Placer County Grand Jury
• 2013-2014
Placer County Grand Jury 2014-2015 Final Report Placer County Grand Jury
⚠️ 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 4 findings
F1
The Older Adult Advisory Commission (OAAC) is advisory only. It is a county-wide volunteer advisory commission, which has no budget, meets monthly, reports to the BOS once yearly, and has no direct authority to act. The OAAC has been given no responsibility for creating a five-year plan, nor does it have the resource capacity to do so. It primarily functions as an interagency coordinator and information sharing group.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
County staff should research collaboration models such as Nevada County’s Aging Disability Resource Connection (ADRC) Program.
F2
The BOS agrees that the needs of the county’s seniors and disabled population ought to be addressed by a plan. Stating that it will happen in the future lacks the specificity that the response requires.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
With county staff recommendations, the BOS should designate an existing agency to take the lead, to seek grant funding, and to move the ADRC model forward to service providers.
F3
It is not clear how the $100,000 contract for the multi-generational facility feasibility study would fit into a five-year plan in terms of service to the senior and disabled population. Conclusion The Board of Supervisors and county staff need to reconsider their response to 2013-2014 Grand Jury Final Report with reference to applicable Penal Code section(s). The focus should be on the necessity for a five-year plan to meet the needs of a growing older and disabled population in the county.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Involve the Director of HHS as a proponent of the ADRC model and have key staff research the model in order to become subject matter experts in how to adapt the ADRC model to meet Placer County needs within the next fiscal year.
F4
of last year’s Grand Jury Report identified the need for the county to develop a five- year plan that will address the needs of its predicted growing senior and disabled populations. The Board of Supervisors (BOS) response to that finding appears to be incomplete.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
If it is determined that the ADRC model is not appropriate as a five-year plan for Placer County, then the county should implement another model for providing necessary single points of entry into a long-term support and services system for older adults and people with disabilities.
Additional Recommendations 1
These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.
-
R5Provide a time frame for the implementation of these recommendations in accordance with subdivision (b)(2) of Penal Code § 933.05. Request for Responses: Recommendations Requiring Response Response Due Date Placer County Board of Supervisors R1 – R5 September 22, 2015 175 Fulweiler Ave. Auburn, CA 95603 Mr. David Boesch R1 - R5 August 24, 2015 Placer County CEO 175 Fulweiler Ave. Auburn, CA 95603 Copies Sent to: Mr. Jeff S. Brown Director, Placer County Health and Human Services 3091 County Center Dr. #290 Auburn, CA, 95603
Conclusions 1
-
CL1The Board of Supervisors and county staff need to reconsider their response to 2013-2014 Grand Jury Final Report with reference to applicable Penal Code section(s). The focus should be on the necessity for a five-year plan to meet the needs of a growing older and disabled population in the county. - 4 - Placer County Grand Jury 2014-2015 Final Report