dedicated law enforcement personnel on the OCHTTF. (F1, F2)
R4: By June 30, 2024, the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange should develop a database dedicated to Human Trafficking that specifically tracks Sex Trafficking networks and victims. (F1, F2, F5, F6, F10)
F2: Limited budgets, training, and hiring challenges constrain local law enforcement agencies’ ability to devote significant resources toward combating human sex trafficking.
Related Recommendations (3)
R1: By June 30, 2024, the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange should secure a stable source of annual funding to incentivize all city law enforcement agencies in Orange County to participate with dedicated law enforcement personnel on the OCHTTF. (F1, F2)
R3: By June 30, 2024, the Orange County Social Services Agency should identify and implement additional long-term victim support programs with financial support for adults in order to enhance opportunities to remove sex trafficking adult victims from the street. (F2, F3, F5, F7, F8, F11)
R4: By June 30, 2024, the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange should develop a database dedicated to Human Trafficking that specifically tracks Sex Trafficking networks and victims. (F1, F2, F5, F6, F10)
F3: The victim support network is defined and well developed for underaged (minor) victims. However, long-term support for adults is voluntary and there is no actionable follow-up for adult victims of human sex trafficking.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: By June 30, 2024, the Orange County Social Services Agency should identify and implement additional long-term victim support programs with financial support for adults in order to enhance opportunities to remove sex trafficking adult victims from the street. (F2, F3, F5, F7, F8, F11)
F4: Education and prevention efforts have increased awareness of human trafficking but remain insufficient to create heightened awareness within the Orange County community.
Related Recommendations (2)
R5: By June 30, 2024, the District Attorney should publicize successful prosecution of human trafficking cases. (F4, F7)
R6: By June 30, 2024, the County of Orange should fully fund Education and Prevention Programs to address Human Sex Trafficking. (F1, F2, F4, F6, F7, F8,
F5: Agencies inadequately record, track, and coordinate their data collection to effectively measure their progress toward addressing human trafficking.
Related Recommendations (3)
R2: By June 30, 2024, the County Social Services Agency and Waymakers should develop a more robust victim assistance database to track victims to measure effectiveness toward reducing recidivism and re-victimization. (F3, F5, F6, F8,
R3: By June 30, 2024, the Orange County Social Services Agency should identify and implement additional long-term victim support programs with financial support for adults in order to enhance opportunities to remove sex trafficking adult victims from the street. (F2, F3, F5, F7, F8, F11)
R4: By June 30, 2024, the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange should develop a database dedicated to Human Trafficking that specifically tracks Sex Trafficking networks and victims. (F1, F2, F5, F6, F10)
F6: There is no centralized, coordinated, and specialized database in Orange County that could be utilized across all affiliated agencies to track repeat victimization.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2: By June 30, 2024, the County Social Services Agency and Waymakers should develop a more robust victim assistance database to track victims to measure effectiveness toward reducing recidivism and re-victimization. (F3, F5, F6, F8,
R4: By June 30, 2024, the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange should develop a database dedicated to Human Trafficking that specifically tracks Sex Trafficking networks and victims. (F1, F2, F5, F6, F10)
F7: Orange County’s wealth and tourist attractions make it a magnet for human sex trafficking.
Related Recommendations (2)
R3: By June 30, 2024, the Orange County Social Services Agency should identify and implement additional long-term victim support programs with financial support for adults in order to enhance opportunities to remove sex trafficking adult victims from the street. (F2, F3, F5, F7, F8, F11)
R5: By June 30, 2024, the District Attorney should publicize successful prosecution of human trafficking cases. (F4, F7)
F8: Sex trafficking is an underground crime. Trafficked individuals are transient and mobile, making it difficult to discover and identify victims.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: By June 30, 2024, the Orange County Social Services Agency should identify and implement additional long-term victim support programs with financial support for adults in order to enhance opportunities to remove sex trafficking adult victims from the street. (F2, F3, F5, F7, F8, F11)
F9: Law enforcement attitudes and methods have changed to a “victim centered trauma informed” approach, but more training is needed to identify, intervene on behalf of, and support victims.
F10: Law enforcement agencies do not focus enough on the demand side of human sex trafficking, and punishment of the clients is minimal.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4: By June 30, 2024, the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange should develop a database dedicated to Human Trafficking that specifically tracks Sex Trafficking networks and victims. (F1, F2, F5, F6, F10)
F11: Victims and survivors need complex ongoing social service support.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: By June 30, 2024, the Orange County Social Services Agency should identify and implement additional long-term victim support programs with financial support for adults in order to enhance opportunities to remove sex trafficking adult victims from the street. (F2, F3, F5, F7, F8, F11)
Findings & Recommendations 11 findings
F1: Group homes too close to one another contribute to the problems associated with overconcentration.
F2: Common nuisances are more likely and disruptive when sober living homes are concentrated in a small geographic area of a neighborhood.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4: The County of Orange and Orange County cities should create a Task Force that includes representatives from OC cities, unincorporated areas, and other entities as appropriate and charge it with the responsibility of developing a plan to generate awareness among State legislators and regulators of the need for improved regulations and management standards to ensure health and safety for Group Home residents. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F2, F10, F11)
F3: Some cities have successfully addressed and informed community members about the challenges faced in regulating group homes.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: Orange County cities and the County of Orange should address citizen concerns regarding group homes by providing an opportunity for an open dialog where an interdisciplinary panel of subject matter experts can share with attendees the challenges cities are facing in the management of group homes. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F3, F4)
F4: Community satisfaction was minimal when cities took the traditional public comment approach towards addressing community complaints.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: Orange County cities and the County of Orange should address citizen concerns regarding group homes by providing an opportunity for an open dialog where an interdisciplinary panel of subject matter experts can share with attendees the challenges cities are facing in the management of group homes. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F3, F4)
F5: Cities are not utilizing police, fire, and code enforcement complaints as a means of locating and tracking Group Homes.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5: Orange County cities and the County of Orange should modify code enforcement report data collection forms to include a searchable field that enables the identification of a residence operating as a group home. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F5, F7, F11) RESPONSES California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g., District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2)The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. The Orange County Grand Jury requires and requests the following responses: 90 Day Response Required County of Orange Board of Supervisors F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 County of Orange Board of Supervisors R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 City Councils of: Aliso Viejo F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Aliso Viejo R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Anaheim F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Anaheim R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Brea F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Brea R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Buena Park F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Buena Park R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Costa Mesa F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Costa Mesa R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Cypress F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Cypress R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Dana Point F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Dana Point R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Fountain Valley F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Fountain Valley R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Fullerton F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Fullerton R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Garden Grove F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Garden Grove R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Huntington Beach F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Huntington Beach R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Irvine F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Irvine R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 La Habra F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 La Habra R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 La Palma F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 La Palma R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Laguna Beach F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Laguna Beach R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Laguna Hills F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Laguna Hills R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Laguna Niguel F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Laguna Niguel R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Laguna Woods F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Laguna Woods R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Lake Forest F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Lake Forest R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Los Alamitos F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, Los Alamitos R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Mission Viejo F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Mission Viejo R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Newport Beach F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Newport Beach R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Orange F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Orange R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Placentia F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Placentia R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Rancho Santa Margarita F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Rancho Santa Margarita R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 San Clemente F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 San Clemente R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 San Juan Capistrano F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 San Juan Capistrano R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Santa Ana F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Santa Ana R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Seal Beach F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Seal Beach R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Stanton F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Stanton R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Tustin F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Tustin R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Villa Park F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Villa Park R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Westminster F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Westminster R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Yorba Linda F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Yorba Linda R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F6: Cities are inhibited from enacting and enforcing ordinances due to fears over the potential cost of litigation.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2: By December 31, 2024, Orange County cities and the County of Orange should collaborate in their efforts to create ordinances for the regulation of group homes, including the development of model ordinances. (F6, F7, F9)
R3: Orange County cities and the County of Orange should pool resources for defense of lawsuits challenging group home ordinances. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F6, F8, F9)
F7: Several cities have created an ordinance that requires a ministerial permit or registration to operate a group home, however many of these cities do not enforce their ordinances.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2: By December 31, 2024, Orange County cities and the County of Orange should collaborate in their efforts to create ordinances for the regulation of group homes, including the development of model ordinances. (F6, F7, F9)
R5: Orange County cities and the County of Orange should modify code enforcement report data collection forms to include a searchable field that enables the identification of a residence operating as a group home. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F5, F7, F11) RESPONSES California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g., District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2)The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. The Orange County Grand Jury requires and requests the following responses: 90 Day Response Required County of Orange Board of Supervisors F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 County of Orange Board of Supervisors R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 City Councils of: Aliso Viejo F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Aliso Viejo R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Anaheim F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Anaheim R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Brea F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Brea R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Buena Park F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Buena Park R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Costa Mesa F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Costa Mesa R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Cypress F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Cypress R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Dana Point F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Dana Point R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Fountain Valley F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Fountain Valley R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Fullerton F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Fullerton R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Garden Grove F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Garden Grove R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Huntington Beach F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Huntington Beach R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Irvine F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Irvine R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 La Habra F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 La Habra R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 La Palma F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 La Palma R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Laguna Beach F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Laguna Beach R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Laguna Hills F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Laguna Hills R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Laguna Niguel F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Laguna Niguel R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Laguna Woods F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Laguna Woods R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Lake Forest F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Lake Forest R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Los Alamitos F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, Los Alamitos R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Mission Viejo F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Mission Viejo R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Newport Beach F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Newport Beach R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Orange F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Orange R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Placentia F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Placentia R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Rancho Santa Margarita F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Rancho Santa Margarita R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 San Clemente F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 San Clemente R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 San Juan Capistrano F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 San Juan Capistrano R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Santa Ana F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Santa Ana R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Seal Beach F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Seal Beach R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Stanton F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Stanton R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Tustin F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Tustin R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Villa Park F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Villa Park R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Westminster F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Westminster R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Yorba Linda F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Yorba Linda R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
F8: City and County officials are deterred from regulating group homes by California Housing and Community Development’s housing element approval process.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: Orange County cities and the County of Orange should pool resources for defense of lawsuits challenging group home ordinances. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F6, F8, F9)
F9: Cities have historically strategized and acted independently in addressing group home challenges and solutions.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2: By December 31, 2024, Orange County cities and the County of Orange should collaborate in their efforts to create ordinances for the regulation of group homes, including the development of model ordinances. (F6, F7, F9)
R3: Orange County cities and the County of Orange should pool resources for defense of lawsuits challenging group home ordinances. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F6, F8, F9)
F10: Well-operated group homes can integrate smoothly into neighborhoods.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4: The County of Orange and Orange County cities should create a Task Force that includes representatives from OC cities, unincorporated areas, and other entities as appropriate and charge it with the responsibility of developing a plan to generate awareness among State legislators and regulators of the need for improved regulations and management standards to ensure health and safety for Group Home residents. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F2, F10, F11)
F11: There is a lack of regulatory oversight for the health and safety of residents of unlicensed group homes.
Related Recommendations (2)
R4: The County of Orange and Orange County cities should create a Task Force that includes representatives from OC cities, unincorporated areas, and other entities as appropriate and charge it with the responsibility of developing a plan to generate awareness among State legislators and regulators of the need for improved regulations and management standards to ensure health and safety for Group Home residents. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F2, F10, F11)
R5: Orange County cities and the County of Orange should modify code enforcement report data collection forms to include a searchable field that enables the identification of a residence operating as a group home. To be implemented by July 1, 2024. (F5, F7, F11) RESPONSES California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g., District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2)The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. The Orange County Grand Jury requires and requests the following responses: 90 Day Response Required County of Orange Board of Supervisors F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 County of Orange Board of Supervisors R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 City Councils of: Aliso Viejo F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Aliso Viejo R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Anaheim F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Anaheim R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Brea F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Brea R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Buena Park F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Buena Park R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Costa Mesa F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Costa Mesa R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Cypress F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Cypress R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Dana Point F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Dana Point R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Fountain Valley F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Fountain Valley R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Fullerton F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Fullerton R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Garden Grove F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Garden Grove R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Huntington Beach F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Huntington Beach R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Irvine F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Irvine R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 La Habra F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 La Habra R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 La Palma F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 La Palma R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Laguna Beach F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Laguna Beach R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Laguna Hills F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Laguna Hills R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Laguna Niguel F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Laguna Niguel R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Laguna Woods F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Laguna Woods R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Lake Forest F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Lake Forest R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Los Alamitos F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, Los Alamitos R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Mission Viejo F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Mission Viejo R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Newport Beach F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Newport Beach R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Orange F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Orange R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Placentia F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Placentia R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Rancho Santa Margarita F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Rancho Santa Margarita R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 San Clemente F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 San Clemente R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 San Juan Capistrano F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 San Juan Capistrano R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Santa Ana F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Santa Ana R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Seal Beach F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Seal Beach R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Stanton F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Stanton R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Tustin F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Tustin R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Villa Park F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Villa Park R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Westminster F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Westminster R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 Yorba Linda F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10, F11 Yorba Linda R1, R2, R3, R4, R5
Findings & Recommendations 17 findings
F1: Management has limited flexibility utilizing personnel within Orange County Animal Care across departments due to structured work rules, volunteer work restrictions, and employees working in departmental silos.
Related Recommendations (2)
R12: By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should hold all- hands staff meetings at least every quarter. (F1, F2)
R13: By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care, OC Community Resources, and OC Human Resource Services should conduct annual surveys of staff to monitor morale and identify opportunities for operational improvement. (F1, F2)
F2: Low staff morale exists within Orange County Animal Care.
Related Recommendations (2)
R12: By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should hold all- hands staff meetings at least every quarter. (F1, F2)
R13: By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care, OC Community Resources, and OC Human Resource Services should conduct annual surveys of staff to monitor morale and identify opportunities for operational improvement. (F1, F2)
F3: Orange County Animal Care staffing is negatively impacted by vacant positions remaining unfilled for greater than six months due to burdensome hiring processes. This delay in recruitment and completion of hiring has resulted in qualified candidates declining job offers.
Related Recommendations (4)
R1: By October 1, 2023, OC Human Resource Services should review and update recruitment strategies to significantly increase the timeliness of recruitment of vacant positions and to anticipate vacancies due to retirement, resignations, transfers. (F3)
R2: By December 31, 2023, Orange County Animal Care, OC Community Resources, and OC Human Resource Services should review hiring practices to facilitate process improvements to expedite filling OCAC vacancies. (F3)
R3: By October 1, 2023, OC Community Resources and Orange County Animal Care should review their current staffing allocations of Animal Care Attendants to reflect NACA guidelines and to provide appropriate staffing allocations for animal care, feeding and enrichment. (F3, F4)
R4: By October 1, 2023, OC Community Resources and Orange County Animal Care should review their current staffing allocations of all positions within the OCAC and reallocate resources to increase Animal Care Attendants to reflect NACA guidelines to provide appropriate staffing for animal care, feeding, and enrichment. (F3, F4)
F4: Based upon industry standards and best practices, Orange County Animal Care kennel attendants are understaffed to meet the needs of animals under care.
Related Recommendations (2)
R3: By October 1, 2023, OC Community Resources and Orange County Animal Care should review their current staffing allocations of Animal Care Attendants to reflect NACA guidelines and to provide appropriate staffing allocations for animal care, feeding and enrichment. (F3, F4)
R4: By October 1, 2023, OC Community Resources and Orange County Animal Care should review their current staffing allocations of all positions within the OCAC and reallocate resources to increase Animal Care Attendants to reflect NACA guidelines to provide appropriate staffing for animal care, feeding, and enrichment. (F3, F4)
F5: Orange County Animal Care’s operating policies and procedures manual is out of date.
Related Recommendations (2)
R5: By December 31, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should review and update policies, procedures, guidelines, and practices to assure they are accurate and reflect current operating practices. (F5)
R7: By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should establish written guidelines, policies, and procedures as standards for evaluating animal behavior for use by the Behavior Evaluation Committee. (F5, F7)
F6: The Orange County Animal Care Volunteer program was stopped during COVID-19 and restarting the program has been slow, resulting in decreased animal socialization and enrichment. Animal Welfare
Related Recommendations (1)
R6: By June 30, 2024, the Board of Supervisors should evaluate the strategic option of creating a Joint Powers Authority for the County and fourteen contract Cities to take ownership and shared responsibility for the financial and operating policies and practices of OCAC. (F1 thru F16) Welfare
F7: Orange County Animal Care’s Behavior Evaluation Committee evaluates dogs for euthanasia without written guidelines, policies, or procedures, resulting in inconsistent outcomes over time. Behavior evaluated euthanasia outcomes are dependent on the experience and personal considerations of the individual committee members and management rather than written objective standards.
Related Recommendations (2)
R7: By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should establish written guidelines, policies, and procedures as standards for evaluating animal behavior for use by the Behavior Evaluation Committee. (F5, F7)
R8: By December 31, 2023, in the interests of transparency, Orange County Animal Care management should add a representative from a rescue organization to serve as a non-voting, at-large member on the Behavior Evaluation Committee. (F7, F14)
F8: The rate of behavioral euthanasia of dogs has increased significantly over the last 2 years.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9: By December 31, 2023, Orange County Animal Care, OC Community Resources, and OC Human Resource Services should hire an animal behaviorist or certified dog trainers to work with aggressive animals to reduce the high rate of dogs being euthanized and enhance their adoptability. (F8, F9)
F9: Orange County Animal Care does not employ a professional or trained and certified animal behaviorist to oversee the shelter’s dog enrichment program, resulting in dogs with declining behavior being placed at greater risk of being euthanized.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9: By December 31, 2023, Orange County Animal Care, OC Community Resources, and OC Human Resource Services should hire an animal behaviorist or certified dog trainers to work with aggressive animals to reduce the high rate of dogs being euthanized and enhance their adoptability. (F8, F9)
F10: While many county and city animal shelters throughout the state have active Trap, Neuter, and Return programs, Orange County Animal Care stopped its Trap, Neuter, and Return program, reportedly on the basis of the County Counsel’s legal opinion that the program violates a California statute related to willful animal abandonment.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10: By December 31, 2023, the Orange County Board of Supervisors and Orange County Animal Care management should request that County Counsel reconsider its opinion about the shelter's former Trap, Neuter, and Return program, or seek an independent second opinion to County Counsel’s opinion, to ascertain whether the program can be re-established, or a modified version of the program can be implemented. (F10, F11)
F11: The termination of the Trap, Neuter, and Return program is correlated with an increase in adult cat euthanasia rate at the shelter.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10: By December 31, 2023, the Orange County Board of Supervisors and Orange County Animal Care management should request that County Counsel reconsider its opinion about the shelter's former Trap, Neuter, and Return program, or seek an independent second opinion to County Counsel’s opinion, to ascertain whether the program can be re-established, or a modified version of the program can be implemented. (F10, F11)
F12: There have been public concerns and requests expressed over the years for public programs to include a spay/neuter program by Orange County Animal Care. Communication / Outreach
Related Recommendations (1)
R11: By July 1, 2024, Orange County Animal Care should implement a low-cost public spay/neuter program. (F12) Communication / Outreach
F13: The current adoption appointment system restricts public access to the dog kennels, thereby limiting potential adopters’ access to all available animals.
Related Recommendations (1)
R14: By December 31, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should open the shelter to the public for walk throughs to maximize opportunities for the public to adopt animals under the care of the shelter. (F13)
F14: Orange County Animal Care’s engagement with some animal rescue partners is negatively impacted due to differences of opinion in appropriate animal care policy.
Related Recommendations (3)
R8: By December 31, 2023, in the interests of transparency, Orange County Animal Care management should add a representative from a rescue organization to serve as a non-voting, at-large member on the Behavior Evaluation Committee. (F7, F14)
R15: By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should look for new ways to be more inclusive and engaged with volunteers and the rescue organizations that are necessary for the shelter’s success. (F14, F15)
R16: By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care should schedule quarterly meetings with community stakeholders to facilitate transparency and engagement. (F14, F15)
F15: Internal and community engagement does not adequately communicate the shelter’s mission and operating strategy.
Related Recommendations (2)
R15: By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should look for new ways to be more inclusive and engaged with volunteers and the rescue organizations that are necessary for the shelter’s success. (F14, F15)
R16: By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care should schedule quarterly meetings with community stakeholders to facilitate transparency and engagement. (F14, F15)
F16: The information currently on the Orange County Animal Care website for low- cost spay/neuter is not up to date with regard to referrals and prices for spay/neuter procedures. Impediments to the Investigation
Related Recommendations (1)
R17: By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should update the information currently on its website for low-cost spay/neuter of feral cats with regard to referrals and prices for spay/neuter procedures. (F16) Impediments to the Investigation
F17: The OC County Counsel’s office misstated to the Grand Jury the scope of its commitment to serving and assisting the Grand Jury in its investigations into County governance respecting managing conflicts between the Board of Supervisors, OC departments and agency clients, and the Grand Jury.
Related Recommendations (1)
R18: Beginning with the 2023/2024 Grand Jury training, and all training thereafter, County Counsel should provide detailed instruction about the circumstances under which the County Counsel’s office might recuse itself from assisting with Grand Jury investigations and the alternatives available to the Grand Jury under such circumstances. (F17)
Findings & Recommendations 16 findings
F1: Many children experiencing homelessness are not identified as such, and therefore do not receive the support and benefits authorized by the McKinney-Vento Act.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1: All Orange County school districts should develop a “Back to School” plan which includes mandatory McKinney-Vento Act training for all district and school administrators, teachers, office staff, and counselors by December 31, 2023, and annually thereafter. (F1, F2, F3)
R2: Participation in Orange County Department of Education (OCDE) McKinney-Vento Act training programs for all Local Education Agencies (LEA) McKinney-Vento Liaisons should be mandated by October 1, 2023, and annually thereafter. (F1, F3, F5, F6)
F2: The lack of mandatory McKinney-Vento Act training of school site office staff, counselors, and teachers contributes to a failure to identify children experiencing homelessness.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: All Orange County school districts should develop a “Back to School” plan which includes mandatory McKinney-Vento Act training for all district and school administrators, teachers, office staff, and counselors by December 31, 2023, and annually thereafter. (F1, F2, F3)
F3: There is disparity in the application of McKinney-Vento regulations across Orange County public school districts which results in unequal access to educational benefits for children experiencing homelessness.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1: All Orange County school districts should develop a “Back to School” plan which includes mandatory McKinney-Vento Act training for all district and school administrators, teachers, office staff, and counselors by December 31, 2023, and annually thereafter. (F1, F2, F3)
R2: Participation in Orange County Department of Education (OCDE) McKinney-Vento Act training programs for all Local Education Agencies (LEA) McKinney-Vento Liaisons should be mandated by October 1, 2023, and annually thereafter. (F1, F3, F5, F6)
F4: The majority of McKinney-Vento Liaisons are in full-time positions, but because their work includes multiple non-McKinney-Vento responsibilities, most do not have sufficient time to do the work required by the McKinney-Vento Act.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: Given that most LEA McKinney-Vento Liaisons are responsible for a number of other duties, and do not have sufficient time to do their McKinney-Vento required work, school districts should identify ways to increase support and/or staff to address the numerous tasks of the Liaisons by October 1, 2023. (F4)
F5: Many McKinney-Vento Liaisons lack needed experience due to a high turnover rate in those positions.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: Participation in Orange County Department of Education (OCDE) McKinney-Vento Act training programs for all Local Education Agencies (LEA) McKinney-Vento Liaisons should be mandated by October 1, 2023, and annually thereafter. (F1, F3, F5, F6)
F6: McKinney-Vento Act training is not mandatory for the majority of McKinney-Vento Liaisons.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: Participation in Orange County Department of Education (OCDE) McKinney-Vento Act training programs for all Local Education Agencies (LEA) McKinney-Vento Liaisons should be mandated by October 1, 2023, and annually thereafter. (F1, F3, F5, F6)
F7: Students experiencing homelessness who are enrolled in an elementary district often do not continue to receive McKinney-Vento benefits when they move to a high school district because the Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) prevents the sharing of this information between districts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4: By January 1, 2024, for children experiencing homelessness to receive uninterrupted McKinney-Vento benefits, Orange County school districts should add a section to their mandatory enrollment school form enabling parents/guardians to give permission for their school to share information regarding their child’s McKinney-Vento status with other districts that their child may be attending. (F7)
F8: McKinney-Vento funds depend on school districts submitting grant proposals, but not all districts have employees trained in writing grant applications, resulting in missed funding opportunities.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5: By October 1, 2023, each Orange County school district should develop and maintain a centralized list of district employees with grant application writing capability so that they are prepared to apply for available grants to assist in educating children experiencing homelessness. (F8, F9, F10)
F9: School districts that do not apply for grants which fund programs benefitting children experiencing homelessness miss potential revenue opportunities.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5: By October 1, 2023, each Orange County school district should develop and maintain a centralized list of district employees with grant application writing capability so that they are prepared to apply for available grants to assist in educating children experiencing homelessness. (F8, F9, F10)
F10: McKinney-Vento is an unfunded federally mandated program; however, school districts which qualify and apply for Title I, Part A funds may obtain revenues that can be used for children experiencing homelessness. These funds are insufficient to meet the needs of the school districts supporting children experiencing homelessness.
Related Recommendations (2)
R5: By October 1, 2023, each Orange County school district should develop and maintain a centralized list of district employees with grant application writing capability so that they are prepared to apply for available grants to assist in educating children experiencing homelessness. (F8, F9, F10)
R11: By July 1, 2024, the County Board of Supervisors should identify and pursue sustainable financial funding to support all Orange County school districts, with enrolled children experiencing homelessness, in their effort to successfully meet the unfunded Federal mandate to equitably educate these children. (F10)
F11: A lack of reliable transportation for children experiencing homelessness often results in chronic tardiness and absenteeism.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8: By May 1, 2024, each Orange County school district administration should develop, and present to the District Board of Education, a plan to lower the Absenteeism Rates of homeless students. (F11, F12)
F12: Chronic Absenteeism Rates of Homeless Students are disproportionately high in comparison with the Chronic Absenteeism Rates of All Students and Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Students.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8: By May 1, 2024, each Orange County school district administration should develop, and present to the District Board of Education, a plan to lower the Absenteeism Rates of homeless students. (F11, F12)
F13: Children experiencing homelessness in Orange County perform at a lower level on standardized tests and have a lower graduation rate than All Students and Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Students.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9: By May 1, 2024, each Orange County school district administration should develop, and present to the District Board of Education, a plan to improve the performance of homeless students in English Language Arts and Math. (F13, F14)
F14: The percent of Homeless Students graduating who failed to meet state standards on English Language Arts and Math tests. is significantly higher than it is for All Students and Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Students.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9: By May 1, 2024, each Orange County school district administration should develop, and present to the District Board of Education, a plan to improve the performance of homeless students in English Language Arts and Math. (F13, F14)
F15: There is a tendency by school districts to operate in isolation, which prevents productive collaboration on addressing the issue of children experiencing homelessness and the challenges of their education.
F16: A significant lack of affordable permanent housing contributes to many families being caught in the cycle of homelessness.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7: To address one of the primary barriers to the education of minors experiencing homelessness, the County of Orange should develop a plan to increase the number of family shelters, permanent supportive housing, and low-cost/long term housing for families by January 1, 2024. (F16)
Additional Recommendations 3

Not linked to specific findings.

R6: By October 1, 2023, a joint task force should be formed by the OCDE comprised of a district-level administrator from each Orange County school district and leadership from non-profit organizations who serve homeless families, to address absenteeism, low test scores and low graduation rates of children experiencing homelessness. (F.11, F.12,
R10: The Orange County Superintendent of Schools should provide information from the School Accountability Report (SARC) to the Board of Supervisors identifying the number and describing the performance of children experiencing homelessness in Orange County public schools. This data should include the aggerate of students in each district who are experiencing homelessness, their chronic absenteeism rates, and the high school graduation rate and the percent who meet or exceed state standards in English and Math, starting October 31, 2023, and yearly thereafter. (F11, F12, F13,
R25-99: 6.8% 7.8% 13.8% >100 7.6% 8.3% 9.2% Middle Schools % Students Who Met or Exceeded State Standards Socioeconomically Disadvantaged # of Homeless All Students Students Homeless Students Students Enrolled ELA MATH ELA MATH ELA MATH < 25 64.5% 54.5% 52.7% 38.6% 43.6% 27.0% 25 - 99 53.5% 44.0% 45.1% 33.8% 36.4% 22.8% > 100 33.5% 21.2% 31.9% 19.1% 28.6% 17.6% High Schools - Chronic Absenteeism Rates Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Homeless All Students Students Students < 25 6.8% 14.9% 44.2% 25 - 49 6.4% 9.4% 25.6% 50 - 99 9.9% 12.5% 28.4% 100 - 199 14.0% 17.6% 28.0% 200 - 299 9.4% 11.8% 15.7% > 300 11.3% 11.6% 14.8% High Schools % Students Who Met or Exceeded State Standards Socioeconomically Disadvantaged # of Homeless All Students Students Homeless Students Students Enrolled ELA MATH ELA MATH ELA MATH < 25 78.9% 72.2% 58.1% 49.3% 25.0% 12.5% 25 - 49 72.5% 53.9% 63.4% 40.1% 42.1% 26.8% 50 - 99 64.2% 43.8% 46.9% 25.8% 34.3% 16.7% 100 - 199 64.4% 36.1% 49.0% 23.6% 41.0% 20.8% 200 - 299 59.2% 35.9% 49.5% 25.6% 44.2% 25.0% > 300 31.9% 16.0% 32.2% 16.0% 30.9% 16.8% High Schools Graduation Rates # of Homeless Socioeconomically Students Disadvantaged Homeless Enrolled All Students Students Students < 25 94.0% 91.5% 89.3% 25 - 49 93.7% 91.4% 82.3% 50 - 99 91.5% 87.9% 82.4% 100 - 199 90.7% 88.1% 83.4% 200 - 299 95.6% 95.4% 94.3% > 300 90.8% 91.5% 90.9% High Schools Graduation Rates Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Homeless All Students Students Students 93.9% 90.7% 86.8% Combined Elementary, Middle, and High Schools Chronic Absenteeism Rates Socioeconomically Disadvantaged All Students Students Homeless Students Elementary School 10.7% 14.3% 22.4% Middle School 7.4% 8.0% 11.8% High School 8.8% 12.9% 22.4% Combined Elementary, Middle, and High Schools Chronic Absenteeism Rates Socioeconomically Disadvantaged All Students Students Homeless Students 9.4% 12.7% 20.5% % Combined Elementary, Middle, and High Schools Students Who Met or Exceeded State Standards Socioeconomically Disadvantaged All Students Students Homeless Students ELA MATH ELA MATH ELA MATH 55.7% 46.3% 42.6% 32.5% 31.7% 22.3% % Combined Elementary, Middle, and High Schools Students Who Met or Exceeded State Standards Socioeconomically Disadvantaged All Students Students Homeless Students ELA MATH ELA MATH ELA MATH Elementary School 51.7% 45.2% 39.9% 33.5% 28.9% 24.2% Middle School 53.7% 43.2% 42.9% 30.3% 31.7% 19.8% High School 72.5% 53.4% 52.6% 32.4% 39.2% 21.1%

Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.

Findings & Recommendations 12 findings
F1: Future water supplies are impacted by climate change and current supplies will not meet future demands.
F2: Climatologists predict future extended periods of low moisture with occasional wet years.
F3: Climate change is inevitable and is exacerbated by human behavior.
F4: South Orange County relies primarily on the importation of water.
F5: Local water suppliers recognize that enhanced stormwater capture and storage, wastewater recycling, and infrastructure improvements will not be sufficient to address the long-term forecast of drought and its effects on supply.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1: The County of Orange Board of Supervisors should take a leadership role by the end of calendar year 2023 to explore the establishment of a “Climate Resiliency District” or Joint Powers Authority to fund and expedite implementation of a drought-resistant source of water. F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F12
R2: Orange County water agencies should expedite the planning, development, and construction of desalination plants over the next five years to insure a sustainable and reliable drought-resistant source of water. F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9,
F6: There is significant water infrastructure planning, but inadequate implementation.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1: The County of Orange Board of Supervisors should take a leadership role by the end of calendar year 2023 to explore the establishment of a “Climate Resiliency District” or Joint Powers Authority to fund and expedite implementation of a drought-resistant source of water. F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F12
R2: Orange County water agencies should expedite the planning, development, and construction of desalination plants over the next five years to insure a sustainable and reliable drought-resistant source of water. F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9,
F7: The review and approval process for major water capital projects is cumbersome and overly restrictive.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1: The County of Orange Board of Supervisors should take a leadership role by the end of calendar year 2023 to explore the establishment of a “Climate Resiliency District” or Joint Powers Authority to fund and expedite implementation of a drought-resistant source of water. F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F12
R2: Orange County water agencies should expedite the planning, development, and construction of desalination plants over the next five years to insure a sustainable and reliable drought-resistant source of water. F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9,
F8: Failing to find solutions to water shortages will have a significant impact on the Orange County economy.
F9: Continued development in Orange County creates additional water supply needs.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: The County of Orange and all Orange County cities should formulate an emergency development moratorium plan in anticipation of the Colorado River water supply being constrained. The emergency moratorium plan should be developed by the end of calendar year 2023. F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9,
F10: Conservation and efficient use of water is essential.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4: Orange County water agencies should update their public communication strategies, by calendar year end 2023, to inform the public of lifestyle changes if additional water sources are not developed. F10, F11, F12
F11: Increased outreach and public education are necessary.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4: Orange County water agencies should update their public communication strategies, by calendar year end 2023, to inform the public of lifestyle changes if additional water sources are not developed. F10, F11, F12
F12: Desalination has proven to be technologically and environmentally feasible and is slowly being embraced as a drought-resistant source of water.
Findings & Recommendations 10 findings
F1: Illicit fentanyl is sold on the streets and through social media marketed as legitimate pharmaceuticals, or as other drugs laced with fentanyl, or sold as straight fentanyl, leading to exponentially increasing fentanyl addiction and deaths in Orange County.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: By July 1, 2024, Orange County Law Enforcement agencies should work with social media companies to ensure law enforcement has timely access to drug- related criminal activity information on their platforms. (F1, F2, F3)
F2: Illicit fentanyl is a pervasive problem in Orange County.
Related Recommendations (5)
R1: By January 1, 2024, the Orange County Board of Supervisors should charter a multi-agency Task Force to address the fentanyl crisis. (F2, F7, F8, F9)
R3: By July 1, 2024, Orange County Law Enforcement agencies should work with social media companies to ensure law enforcement has timely access to drug- related criminal activity information on their platforms. (F1, F2, F3)
R4: By January 1, 2024, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department, Probation Department, and Orange County Health Care Agency should collaborate to evaluate the effectiveness of existing in-custody and post-custody sobriety treatment programs and determine where improvements can be incorporated. (F2, F7, F8)
R5: By January 1, 2024, the Orange County Department of Education should develop a model fentanyl/opioid prevention educational program to be offered to all K-12 school districts in Orange County. (F2, F8, F9, F10)
R6: By October 1, 2023, the Orange County Department of Education should promote the use of currently established and in-place fentanyl and drug-related educational programs offered by OC agencies such as Health Care Agency, OC Sheriff's Department, and non-governmental organizations to all K-12 school districts in Orange County. (F2, F8, F9, F10) RESPONSES California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g., District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding; in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the
F3: Drug dealers use social media to sell fentanyl and other drugs. Social media business models impede law enforcement investigations.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: By July 1, 2024, Orange County Law Enforcement agencies should work with social media companies to ensure law enforcement has timely access to drug- related criminal activity information on their platforms. (F1, F2, F3)
F4: California law limits prosecution of fentanyl deaths as homicides. Fentanyl death related cases are selectively referred for federal filing consideration. The Orange County District Attorney has cross-designated one of its own senior deputy district attorneys to prosecute such cases under federal narcotics laws.
F5: California law does not provide for uniform admonishment of drug dealers of their potential criminal liability for drug-related deaths. Proposed legislation requiring judicial admonishments has been rejected multiple times by the California Legislature.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: By July 1, 2024, the Orange County Board of Supervisors, the Orange County District Attorney, and the Orange County Sheriff should lobby the California State Legislature to add fentanyl to the list of drugs subject to penalty enhancements in felony drug convictions and to add statutory authority for judicial admonishments when drug dealers and traffickers are convicted of fentanyl-related crimes. (F4,
F6: Under current California law, fentanyl related felonies are not subject to additional penalty for weight enhancements as are other dangerous drugs such as cocaine and heroin.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: By July 1, 2024, the Orange County Board of Supervisors, the Orange County District Attorney, and the Orange County Sheriff should lobby the California State Legislature to add fentanyl to the list of drugs subject to penalty enhancements in felony drug convictions and to add statutory authority for judicial admonishments when drug dealers and traffickers are convicted of fentanyl-related crimes. (F4,
F7: Orange County will benefit by establishing a chartered multi-agency Task Force to address the fentanyl crisis in Orange County.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1: By January 1, 2024, the Orange County Board of Supervisors should charter a multi-agency Task Force to address the fentanyl crisis. (F2, F7, F8, F9)
R4: By January 1, 2024, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department, Probation Department, and Orange County Health Care Agency should collaborate to evaluate the effectiveness of existing in-custody and post-custody sobriety treatment programs and determine where improvements can be incorporated. (F2, F7, F8)
F8: As long as there is a demand, producers will find ways to supply drugs. Orange County cannot law enforce its way out of the fentanyl crisis. Education, prevention, and treatment are critical to reducing demand.
Related Recommendations (4)
R1: By January 1, 2024, the Orange County Board of Supervisors should charter a multi-agency Task Force to address the fentanyl crisis. (F2, F7, F8, F9)
R4: By January 1, 2024, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department, Probation Department, and Orange County Health Care Agency should collaborate to evaluate the effectiveness of existing in-custody and post-custody sobriety treatment programs and determine where improvements can be incorporated. (F2, F7, F8)
R5: By January 1, 2024, the Orange County Department of Education should develop a model fentanyl/opioid prevention educational program to be offered to all K-12 school districts in Orange County. (F2, F8, F9, F10)
R6: By October 1, 2023, the Orange County Department of Education should promote the use of currently established and in-place fentanyl and drug-related educational programs offered by OC agencies such as Health Care Agency, OC Sheriff's Department, and non-governmental organizations to all K-12 school districts in Orange County. (F2, F8, F9, F10) RESPONSES California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g., District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding; in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the
F9: There is a need to increase public awareness and acknowledgement of the risks of illicit fentanyl.
Related Recommendations (3)
R1: By January 1, 2024, the Orange County Board of Supervisors should charter a multi-agency Task Force to address the fentanyl crisis. (F2, F7, F8, F9)
R5: By January 1, 2024, the Orange County Department of Education should develop a model fentanyl/opioid prevention educational program to be offered to all K-12 school districts in Orange County. (F2, F8, F9, F10)
R6: By October 1, 2023, the Orange County Department of Education should promote the use of currently established and in-place fentanyl and drug-related educational programs offered by OC agencies such as Health Care Agency, OC Sheriff's Department, and non-governmental organizations to all K-12 school districts in Orange County. (F2, F8, F9, F10) RESPONSES California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g., District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding; in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the
F10: Some educational institutions are not participating in available educational and preventive fentanyl/drug programs.
Related Recommendations (2)
R5: By January 1, 2024, the Orange County Department of Education should develop a model fentanyl/opioid prevention educational program to be offered to all K-12 school districts in Orange County. (F2, F8, F9, F10)
R6: By October 1, 2023, the Orange County Department of Education should promote the use of currently established and in-place fentanyl and drug-related educational programs offered by OC agencies such as Health Care Agency, OC Sheriff's Department, and non-governmental organizations to all K-12 school districts in Orange County. (F2, F8, F9, F10) RESPONSES California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g., District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding; in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the