📋
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.

Los Angeles County Grand Jury • 1990-1991

A. Cable Companies Survey

44 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 1 findings

F1 Page 170
focused using separately funded programs. Under this system, services to children and their families are provided only after problems have already arisen. In addition, interviews and literature review indicate the current children's services delivery system is institutionally fragmented, making it difficult for agencies to provide services effectively and efficiently. Interviews, document review, and site visits clearly indicate that a prevention-based approach is increasingly the trend in the thinking and action of those involved in the children's services community. Among the variety of services identified, our analysis found there are some key services that a prevention-oriented, one-stop neighborhood center should provide. The concept of neighborhood-based, one-stop centers providing a coordinated array of services is not a new one in the children's services community. Specifically, several models exist which demonstrate similarities with the one-stop neighborhood center concept under review. A neighborhood-based one stop center is feasible in Los Angeles County. We base this conclusion on the following reasons: Centers that exhibit very similar traits and program objectives such as we envision are either already in operation or will soon be operational. For example, San Diego 143 County New Beginnings, in its two and one-half years of examining this issue, has performed the most intensive analysis for feasibility of such centers that we are aware of. Interviews with leading practitioners and literature review strongly indicate that such centers are feasible and desirable. Although empirical cost data is not available, many experts suggest that this prevention approach may, over time, actually result in cost savings. Responsible children's services professionals in Los Angeles County, both from the public and the private sector, agree that improvements need to be made to the current system, and action needs to be taken. Recently passed legislation, specifically Senate Bill 997 (Chapter 1303, 1989), points out the need for prevention-based integrated services and collaboration between agencies. Several funding sources are potentially available to fund such centers. We conclude that San Diego County's New Beginnings provides the best "fit" and complete package as a prototype model for Los Angeles County. We base this conclusion on the following key reasons: It stresses an array of prevention-oriented services to work comprehensively with children and families to prevent abuse and neglect from occurring. It features strong and well-constructed governance. Extensive government interagency collaboration and coordination among the critical agencies will provide coordinated programs and services. Collaboration with nonprofit agencies, that will provide many of the services, is another key component of the center. It features a comprehensive case management approach to working with children and families. This approach allows for coordinating, monitoring, and providing the full range of human services required. It features a local, neighborhood-based focus within the jurisdiction of a local elementary school located in a multi-ethnic and economically depressed area. It creates a comprehensive and coordinated three-tiered service delivery approach involving all the key agencies on site at the center and in the referral agencies. Most people we interviewed who are knowledgeable about the neighborhood center concept had favorable comments toward New Beginnings. The New Beginnings team conducted a comprehensive analysis over a two and a half year period. This team has identified and grappled with many of the issues and barriers associated with the center concept discussed in this report.

Recommendations 12