📋
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.
El Dorado County Grand Jury
• 2008-2009
Garden Valley Fire Protection District
⚠️ 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 9 findings
F1
Page 13
For over three decades, payroll, accounting and accounts payable services were provided by the El Dorado County Auditor-Controller’s office at no cost to the District. The GVFPD Board of Directors decided to withdraw the GVFPD funds from the County Auditor-Controller. This decision doesn’t appear to be based on any viable alternative to the services that were being performed by the County. Furthermore, GVFPD did not offer a rational explanation to the Auditor- Controller’s office as to why the funds were withdrawn. The GVFPD recently decided to go back into the El Dorado Auditor-Controller’s program and work with the Auditor’s office to re-establish fiscal oversight. The overall cost to GVFPD withdrawing from the Auditor-Controller’s office and eventually returning to the County has yet to be determined. 9
F2
Page 14
The GVFPD Board of Directors was negligent in their fiduciary responsibilities to the citizens of the District by their failure to properly oversee the operation of the Department. Lack of control with hiring procedures resulted in the District contracting with a person (to perform District financial transactions) who had previously plead guilty to grand theft and selling securities without a license. Additionally, this consultant misrepresented his qualifications but was not immediately terminated when this information was provided to the District. Contract agreements for financial services were not formalized in writing nor approved by the Board.
F3
Page 14
The Fire Chief is ultimately responsible for the supervision and oversight of Fire District personnel. The previous Fire Chief(s) were negligent in their oversight of the administration and personnel issues which led to conflicts within the Department. Former Fire Chief(s) allowed administrative personnel to develop a pattern of insubordination and bypass the chain of command. By not addressing these affronts to the Fire Chiefs' authority, administrative personnel were allowed to operate with impunity affecting the good order and function of the Fire District.
F4
Page 14
Financial obligations were/are delinquent and inaccurate, including both payroll and billing to United States Forest Service (USFS). The result of these actions could cost the District thousands of dollars in repayment and expenses.
F5
Page 14
The contract with USFS for the All Risk Team was poorly managed. Problems include inaccurate record keeping, incorrect payments to employees and mishandling of Government funds.
F6
Page 14
The financial controls and budgetary process in GVFPD that were found to be deficient are now in the process of being corrected by the current Board of Directors and Fire Chief.
F7
Page 24
Although the problems within the purchasing function are recognized and acknowledged by both the CAO and the purchasing department, there are no definitive plans to fix the problems.
F8
Page 31
Victims of misdemeanor crimes do not have their restitution orders actively collected by the County. 27
F9
Page 32
The restitution administration fee is currently being collected in an inefficient manner and occasionally at a rate higher than authorized by State statute. The current practice of the County is to collect the restitution administrative fee after the court-ordered amount is satisfied. The Grand Jury is aware of the justification for this method; however, research indicates the method of collecting administrative costs as payments are received improves the Restitution Program’s ability to increase collections in future years.
Recommendations 9
-
R1Page 24The Grand Jury recommends that a task force be formed comprised of expert end users and outside vendors, charging them with the responsibility of streamlining the procurement process and improving the customer service level to all internal departments and external vendors. This end user task force should include members from all major County functions. The BOS should champion this process and assign one of the Supervisors to oversee the progress of this task force, with a monthly update from the leader of this task force to him/her and the CAO. We recommend that this task force start with a “blank page,” and identify an appropriate flow process, effective computer systems’ support and lead times that best serve the needs of the County and outside vendors. Significant progress has already been made in identifying the current process, but the challenge to the team is to identify what changes should be made to improve the procurement process. 2. The completed task force report should be written and submitted to the BOS with all recommended changes no later than the end of fiscal year 2008-2009. 3. No additions to personnel should occur until such time as a full review of the procurement process is completed. RESPONSES Response(s) to this report is required in accordance with California Penal Code §933.05 20 -003 REASON FOR REPORT The El Dorado County Grand Jury received several complaints from citizens of South Lake Tahoe. The complaints centered on the verbally abusive behavior and menacing actions of the South Lake Tahoe Chief of Police. Investigation of these complaints uncovered additional information which prompted the Grand Jury to look further into his managerial and behavioral issues.
-
R2Page 12The District Fire Chief must fully understand the duties of the position. Included in those duties is the proper oversight and supervision of all personnel within the Fire District. The Chief must be able to quickly recognize and deal with personnel and administrative issues that may lead to financial or operational problems.
-
R3Page 12The GVFPD Board of Directors should participate in the educational programs offered through the California Special District Association. 10
-
R4Page 12County Auditor to provide a final report with findings of fact regarding financial standing of the GVFPD with the recommendation that checks and balances be put in place.
-
R5Page 12The Grand Jury strongly recommends that the GVFPD seriously consider the recommendation of the 2007-2008 Grand Jury Final Report Part II concerning the consolidation of fire districts. RESPONSES Response(s) to this report is required in accordance with California Penal Code §933.05. 11 -020 REASON FOR REPORT The El Dorado County Grand Jury received a complaint from a citizen/resident of the Hillwood Community Services District (HCSD). The citizen requested the Grand Jury investigate the Board of Directors of the HCSD regarding various actions taken by the Board, including violation of California Government Codes and the collection of monies for the purpose of establishing a Road Improvement Group (RIG) within the HCSD. The Grand Jury has also had communication with the El Dorado County Auditor-Controller concerning Community Service Districts (CSD) in the county and the problems associated with managing and operating CSDs within the requirements of the Government Code.
-
R6Page 12The SLTPD’s Strategic Plan should address clearly defined performance measures that include at a minimum the following areas of concern: • Confidence in Senior Management • Cynicism • Morale • Visions and Values of the Department
-
R7Page 13The Chief of Police should present a written progress report to the City Council and City Manager annually for public review.
-
R8Page 13The City Manager and City Council should maintain an active presence in tracking the Strategic Plan progress.
-
R9Page 13The Chief's annual performance evaluation should include the progress of the goals set in the Strategic Plan. RESPONSES Response(s) to this report is required in accordance with California Penal Code §933.05. 24 -014 REASON FOR REPORT The Grand Jury elected to investigate the County’s Victim Restitution activity to determine if El Dorado County is effectively and efficiently managing victim restitution.
Conclusions 2
-
CL1Sampling results indicate that failures to uphold Medi-Cal documentation standards for claims are consistent across all populations, although they were noticeably more prevalent in the Mallard site adult outpatient sample. Results also indicate that a significant portion of billable, documented services were not being claimed at the time the audit field work was conducted.
-
CL2Many of the Department of Human Services Public Guardian program case records appear to be out of compliance with TCM program requirements, based on a review of a sample of client case records and documentation supporting Medi-Cal claims for reimbursement. Few of the case records reviewed make the required link between client Assessments, Individual Client Service Plans and Periodic Reviews to ensure that client Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC 36 Section 4: DHS Targeted Case Management Medi-Cal Billing needs have been identified and addressed with specific activities and service strategies. Though a TCM requirement, follow-up checks on services to which clients are referred are routinely not taking place. Most cases are not meeting the six month Periodic Review requirement. The Department’s Linkages program, on the other hand, was found substantially in compliance with TCM program requirements in the ten sample sets of case records reviewed. Linkages program management appears to have designed their case file documentation and established policies and procedures with TCM program requirements, or intent, in mind. Periodic review documents are structured to ensure that service objectives and client needs identified in previous assessments and reviews continue to be addressed.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
El Dorado County
County