Fil September 2,2009 Oct 0 9 2009 CDhieAfVeIxDecuHtiv.eYAOMfflcAerS/CAllKi'kI

1a. FAF is invited but rarely attends the monthly meetings held by the Elmwood Captain at Elmwood, where Operations and Custody issues are discussed. Effective exchange of issues and concerns does not occur among all responsible agencies. 1b. The DOC Support Services Division Commander meets monthly with the FAF Executive Manager of Building Operations at Berger Drive. Problems expressed by staff do not appear to reach these individuals. Ie. Corrective Maintenance meetings are held every Thursday at I pm. on Berger Drive. They are attended by FAF Managers and the supervisors who answer to them. One or two high-ranking DOC Operations staff usually attend. Custody attends only when they have a problem. There is no agenda and no minutes are kept. These are informal meetings to air problems and give status reports on major projects. Id. FAF states they have an appointed Facilities Manager at DOC. However, DOC staff state they do not know of any "Facilities Manager."

DOC is limited to setting all service requests as "Priority Three" orbelow, though they phone in emergency Priority One and Two requests for immediate help. Work orders are prioritized by the MAXIMO Building Operations Monitor Systems Operator and responded to according to the urgency of theproblem, defined as the "severity of the damage itcan do and the disruption tothe client's operations": . Priority 1- Healthand Safety - Immediate Response Priority 2- Mission Critical- 24-hour Response Priority 3- Painting, etc- 48-hour Response Priority 4- Tenant request, non-urgent - ten-day Response Priority 5- 30-day Response Priority Three response time is typically over one week. DOC states that problems such as a malfunctioning security camera may be assigned the samepriority as apainting job.

The Elmwood Office Specialist's primary job is to submit service requests to FAF. Other DOC personnel submit them as well, sometimes resulting in the same request being sent in multiple times, and duplicate work orders.

DOC is not givenadvance notice of whenjobs will begin, but require such notice ifinmates must be moved.

5a. There are approximately 100 entries and exits per day by FAF personnel at Elmwood, 30 of which are not electronically recorded, and 70 of which are recorded by card swipe. 5b. With an average of20 corrective maintenance service requests per day, DOC is unable to reconcile the large number of workers with the number ofjobs, and the large numbers of entries and exits. DOC questions the need for so many FAF staff at Elmwood. 5c. DOC does not know which jobs are being done on any particular day. 5d. DOC is not informed ofjob progress. This is problematic when jobs involve more than one trade. Trades do not communicate and work stops until DOC realizes the first part of ajob is done and it is time to schedule the next trade. 4 5e. DOC is not given notice ofjob completion and must personally check job areas for job status, which is time-consuming in a 62+ acre facility.

DOC has been unable to electronically monitor work status.

7a. There islittle orno supervision of FAF staff and DOC notices, "idle" FAF staff. 7b. DOC Operations staff does not inspect or approve completed jobs done by either FAF or outside vendors/contractors. FAF workers sign off ontheir ownjobs. 4 7c. The DOC Correctional Support Services Manager is not readily available at Elmwood. Custody personnel must liaise with FAF on big jobs, though Operations is not their responsibility. 7d. The DOC Assistant Operations Manager, though stationed at Elmwood, does not frequently leavethe shop area tomonitor theoverall stateofthe facility, andto oversee and coordinate the efforts of Ops and FAF. This task is left to other Operations and Custody personnel who arethen forced toneglect their specified duties.

FAF deletes work orders that are not addressed within three months from the system without always firstnotifying the client.

On average, there are four outside vendors/contractors working at Elmwood per day. They must be escorted by CSAs. If they arrive unexpectedly, CSAs may be on other assignments, and the vendors must wait until CSAs areavailable, wasting time andmoney.

FAF work isfrequently delayed when inmates are inareas FAF needsto access. ReconunendationlO FAF should make every effort to let DOC know when FAF needs access to inmate occupied areas. It should be noted that Custody administration has put itself on-call to be available any time for inmate moving to assist FAF in accessing areas, and that FAF plans to assign one of its long-time Elmwood workers as onsite supervisor forthe entire facility. DOC Response DOC agrees.

DOC receives a non-itemized bill from FAF for accumulated corrective maintenance charges. In FY 2008, this bill totaled $3.364M.

Several DOC personnel enter service requests to FAF (through the FAF web site or bye-mail). This at times results in duplicate requests, resulting in duplicate work orders. The duplicates show up onMAXIMO as incompletejobs, requiring review several months later.

FAF supervisors work at Berger Drive. They make brief and infrequent visits to Elmwood. As a result, FAF is unable to verify the hours their workers spend on the job.

FAF has not implemented the formal customer feedback process cited in its response to the 2007-2008 Civil Grand Jury Report County Building Maintenance: High Cost, Poor Customer Communication.

FAF Building Operations last received a county management audit in 1991 when it was known as GSA.

Ia. FAF is invited but rarely attends the monthly meetings held by the Elmwood Captain at Elmwood, where' Operations and Custody issues are discussed. Effective exchange of issues and concerns does not occuramong allresponsible agencies. Ib. The DOC Support Services Division Commander meets monthly with the FAF Executive Manager of Building Operations at Berger Drive. Problems expressed by staff do not appear to reach these individuals. I Ie. Corrective Maintenance meetings are held every Thursday at pm. on Berger Drive. They are attended by FAF Managers and the supervisors who answer to them. One or two high ranking DOC Operations staff usually attends. Custody attends only when they have a problem. There is no agenda and no minutes are kept. These are informal meetings to air problems and give status reports onmajor projects. Id. FAF states they have an appointed Facilities Manager at DOC. However, DOC staff state they do notknow of any"Facilities Manager." Board ofSupervisors: Donald F.Gage, GeorgeM. Shirakawa, DaveCortese, KenYeager, LizKniss Acting County Executive: Gary A.Graves Recommendation 1 DOC and FAF should schedule weekly meetings with mandatory attendance by DOC Operations Managers and FAF Maintenance Managers to discuss common problems and concerns, and to share project plans and updates. There should be a formal agenda and published minutes available toallstaff of both facilities, including Custody administration. The DOC Facilities Manager should be formally identified and his responsibilities as liaison made explicit toall staffby the Support Services Division Commander. FAF should implement the formal customer feedback mechanism cited in its reply to the 2008 County Building Maintenance Report. DOC Response Due to the long-term nature of maintenance and construction projects, weekly meetings between FAF and DOC managers are unnecessary. The suggestion of recording official minutes of meetings have merit and we support this recommendation. Currently the Correctional Support Services Manager (Operations/Facilities Manager) represents the DOC at monthly meetings attended by the FAF Building Operations Manager and the DOC Support Services Commander. Additionally the Correctional Support Services Manager meets monthly with the FAF managers from each ofthe identified "work centers" as established byFAF. The DOC "Facilities Manager" isthe Correctional Support Services Operational Manager. When DOC staff were asked if there was a Facilities Manager assigned to Elmwood by FAF to act as liaison; DOC staffwere confused by the phrasing ofthe question bythe Civil Grand Jury. DOC concurs that the customer feedback mechanism would behelpful. Finding 2 DOC is limited to setting all service requests as "Priority Three" orbelow, though they phone in emergency Priority One and Two requests for immediate help. Work orders are prioritized by the MAXIMO Building Operations Monitor Systems Operator and responded to according to the urgency of theproblem, defined as the "severity of the damage itcan do and the disruption tothe client's operations": . Priority 1- Healthand Safety - Immediate Response Priority 2- Mission Critical- 24-hour Response Priority 3- Painting, etc- 48-hour Response Priority 4- Tenant request, non-urgent - ten-day Response Priority 5- 30-day Response Priority Three response time is typically over one week. DOC states that problems such as a malfunctioning security camera may be assigned the samepriority as apainting job. Recommendation 2 The ability of DOC to set priority should be revisited during the mandatory meetings between FAF and DOC. DOC Response DOC agrees; The DOC would like to establish service request priorities while taking into consideration FAF project and workload coordination. Recently DOC and FAF partially addressed this issue by consolidating the DOC input functions, giving responsibility to fewer people andproviding stafftraining. Finding 3 The Elmwood Office Specialist's primary job is to submit service requests to FAF. Other DOC personnel submit them as well, sometimes resulting in the same request being sent in multiple times, and duplicate work orders. Recommendation 3 DOC should assign one Office Specialist and one designated back up toenter all service requests to avoid duplicates. It should benoted DOC isalready working onthis problem. DOC Response DOC agrees; this issuehas been addressed as noted inDOC Response to Recommendation 2. Finding 4 DOC is not givenadvance notice of whenjobs will begin, but require such notice ifinmates must be moved. Recommendation 4 DOC service requests should indicate ifinmates would needtobe moved to allowFAF access. It should be noted that Custody administration has put itself on-call to be available any time for inmate moving to assist FAF inaccessing areas. DOC Response DOC agrees; The DOC understands that this issue delays project and maintenance details and has established better lines ofcommunication with FAFtomitigate these concerns. FindingS Sa. There are approximately 100 entries and exits per day by FAF personnel at Elmwood, 30 ofwhich arenot electronically recorded, and 70ofwhichare recorded bycard swipe. Sh. With an average of 20 corrective maintenance service requests per day, DOC is unable to reconcile the large number of workers with the number ofjobs, and the large numbers of entries and exits. DOC questions the need for somany FAF staff atElmwood. Sc. DOC does notknow whichjobs arebeing doneon anyparticular day. 3 5d. DOC is not informed of job progress. This is problematic when jobs involve more than onetrade. Trades do not communicate andwork stops until DOC realizes the first part of a job is done andit istime to schedule thenext trade. 5e. DOC is not given notice of job completion and must personally check job areas for job status, which istime-consuming ina62acrefacility. Recommendation 5 Sa. FAF should track entries by work order number. This will identify any superfluous personnel at Elmwood. 5b. FAF should addan additional cardreader atthe West entrance off Thompson St. 5c. FAF should simultaneously fax duplicates of daily work orders to the OS desk. DOC would be able tospot-check work inprogress, precluding the need to contact FAF. 5d. SeeFinding 5dand5e. 5e. SeeFinding 5dand 5e. DOC Response DOC defers toFAF inregards to 5a, 5b,and 5c. DOC agrees with 5d and 5e; DOC has concerns about the lack of information available to determine "real time" status of work orders and in progress projects. The Correctional Support Services Manager is working with FAF managers to address this issue. DOC staff is also reviewing the FAF work order database and the interface database and will make modification recommendations designed toaddress these concerns. Finding 6 DOC has been unable to electronically monitor work status. Recommendation 6 FAF should provide DOC with training on how to access and utilize MAXIMO capabilities as they relate to DOC concerns. DOC Response DOC agrees; DOC and FAF have recently worked together to provide staff training and to provide increased access tothe MAXIMO system for DOC staff. Finding 7 7a. There islittle orno supervision of FAF staff and DOC notices, "idle" FAF staff. 7b. DOC Operations staff does not inspect or approve completed jobs done by either FAF or outside vendors/contractors. FAF workers sign off ontheir ownjobs. 4 7c. The DOC Correctional Support Services Manager is not readily available at Elmwood. Custody personnel must liaise with FAF on big jobs, though Operations is not their responsibility. 7d. The DOC Assistant Operations Manager, though stationed at Elmwood, does not frequently leavethe shop area tomonitor theoverall stateofthe facility, andto oversee and coordinate the efforts of Ops and FAF. This task is left to other Operations and Custody personnel who arethen forced toneglect their specified duties. Recommendation 7 DOC should direct the DOC Correctional Support Services Manager to spend sufficient time at Elmwood to effectively supervise and monitor ongoing work. He should be accessible to his Ops staff soissues canbe conveyed toFAF during meetings. DOC should ensure that the appropriate DOC personnel conduct spot visits to work areas and regular patrols of Elmwood with the Safety Officer, and be available to liaise with FAF on major projects. DOC Response DOC agrees; the Correctional Support Services Manager has been directed to spend moretime at Elmwood and is currently required tovisit the Elmwood Complex and inspectsFAF work details as needed. DOC operations and custody staff arecurrently performing spot checks ofFAF work. ' Finding 8 FAF deletes work orders that are not addressed within three months from the system without always firstnotifying the client. Recommendation 8 FAF needs to check with DOC before deleting or closing inactive work orders, even though the deletions may seem tobe "common sense" decisions. DOC Response DOC agrees. Finding 9 On average, there are four outside vendors/contractors working at Elmwood per day. They must be escorted by CSAs. If they arrive unexpectedly, CSAs may be on other assignments, and the vendors must wait until CSAs areavailable, wasting time andmoney. Recommendation 9 FAF should inform DOC as far in advance as possible to arrange for escorts when multiple vendors are scheduled. FAF should advise DOC of where vendors are to work, and be prepared to escort the vendors if necessary. DOC Response DOC agrees. Finding 10 FAF work isfrequently delayed when inmates are inareas FAF needsto access. ReconunendationlO FAF should make every effort to let DOC know when FAF needs access to inmate occupied areas. It should be noted that Custody administration has put itself on-call to be available any time for inmate moving to assist FAF in accessing areas, and that FAF plans to assign one of its long-time Elmwood workers as onsite supervisor forthe entire facility. DOC Response DOC agrees. Finding 11 DOC receives a non-itemized bill from FAF for accumulated corrective maintenance charges. In FY 2008, this bill totaled $3.364M. Recommendation 11 FAF should provide to DOC an itemized quarterly statement so that the charges can be reconciled with the servicesprovided to ensure accurate accounting. DOC Response DOC agrees. Finding 12 Several DOC personnel enter service requests to FAF (through the FAF web site or bye-mail). This at times results in duplicate requests, resulting in duplicate work orders. The duplicates show up onMAXIMO as incompletejobs, requiring review several months later. Recommendation 12 It should be noted DOC is already working on designating only one individual to enter all requests. DOC Response DOC agrees. ., 6 Finding 13 FAF supervisors work at Berger Drive. They make brief and infrequent visits to Elmwood. As a result, FAF is unable to verify the hours their workers spend on the job. Recommendation 13 FAF should designate a supervisor for Elmwood. It should be noted that FAF plans to assign one of their long-time Elmwood workers as onsite supervisor for the facility. DOC Response DOC agrees. Finding 14 FAF has not implemented the formal customer feedback process cited in its response to the 2007-2008 Civil Grand Jury Report County Building Maintenance: High Cost, Poor Customer Communication. Recommendation 14 FAF should implement the formal customer feedback process cited in its response to the 2007 2008 Civil Grand Jury Report County Building Maintenance: High Cost, Poor Customer Communication. DOC Response DOC agrees. Finding 15 FAF Building Operations last received a county management audit in 1991 when it was known as GSA. Recommendation 15 The County Board of Supervisors should order a management audit on FAF. DOC Response DOC will defer to Administration. Theforegoing Instrumentisacorrectcopy oftheoriginal. ATTEST: MariaMarinos n BY:~~ Clerk~ theBoa~d _ (\ Deputy Clerk Date: AUG 2 5 2009 7 County of Santa Clara Facilities and Fleet Department Administration 2310 N.First Street, 2nd Floor, Suite 200 San Jose, California 95131-1101 (408)993-4700 FAX (408)993-4801 Date: August 10, 2009 To: Gary A. Graves Acting Coun lve From: rrey D. Draper, Director Facilities and Fleet Department Subject: Response to Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report "Department of Correction/Facilities and Fleet - a Broken Relationship in Need of Repair" While Facilities and Fleet (FAF) agrees with a number of the recommendations contained in the 12 page report, FAF disagrees with the report's characterization of the relationship between the Department of Correction (DOC) and FAF as dysfunctional. The fact is that great effort over the last few years has led to a significantly improved working relationship between the departments. DOC and FAF are both large and complex organizations that operate 24 hours per day in various locations under trying circumstances, e.g. austere budget situation, unrelenting and daunting workloads, aging facilities, etc. Communication, priority setting and coordination of operations are challenging, and both departments acknowledge that improvements can be made both within our departments and in working with each other. To that end, FAF will redouble efforts at improving communication and coordination with DOC in order to provide the best possible service to DOC within the resources available in order to help DOC achieve its mission. The Grand Jury stated that the DOC generates "over 66% of the county's FAF business." While DOC is a major customer, DOC facilities represent 23.94% of the 4,797,954 square feet maintained by FAF. Looked at differently, 36% of the direct service staffhours of the FAF Building Operations Division is used to service DOC facilities including preventive and corrective maintenance as well as project related work. Or yet another look, 39% of the work orders received by FAF are generated by DOC. FAF noted from the Grand Jury's report that there is some confusion, at least in the minds of some staff interviewed in conjunction with the investigation, about the roles and responsibilities of parties in both departments toward maintenance of DOC facilities. Apparently, the role of what the County labels a departmental "Facility Manager" needs to be clarified and reinforced. The number of secure entries by FAF staff needs to be better understood and perhaps made more efficient. Proper methods of accessing the work order entry system in order to initiate work and be kept up dated on its status, need to be improved upon and communicated. The system of tracking time and evaluating employee productivity and performance also needs to be more closely studied for improvement opportunities. Board ofSupervisors: Donald F.Gage, George Shirakawa, DaveCortese, KenYeager, LizKniss Acting County Executive: GaryA Graves FAF's response to each recommendation is as follows: Finding 1 1a. FAF is invited but rarely attends the monthly meetings held by the Elmwood Captain at Elmwood, where Operations and Custody issues are discussed. Effective exchange of issues and concerns does not occur among all responsible agencies. 1b. The DOC Support Services Division Commander meets monthly with the FAF Executive Manager of Building Operations at Berger Drive. Problems expressed by staff do not appear to reach these individuals. Ie. Corrective Maintenance meetings are held every Thursday at I pm. on Berger Drive. They are attended by FAF Managers and the supervisors who answer to them. One or two high-ranking DOC Operations staff usually attend. Custody attends only when they have a problem. There is no agenda and no minutes are kept. These are informal meetings to air problems and give status reports on major projects. Id. FAF states they have an appointed Facilities Manager at DOC. However, DOC staff state they do not know of any "Facilities Manager." Recommendation 1 DOC and FAF should schedule weekly meetings with mandatory attendance by DOC Operations Managers and FAF Maintenance Managers to discuss common problems and concerns, and to share project plans and updates. There should be a formal agenda and published minutes available to all staff of both facilities, including Custody administration. The DOC Facilities Manager should be formally identified and his responsibilities as liaison made explicit to all staff by the Support Services Division Commander. FAF should implement the formal customer feedback mechanism cited in its reply to the 2008 County Building Maintenance Report. FAF Response FAF Building Operations attends the DOC Chiefs Weekly Staff meeting along with all DOC divisions including Custody administration atboth facilities. FAF Building Operations and DOC Operations meet monthly and important issues are documented for follow up. FAF is willing to meet more often provided DOC feels additional meetings would add value. The DOC "Facilities Manager" isthe DOC Support Services Manager. DOC is not confused on this issue. FAF does not have a "Facilities Manager" assigned to either Elmwood or the jail complex. While email, telephone calls, meetings, and personal visits provide ample opportunities for customer feedback, FAF agrees that a formal customer feedback system needs to be implemented and is in the process of doing so. Finding 2 DOC is limited to setting all service requests as "Priority Three" or below, though they phone in emergency Priority One and Two requests for immediate help. Work orders are prioritized by the MAXIMO Building.Operations Monitor Systems Operator and responded to according to the urgency of the problem, defined as the "severity of the damage it can do and the disruption to the client's operations": I- Priority Health and Safety - Immediate Response Priority 2- Mission Critical - 24-hour Response Priority 3- Painting, etc - 48-hour Response Priority 4 - Tenant request, non-urgent - ten-day Response Priority 5- 30-day Response Priority Three response time is typically over one week. DOC states that problems such as a malfunctioning security camera may be assigned the same priority as a painting job. Recommendation 2 The ability of DOC to set priority should be revisited during the mandatory meetings between FAF and DOC. FAF Response Agree in concept with this recommendation. FAF will take the lead in revisiting the structure of the prioritization system with DOC to make sure the system works for both departments. DOC currently has the ability to set priorities. High priority work must be called in to the MAC Room, while priority 3,4, and 5 work can be submitted via a web site. A malfunctioning security camera should be classified as a priority I or 2 depending on DOC's determination of that camera's importance to their mission. A response time goal for priority 3 work is one work week, not 48-hours as noted in the finding. Finding 3 The Elmwood Office Specialist's primary job is to submit service requests to FAF. Other DOC personnel submit them as well, sometimes resulting in the same request being sent in multiple times, and duplicate work orders. Recommendation 3 3 DOC should assign one Office Specialist and one designated back-up to enter all service requests to avoid duplicates. It should be noted DOC is already working on this problem. FAF Response Agree in concept with this recommendation. DOC has recently consolidated input functions giving responsibility to fewer people and providing training to each person to obtain the best result. FAF has been supporting this shift by providing DOC staff more training. Finding 4 DOC is not given advance notice of when jobs will begin, but require such notice if inmates must be moved. Recommendation 4 DOC service requests should indicate if inmates will need to be moved t.oallow FAF access. It should be noted that Custody administration has put itself on-call to be available any time for inmate moving to assist FAF in accessing areas. FAF ReslJonse Agree in concept with the recommendation. FAF and DOC collaborate regularly in scheduling work and in spite of the challenges and emergencies that occur, mostly find away to accomplish most of the work without major impacts to either department. DOC and FAF staff will continue to communicate . regarding work scheduling to minimize disruptions and maximize productivity. Finding 5 5a. There are approximately 100 entries and exits per day by FAF personnel at Elmwood, 30 of which are not electronically recorded, and 70 of which are recorded by card swipe. 5b. With an average of20 corrective maintenance service requests per day, DOC is unable to reconcile the large number of workers with the number ofjobs, and the large numbers of entries and exits. DOC questions the need for so many FAF staff at Elmwood. 5c. DOC does not know which jobs are being done on any particular day. 5d. DOC is not informed ofjob progress. This is problematic when jobs involve more than one trade. Trades do not communicate and work stops until DOC realizes the first part of ajob is done and it is time to schedule the next trade. 4 5e. DOC is not given notice ofjob completion and must personally check job areas for job status, which is time-consuming in a 62+ acre facility. Recommendation 5 5a. FAF should track entries by work order number. This will identify any superfluous personnel at Elmwood. 5b. FAF should add an additional card reader at the West entrance off Thompson St. 5c. FAF should simultaneously fax duplicates of daily work orders to the OS desk. DOC would be able to spot::check work in progress, precluding the need to contact FAF. 5d. See Finding 5d and 5e. 5e. See Finding 5d and 5e. FAF Response 5a. Agree in concept, but implementation is complex since staff members are typically assigned more than one work order at a time. However FAF will evaluate the suggestion for future implementation as part of its initiative to implement real time tasking via handheld electronic devices. 5b. Agree to work with DOC and evaluate the situation. Review of the May 2009 data showed only 9 FAF entries at the West Gate. Four ofthese were FAF staff, while five were contractor staff working on facility projects. Contractor staff members are required to enter through the West gate to go to a project site tU1lessthey are driving a piece of equipment necessary to support the project. FAF will work with DOC to monitor the level of FAF or other departmental entries at the West gate over the next few months, but atthis time it does not appear the level of FAF entries at this location warrants a card reader installation at this location. FAF will follow DOC's protocols for entries and exits at the West Gate. 5c. Agree in concept. DOC now has access to work order status through computerized maintenance management system. 5d. Agree in concept. FAF is working with DOC to improve commtU1ication on each and every project. Supervisory staff members are being asked to follow up with DOC more regularly regarding work status, scheduling, and completion. FAF is also working to improve the computerized maintenance management system to automate work order status reports in as real time as possible and FAF is looking into implementing the use of handheld devices for tasking and noting completion of work orders on a real time basis. 5 5e. Agree in concept FAF is working with DOC and the computerized maintenance management system to make work order status checks as real time as possible. FAF is looking into implementing the use of handheld devices for tasking and noting completion of work orders on a real time basis. Finding 6 DOC has been unable to electronically monitor work status. Recommendation 6 FAF should provide DOC with training on how to access and utilize MAXIMO capabilities as they relate to DOC concerns. FAF Response DOC and FAF have been working together to provide this training and to provide increased use of the MAXIMO system for DOC staff. Finding 7 7a. There is little or no supervision of FAF staff and DOC notices "idle" FAF staff. 7b. DOC Operations staff does not inspect or approve completed jobs done by either FAF or outside vendors/contractors. FAF workers sign off on their own jobs. 7c. The DOC Correctional Support Services Manager is not readily available at Elmwood. Custody personnel must liaise with FAF on big jobs, though Operations is not their responsibility. 7d. The DOC Assistant Operations Manager, though stationed at Elmwood, does not frequently leave the shop area to monitor the overall state of the facility, and to oversee and coordinate the efforts of Ops and FAF. This task is left to other Operations and Custody personnel who are then forced to neglect their specified duties. Recommendation 7 DOC should direct the DOC Correctional Support Services Manager to spend sufficient time at Elmwood to effectively supervise and monitor ongoing work. He should be accessible to his Ops staff so issues can be conveyed to FAF during meetings. DOC should ensure that the appropriate DOC personnel conduct spot visits to work areas and regular patrols of Elmwood with the Safety Officer, and be available to liaise with FAF on major projects. FAF Response DOC's Support Services Manager has been spending more time at Elmwood. 6 . In addition to the recommended DOC spot checks ofFAF work, FAF supervisors have been directed to spend more time spot checking work in the field and they regularly report to Elmwood. Finding 8 FAF deletes work orders that are not addressed within three months from the system without always first notifying the client. Recommendation 8 FAF needs to check with DOC before deleting or closing inactive work orders, even though the deletions may seem to be "common sense" decisions. FAF Response Agree that FAF will consult with DOC prior to cancelling any work orders. While no work orders are deleted from the system, it has been common practice to cancel certain types of work orders that have no work hours against them after 90 days. Examples of such work orders are toilet back ups or plumbing leaks. FAF staff members do respond to these calls regularly and correct the deficiencies but periodically put their time on other work orders they are working on that day. As a result some of the work orders have remained in the system as still in progress until cancelled. Recent changes in the computerized maintenance management system have improved management's ability to see and check status on work orders that are exceeding the expected response times. Finding 9 On average, there are four outside vendors/contractors working at Elmwood per day. They must be .escorted by CSAs. If they arrive unexpectedly, CSAs may be on other assignments, and the vendors must wait until CSAs are available, wasting time and money. Recommendation 9 FAF should inform DOC as far in advance as possible to arrange for escorts when multiple vendors are scheduled. FAF should advise DOC of where vendors are to work, and be prepared to escort the vendors if necessary. FAF Response Agree. FAF will inform DOC as far in advance as possible to arrange for escorts. FAF will also advise vendors to coordinate access requests in a timely manner. There has been a lot of facilities work at Elmwood over the past couple of years, and as aresult the DOC CSA staff has been stretched thin. Finding 10 7 FAF work is frequently delayed when inmates are in areas FAF needs to access. Recommendation 10 FAF should make every effort to let DOC know when FAF needs access to inmate occupied areas. It should be noted that Custody administration has put itself on-call to be available any time for inmate moving to assist FAF in accessing areas, and that FAF plans to assign one of its long-time Elmwood workers as onsite supervisor for the entire facility. FAF Response Agree. FAF will make every effort to advise DOC as far in advance as possible that work in an occupied area isplanned. Finding 11 DOC receives a non-itemized bill from FAF for accumulated corrective maintenance charges. In FY 2008, this bill totaled $3.364M. Recommendation 11 FAF should provide te DOC an itemized quarterly statement so that the charges can be reconciled with the services provided to ensure accurate accounting. FAF Response Agree in concept. In FY 2008, DOC was billed $582,423 and in FY2009, DOC was billed only $369,846. The figure of $3.364M in the finding is a reference to all work that was accomplished at any DOC facility in FY2008, with most of those resources having been programmed and expensed as part of the FAF budget. DOC actually has access to billing information in the County accounting system. FAF regularly accepts feedback and resolves overcharges from departments who feel they have been inappropriately charged for reimbursable work. Finding 12 Several DOC personnel enter service requests to FAF (through the FAF web site or by e-mail). This at times results in duplicate requests, resulting in duplicate work orders. The duplicates show up on MAXIMO as incomplete jobs, requiring review several months later. Recommendation 12 It should be noted DOC is already working on designating only one individual to enter all requests. FAF Response DOC is already implementing this recommendation. Finding 13 FAF supervisors work at Berger Drive. They make brief and infrequent visits to Elmwood. As a result, FAF is unable to verify the hours their workers spend on the job. Recommendation 13 FAF should designate a supervisor for Elmwood. It should be noted that FAF plans to assign one of their long-time Elmwood workers as onsite supervisor for the facility. FAF Response Agree in concept. FAF Managers and Supervisor have put into effect a schedule for daily visits to Elmwood to provide supervision and monitoring of FAF staff. These supervisors and managers will be coordinating closely with the DOC Support Services Manager. Finding 14 FAF has not implemented the formal customer feedback process cited in its response to the 2007-2008 Civil Grand Jury Report County Building Maintenance: High Cost, Poor Customer Communication. Recommendation 14 FAF should implement the formal customer feedback process cited in its response to the 2007-2008 Civil Grand Jury Report County Building Maintenance: High Cost, Poor Customer Communication. FAF Response Agree in concept with this recommendation. FAF is working with DOC to clarify issues and open communications through weekly and monthly meetings and FAF daily supervisor site visits. Frank discussions with Elmwood Captain, Lt. Taylor and Sgt Liddle indicate communications with FAF have greatly improved over the past couple afyears and they are generally happy with the current situation. It was noted by DOC that some past unfavorable events may continue in the memory of current DOC staff While emai1, telephone calls, meetings, and personal visits provide ample opportunities for customer feedback, FAF agrees that a formal customer feedback system needs to be implemented and is in the process of doing so. Finding 15 FAF Building Operations last received a county management audit in 1991 when it was known as GSA. Recommendation 15 The foregoing Instrument isacorrect copy of the original. ATTEST: Maria Marinos 9 Clerk ofthe Board ••.. B'f.~~~ Deputy Clerk Date: AUG 2 5 2009 The County Board of Supervisors should order a management audit on FAF. FAF Response FAF will defer to the Administration regarding an audit. 10