⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 4 findings
F1
Employee confidentiality and ongoing litigation with conservatees’ families impeded Grand Jury inquiry into allegations of misappropriation of conservatees’ property. However, investigation into past and recently revised PG procedural policy indicated corrective actions have been undertaken to address future situations so that such allegations would be less likely to arise. Outcome of the present allegations will await adjudication by the Court.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Public Guardian’s Office must continue to pursue its recently revised standard of accountability to the public and provide increased public exposure to its role in assisting citizens who cannot help themselves.
F2
The complaints received by the Grand Jury had a common theme: there has been inadequate documentation of conservatees’ wishes regarding how they wanted their estates and persons to be administrated in case of incapacity to act for themselves.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The Public Guardian should create an outreach program, including efforts to inform vulnerable populations, especially seniors, about options for assigning alternate agents to step in when necessary.
F3
The PG operates under the jurisdiction of the Probate Code and the Probate Court. Complaints about the PG frequently revolve around the perceived ponderousness of deliberation and protracted time it takes to address even routine requests. These complaints are commonly heard about any of the agencies working with the overloaded court system.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
The PG has undergone a significant re-organization in the recent past resulting in reassignment of responsibilities of the Chief Guardian, who now has a greater role in overseeing operations and supervising Deputies. CONCLUSIONS The staff of the Public Guardian presents as highly knowledgeable and qualified for the tasks of providing conservatorship as defined in the Probate Code. Confidentiality is a significant and appropriate consideration in dealing with conservatees and their families. Conservatees cited in the complaints reviewed by the Grand Jury have been and are being provided with care and compassion appropriate to their needs. It is extremely difficult at times for the Public Guardian to balance the demands of conservatees’ families with the responsibilities to provide competent, legal and compassionate care. The PG has experienced some troubling lapses in the recent past and management has made changes in personnel and policy to address perceived difficulties. They are continually monitoring and improving the quality and effectiveness of their mandate to provide care and supervision. Potential conservatees (and that means anybody) could avoid considerable stress and conflict if they (and all of us) attend to the continuity of health and well-being by thoughtfully and thoroughly preparing advance financial and healthcare directives. These directives would include a will or living trust, Durable Power of Attorney for Finances that specify who will administer money matters, and Advance Healthcare Directive to assist family, domestic partner, or other designated agent(s) to make informed medical decisions in case of a person’s inability to speak for him or her self. A frank discussion of these matters with family members before the need arrises would go a long way to assure that wishes are honored and would greatly lessen the necessity to require the PG’s services. For those who cannot fend for themselves and for those who have no family or trusted surrogate to speak for them, the PG is there to assure health and well-being are professionally and compassionately available as best it can be. RECOMMENDATIONS
No recommendations for this finding
Conclusions 1
-
CL1 Page 2The staff of the Public Guardian presents as highly knowledgeable and qualified for the tasks of providing conservatorship as defined in the Probate Code. Confidentiality is a significant and appropriate consideration in dealing with conservatees and their families. Conservatees cited in the complaints reviewed by the Grand Jury have been and are being provided with care and compassion appropriate to their needs. It is extremely difficult at times for the Public Guardian to balance the demands of conservatees’ families with the responsibilities to provide competent, legal and compassionate care. The PG has experienced some troubling lapses in the recent past and management has made changes in personnel and policy to address perceived difficulties. They are continually monitoring and improving the quality and effectiveness of their mandate to provide care and supervision. Potential conservatees (and that means anybody) could avoid considerable stress and conflict if they (and all of us) attend to the continuity of health and well-being by thoughtfully and thoroughly preparing advance financial and healthcare directives. These directives would include a will or living trust, Durable Power of Attorney for Finances that specify who will administer money matters, and Advance Healthcare Directive to assist family, domestic partner, or other designated agent(s) to make informed medical decisions in case of a person’s inability to speak for him or her self. A frank discussion of these matters with family members before the need arrises would go a long way to assure that wishes are honored and would greatly lessen the necessity to require the PG’s services. For those who cannot fend for themselves and for those who have no family or trusted surrogate to speak for them, the PG is there to assure health and well-being are professionally and compassionately available as best it can be.
Commendations 1
-
CM1 Page 2The Grand Jury commends those concerned citizens who spoke up and asked the Jury to look into perceived irregularities in the administration of public offices. The officers of the Public Guardian, the Public Conservator, and the Public Administrator have been uncommonly patient in explaining the complicated interactions and statutes that inform their tasks. REQUIRED RESPONSES TO RECOMMENDATIONS Sonoma County Public Guardian: R-1, R-2
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Sonoma County
County