📋
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.
⚠️ 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 3 findings
F1
Page 29
For the last two years, the Department has engaged in significant efforts to clear the Department of sworn officers who have engaged in criminal conduct. Many of these offi- cers were hired during a period when the sheer volume needed to fill positions resulted in a laxness of screening. Failures of discipline and lack of personnel to investigate and ade- quately defend cases appealed to the Civil Service Commission further hampered the De- partment’s efforts.
F2
Page 29
Assembly Bill 109 (AB 109), which calls for realignment of inmates from state pris- ons to local communities, has put pressure on the Department once again to hire a large vol- ume of employees to serve as probation officers for inmates released from the County jails. The Department must remain vigilant to ensure that the pressure to hire does not compro- mise the quality of the hires. Further, a balance must be struck so that the experienced pro- bation officers in the camps are not the sole source of hire into these positions. Too much upheaval in camp staffing could seriously undermine the improvements that have been made in the camps.
F3
PROBATION DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Los Angeles County Probation Department (Department) has faced many well publicized challenges over the last five years dealing with its operation of juvenile halls and camps. The 2012-2013 Civil Grand Jury (Grand Jury) learned that many of these challenges come back to issues of staffing and personnel. After discussions with the leadership of the Department, the Grand Jury has chosen to focus on two areas.
Recommendations 1
-
R4FOSTER CARE HOTLINE INVESTIGATION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury (Grand Jury) has frequently reviewed the activities of the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS), an organization that has faced signifi- cant challenges, even crises, over the years. This section focuses on the Child Protection Hotline (Hotline), the public’s ingress into the foster care system, the entry point where suspected child abuse or neglect is first reported. While the Hotline, in most instances, is doing an outstanding job with knowledgeable manage- ment and skilled, dedicated workers, it has drawn intense criticism, most recently in April 2012 from the Board of Supervisors’ Children’s Special Investigation Unit. (The CSIU Report.1) The Grand Jury agrees that there is always room for improvement and, in a few instances, urgent im- provement is needed at the Hotline. DCFS’ responsibilities include the protection of all children in this County from abuse and ne- glect. That work begins at the Hotline, which receives too many noncritical calls, makes too many referrals, and creates too much work for DCFS employees downstream. DCFS must focus senior management and its resources to improve the Hotline by reducing the number of calls that go through the system, by upgrading the personnel and the compensation of those who work there, by reducing the number of policies within DCFS and by engaging the community into its efforts to reduce child abuse within the county. To be specific, community- based services need to be expanded. Utilizing the community involved Point-of-Engagement (POE) approach should be revisited to apply countywide as it appears to be showing significant success in the Compton and Torrance regions. The County must establish a separate crisis hotline and must embrace regionalization of the sys- tem. The Hotline must promote the notion that Hotline employees need special interpersonal probing skills not present in every individual. Further, it must implement better means to reward the employees under intense stress and reward the high performing employees. Clearly, there are excessive policies, procedures and practices throughout DCFS that need to be more effectively accessible and easier to navigate, if not reduced. At a minimum, a search fea- ture needs to be incorporated within the policies, procedures and practices themselves to allow ease of searching for appropriate information within the document. Generating referrals takes significant time and there continues to linger a “culture of fear” throughout the Hotline. Report Regarding DCFS Recurring Systemic Issues, Children’s Special Investigation Unit (CSIU), April 16, 2012, (CSIU Report),