Hiring Issues in the Coroner’s Office Joanne Saliba Chair Regi Block Sharon Muravez

Recommendations 6

• R1

  Page 29
  The BOS should commend the partners of the Work Group formed to ameliorate the myriad issues related to the DMEC. The three partners, DMEC, DHR, and the CEO, use open dialogue and effective problem-solving approaches in identifying issues. The Work Group has made significant progress in obtaining resources for the DMEC.
• R2

  Page 30
  The DHR should implement “Alternative Banding” for the DMEC to fill budgeted positions.
• R3

  Page 30
  The CEO should implement “Alternative Banding” for the DMEC to fill budgeted positions.
• R4

  Page 30
  The DHR should decrease the timeframe of the hiring of DMEC personnel, currently at six to eight months.
• R5

  Page 30
  The DHR should assign a Human Resources Manager to the DMEC with a higher classification level. VI REQUIRED RESPONSES California Penal Code Sections 933(c) and 933.05 require a written response to all recommendations contained in this report. Responses shall be made no later than ninety (90) days after the Civil Grand Jury publishes its report and files it with the Clerk of the Court. Responses shall be made in accord with Penal Code Sections 933.05 (a) and (b). All responses to the recommendations of the 2016-2017 Civil Grand Jury must be submitted on or before September 30, 2017, to: Presiding Judge Los Angeles County Superior Court Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center 210 West Temple Street Eleventh Floor-Room 11-506 Los Angeles, CA 90012 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT 27 Responses are required from: Responding Agency Recommendations The County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors 2.1 The County of Los Angeles Department of Human Resources 2.2, 2.4. 2.5 The County of Los Angeles Chief Executive Office 2.3 VII ACRONYMS BOS County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors CEO Chief Executive Officer CGJ 2016-2017 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury CSC Civil Service Commission DHR Department of Human Resources DMEC Department of Medical Examiner-Coroner DPSS Department of Public Social Service ECFS Electronic Case Filing System HRM Human Resources Manager MSW Master of Social Work NAME National Association of Medical Examiners PIO Public Information Officer SORT Special Operations Response Team TSE Transitional Subsidized Employees VIII COMMITTEE MEMBERS Joanne D. Saliba Chair Regi Block Sharon Muravez 28 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT MENDING THE SAFETY NET Lucy Eisenberg Co-Chair Shelley Strohm Co-Chair Joyce Simily MENDING THE SAFETY NET Changes in the County’s Child Safety System I SUMMARY On May 24, 2013, an eight-year-old boy named Gabriel Fernandez died a tragic death in his home due to abuse and neglect. Gabriel’s problems were not unknown—there had been multiple calls and referrals to the County of Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS). But DCFS closed the case and a month later Gabriel was later found not breathing. His skull was cracked, three ribs were broken, his skin was bruised and burned and there were BB pellets in his lung and groin.1 Faced with the facts of Gabriel’s case and other tragic fatalities, the County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors (BOS) decided to establish a Blue Ribbon Commission on Child Protection (BRCCP), which was assigned to review child protection failures and develop a plan for reform. The BRCCP worked for eight months, conducted 13 public hearings and interviewed more than 300 stakeholders. On April 18, 2014 it issued a lengthy report calling for a fundamental transformation of the current child protection departments and providing the BOS with “a roadmap for creating an integrated, effective child safety system.”2 The Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury (CGJ) reviewed the BRCCP report and investigated some of the recommendations in the report with the goal of determining whether the child safety system has indeed been reformed and improved. Specific areas that have been reviewed include: the training and supervision of the Children’s Social Workers (CSWs), who are assigned to oversee children at risk; what is being done to increase the number of children who are placed in the care of relatives after being removed from their homes; efforts to provide medical examination for children in DCFS care; and the development of resources to provide housing and care to high risk children for whom no relative is found. II BACKGROUND Since the BRCCP issued its report in 2014, the DCFS has hired approximately 2,100 additional social workers to staff its 18 district offices. The CSWs currently have an average caseload of 23 children,3 and there is one Supervising Children’s Social Worker (SCSW) for every 6-7 CSWs. DCFS established a new “University” for training newly hired social workers. But the real responsibility for helping social workers work with parents and children lies on the shoulders of 1Melissa Etehad and Richard Winton, “Red Flags Were Everywhere,” Los Angeles Times, March 21, 2017 2Los Angeles County Blue Ribbon Commission on Child Protection, Executive Summary, p.2 3 A state-by-state study shows the standard case worker caseload to be significantly lower, at 12 per emergency responder and 15 for standard case workers. 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT 29 the supervising social workers who may, or may not, accompany their social workers into the field, and who are responsible for monitoring their performance.4 When a child is removed from a home because of abuse and/or neglect, the first goal for placement is to find a relative to care for the child. In the last ten years, studies from Canada and Hawaii have provided strong support for the conclusion that placement with relatives should be the preferred choice when a child is removed from parental care. An article by retired Judge Leonard Edwards (Santa Clara County) quotes these and other studies which indicate that the best way to improve outcomes for abused and neglected children is to engage relatives early.5 The BOS moved to improve relative finding in Los Angeles County by passing a motion on May 31, 2016, instructing DCFS and the Los Angeles County Probation Department to establish a “Countywide Upfront Family Finding Protocol.” In response to the Board motion, a pilot project was established in two DCFS district offices, Glendora and Santa Fe Springs. The project began in November 2016, and is expected to finish in April or May 2017. Overseeing the health condition of children under DCFS care is the joint responsibility of DCFS and the Department of Mental Health (DMH), with services provided by the Department of Health Services (DHS). DHS, DCFS, and DMH run a countywide Medical Hub system that includes six Medical Hub clinics: the High Desert Health system; Olive View-UCLA Medical Center; the Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center (LAC+USC) Medical Center; the LAC+USC East San Gabriel Hub; the Martin Luther King, Jr. Ambulatory Care Center; and the Harbor-UCLA Medical Center. (Another service center is located at Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, which is a non-public entity but is available to provide services to DCFS-supervised children.)6 The Hub clinics are responsible for providing an initial medical examination for all newly- detained children. State regulations require the initial medical examination to be performed after placement. Some of the Hubs are also staffed to conduct a forensic examination of a child when there are allegations of physical or sexual abuse. When a forensic examination is required it must be made within 72 hours of the time the child was taken into custody. (If allegations of physical abuse are made when a child is already in custody, the forensic examination must be made within 72 hours of the time the allegations were made.) The Hub at LAC+USC is part of the Violence Intervention Program (VIP), which was established by a physician at the USC Keck School of Medicine and has become a model for hundreds of programs around the world. The VIP program is housed on the campus of the Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center (LAC+USC). In addition to the services provided by the 4 The supervising social workers in turn are monitored by an assistant regional administrator who in turn reports to a regional administrator in each district office. The Bench, Summer 2016, p6. Interview with Hub management. The High Desert and the East San Gabriel Hubs do not currently conduct forensic examinations. 30 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT Hub, the VIP program provides medical care for children suffering from sexual assault and includes an LGBTQ clinic. The VIP program provides services 24/7, and also does screening for Fetal Alcohol syndrome, a condition that may result in abnormal appearance, low intelligence, behavioral problems, and trouble in school.
• R6

  Page 41
  The OCP should define and adopt measures of success for the performance of DCFS, and require quarterly reports from DCFS on its performance with respect to those measures. VI REQUIRED RESPONSES California Penal Code Sections 933(c) and 933.05 require a written response to all recommendations contained in this report. Responses shall be made no later than ninety (90) days after the Civil Grand Jury publishes its report and files it with the Clerk of the Court. Responses shall be made in accord with Penal Code Sections 933.05 (a) and (b). All responses to the recommendations of the 2016-2017 Civil Grand Jury must be submitted on or before September 30, 2017, to: 36 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT Presiding Judge Los Angeles County Superior Court Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center 210 West Temple Street, Eleventh Floor-Room 11-506 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Responses are required from: Responding Agency Recommendations County of Los Angeles Department of 3.1, 3.2, 3. 3, 3. 4, 3. 5, 3.6 Children and Family Services County of Los Angeles Office of Child 3.6 Protection VII ACRONYMS APT Accelerated Placement Team BRCCP Blue Ribbon Commission on Child Protection (BRCCP) CSW Children’s Social Worker DCFS Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services DHS Department of Health Services DMH Department of Mental Health LAC + USC Los Angeles County/ University of Southern California NREFM Non-Related Extended Family Members OCP Office of Child Protection SCSW Supervising Children’s Social Worker TSC Transitional Shelter Care VIP Violence Intervention Program VFM Voluntary Family Management VIII COMMITTEE MEMBERS Lucy Eisenberg Shelley Strohm Joyce Simily 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT 37 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 38 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT SCHOOLS OF THE FUTURE Gloria Garfinkel Co-Chair Thomas Kearney Co-Chair Hilda Dallal Marilyn Gelfand SCHOOLS OF THE FUTURE I SUMMARY The “Los Angeles County Strategic Plan for Economic Development (2016-2020)” recognizes the need to shift the educational focus. The plan’s introduction states: “Unlike the move from an agricultural economy to a manufacturing-based one 150 years ago, when a worker needed little training to move seamlessly from the field to a factory floor, moving from a production-based economy to an information-age one today requires much higher levels of skills and education.”1 The first goal within this plan focuses on preparing our students for the highly technical, knowledge-based careers of the future. This goal aligns with today’s world of product globalization, instant world-wide communication, entrepreneurship, and rapidly developing scientific advancements. The challenge will be implementing change within the public educational system, which has not historically been an institution to quickly implement change in curricula or teaching methodologies. The Civil Grand Jury (CGJ) decided to investigate current developments and trends in the field of public education. While the need for traditional schools remains firm, there are students who can certainly benefit from different learning models such as those highlighted in this report. In today’s society, our students need a deeper level of learning in order for them to remain competitive in the globalized market and enhance their career potential. Having a stronger knowledge and skills base will make Los Angeles County (“County”) a more desirable location for businesses and industries. Appropriate changes to our educational system will provide these requisite skills and knowledge and lead to greater opportunity for our children to succeed in the future. II BACKGROUND History of Public Education Formation of the “traditional” public educational system is credited to Horace Mann along with other educational reformers in the early nineteenth century2,3. They believed a free educational 1 [Online] Available: http://laedc.org/2016/01/04/2016‐2020‐l‐a‐county‐strategic‐plan‐for‐economic‐ development/ 2 Massachusetts Board of Education was created in 1837 with Horace Mann appointed as its secretary. Horace Mann started a biweekly journal, Common School Journal, in 1838 for teachers and lectured on education. 3 [Online] Available: http://www.biography.com/people/horace‐mann‐9397522 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT 39