📋
Extraído del Informe Consolidado
Esta investigación fue publicada originalmente como parte de un informe consolidado más amplio que contiene múltiples investigaciones. Consulte el PDF consolidado para ver el documento completo.
Santa Cruz County Grand Jury
• 2017-2018
• Agency Response
Board of Education
⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 6 findings
F1
Page 26
As promised in their responses to the 2016-17 Grand Jury report, the COE and CSO collaborated with local law enforcement agencies to produce a thorough and well-written Countywide Threat Assessment Plan.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Page 26
The Plan’s detailed flow chart, assessment protocol, and related documents will be valuable resources for school districts to use in threat situations.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Page 26
The Santa Cruz County Professional Development Plan for School Safety demonstrates the COE and CSO’s commitment to adequately preparing school staff and local law enforcement to respond to future threats in our schools. Response (F1, F2, F3) The COE and CSO have worked hard to implement the direction of the Grand Jury. This work has resulted in the development of resources, policies, and practices that improve student safety across all schools in the county.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
Page 26
Neither the Countywide Threat Assessment Plan nor the Professional Development Plan for School Safety explicitly call for rehearsing the threat assessment protocol in a non-threat situation, which may compromise the responders’ readiness in a threat situation. Response The Threat Assessment protocol has been modified to explicitly call for rehearsing the threat assessment protocol in non-threat situations. Please see pages 4 and 25 of the updated Threat Assessment Protocol (attached).
No recommendations for this finding
F5
Page 34
Current dispatch procedures do not distinguish between threatening and non-threatening EDP calls. Making this distinction would create an opportunity for MERT to respond to the 70 percent of 9-1-1 EDP calls that do not involve a threat.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
Page 34
Having a private, for-profit contractor operate the County BHU reduces transparency between the Behavioral Health Department and the people they serve. Published May 17, 2018
No recommendations for this finding
Commendations 4
-
CM1 Page 27C1. The COE and CSO responded quickly and comprehensively to the recommendations of the 2016-17 Grand Jury report and drafted a plan that creates a firm foundation to address the safety of our students in the context of targeted school violence. C2. The COE and CSO have demonstrated clear commitment to providing ongoing training so that school staff and law enforcement can function collaboratively and respond effectively to threats of violence in our schools. Response (C1, C2) We are grateful to the Grand Jury for the opportunity to demonstrate our commitment to student safety through a collaborative process that resulted in the development of resources, policies, and practices that will improve student safety. 3
-
CM2 Page 2824 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury
-
CM3 Page 292017-2018 Consolidated Final Report 25 Mental Health Crisis Seeking An Integrated Response Summary In two separate incidents in October and November of 2016, a person experiencing a behavioral crisis was shot and killed in a confrontation with law enforcement. These incidents led the Grand Jury to examine how people in a mental health crisis in our community are handled. Why is law enforcement the primary responder to a person in crisis when the issue is one of mental health? The Behavioral Health Division of the County Health Services Agency (Behavioral Health) has field-based personnel who respond on an emergency basis, but who are not accessible through 9-1-1. Can our system of initial response be modified to more fully integrate law enforcement and mental health? And once the initial contact is over, are people in crisis receiving appropriate and quality care when delivered to the County’s Behavioral Health Unit (BHU) for evaluation? National funding priorities have resulted in law enforcement becoming the primary responder to mental health calls. While our local law enforcement agencies have done some collaboration with Behavioral Health in improving the initial contact with people in crisis, more can be done. This report recommends changes that would expand the role of Behavioral Health personnel and reduce the burden on law enforcement when responding to 9-1-1 calls concerning people in crisis. Published May 17, 2018 Page 1 of 10
-
CM4 Page 3026 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Santa Cruz County
County