Every County Grand Jury will inquire into the condition and management of public prisons in the County.

Commendations 16

• CM1 Page 20
  The audit recommended by the 2005-2006 Grand Jury has not been performed.
• CM2 Page 17
  The City of Napa has recognized and is working with the DAC.
• CM3 Page 18
  The Trackit software program has the potential to be useful for managing and processing project applications for CDD. It can also serve to document the staff hours actually applied to the various projects and relate them to the Department’s billings. Ongoing review and correction on the part of CDD management is crucial for the successful implementation of this costly software.
• CM4 Page 19
  Charges by consultants are often not itemized, and thus there is no verifiable relationship between the work performed and the amount billed.
• CM5 Page 63
  The Grand Jury finds that, among professionals interacting with the child welfare system, there is a lack of confidence in CWS’s procedures for investigating and acting on abuse allegations. The Grand Jury recognizes that CWS has major responsibilities for cases being processed through Juvenile Court, but has a limited role in cases being processed through Family Law Court. A lack of understanding about CWS's authority to act in each court may contribute to an impression that the agency is not consistent in its response to referrals.
• CM6 Page 16
  The City of Napa CDD lacks sufficient, specific written policies and procedures. In addition to written departmental goals and objectives, written comprehensive job descriptions for each position are needed.
• CM7 Page 66
  The Napa Sanitation District’s reclamation program is well designed and has adequate capacity to meet existing service demands. The wastewater treatment plant’s reclamation facilities can be expanded to meet additional capacity requirements as new users are brought on-line. 66
• CM8 Page 67
  The Napa Sanitation District’s Soscol Wastewater Treatment Plant produces tertiary-level treated wastewater. This level of reclaimed water offers the greatest range of beneficial uses, including agricultural, landscaping, industrial, wetlands maintenance and enhancement, and greenbelt preservation.
• CM9 Page 66
  The Napa Sanitation District’s reclamation program is a beneficial and efficient use of existing water resources by lessening the demand for potable water within its service area. Recycled water from the NSD is being utilized by the following : Golf Courses • Chardonnay Golf Course • Eagle Vines Golf Course • Napa Municipal Golf Course School • Napa Valley College Commercial Developments • JHL Properties • Napa Valley Crossroads LLC • Napa Valley Gateway • One Executive Way LLC • Napa Valley Corporate Park Cemeteries • Inspiration Chapel Vineyards • Chardonnay • Eagle Vines • Giles • Laird • Grgich • Meritage • Napa Valley College Vineyard Extensions of sites to receive recycled wastewater are dependent upon the proposed expenditures of capital funds as noted in NSD’s Operating & Capital Budget, FY 06/07: Water Reuse Debt Service* $623,200 Reclamation Pipeline* $500,000 67 Recycled Water Strategic Plan $430,000 Aquifer Storage Recovery Evaluation $221,400 Tractor (190-210hp)* $200,000 Jameson Cyn. Water Recovery System $ 70,000 Biosolids Pod Holding Site Jameson $ 50,000 Jameson Pump Station Rehab* $ 50,000 Rec. Site Automation Upgrades $ 40,000 Kennedy Park Conversion $ 40,000 *These projects are noted as “Critical” Additional capital expenditures for expanding recycled wastewater use are forecast for the Fiscal Years 2007/08, 2008/09, 2009/10. The NSD also seeks Federal and State grants and low cost loans to finance projects. Finding 2 The natural process of collecting and treating water from sewage generates more recycled water than can be delivered to potential users.
• CM10 Page 15
  The CDD and the City of Napa are to be commended on their willing participation with the DAC. Through this ongoing open discussion, problems of the past will be removed and working solutions will be established. This will make a world of difference as Napa continues to grow by infilling neighborhoods, and revitalizing itself with new and improved commercial areas. DISCUSSION 1 Compliance with Maximus Report This Grand Jury reviewed the City of Napa’s response to the 2005-2006 Grand Jury Report with the then serving CDD Director. Contained in the City’s response is a 50-item list outlining implementation of the original 2002 Maximus Report. One of the first items of note was the Director’s well-worn copy of the 2002 Maximus Report, complete with highlighted passages and bookmarks. This Grand Jury was informed that the 15 Planning Manager and the Development Engineering Manager resigned in the spring 2006. The Planning Manager and Development Engineering Manager positions have been filled temporarily with existing personnel. Due to budget restrictions, permanent replacements for these positions were not hired. Of the 50 points of response to the 2002 Maximus Report, only seven (7) items in the Report were either rejected or not yet fully implemented, in some cases due to the City’s current financial difficulties. One of the seven items not implemented was the recommendation that the City develop written department policies and operating procedures as well as specific job descriptions. According to the new City Manager, the 2002 Maximus Report has set a good baseline for CDD. There is a need to complete standardized policies and procedures, along with appropriate short-term goals for the department. In addition, goals and objectives need to be updated regularly to stimulate growth and overall improvement for the staff. With policies and procedures documents, sound goals and objectives, employee evaluation and departmental evaluation can more easily be accomplished. Though some of the methods outlined in the original 2002 Maximus Report may not be possible due in part to budget constraint, the overall goals of clear, timely, accountable and professional project application processing still apply. Finding 1 The City of Napa CDD lacks sufficient, specific written policies and procedures. In addition to written departmental goals and objectives, written comprehensive job descriptions for each position are needed. Recommendation 1 CDD should draft and make public its written policies, operating procedures and job descriptions consistent with the recommendations of the 2002 Maximus Report. 16 DISCUSSION 2 Quality of Service The 2005-2006 Grand Jury reported that customer service at the CDD was lacking. Recommendation number 9 in that report was made in response to that issue. Shortly after the release of the 2005-2006 Grand Jury Report in July of 2006, the first meeting of the DAC was held. This group was first called together a year previously by the now retired CDD Director as part of the City’s response to the 2002-2003 Grand Jury Report on the same issues. However, as the group’s concerns and suggestions went unresolved, they formed a separate and autonomous group to outline and promote a course of corrective action to improve service and accountability within the CDD. The DAC continues with regular meetings, and extensive interaction with the City of Napa to assist in establishing some of the stated goals of the City of Napa and the DAC itself. City management confirms a good working relationship with DAC and acknowledges that the DAC has contributed to correction of some of the customer service issues reported by the prior Grand Jury. Finding 2 The City of Napa has recognized and is working with the DAC. Recommendation 2 The City of Napa should continue to involve and utilize the DAC for oversight, feedback and direction toward correction and ongoing effectiveness of the CDD. Further, this committee should be left autonomous, to provide independent and effective oversight of the CDD DISCUSSION 3 Staff Project Billing via Trackit One of the major recommendations of the 2002 Maximus Report was the need for an improved tracking system in regards to building permits, and commercial and residential planning. The City of Napa purchased 17 Trackit, a software program. When the CDD demonstrated the program to the 2005-2006 Grand Jury in the spring of 2006, it had been in use for six months. Some of the components were not functioning and staff was partially trained with Trackit. The 2006-2007 Grand Jury visited CDD in December 2006, specifically to see the progress made in implementing the system. By then, most elements of the software were operational, data from the old system were entered and most employees were using Trackit regularly. This Grand Jury observed some data input errors and other minor problems consistent with converting to the new system. The program proved adaptable. As errors were found they were quickly corrected, or in the case of some items, the manager could modify the software to correct the situation for future entries of that type. Finding 3 The Trackit software program has the potential to be useful for managing and processing project applications for CDD. It can also serve to document the staff hours actually applied to the various projects and relate them to the Department’s billings. Ongoing review and correction on the part of CDD management is crucial for the successful implementation of this costly software. Recommendation 3 CDD management should continue to monitor employee use of Trackit to check for accurate data entry. For this software system to be useful, it is imperative that staff post billable hours on a daily basis. Continued training of staff should accomplish this goal. DISCUSSION 4 Consultant Billing Regular reports from Trackit are prepared and examined by CDD management as a tool in monitoring internal staffing, and billable hours. An area of concern is that outside consultants who are contracted by the City of Napa to review and comment on building/development applications 18 are not required to provide itemized billing statements showing how their time was spent on reviewing a project. Finding 4 Charges by consultants are often not itemized, and thus there is no verifiable relationship between the work performed and the amount billed. Recommendation 4 Outside consultants should be required to itemize their charges. DISCUSSION 5 Accounting of Prior CDD Revenue/Expense The 2005-2006 Grand Jury found that the City of Napa’s Finance Department was unable to document total revenues generated from project applicant fees, and could not provide backup to establish the uses to which planning process fees were applied. The 2005-2006 Grand Jury recommended that the City of Napa hire an independent auditor to examine all revenues generated by the permit application system for the prior five years, as well as the use to which those revenues were spent. The 2006-2007 Grand Jury reviewed the City of Napa’s response to these 2005-2006 findings and concluded that they are inadequate, lacking detail and supporting documentation. Furthermore, the City of Napa has not complied with the recommendation that it retain an independent auditor. The “City of Napa Cost Recovery Manual” governs this process by stating, “… It is policy to establish fees to recover the cost of providing certain services. Once established, fees should be reviewed annually to ensure that all the reasonable costs incurred providing these services are being recouped. The City is generally precluded from recovering more than the cost of a service by Proposition 4, which requires that the fees and charges in excess of total cost be counted as taxes against the City’s Gann limit. To avoid either over or undercharging for City services, fees and charges must be based on a cost recovery analysis….” [Citation] By disregarding its own stated policy and the 2005-2006 Grand Jury recommendation, the City of Napa has failed to account for the actual cost to review and process development applications and the total revenues 19 derived therefrom and the costs to which they are applied. It is impossible to determine the actual and reasonable cost of the development process without an audit. Finding 5 The audit recommended by the 2005-2006 Grand Jury has not been performed. Recommendation 5 A complete audit should be performed to establish the cost of providing services, the amount of fees generated, and the purposes for which they are used. The City Council should make the necessary funds available to retain a private firm to complete this audit, covering the years from 2000 to the present. RESPONSE REQUIRED None
• CM11 Page 27
  The 2006-2007 commends NVUSD for its candor and willingness to review and update the Findings and Recommendations of the 2005-2006 Grand Jury. It is evident that the Superintendent and Interim Director of Student Services are making a sincere effort to address the concerns raised in the Report in spite of the budgetary constraints placed upon the District, the Napa County Office of Education(NCOE) and the City of Napa.
• CM12 Page 42
  This Grand Jury commends the St. Helena Unified School district for its proactive approach to the recommendations of the 2005-2006 Grand Jury. It is evident that serious consideration of each finding and recommendation was carried out in a timely manner and, after thorough investigation, action was taken to correct and/or resolve each situation identified. Commendation is also given to SHUSD for including energy saving measures in planning the future growth of the District’s campuses. The District is presently investigating solar panels to provide electric power at the high school, biofuel for vehicles purchased by the District, . and water conservation for athletic fields and landscaping 42
• CM13 Page 53
  SHUSD Administration is to be commended for their prompt action in addressing the allegations made public in the “Letters to the Editor” feature of the “St. Helena Star”. New policies and procedures will help in eliminating possible future fiscal mishandling of SHUSD funds.
• CM14 Page 57
  The Grand Jury commends the staff and management of CWS, dedicated professionals who care deeply about their work and about the welfare of the children of Napa County. The Grand Jury endorses the plan and direction that has been recently undertaken and believes that CWS will continue to improve and further align with state initiatives. The Grand Jury thanks and commends the foster parents and CASA volunteers of Napa County for their efforts, dedication, and general interest in improving the lives of children who are subject to abuse and neglect. Foster parents and CASA volunteers commit their time to receive extensive training on child welfare, child development and legal issues. They also add their individual life experience and professional expertise along with a genuine desire to improve the quality of life of children who are remanded to their care. 57 DISCUSSION 1 When the Grand Jury began its investigation in the fall of 2006, it found that a comprehensive review and reorganization of CWS was in progress under the direction of the new Director of Napa County’s Health and Human Services Agency. As a part of that process, a private company, California Consulting, had been retained to analyze CWS’ structure, staffing and operations. The consultant’s report included approximately 50 recommendations. Changes that have been implemented include reclassifying the Department Manager position to a Director position, adding a new position of Assistant Director, and increasing the number of social workers and support staff. CWS has been aggressive in its recruiting and hiring efforts, and is filling new and vacant positions as quickly as possible. The Department’s practice of scheduling Emergency Response workers seven days a week, from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., was creating an unnecessary strain on human resources. Effective May 1, 2007, Emergency Response workers are scheduled Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. After-hours coverage is now provided by the Adult Crisis unit and an on-call system for CWS workers and supervisors. This approach is in keeping with the system used by most of the larger counties in California. Through interviews and the review of the California Consulting Report and Findings, the Grand Jury affirms the direction and steps taken for improving services for children in the child welfare system both on a statewide and local level. The Grand Jury further acknowledges the difficult job of addressing the complex needs of children who are in situations of abuse and neglect and the commitment of Child Welfare staff to improving the lives of children and families in need. 58 Finding 1 The Grand Jury consistently heard complaints centered around communication with CWS. Recommendation 1 It is likely that a lack of adequate staffing was a major contributing factor to poor communication practices. This problem should be ameliorated with the addition of new staff and the filling of vacant positions. Additionally, the Grand Jury recommends that CWS examine its communication practices and develop a triage system for assessing the degree of urgency of calls in order to improve communication with all interested parties. The Grand Jury also recommends that efforts be made to use support staff to help improve communication practices and thereby free up social workers to focus directly on client needs. The Grand Jury further recommends immediate implementation of a policy requiring social workers to keep their voice and email messaging system current by recording or posting messages notifying callers if they are unavailable due to vacation or other extended leave. The caller should also be informed when to expect a return call, or as an alternative, how to get immediate assistance. Finding 2 The Grand Jury finds that there is a significant need for bi-lingual Child Welfare staff and foster parents. This is a universal problem for CWS and reflects the changing diversity of not only Napa County and the State of California, but also the nation. Recommendation 2 The Grand Jury recommends that there be a focus on recruitment and retention of bi-lingual staff. The Grand Jury acknowledges that CWS is aware of this need and has made efforts to increase staff diversity. The Grand Jury supports this effort and any additional targeted efforts to increase the number of bi-lingual staff and foster parents. The Grand Jury also acknowledges that CWS has future plans to develop Spanish language materials and an outreach campaign to the 59 Spanish-speaking community. The Grand Jury urges the Director of Napa County Health and Human Services Agency to make funding available for these outreach efforts. Finding 3 The Grand Jury finds a serious shortage of services available for emergency foster care placements. When children are removed from their homes, including removal in the middle of the night, they are currently brought to the Child Welfare offices while social workers locate appropriate placement. The Child Welfare office is not a conducive setting for minimizing the trauma a child(ren) experiences when they are removed from their home. A safe and appropriate shelter is needed for children under these circumstances to lessen the trauma and ease the transition to a foster care placement. CWS is part of a consortium of agencies within Napa County which is working to create a Receiving Center in downtown Napa to address this need. A location has been identified and community members have offered their services pro-bono to rehabilitate the existing structure. Grant money is being sought to develop and operate this Receiving Center. Recommendation 3 The Grand Jury endorses the Receiving Center concept and strongly recommends that the Director of Health and Human Services ensure that sufficient funding is available to make the new center operational as soon as possible. Finding 4 The Grand Jury finds that there is an urgent need for respite care for foster parents, for both emergency and overnight child care. Because there are restrictions regarding individuals that care for children who are wards of the court, foster parents can not hire just any babysitter as other parents do. Securing an appropriate babysitter so that foster parents can enjoy an evening away from the children can be 60 challenging. Currently there also is no place for foster parents to drop off children in an emergency situation. Recommendation 4 The Grand Jury recommends that efforts to address foster care respite, both for relative and non-relative foster parents, be a high priority. The Grand Jury acknowledges that the proposed receiving center will also provide some respite care. The Grand Jury believes that ongoing efforts to provide respite care should be a high priority, an action which may improve the ability of Napa County to recruit and retain foster parents. Finding 5 The Grand Jury finds that the current system of financial compensation to foster parents for the care of children placed in their homes is inadequate. Monthly payments of $450 per child fall far short of the actual out-of-pocket costs of providing a child with food, shelter, clothing, transportation and school-related expenses. Foster care reimbursement rates are set by the California State Department of Social Services. A bill currently pending in the State Assembly, AB324, would require an immediate increase in foster care payments, as well as annual adjustments. Additionally, the Napa County Department of Health and Human Services is seeking non-governmental partnerships within our local community to create ancillary funding in support of foster children’s unmet needs, such as sports equipment, field trips and additional clothing, among others. Another common complaint is that foster care reimbursement payments frequently lag three months or more behind incurred expenses. This cash flow problem presents a serious challenge for many and is an impediment to recruiting and retaining foster parents. These payments are authorized by the State and subsequently distributed by the County Auditor’s Office. 61 Recommendation 5 The Grand Jury is encouraged by pending legislation which would increase payments to foster parents, and endorses efforts by the Department of Health and Human Services to create public/private partnerships to help meet the needs of foster children in our community. The Grand Jury recommends that CWS begin to monitor the actual time taken for foster parents to receive reimbursement checks. The Grand Jury further recommends that, if the lag time is found to be excessive, CWS identify any possible procedures within Napa County that would expedite the payments, and actively advocate at the State level for more timely payments to foster parents. DISCUSSION 2 The Grand Jury heard several complaints that CWS lacked clear criteria for responding to referrals, and that the agency’s responses to referrals, including the removal of children from their homes, have been inconsistently applied. The Grand Jury heard reports of minimal action taken by the agency in response to repeated referrals from professionals concerned about children being seriously neglected and/or abused within their homes. It should be noted that the incidents related to the Grand Jury took place in the past. However, because of the troubling nature of these accounts and the credibility of the professionals reporting these problems, the Grand Jury feels compelled to include this information in its report. The Grand Jury further notes that during the course of its investigation, the Department of CWS has recently (February 2007) instituted the Comprehensive Assessment Tool (CAT) Safety and Risk Assessment System. This evidenced-based system, utilizes five safety and risk assessment tools for use at seven critical decision points in the life of a child welfare case, providing critical decision making support for social workers. 62 Finding 6 The Grand Jury finds that, among professionals interacting with the child welfare system, there is a lack of confidence in CWS’s procedures for investigating and acting on abuse allegations. The Grand Jury recognizes that CWS has major responsibilities for cases being processed through Juvenile Court, but has a limited role in cases being processed through Family Law Court. A lack of understanding about CWS's authority to act in each court may contribute to an impression that the agency is not consistent in its response to referrals. Recommendation 6 The Grand Jury endorses the implementation of the CAT tool and recommends that the Director of CWS evaluate the efficacy of this system periodically to ensure that it is improving service to families in need. The Grand Jury recommends that all new hires are thoroughly trained to utilize the CAT tools. RESPONSE REQUIRED The Grand Jury requests a response from the Director of Health and Human Services, regarding Recommendations 4 and 5, ensuring sufficient funding to support the Receiving Center and increase availability of respite care.
• CM15 Page 70
  The Grand Jury has observed and confirmed that the NCJDF and Probation Department perform in a competent and professional manner. The Grand Jury has observed and confirmed that the facility itself is well maintained and operated. The Grand Jury commends both the administrative and Juvenile Probation staffs for their performance, and further commends the administrative staff on its preparedness and willingness to accommodate the many requests that were submitted by this Grand Jury.
• CM16 Page 77
  The Grand Jury was impressed by the dedication of the Hope Center personnel and the professionals and volunteers that are working at the Center on a daily basis. The Center operates on a budget of less than $200,000 annually. The Grand Jury recognizes that some individuals will always be homeless. The Center offers hope and opportunity for those 77 that have a desire to confront problems of homelessness, addictions, mental health issues in order to become productive members of society.

No Responses Found 5

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.