Score: +4
(4/0/0)
Contra Costa County Grand Jury
• 2015-2016
Contact: Michael Simmons Foreperson
⚠️ 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 23 findings
F1
There is an estimated backlog of 2,300 welfare fraud cases being processed in the fall of 2015.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Approximately 300 welfare fraud cases have been released for review to the DA from July through December 2015.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Although the amount of money distributed by EHSD in the three main programs is roughly $185 million annually, the County only pays $4.4 million of this amount, while the remainder of these benefits are paid for by the federal and state government.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
The ratio of recovered money to total payments was less than 1 percent in 2014 and 1.87 percent in 2013.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
The lack of staff to process suspected fraud cases is one of the primary reasons Contra Costa County did not recover more monies from welfare fraud in 2013 and 2014.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
Contra Costa County has the third lowest welfare fraud referral rate in the nine county Bay Area and is at one-third of the statewide rate.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
There are currently two Welfare Fraud Investigators and one Welfare Fraud Investigator Supervisor.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
EHSD is authorized to fill five Welfare Fraud Investigator positions.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
The County has difficultly hiring and retaining Welfare Fraud Investigators.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Board of Supervisors should consider, in order to make the position more attractive with higher net pay, offering non-benefitted status to candidates for Welfare Fraud Investigator, after reviewing the legal and policy-related considerations of doing so.
F10
EHSD and HR have been unsuccessful in filling three Welfare Fraud Investigator positions over the past 18 months.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The Board of Supervisors should consider directing EHSD to hire two full time EHSD Overpayment Unit workers to fill the currently open positions.
F11
The main reason the County has difficultly hiring and retaining Welfare Fraud Investigators is that a potential candidate with POST certification can receive better pay by becoming a police officer or a deputy sheriff instead of a Welfare Fraud Investigator.
No recommendations for this finding
F12
As a practical matter, the County is limited to hiring retired or medically retired police officers with POST certification for Welfare Fraud Investigators.
No recommendations for this finding
F13
With the backlog of approximately 2,300 referrals, EHSD hired two (2) temporary Overpayment Unit workers to assist the four (4) current full-time Overpayment Unit workers clear the backlog.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
To allow the Welfare Fraud Investigators time to perform more in-field investigations such as UHVs, the Board of Supervisors should consider directing EHSD to create a position classification for Fraud Investigation Technicians or Aides, who would prepare and process case documentation.
F14
Each temporary Overpayment Unit worker is limited to working no more than 1000 hours per year in that position.
No recommendations for this finding
F15
County policy prohibits Welfare Fraud Investigators from carrying handguns while conducting unannounced home visits, even in dangerous areas of the County.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The Board of Supervisors should consider allowing Welfare Fraud Investigators to wear firearms at their personal discretion while conducting UHVs.
F16
Some counties hire fraud investigative staff in non-peace officer classifications, called Investigative Technicians, to perform office work processing case documentation and allowing fraud investigators to conduct more UHVs and field investigations.
No recommendations for this finding
F17
Investigative Technicians are not required to be POST certified and are paid at a lower salary range than Welfare Fraud Investigators.
No recommendations for this finding
F18
The County is reimbursed by CDSS for approximately 80 percent of the labor cost in administering CalWorks, CalFresh, and In-Home Supportive Services and investigating fraud related to these programs.
No recommendations for this finding
F19
The County does not receive reimbursement for the cost of the administrating General Assistance and investigating potential fraud related to those benefits.
No recommendations for this finding
F20
Because the State shares 12.5 percent of monies recovered for the overpayment of benefits related to CalWorks, CalFresh, and In-Home Supportive Services, hiring additional fraud investigation officers and Overpayment Unit Workers would cost the County little.
No recommendations for this finding
F21
The Senior Inspector in the DA’s Welfare Fraud Investigation Unit is authorized to carry a handgun.
No recommendations for this finding
F22
The County DA’s Office has only one senior inspector and a Deputy District Attorney assigned for welfare fraud prosecution.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
As EHSD fraud referrals increase, and as funding is identified and made available, the District Attorney should consider increasing the number of Senior Inspectors and Deputy DAs so that investigations can also be done on Electronic Benefit Transfer card fraud and internal fraud within EHSD.
F23
If the County hires more senior inspectors, they could conduct investigations into EBT card fraud, internal fraud, and in-home supportive services violations.
No recommendations for this finding
Conclusions 2
-
CL1 Page 19Public assistance programs in the County totaled about $185 million in benefits in 2015 for roughly 10,000 recipients. Fraud detection efforts to weed out overpayments, fraud, and criminal activity have been underperforming compared to efforts statewide and in six (6) other bay area counties. Fraud referral cases declined to below 1 percent in 2015. This coincided with the drop in the number of welfare fraud workers and Welfare Fraud Investigators at EHSD. In July 2015, the County took the first step to improve welfare fraud prosecution by sending 300 referrals to the DA’s Office. Since the number of welfare fraud referrals
-
CL2 Page 20has also increased, EHSD is actively recruiting additional Welfare Fraud Investigators and two additional full time staff in the overpayments unit. Most of the salaries and benefits of Welfare Fraud Investigators, EW, overpayment workers, and DA staff come at little cost to the County because they are reimbursable by CDSS. In addition, CDSS has increased the incentive for fraud recovery to 12.5 percent of all fraud recovered in the CalWorks, CalFresh and In-Home Supportive Services programs. Through these mechanisms, the County could fully staff welfare fraud programs at little cost. The issue of Public Assistance Fraud is an important one for the County, and one which must be addressed to ensure that public funds are awarded only to needy and qualified recipients, and that those who steal public funds are properly punished. Investigation and prosecution sends a message to the county taxpayers that their taxes are being used for problems that need to be fixed. Finally, when the County acts as a welfare fraud watchdog, criminals and people willing to commit fraud are discouraged from doing so.
Agency Responses 1
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office