📋
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.
⚠️ 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 11 findings
F1
Page 57
The City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works is unable to respond to citizens’ inquiries because it does not have an adequate system for records retrieval.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Page 57
The City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works and the Los Angeles Department of City Planning do not have shared identifier numbers for their common projects.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Page 57
The City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works has no tracking numbers for disputes related to its projects. The permit number and plan number given to the document compiler was the same information given to City Planning in an earlier interview. LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2014–2015 CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT
No recommendations for this finding
F4
Page 58
A nonresident owner may not be aware of a hearing because the notice of hearing was not mailed, or it was not properly delivered, or it was received but the owner did not recognize it.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
Page 58
The Los Angeles Department of City Planning does not keep a copy of notices mailed.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
Page 58
The Los Angeles Department of City Planning keeps copies of affidavits of mailings but could not locate that affidavit in this instance.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
Page 57
The City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works does not have access to information about its mailing of notices.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
Page 58
Without public access to city identifier numbers, city staff cannot respond to public inquiries.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
Page 58
After the public hearing, data is confidential, available to the property owner and the city only, until the project is approved.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
Page 57
The City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works’ website is not organized to help the public register disputes.
No recommendations for this finding
F11
Page 57
The City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works has no dedicated phone number that the public can use to register disputes.
No recommendations for this finding
Commendations 1
-
CM1Based on observations of the group homes visited, the committee commends the efforts of these group home providers in delivering services and promoting the safety and well-being of the home residents. 11 Information obtained from http://ChronicleofSocialChange.org. 12 Board of Supervisors Statement of Proceedings, March 3, 2015. 106 LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2014–2015 CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT The committee also applauds the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors’ decision to participate in the Approved Relative Caregiver Funding Program. It will be a tremendous savings for the county and a win-win situation for all parties. ACRONYMS ARC Approved Relative Caregiver Funding Program CAP Corrective Action Plan CCL Community Care Licensing Division DCFS Department of Children and Family Services GH Group Home RCL Rate Classification Level PPQA Placement Permanency and Quality Assurance unit COMMITTEE MEMBERS Wesley C. Thompson, chair Larry Lyman, vice chair Earline Parker, secretary Doris K. Reed Joyce Simily Margaret Yasuda 107 LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2014–2015 CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT This page intentionally left blank. 108 LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2014–2015 CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT METRO RIDERSHIP Jim Contreras, chair Simeon Zano, vice chair Shari E. Pearce, secretary METRO RIDERSHIP TOPIC The Los Angeles County 2014–2015 Civil Grand Jury (CGJ) formed the Metro Ridership Committee (committee) to look into increasing the ridership within the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) system and investigate the efforts of Metro to do the same. The committee also looked into whether Metro would receive maximum funding from federal sources based on achieving the farebox recovery goal of 33 percent.1
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office