Fresno County Grand Jury • 2019-2020

The County of Fresno Grand Jury

Published: June 04, 2019 150 pages Consolidated Report
View Original PDF

Note: Missing finding numbers detected: F7, F8, F9, F10

Findings 13 findings

F1 Page 23
Respondents to Grand Jury Report Findings and Recommendations do not consistently follow Penal Code timeline requirements.
F2 Page 23
Respondents to Grand Jury Report Findings and Recommendations do not consistently follow Penal Code response format and language requirements, leaving interpretation to the reader.
F3 Page 23
The Grand Jury does not receive responses to Grand Jury Reports from the County as they are received.
F4 Page 23
Prior Fresno County Grand Juries have been remiss in following up on the status of implementation on Grand Jury Recommendation responses indicating future implementation.
F5 Page 26
There is significant emotional turmoil for inmates and their families during Warden & incarceration and release from prison. Programs for decreasing this turmoil and Medical Same as above Disagree helping inmates and families reunite are lacking, especially for those on CEO probation compared to those on parole.
F6 Page 26
Recruiting psychologists continues to be a challenge and the process could Warden & be improved. Other mental health and substance use positions appear to be Medical Same as above Agree filled in a timely manner and are close to being fully staffed (such as psychiatry, CEO social work, substance abuse counselors).
F11 Page 35
FSD has failed to regularly schedule meetings with user departments to aid in understanding of charges and invoicing. FSD’s regular meetings with user departments Same as above Same as above Partially Disagree encourages openness and accessibility, which fosters better management of FSD.
F12 Page 35
FSD continues to train lower-level staff to provide user departments with additional information to provide another Same as above Same as above Agree layer of training to user departments which may reduce user departments’ concerns regarding rates, costs, and invoicing.
F13 Page 35
Failure to publish additional rates and charges on the 1.Robert Bash, Fresno 1.Yes MSF prohibits effective planning by user departments for County Director ISD/CIO anticipated projects. 2.Jean Rousseau, Fresno CAO 2.Yes 3.Oscar Garcia, Fresno 3.Yes Disagree County Auditor-Controller/ Treasurer-Tax Collector 4.Fresno County BOS 4.Yes
F14 Page 35
FSD does not receive sufficient and regular allocations 1. Robert Bash, Fresno 1.Yes of deferred maintenance funds. Lack of deferred mainten- County Director ISD/CIO Partially disagree ance funds fails to protect the lifecycle of county property, 2.Jean Rousseau, Fresno CAO 2.Yes which in turn impacts FSD’s multi-year budget planning. 3.Fresno County BOS 3.Yes
F15 Page 35
The turnover and absence of facility managers has led to difficulty with cohesiveness of operations, proper delivery Same as above Same as above Agree of goods and services, and communication with user departments. 35
F16 Page 36
Circumventing FSD is not a widespread problem. When it does happen, failure to follow policy appears to lead to morale issues with FSD, along with potential liability to Same as above Same as above Agree persons and property, and from the possible filing of union grievances.
F17 Page 36
Failure by FSD personnel to properly complete the Robert Bash, Fresno County Facility Services Request forms can lead to confusion by Yes Partially disagree Director ISD/CIO giving the impression of duplicated surcharges. (1) Agreed = One or more respondent agrees with Finding in full or part. Disagree = All respondents disagree with Finding in full. Partially Disagree = All respondents disagree in part with Finding. 2019-2020 Grand Jury Responses Investigation Implementation Outcome

Recommendations 7

Commendations 4