📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Los Angeles County Grand Jury • 2007-2008

Audit of County-Wide Vehicle Use: The Drawbacks of Decentralized

Published: May 29, 2008 346 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 18 findings

F1 Page 18
There is now a recently implemented cap of $900 on the amount an inmate may have in his or her account, whether deposited by outside third parties, or in the inmate’s possession at the time of booking. The $900 maximum on inmate accounts is excessive, and it creates an opportunity for disparity in the jail setting, where there are many rules and regulations in place for the express purpose of maintaining a level playing field among inmates. Inmates who are able to amass such a substantial sum of money, and the amenities that money can buy, have an opportunity to use such money or amenities to barter for extraordinary privileges.
F2 Page 18
Government Code § 26640 does not speak to whether the Sheriff may release money in an inmate’s account to outside third parties at the direction of the inmate, except for that money in the inmate’s possession at the time he or she is booked into custody. There is no legitimate purpose in permitting a jail inmate to function as a cash conduit by directing the release of funds to outside third parties that were initially deposited by persons outside the jail system. - 10 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report
F3 Page 19
The Sheriff does not require identification from outside third parties who make cash deposits to an inmate’s account through the cashier’s office.
F4 Page 78
Cases have been identified by the district attorney wherein care providers are allegedly providing aid under different names and fraudulently collecting benefits. Cases have also been identified wherein aid recipients are allegedly receiving aid under different identities.
F5 Page 78
DPSS administers various federal and state-funded aid programs at the county level, including General Relief (welfare), CalWorks, Food Stamps, Medi-Cal, and IHSS. The district attorney has identified a number of cases where benefits from one program would reduce or eliminate eligibility for another program, and contends that DPSS computer databases do not “talk to” one another, so inter-program opportunities for fraud abound. - 70 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report
F6 Page 79
Neither the State of California nor the County of Los Angeles conducts a criminal background investigation on the provider of IHSS services. Since the recipient has carte blanche to choose a provider, but cannot conduct a background investigation, the county is in a position to do so on behalf of the recipient.
F7 Page 79
Reassessments of the recipient’s need for continuing IHSS care are not done in a timely and systematic manner.
F08 Page 117
As such, the department is in the process of issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a vendor to provide routine maintenance services. The current contract does not contain a maximum amount and the department indicated that the new agreement will also not contain such provisions. The Internal Services Department should consider a contract structure more similar to those that have been entered into by other departments and contain a maximum amount. • The Department of Public Works has entered into agreements for routine vehicle maintenance services with 76 vendors. These contracts contain provisions that cap the total expenditures by the department at a maximum amount of $1.5 million. The department expended the maximum amount for routine maintenance in FY 2006-07 and is expected to expend the maximum amount in FY 2007-08. • The Fire Department has entered into agreements with a total of 82 vendors to provide routine vehicle maintenance services for the department for a maximum amount of $3.5 million per year. The actual expenditures for services received through these agreements are the maximum of $3.5 million. • The Sheriff’s Department recently entered into an agreement with a single vendor to provide routine maintenance services for its fleet. This agreement, with the Penske Corporation, is for an amount not to exceed $16.0 million per year. Accident Costs Accident repair costs involve actual payments for County vehicle repairs involved in accidents and, in many instances, the repair costs are not covered by the contracts discussed above. Many of the accidents cost the department additional amounts that vary year-to-year. Complete and verifiable cost information was not readily available from the departments for this audit. However, the table on the next page shows the numbers of accidents as reported by the individual departments. - 109 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Table 9 Reported Vehicle Accidents in the Four Largest Vehicle Usage Departments FY 2005-06 through March 2008 Ratio of Number of Number of Department Accidents to Number of Accidents* Vehicles** Sheriff’s Department 849 16.0% Public Works Department 747 40.2% Fire Department 132 9.9% Internal Services Department 124 12.8% Total 1,852 – Sources: Los Angeles County Departments * Data is for FY 2005-06 to FY 2007-08. The data for FY 2007-08 is year to date and does not contain the entire year. ** The number of vehicles is based on the totals received from the Auditor-Controller’s Fixed Asset database. The Sheriff’s Department can expect accidents due to vehicle pursuits and other patrol activities, and has implemented several policies and procedures to ensure that accidents are kept to a minimum and thoroughly reviewed. Further, the Risk Management Branch of the County Executive’s Office works with departments by providing “technical support (consultations, training, surveys, etc.)6” to reduce costs associated with vehicle liability. The County Executive Office continues to work with departments to keep accidents to a minimum and thus reduce claim costs and accident repair costs. Acknowledgements We would like to thank the managers and staff from each of the departments included in this study. In virtually every instance, the departments responded to our requests for data and interviews in a timely manner, and provided access to records required to accomplish the study objectives. Even when access to certain records was delayed because of privacy concerns, Sheriff’s Department management and staff worked diligently toward obtaining the information we required for our review. This high level of cooperation permitted us to accomplish a complex study in the timeframe requested by the Civil Grand Jury, and provide recommendations that we believe will assist the departments to improve vehicle usage throughout the County. Chief Administrative Office Risk Management Annual Report, p. 21. - 110 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report
F8 Page 80
Personnel of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services (DPSS) are not always qualified to assess the kind and intensity of the care required, which is roughly analogous to Medicare’s definition of “custodial care.” Among the chief determining criteria for receiving IHSS is the requirement that but for this program, the recipient would require out-of-home placement. Quoting from the County Welfare Directors Association (CWDA) report entitled In-Home Supportive Services: Past, Present and Future, January 2003: “The IHSS program is based on a social model – one that relies on a social worker assessment rather than assessment based on medical criteria. As such, caregivers are not medical personnel, nor are the social workers and, obviously, the consumer… “Quality of care is dependent on the caregivers qualifications and job satisfaction and how accurately the social worker’s assessment of the consumer’s need comports with the consumer’s actual supportive service needs.” Recipient need assessments have a significant subjective component, influenced by the personal bias of the social worker, personality interactions, and the innate desire to be charitable. DPSS also realizes that the initial assessment home visit, reassessment visits and scheduled visits are sometimes stage-managed in order to draw the maximum benefit of the program. The attempted reassessment via repeated random visits, to a supposedly housebound recipient who is never home, should be a cause for concern.
F9 Page 80
As an alternative to personalized, in-home care, electronic home monitoring could be made available for those recipients who neither want nor require personal contact. - 72 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report
F10 Page 81
Providers of in-home care complain that they are not getting paid by the recipients of in-home care. Conversely, recipients complain that the providers are not providing the level and/or quality of care for which they are being paid from IHSS funds. In some cases, time cards have been forged or altered.
F11 Page 81
Initial fraud referrals are supposed to be sent to DPSS headquarters. However, in some cases, DPSS employees attempting to report suspected IHSS fraud have been met with responses ranging from apathetic to hostile on the part of district office supervisors and managers. Reports of suspected fraud, forwarded to DPSS headquarters, are not followed up on with the employees who initiated the reports; in essence, a lack of feedback. Senate Bill (SB) 1104 grants jurisdiction for IHSS fraud investigations to the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS), formerly known as the Department of Health Services. Specific provisions contained in SB 1104 created fraud detection and quality assurance protocols, adherence to which is not optional.
F12 Page 81
An Affidavit of Support, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I-864, must be submitted by those who are sponsoring foreign nationals under the family- - 73 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report based immigration system. Furthermore, the Affidavit of Support is required in certain employment-based immigration situations. Section 213a of the Immigration and Nationality Act (Title 8 CFRs) creates a legally enforceable contract between the sponsor(s) and the foreign national. The Act also creates a legally enforceable contract between the sponsor(s) and the federal agency or any state agency which may provide means-tested public benefits to the sponsored immigrant. Implemented in 1996 to ensure that foreigners do not become public charges after admittance to the U.S.A., the Affidavit of Support requirement must be satisfied in order for many foreigners to ultimately obtain legal permanent residence. The Affidavit of Support terminates once the sponsored immigrant “naturalizes” or when credited with 40 qualifying quarters of work as defined by the Social Security Act. Form I-864 and I- 864A data may be disclosed to other federal, state and local agencies providing means- tested public benefits for use in any civil action against the sponsor(s) for breach of contract. Social Security numbers may be verified with the Social Security Administration. It may also be disclosed as a matter of routine use to other federal, state, local and foreign law enforcement agencies to enable these entities to carry out their law enforcement responsibilities.
F13 Page 82
The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) is a refundable federal income tax credit for low- income working individuals and families. It is not a tax rebate, but rather a federal subsidy. In addition, the EITC has no effect on certain welfare benefits; the EITC will not be used to determine eligibility for Medicaid, SSI, Food Stamps, Section 8 housing or most payments of temporary assistance for needy families. The EITC is based on a past and an anticipated calendar year of income. Applicants must file a federal tax return and have a valid Social Security number. Full details are contained in IRS Notice 797 and Form W-5.
F14 Page 83
Although the Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury cannot comment upon or review State of California operations, the successful and professional local administration of IHSS is dependent upon state databases. The state’s and Los Angeles County’s Department of Social Services computers and software must handshake and exchange data, primarily with the following: • State Medi-Cal Eligibility Data System (MEDS) • Income and Eligibility Verification System (IEVS) There is no longer a demarcation between county and state functions; we live in a virtual world. Even checking a person’s federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI) status requires DPSS to go through the state systems to obtain Social Security Administration data. Obviously, Los Angeles County DPSS is at the mercy, interest and competence of state agencies, particularly the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) and California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS). Providers and recipients of IHSS services sign and submit a biweekly timesheet which is ultimately processed by the state, the payment warrant is issued by the state, and fraud investigation is within the purview of the state. The acceptance of scrawled or absent signatures on the timesheet does not constitute good management of a multi- billion dollar program such as IHSS. Dual endorsement of the payment warrant would definitely be a good business practice.
F15 Page 83
The Advance Pay feature of IHSS is reportedly abused, particularly by the recipient receiving “advance pay” for weeks and months without submitting a time card in support of that pay.
F16 Page 84
A member of the 2007-2008 Civil Grand Jury, a past service provider in the IHSS program, was approached by an IHSS employee to sign up to take other recipients. All the member had to do was give the IHSS employee permission to re-use the member’s provider information, which was already in DPSS files, and periodically sign papers. For this, the member would keep one-half of each check / warrant, and yield the other half to an associate of the DPSS employee. The grand jury member was subsequently approached by someone who was not a county employee, but offering a similar scam. He told the member that “…lots of people are doing it.” Needless to say, the current grand jury member emphatically refused both offers.
F17 Page 51
• The LOFT (Larkin Opportunities for Transition) is a licensed transitional-living facility designed to meet the unique needs of underage homeless and runaway youth. • The Ellis Street Apartments supply permanent housing, coupled with an array of support services, including six units specifically reserved for youth diagnosed with HIV/AIDS. • LEASE is a supportive residential program for youth who have emancipated from San Francisco’s foster care system. The program uses scattered-site apartments, and participants are linked to a range of supportive services, including employment, education, and life skills training services. • Larkin Street Youth Services serves more than 3,000 youth and young adults ages 12-23. Approximately 80% of the young people who have completed Larkin Street’s counseling programs have left street life permanently. More than 85% of graduates from Avenues to Independence, a unique transitional-living program for young adults ages 18-23, have secured and retained permanent housing and career-track employment. Of the 84 young people served by the Aftercare Program, which helps young adults ages 18-23 living with HIV/AIDS achieve self-sufficiency, 92% successfully stabilized their lives off the street.” 3) Colorado Department of Human Services, Family Unification Program (FUP) Location: State of Colorado Contact: Valerie Jenkins, Independent-Living Coordinator, Colorado Department of Human Services, 303-866-4539, [email protected]. Target Population: Youth ages 18-21 that left foster care at age 16 or older for housing support program; youth ages 16-21 for mentoring services Purpose: Provide housing assistance and after-care services to former foster youth. - 43 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Features: Housing vouchers provided to youth through Colorado’s Department of Human Services partnered with Supportive Housing and Homeless Programs. Chafee funding is used to provide aftercare services with Family Tree, Volunteers of America, and Urban Peak – non- profits that provide 18-month aftercare services to young people in this program. “Colorado has also developed a unique partnership with AmeriCorps for youth in transition. AmeriCorps members located at FUP agencies support the development of local partnerships to assist youth ages 16-21 in successfully transitioning to adulthood. Members provide comprehensive mentoring services and help youth obtain employment and educational opportunities.” 4) Connecticut Department of Children and Families, Housing Continuum Location: State of Connecticut Contact: Bill Pinto, Independent-Living Coordinator, Connecticut Department of Children and Families, 860-550-6471, [email protected]. Target Population: Youth up to age 23 Purpose: To assist youth in transitioning to adulthood by providing support to foster youth up to age 23. Features: “Connecticut’s Department of Children and Families provides adolescents in foster care a broad continuum of housing options. Youth move from highly structured, supervised living arrangements to a transitional living program where support is provided while structure and restrictions are decreased. Part of the department’s housing continuum includes a Community Housing Assistance Program, which provides youth with a subsidy to cover living expenses such as rent, food, utilities, telephone, transportation, and clothing. Youth are required to complete the department’s life skills program, be employed and enrolled in an educational or vocational program, and contribute a portion of their income toward expenses and a savings account. The average length of stay in this program is two years. Connecticut allows youth to remain in foster care up to age 23 if enrolled in post-secondary education.” 5) Illinois Dept. of Children and Families, Youth Housing Assistance Program Location: State of Illinois Contact: Ted Ernst, Youth Housing Assistance Coordinator, Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, 312-814-5571, [email protected] Target Population: Youth who have aged out or are preparing to age out of the foster care system; youth age 17-20 are eligible for housing advocacy services and youth 18-21 for cash assistance services Purpose: Provide housing assistance to youth at risk of becoming homeless who have aged out or are preparing to exit from the foster care system. Features: “Housing advocacy services include assisting youth in obtaining and maintaining stable housing, providing consumer education and budget counseling, linking youth to community-based resources, and follow-up services for a minimum of three months after youth secure housing. Cash assistance services are available to help newly emancipated foster youth or former foster youth before their 21st birthdays when in crisis. Cash assistance may be used for housing and utility deposits, emergency rental assistance, temporary rental subsidies, and necessary furniture or appliances. Sixteen housing advocates throughout the state help youth locate, secure, and maintain affordable housing. Illinois uses 30% of its Chafee funding for room and board services for youth ages of 18-21.” - 44 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report 6) Lighthouse Youth Services Location: Cincinnati, Ohio Contact: Mark Kroner, Director of Self Sufficiency Services, Lighthouse Youth Services, 513- 487-7130, [email protected]. Target Population: Independent Living Program targets foster youth and juvenile offenders ages 16-19. Transitional Living Program targets homeless youth ages 18-25. Purpose: “Lighthouse is committed to continuously educating public systems about the importance of giving youth opportunities to live on their own and the need for affordable housing at discharge.” Features: “Lighthouse Youth Services prevents youth in child welfare from becoming homeless and prevents young adults in the adult shelter system from remaining homeless through Independent Living and Transitional Living Programs. In 1981, Lighthouse developed a semi- supervised scattered-site apartment model based on the philosophy that young people learn best by doing and that youth should have opportunities to live on their own and develop self- sufficiency skills before discharge from care. The agency has served more than 1,000 youth in its model and averages around 80 youth a day living in their own apartments.” 7) New York City, Section 8 Priority Code Location: New York City Contact: Nancy Martinez, Independent Living Coordinator, New York State Office of Children and Family Services, 518-474-9586, [email protected] Target Population: Youth aging out of the foster care system Purpose: Provide housing support for youth aging out of the foster care system, with some housing units set aside for those with mental health needs. The Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) and the Office of Housing Policy and Development (HPAD), in cooperation with the New York City Housing Authority provide this program. Features: “This program provides Section 8 vouchers or public housing units to qualified current and former ACS Independent Living clients. As of December 2002, more than 1,700 youth had utilized this program. ACS and HPAD, in conjunction with other private not-for- profit housing developers, continue to support the development of supportive housing for young people aging out of the system. Currently, at least 25 ACS Independent Living clients reside in a permanent supportive housing program by using their Section 8 vouchers, accessed through the Independent Living Priority Code Program. In February 2003, five units of permanent supportive housing were made available to former Independent Living clients with mental health needs.” 8) New Jersey Community Housing Demonstration Program, Shared Living Residence Rental Housing Program Location: State of New Jersey Contact: Bruce Blumenthal, New Jersey Mortgage Finance Agency, 609-278-7449, [email protected] Target Population: “Eligible clients include persons with specials needs over age 18 and adolescents who are referred in writing by the New Jersey Department of Human Services or other DHS-approved sponsors.” Purpose: “The program assists persons with special needs to live independently within the communities of their choice by expanding the supply of affordable and quality housing.” - 45 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Features: “The New Jersey Community Housing Demonstration Program (NJCHDP) is a partnership between the Department of Human Services and the New Jersey Mortgage Finance Agency (NJMFA). The NJCHDP Shared Living Residence Rental Housing Program provides financing to non-profits, for-profit developers, and municipalities for the acquisition of land and buildings, new construction, or the rehabilitation or conversion of buildings as transitional or permanent rental units for persons with special needs. The entire community residence or a portion of the units (as determined by the appropriate division of the New Jersey Department of Human Services) can be set aside for these individuals.” PROGRAMS THAT PROVIDE EDUCATIONAL/JOB TRAINING/EMPLOYMENT SUPPORT 1) Education and Training Vouchers Program Location: Federal nationwide program Contact: Dottie Ansell, National Resource Center for Youth Development, University of Oklahoma, College of Continuing Education; 918-660-3700; [email protected]. Target Population: Youth aging out of the child welfare system Purpose: Provide educational assistance to former foster youth in need Features: “Education and Training Voucher (ETV) funds pay for the cost of attending institutions of higher learning. The vouchers cannot exceed $5,000 per year or the actual incurred cost of attendance at the institution. Cost of attendance includes tuition, room and board, and other costs associated with participating in the educational or vocational training program. The ETV Program is federally funded through the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Amendment of 2001, which expanded the John H. Chafee Independence Program to include these funds for educational/vocational assistance. Most vouchers are administered through the state’s Independent Living/Chafee program. Some states have contracted with the Orphan Foundation of America to administer their ETV programs.” 2) Los Angeles Infrastructure Academy Location: Los Angeles, CA Contact: http://www.infrastructureacademy.org/index-1.html Target Population: High school juniors and seniors Purpose: Their mission is “to build a pipeline of diverse, well-qualified, young people to enter the Civil Infrastructure field and place them into careers.” It also helps high school students prepare for a well-paying job that leads to a meaningful career with growth opportunities. In addition, the program should keep kids off the streets and out of gangs. It is scheduled to begin in May 2008. This program was developed by the Office of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the LA Department of Water and Power. Features: “The LA Infrastructure Academy program will consist of a selective, two-year program for young people interested in pursuing a career in civil infrastructure. Students will apply in the second half of their sophomore year of high school and will begin the program in the summer between their sophomore and junior years. The LA Infrastructure Academy will work with students through the employers’ application process and will support them on an ongoing basis during and after the program. Mentoring will be a critical component throughout the entire student-alumni life cycle.” Technical training, hands-on training, leadership training and - 46 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report community services projects are all part of the junior and senior year program. Students participate at least two days per week after school and two Saturdays per month. In addition, paid summer internships, employment assistance, and even college application assistance are made available. 3) Guardian Scholars Program Location: California State University, Fullerton Contact: California State University, Fullerton, Guardian Scholars Program, PO Box 6828 C- 120, Fullerton CA 92834-6828; 714-278-4900; www.fullerton.edu/guardianscholars Target Population: Former foster youth aspiring to attend a 4-year university Purpose: Provide former foster youth the opportunity to attend and graduate from Cal State Fullerton without the fear of running out of money or accumulating sizeable debt. Features: “The innovative Guardian Scholars Program admits several students each semester to California State University. Each scholar receives full tuition and funding for textbooks, supplies, and annual fees. Additionally, the program offers assistance in completing college entrance and financial aid forms; an orientation to university life; year round, on-campus housing and on-campus student employment; one-on-one counseling, academic advising, peer mentoring, and faculty mentoring; a drop-in study center; assistance with off-campus employment in the young person’s career field; and post-graduation career planning.” The program supports 10 new students each year for five years each. Fifty students are in the program at any given time. 4) UPS School-to-Career Partnerships Location: Maryland; Hartford, Connecticut; New York, New York; Oakland, California; Portland, Maine; Providence, Rhode Island; San Antonio, Texas; and San Diego, California. Contact: Mark Giuffre; 502-329-3060; www.community.ups.com/education/school.html. Target Population: Disadvantaged young adults, with recent emphasis on recruiting former foster youth Purpose: To provide career opportunities to disadvantaged youth. “The long-term goal of the UPS Partnership is to establish a best-practices workforce development system that will be expanded in the current service area and replicated with committed employers in other communities nationwide.” Features: “The United Parcel Service (UPS) School-to-Career Partnership for youth is a community-based initiative engaging disadvantaged young adults in a work and learning experience at UPS, Marriott, Bank of America, and other employers to expand their opportunities for career and academic success. The UPS Partnership is a collaborative effort involving the facilitator and funders, employers, referral agencies, and transportation providers. Through UPS, colleges and non-profit agencies collaborate to create programs tailored to the unique educational and employment needs of each community. Some programs work with four- year colleges, while others work with community colleges and technical assistance and trade schools.” 5) San Diego Workforce Partnership, School-To-Career Intermediary Team Location: San Diego, California Contact: School-to-Career Intermediary System, San Diego Workforce Partnership Inc., 3910 University Avenue, Ste. 400, San Diego CA 92105; 866-YCN-SDWP (926-7397), 619-744- 0318; [email protected], http://sdyouth.sandiegoatwork.com Target Population: Youth - 47 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Purpose: To provide career support for youth Features: “The Youth Connect Network’s School-to-Career Intermediary System links businesses with students to create rich work-based learning experiences, including job fairs, internships, job shadowing, company tours, and mentoring. This collaboration between local schools and businesses helps create pathways to postsecondary education and career development. The intermediary system is a partnership among the San Diego Workforce Partnership, the San Diego County Office of Education, local school districts, regional community college districts, regional chambers of commerce, business leaders, and other community-based organizations.” APPENDIX B: TAY Survey A survey was developed and distributed to a sample of youth in DCFS and Probation, and My Friend’s Place (a drop-in center for homeless youth in Los Angeles) to get their perspective on the services and programs available to them. They were also encouraged to give comments and suggestions for new, needed programs. A total of 205 TAY participated in the survey. Approximately two-thirds of the survey participants are or were from DCFS and one-third from Probation. The survey participants were asked to rate TAY services and programs by indicating their degree of agreement with a series of statements concerning: • Education • Workforce Readiness • Life Skills • Housing • Transportation • Legal Assistance • Physical Health • Social and Emotional Wellbeing Exhibit D displays the findings for all categories using a rating scale of 1-4 to measure response averages. Exhibit D: TAY Service and Program Ratings AGREE – 4 SOMEWHAT AGREE – 3 SOMEWHAT DISAGREE – 2 DISAGREE – 1 Rating Average Survey Statement 20 or 16-17 18-19 Overall older EDUCATION I am receiving the education I want. 3.3 3.6 3.3 3.4 I get the assistance I need to succeed in school. 3.2 3.6 3.3 3.4 I get both educational and vocational information and choices. 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.3 I have received good educational guidance. 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.5 I am receiving support and advice for educational options beyond high school. 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 - 48 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Rating Average Survey Statement 20 or 16-17 18-19 Overall older WORKFORCE READINESS I have the job skills, knowledge and experience to get a good job. 3.1 3.4 3.5 3.3 I have a career/employment plan for the next 2 – 5 years. 2.7 3.2 3.2 3.0 I know what services are available to help me get a job. 3.2 3.5 3.6 3.4 LIFE SKILLS I have enough savings to live independently. 1.6 1.9 2.0 1.9 I feel I can manage my money. 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.2 I know how to budget my money for groceries, etc. 3.1 3.4 3.5 3.4 I know how to access public assistance programs if I need them. 2.9 3.5 3.6 3.3 I am aware of free public programs (library, recreational centers, etc). 3.4 3.7 3.8 3.6 I know how to register to vote. 2.5 1.9 3.6 3.2 HOUSING I am aware of rental costs. 2.9 3.6 3.7 3.4 I feel I can cover the housing costs (furniture, equipment, utilities, etc.) of living 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.4 independently. I know how to get rental assistance. 2.5 3.0 3.1 2.8 TRANSPORTATION I can get to work on time. 3.6 3.7 3.9 3.7 I know how to use public transportation. 3.7 3.8 4.0 3.8 LEGAL ASSISTANCE I know how to get legal help if I need it. 3.1 3.2 3.4 3.2 I have access to a lawyer. 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.6 I understand my rights if I have a problem with the law. 3.3 3.1 3.2 3.2 PHYSICAL HEALTH I am in good physical health (dental, vision, hearing etc.). 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.6 I am strong and in good shape. 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 I know how to access health care (insurance, free clinics, etc.). 3.0 3.5 3.6 3.4 I know how to prevent sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy. 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.9 SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL WELL-BEING I have friends and/or family members who are supportive. 3.7 3.6 3.5 3.6 I know how to access community based support groups (church, counselors, etc.). 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.6 I am able to live independently. 3.3 3.1 3.3 3.2 I know how/who to ask for help if I have trouble living independently. 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 Education Survey participants agree to some degree that they are receiving the education that they want (3.4) and are getting the assistance (3.4), information and choices (3.3) guidance (3.5), and support and advice (3.5) necessary for educational success. Workforce Readiness Survey participants agree to some degree that they have the job skills, knowledge, and experience necessary to get a job (3.3), have a 2- to 5-year employment plan (3.0), and know what services are available to help them in their job search (3.4). Participants who identified themselves as 16- or 17-year-olds indicated ratings a lower than the older age groups. This difference might be related to the possibility that not as many 16- and 17-year-olds have jobs. Life Skills Survey participants agree to some degree that they are aware of free public programs (3.6), and know how to manage money (3.2), budget (3.4), access public assistance programs (3.3), and register to vote (3.2). Participants who identified themselves as 16- or 17-year-olds are somewhat less self-assure in their life skills. With the lowest rating on the survey, survey - 49 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report participants somewhat disagree that they have enough savings to live independently, emphasizing a disconnect between knowledge of and success in applying life skills. Housing Survey participants agree to some degree that they aware of rental costs and those participants who are 18 and older agree somewhat that they know how to get rental assistance. 16- and 17- year-olds are less aware and participants somewhat disagree that they feel they can afford housing costs, calling attention to the lack of affordable housing in the Los Angeles area and the need for more TAY assistance in this area. Transportation Survey participants agree that they can get to work on time (3.7) and know how to use public transportation (3.8). Legal Assistance Survey participants agree somewhat that they know how to get legal help (3.2) and understand their legal rights (3.2); they are less sure (2.6) that they can access a lawyer. Physical Health Survey participants agree to some degree that they are in good physical shape (3.6), strong (3.5), know how to access health care (3.4) and prevent sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy (3.9). Social and Emotional Well-being Survey participants agree to some degree that they have family or friends that are supportive (3.6), know how to access community based groups (3.6), are able to live independently (3.2), and know how and who to ask for help if they are having trouble living independently (3.5). Additional Comments Forty seven additional comments or suggestions were received. Approximately 20% of the respondents made positive comments about their experiences, many expressing their gratitude, with TAY services and programs. The rest of the respondents commented negatively or gave suggestions for improvements. The respondents’ negative comments or suggestions in order of frequency were concerns about housing, the social worker or system, jobs/income/budgeting, quality of instruction or support, educational support and access to health care. APPENDIX C: DMH TAY Programs 5.1) Transition Age Youth Full Service Partnerships (TAY FSP) Program Description: An intensive Mental Health Services and supports program for not served, underserved, and inappropriately served SED/SPMI (Serious Emotional Disturbance/Severely and Persistently Mentally Ill) TAY based on use of effective and innovative approaches focused on achieving recommended outcomes: a) Meaningful use of time and capabilities (employment, vocational, educational, social, and community activities; b) Safe and adequate housing and living environments and reduction in homelessness; c) A network of supportive relationships; d) Timely access to needed help, including in times of crisis; - 50 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report d) Reduction in incarceration in jails and juvenile halls; e) Reduction in involuntary services, reduction in institutionalization, and reduction in out of home placements; f) Maintaining or improving physical health; g) Reduction in early pregnancy; and h) Completion of high school diploma or GED. An individualized comprehensive services and supports plan, in partnership with an FSP team, is developed for each youth focusing on recovery and resiliency/wellness. A case manager is available 24/7 to respond to clients needs (this is a critical service and support component). An array of services and supports are provided including clinical interventions, linkages and referrals, housing assistance (rental subsidies, eviction assistance), benefits establishment, money management, leisure activities and planning, vocational training, job assistance, or anything else the youth or family needs to better function. Misc. Information: This program enrolled the first client in December 2006. DMH states that available MHSA funding is currently not sufficient to provide FSP services to all SED/SPMI TAY who otherwise qualify and might benefit from them. Funding: This program is funded by the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA). Total funding is $19,668,660 annually and includes EPSDT (Early Periodic Screening Diagnosis and Treatment) funding and Medi-Cal. Of this, approximately 40% ($7.9 million) is targeted towards youth aging out of DCFS and Probation. Target Population/Potential clientele: This program serves 16-25 year olds in the child welfare and juvenile justice systems (system) as well as those outside the system. The $7.9 million targets youth currently in DCFS/Probation, youth aging out of the system, and youth formerly in the system. The balance of funding is for youth who are homeless or currently at risk of homelessness, are aging out of the child mental health system, leaving long-term institutional care (e.g. an Institution of Mental Disease or State Hospitals), and youth experiencing their first psychotic break. Program capacity: This program provides 1122 slots for 16-25 year olds for all of L.A. County ($17,530 per slot). Due to natural “slot-turnover” during the fiscal year, one slot usually serves more than one person. Clients served (since program inception): 1113 have been authorized (slot-turnover); 898 clients currently authorized to receive TAY FSP Services Evaluation Process: Program success is measured through the State and County approved Outcome Measures Application (OMA). Upon enrollment in an FSP program, a baseline assessment is completed by the provider agency. Subsequent updates are completed quarterly (minimally), and when there is a change in a “key event.” The OMA is an electronic-based application. 5.2) TAY Drop-In Centers Program Description: Drop-In Centers are intended as entry points into the mental health system for SED/SPMI TAY who are living on the street or in unstable living situations. Drop-In Centers provide “low-demand, high tolerance” environments in which youth can find temporary safety and basic supports (e.g. showers, meals, clothing, referrals, linkage to services, vouchers, counseling, etc.). TAY accessing Drop-In Centers have an opportunity to build trusting relationships with staff persons who can, as the youth is ready and willing, connect them to the services and supports they need in order to work toward stability and recovery. Existing Drop-In Centers operate during regular daytime hours. MHSA funding is made available to extend hours of operation to evenings and weekends for the primary purpose of ensuring access to these vital services and supports - 51 - 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Final Report Misc. Information: In March 2008 The Board of Supervisors approved funding for three Drop- In Centers in FY 2007-08, and two in FY 08-09. Funding: Private funding is raised by the centers for the bulk of their operations. MHSA funds are used to extend the hours of operation to evenings and weekends: $250,000 annually for each of two centers. Target Population/Potential clientele: TAY who are diagnosed SED/SPMI and living on the streets or in otherwise unstable living environments. According to DMH many of the youth accessing Drop-In Centers are current or former foster or probation youth. Program capacity: Currently two centers will be fully funded for extended hours of operation in the 2008-09 FY. If additional funding becomes available, DMH would be able to increase support of Drop-In Centers in other areas of the county. Their goal is to provide at least one center in each of the eight SPAs (Service Provider Areas). Clients served: Not available. Note: Youth accessing Drop-In Centers are not required to disclose their legal status to access services. Once trust is established, the youth may decide to disclose that information. This is an example of “low-demand, high tolerance.” Evaluation Process: Information available to DMH indicates that the Drop-In Center programs awarded MHSA funding have established records of providing effective services and successfully engaging, often difficult to reach youth in accessing their available services and supports. DMH TAY Division is developing a Drop-In Center evaluation tool to measure the success of the program in achieving the outcomes for TAY as identified in the CSS Plan. (See 5.1 above) 5.3) TAY Housing Services Program Description: This program provides the following. • Enhanced Emergency Shelter Program for TAY (EESP) $605,000 per year. This program provides temporary shelter for SED/SPMI TAY ages 18-25 in a supportive housing environment for up to 29 nights while pursuing the long-term goal of secure and permanent housing. Program offers semi-private rooms, hygiene facilities, hot meals, case management, referrals and linkage services to SED/SPMI TAY who have no other resources to pay for shelter. There is one shelter that is licensed (6-beds) to serve 16-17 years old. DMH TAY Division is working with DCFS Command Post Unit to develop protocols for access for DCFS clients. • Project-Based Operating Subsidies for Permanent Housing $390,000 per year. This program provides a unit-based housing subsidy (not an individual rental subsidy). This program is currently under development. When implemented it is estimated that approximately 83 units of affordable housing will be available to SED/SPMI TAY who are capable of living independently in the community in their own apartment/unit. • Housing Specialists, one per SPA, Total funding $575,000 per year. Housing specialists assist youth with finding, securing and retaining housing by providing individualized services including accompanying youth on housing search, advocating with landlord, and assistance completing application forms. Misc. Information: The EESP Program was approved by the Board of Supervisors on March 18,

Recommendations 23

Conclusions 6

Comments 36