Working Title 1: Working Title 2 (Case No. xx20) Good Intentions Are Failing San Joaquin County’s At‐Risk Children

Conclusions 1

• CL1
  The agencies of San Joaquin County tasked with caring for the health and safety of our At‐Risk Youth need to come together and be proactive in changing the current system. Unfortunately, there is no one‐size‐fits‐all remedy that solves all the problems. What is recommended in this report may help in the short term, but long‐term solutions require a reevaluation of recent legislative changes and guiding principles. Locally, the system needs to be given the priority it deserves. County leaders must work together to seek out and take advantage of all existing State and Federal programs. They must become more effective leaders. They need to join, sponsor, and advocate for groups and programs by lobbying for legislative changes. Currently, the County needs more hands‐on, face‐to‐face staffing to care for and guide the most challenging youth. The County needs to have structured placement options with some restrictions to separate the justice‐involved youth from the youth Children’s Protective Services has removed for safety reasons. 22 The County should immediately enhance recruitment efforts through the use of a third‐party recruiter. In addition, priority should be given to recognizing and aiding at‐risk families, helping them stabilize and stay together so foster care will not be needed. The County has plenty of laws, funds, and the knowledge that the system as it currently exists needs to be improved. Disclaimers Grand Jury reports are based on documentary evidence and the testimony of sworn or admonished witnesses, not on conjecture or opinion. However, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing such evidence except upon the specific approval of the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, or another judge appointed by the Presiding Judge (Penal Code Section 911, 924.1(a), and 929). Similarly, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing the identity of witnesses except upon an order of the court for narrowly defined purposes (Penal Code Sections 924.2 and 929). The Grand Jury issued this report except for one member of the jury. This juror was excluded from all parts of the investigation including interviews, deliberations, and the making and acceptance of the report. Response Requirements California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05 require that specific responses to all findings and recommendations contained in this report be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the San Joaquin County Superior Court within 90 days of receipt of the report. Note: If the responder is an elected official, the response must be sent within 60 days of receipt. San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors Findings – F1.1, F1.2, F1.3, F1.4, F3.1, and F3.2 Recommenda(cid:415)ons – R.1.1, R1.2, R1.3, R1.4, R3.1, and R3.2 San Joaquin County Human Services Agency Findings – F1.2, F1.3, F1.4, F2.1, F2.2, F2.3, F3.1, and F3.2 Recommenda(cid:415)ons – R1.1, R1.2, R.1.4, R2.1, R2.2, R2.3, R3.1, and R3.2 San Joaquin County Sheriff’s Office Findings – F3.2 and F3.3 Recommenda(cid:415)ons – R3.2 and R3.3 San Joaquin County Proba(cid:415)on Department Findings – F1.1, F1.3, and F3.2 Recommendations – R1.1, R1.2, R1.3, and R3.2 23 Mail or hand deliver a hard copy of the response to: Honorable Michael D. Coughlan, Presiding Judge San Joaquin County Superior Court 180 E Weber Ave, Suite 1306J Stockton, California 95202 Also, please email a copy of the response to Mr. Irving Jimenez, Judicial Staff Secretary to the Grand Jury, at [email protected]. 24

No Responses Found 1

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.