Score: +2
(4/9/2)
Contra Costa County Grand Jury
• 2017-2018
• Agency Response
A Report by the 2017-2018 Contra Costa County Civil Grand Jury*
Published: December 20, 2017
24 pages
⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and recommendations have not been extracted yet.
The full report content may still be accessible via the PDF link above.
Agency Responses 5
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
▶
Board of Supervisors
August 07, 2018
•
5 pages
• 21 responses
•
Score: 0
(+2, 2, -2)
View Details ▾
21 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
The Bay Area Earthquake Plan of July 6, 2016, establishes operational planning and preparation criteria for each Bay Area county.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F1. Individual departmental IT groups are useful in supporting the very different businesses of each department, but many find it difficult to stay abreast of all technology areas.
R1
Sheriff OES should consider creating a schedule for updating the Bay Area Earthquake Plan operational annexes
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R1 Response. The recommendation has not yet been implemented. The CIO is currently reviewing the County’s IT strategy documents and will produce an updated draft IT strategy by Decembe
F2
The Sheriff OES is charged with planning and coordinating the County’s response to a disaster.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F2. The County does not have sufficient policies to promote coordination and/or centralization in IT strategy, policy, procurement and strategic knowledge concentrations, especially in advanced cost-saving technologies.
R2
The Board of Supervisors should consider identifying funds by July 1, 2018, to permit Sheriff OES and EHSD to coordinate and complete the Mass Care and Shelter Plan according to the schedule submitted by the Sheriff OES.
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
R2 Response. The recommendation will be implemented. The Board will direct the County Administrator to seek and apply for funds to bolster the County's cybersecurity program, which is under the direction of the CIO.
F3
Sheriff OES Catastrophic Mass Care and Shelter Plan and other earthquake operational planning and preparation plans, dated 2010, do not meet the 2016 Bay Area Earthquake Plan requirements.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F3. The County’s IT Strategy document, which sets out goals, guiding principles, and policies, is out of date, having last been updated May 2000.
R3
Sheriff OES should consider developing a written Mass Care and Shelter protocol by July 1, 2018, that covers selection, inspection, and opening a shelter, and identifying funds to do so.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R3 Response. The recommendation has not yet been implemented. The CIO has begun to restore the current Information Technology Advisory Committee. Additionally, the CIO will work with the County Administrator's Office to reassemble the Information Technology Steering Committee. Both are expected to be in place by Decembe
F4
EHSD is responsible for executing the Mass Care and Shelter Plan and coordinating with the American Red Cross to operate emergency shelters.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F4 Response. The respondent partially disagrees with the finding. A governance structure exists for certain large, coordinated multi-department systems such as the personnel and benefits administration system (Peoplesoft), which is overseen by an executive steering committee; and law and justice systems, which are overseen by the Justice Automation Advisory Committee.
R4
Sheriff OES should consider including shelter selection, inspection and preparation when it establishes the Emergency Operations Center for a simulated disaster as part of disaster exercises.
Response: Requires Analysis
Score: 0
R4 Response. The recommendation requires further analysis. The CIO is currently working with Purchasing, department technical leadership, and vendors to identify areas where efficiency and cost reductions can be realized. The CIO is also evaluating enterprise software and hardware expenditures that can be centralized, such as email and disaster recovery services.
F5
EHSD 2016 Emergency Management Plan differs from the Sheriff OES 2010 Mass Care and Shelter Plan.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F5. Neither the County nor many individual departments have a consolidated IT budget or track overall IT expenditure, making it difficult to assess.
R5
EHSD should consider access to view the NSS list
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R5. The BOS should consider directing the CIO to centralize the delivery of certain common services in time for the FY 2019-2020 budget cycle. Opportunities include email, IT security, and disaster recovery.
F6
EHSD 2016 Emergency Management Plan does not meet the 2016 Bay Area Earthquake Plan requirements.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F6. The County may not be taking full advantage of economies of scale due to the lack of policy coordinating equipment and service procurement among separate departments.
R6
Sheriff OES should consider providing training to EHSD on how to use the NSS system after EHSD is granted access to view the NSS list,
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
R6 Response. The recommendation will be implemented. A review has been scheduled and will be led by the Security Officer. Timing will most likely be in the third or fourth quarter of the 2018-19 fiscal year.
F7
EHSD does not have the resources to continually work with the Sheriff OES to coordinate, plan and keep updated the Mass Care and Shelter Plan.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F7. County-wide email and associated calendaring and address book functions are not sufficiently consolidated. Infrastructure and management is distributed throughout the departments. Policy and procedure have hindered efficient communication.
R7
EHSD should consider periodic reviews of the currency of the data and make update recommendations and corrections to the American Red Cross after EHSD is granted access to view the NSS list.
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
R7 Response. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. The County's IT model is predominantly decentralized. Additionally, sources of individual departmental revenues are diverse and the majority of these revenue sources are categorical and cannot be transferred from one program or department to another. Consequently, a Countywide consolidated IT budget would not contribute to better budgeting decisions. When directing County resources, the Board must consider, on a case-by-case basis in the context of all related factors, which needs will receive priority. Consol...
F8
Sheriff OES does not have the resources to update all the operational planning and preparation plans as required by the 2016 Bay Area Earthquake Plan.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F8. The County is constrained in implementing IT technology advances, in part due to insufficient or lack of access to appropriate skill sets.
R8
Sheriff OES and American Red Cross should consider inviting EHSD to their regular meetings regarding earthquake planning and review of associated policies.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R8 Response. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but implementation is in progress. Through the IT Users' Group and the IT Steering Committee, standards will be developed that will allow Countywide procurement of technology.
F9
Sheriff OES has no written procedures concerning selection, inspection and opening an emergency shelter.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F9. DoIT does not have the staff to extend security oversight from County level to the departmental level. Cybersecurity capabilities vary by department.
R9
Sheriff OES should consider reviewing its plans to coordinate local jurisdictions, EHSD and the American Red Cross during an emergency, and develop procedures and provide training where deficiencies are identified.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R9. The BOS should consider directing the CIO to investigate establishing technology resource centers for dissemination of strategic technology knowledge and support, in order to create efficiencies and attract and retain staff. Candidate areas include cloud architecture and implementation, data management, business process automation, and cybersecurity.
F10
Sheriff OES has no standard training program that covers how emergency shelters are selected, inspected, and opened.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F10. Disaster recovery plans are in various stages of completion and readiness by department and typically are not tested on a regular basis.
R10
The County Board of Supervisors and the Antioch City Council should consider negotiating an MOU whereby the Shelter agrees to accept all animals. Those that are identified as non-city of Antioch animals should be regularly picked up and transported to a County Shelter by County Animal Control Officers.
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
R10 Response. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not reasonable. Robust and competent project management continues to be a goal for all of the County's IT projects, large and small. However, the recommendation is predicated on an assumption that the County has sufficient resources to quickly recruit and retain qualified project management staff for all of the County's large, complex software projects, which is not the case. While often critical to County operations and service delivery, IT programs compete with direct operations and other administrative programs for budge...
F11
The Sheriff OES recognizes the American Red Cross makes non-binding pre- arrangements for shelters and lists the shelters on the FEMA sponsored database, National Shelter System (NSS).
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F11. There are insufficient Project Management resources with the expertise and authority to consistently implement the County’s critical IT projects on time and within budget.
▶
Board of Supervisors
July 10, 2018
•
4 pages
• 10 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 1, 0)
View Details ▾
10 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
The Bay Area Earthquake Plan of July 6, 2016, establishes operational planning and preparation criteria for each Bay Area county.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F1. For the last ten years, there have been no reported significant security or voter fraud issues with County elections.
R1
Sheriff OES should consider creating a schedule for updating the Bay Area Earthquake Plan operational annexes
Response: Requires Analysis
Score: 0
R1 Response. The recommendation requires further analysis. The CRO continues to develop and refine the threat and vulnerability assessment, and implement changes as needed. Threats and risks are not static and assessments need to be continuously reviewed and updated to reflect the current situation.
F2
The Sheriff OES is charged with planning and coordinating the County’s response to a disaster.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F2. The CRO is following good cyber security and logistical security practices, with a process that is as open and accountable as is practicable under current law.
R2
The Board of Supervisors should consider identifying funds by July 1, 2018, to permit Sheriff OES and EHSD to coordinate and complete the Mass Care and Shelter Plan according to the schedule submitted by the Sheriff OES.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R2. The Grand Jury recommends that the CRO consider updating its business continuity plan and Memorandum of Understanding with Sacramento County prior to the June 2018 election, and then test the plan’s effectiveness on a regular basis.
F3
Sheriff OES Catastrophic Mass Care and Shelter Plan and other earthquake operational planning and preparation plans, dated 2010, do not meet the 2016 Bay Area Earthquake Plan requirements.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F3. The County's voting machinery is reaching the end of its maintainable life, but the County expects to implement a new system for the June 2018 election. The CRO had put aside sufficient funds for a new voting system and recommended one for purchase, which the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved.
F4
EHSD is responsible for executing the Mass Care and Shelter Plan and coordinating with the American Red Cross to operate emergency shelters.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F4. Vote-by-mail is the more secure method of voting in the County, simplifying logistics and avoiding the “single point of failure” where a traffic accident could wipe out all voter records for multiple polling locations.
F5
EHSD 2016 Emergency Management Plan differs from the Sheriff OES 2010 Mass Care and Shelter Plan.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F5. Implementation of SB 450, the California Voter’s Choice Act, is not mandated. Before determining whether to implement the law, Contra Costa County is waiting to see how the law affects other counties that have chosen to implement the law, especially as it relates to the optimal number of voter centers and drop-off locations needed.
F6
EHSD 2016 Emergency Management Plan does not meet the 2016 Bay Area Earthquake Plan requirements.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F6. The implementation of VoteCal, the new State-wide voter registration system, introduces the facility for automated updates, and it is now connected to the DMV.
F7
EHSD does not have the resources to continually work with the Sheriff OES to coordinate, plan and keep updated the Mass Care and Shelter Plan.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F7. The CRO is preparing a threat and vulnerability assessment of the new system, which is planned to complete prior to the June 2018 primary election.
F8
Sheriff OES does not have the resources to update all the operational planning and preparation plans as required by the 2016 Bay Area Earthquake Plan.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
F8. The CRO follows good practice in system redundancy and backup, and has a business continuity plan with Sacramento County to provide reciprocal vote counting support since each county has the same voting system. The Memorandum of Understanding and plan covering the agreement are not yet updated to include the new voting system.
▶
Board of Supervisors
July 05, 2018
•
2 pages
• 3 responses
•
Score: +1
(+1, 2, 0)
View Details ▾
3 responses to findings and recommendations
R2
The Board of Supervisors should consider identifying funds by July 1, 2018, to permit Sheriff OES and EHSD to coordinate and complete the Mass Care and Shelter Plan according to the schedule submitted by the Sheriff OES.
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R2. The Board of Supervisors should consider maintaining grant funding levels for healthcare programs upon dissolution of LMCHD. Response: The recommendation has been implemented. County Resolution No. 2018/218, in part, requests the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to impose certain terms and conditions (Attachment B to Resolution No. 2018/218) on the County, as successor to the Los Medanos Community Healthcare District (the District), should LAFCO approve the application for dissolution of the District as proposed. Specifically, the County is recommending that LAFCO impose the follo...
R3
Sheriff OES should consider developing a written Mass Care and Shelter protocol by July 1, 2018, that covers selection, inspection, and opening a shelter, and identifying funds to do so.
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R3. The Board of Supervisors should consider using any savings from LMCHD dissolution to improve and expand heathcare programs once appointed as the successor to LMCHD. Response: This recommendation has been implemented. As discussed above, the County has adopted proposed terms and conditions that it will be asking LAFCO to impose on the County as successor to the District, including a condition requiring development of a grant program to be administered for the benefit of the community within the District boundaries. In addition, the County is requesting a condition that the County form an ad...
F5
EHSD 2016 Emergency Management Plan differs from the Sheriff OES 2010 Mass Care and Shelter Plan.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F5. As the County already has a grant administration program in place, and has some of the same grantees as the District, there is potential for administrative cost savings through elimination of redundancies. Response: Agree. RECOMMENDATIONS - California Penal Code Section 933.05(b) requires a response to the designated recommendations of the Grand Jury.
▶
Contra Costa Local Agency Formation Commission
July 11, 2018
•
4 pages
• 6 responses
•
Score: +1
(+1, 4, 0)
View Details ▾
6 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
The Bay Area Earthquake Plan of July 6, 2016, establishes operational planning and preparation criteria for each Bay Area county.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F1. LMCHD website lacked data addressing the public health needs of the community or measurable outcomes of the grant programs targeting the population served. <b>Response</b>: The respondent partially disagrees with the finding. The LMCHD website includes the District's 2017 Health Profile, 2017-2022 Strategic Plan and Strategic Goals that address community needs and utilize data contained in various health needs assessments, most of which are recent. The District's Strategic Plan identifies health disparities within the District. The Strategic Plan also contains an "LMCHD Health Profile (201...
R1
Sheriff OES should consider creating a schedule for updating the Bay Area Earthquake Plan operational annexes
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
R1. LAFCO should consider dissolving the LMCHD by Decembe
F2
The Sheriff OES is charged with planning and coordinating the County’s response to a disaster.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F2. LMCHD used obsolete data rather than the current health needs assessments to prioritize grants. <b>Response</b>: The respondent partially disagrees with the finding. In developing its 2017 Strategic Plan and the "LMCHD Health Profile", the District relied on various data sources including several CHNAs such as those prepared by Sutter Delta Medical Center (2016), Kaiser Foundation Hospital Antioch (2016), Contra Costa Behavioral Health (2016), and Contra Costa Health Services (2010), along with data from the American Community Survey, U.S. Census Bureau and various other sources. The LMCHD...
F3
Sheriff OES Catastrophic Mass Care and Shelter Plan and other earthquake operational planning and preparation plans, dated 2010, do not meet the 2016 Bay Area Earthquake Plan requirements.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F3. The Grand Jury found no evidence LMCHD collaborated with the County, nonprofit hospitals, or other local districts to avoid duplication of services. Grand Jury Report 1802 Contra Costa LAFCO Response Page 3 <b>Response</b>: The respondent partially disagrees with the finding. As noted in the LAFCO MSR, LMCHD participated in the Healthy and Livable Pittsburg Collaborative which also includes the County, City of Pittsburg and other entities. In 2013, the County Health Services Department produced a report describing health issues related to obesity in the Antioch, Bay Point and Pittsburg are...
F4
EHSD is responsible for executing the Mass Care and Shelter Plan and coordinating with the American Red Cross to operate emergency shelters.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F4. LMCHD's level of administrative costs is high compared to other government agencies that fund grants. <b>Response</b>: The respondent partially disagrees with the finding. As presented in its FY 2018-19 budget, the District's administrative costs have been reduced to 25%, which is significantly lower than prior year costs, and is now in line with other healthcare districts (HCDs). The 2017-18 LAFCO MSR noted that there is no absolute standard for establishing overhead factors due to differences among agencies' budgets and operations. The MSR included the following comparisons: Concord Plea...
F5
EHSD 2016 Emergency Management Plan differs from the Sheriff OES 2010 Mass Care and Shelter Plan.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
F5. As the County already has a grant administration program in place, and has some of the same grantees as the District, there is potential for administrative cost savings through elimination of redundancies. Response: Agree Grand Jury Report 1802 Contra Costa LAFCO Response Page 4 One of the factors LAFCO considers in its review of local agencies is "opportunities for shared facilities." LAFCO encourages agency collaboration and sharing of facilities and resources. RECOMMENDATIONS
▶
Contra Costa Local Agency Formation Commission
∼ June 30, 2018
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Contra Costa County Sheriff
Elected County Office
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.