⚠️ 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 18 findings
F01
The Grand Jury found that Phoenix school personnel are well trained and work collaboratively using NCPI protocol and CHAMPS behavioral interventions to teach positive behaviors and to de-escalate volatile situations involving students. (FA-04, FA-05)
No recommendations for this finding
F02
The Grand Jury found that the VCOE believes that using NCPI and CHAMPS positive behavioral interventions are preferable strategies to promote school safety rather than having a dedicated SRO on campus. (FA-04, FA- 05, FA-16)
No recommendations for this finding
F03
The collaborative relationship between the Ventura County Office of Education and law enforcement is not as strong as the best practice recommended by the National Education Association. (FA-11, FA-16)
No recommendations for this finding
F04
Students at Phoenix schools often act out in frustration. Despite the high staff-to-student ratios and the consistent use of positive behavioral interventions, administrators at Phoenix-Airport still call law enforcement on an average of 2-3 times weekly for support with situations they are unable to de-escalate. (FA-01, FA-02, FA-08, FA-09, FA-10)
No recommendations for this finding
F05
School Resource Officers should be dedicated to a particular school in order to work most effectively with both students and faculty. In particular, when working with special education students, it is essential that the SRO focus his/her attention on developing relationships and acting as a mentor and educator rather than exclusively as a law enforcer. (FA-11, FA-12, FA-13, FA-14, FA-17)
No recommendations for this finding
F06
While SROs can be invaluable additions to enhance school safety and support faculty and administration, it may be difficult to justify employing a dedicated SRO at each Phoenix school because of the low enrollments, low number of incidents resulting in serious bodily harm, and the absence of arrests. (FA-03, FA-08, FA-10) 6 Phoenix School Safety
No recommendations for this finding
F07
The Grand Jury found that when a school calls for law enforcement support, responding patrol officers may not have CIT training. With seriously emotionally disturbed children, this lack of training may escalate rather than de-escalate a situation and result in violence. (FA-18)
No recommendations for this finding
F08
The Grand Jury found that a formally trained and dedicated SRO would be even more effective at preventing or de-escalating volatile situations than a patrol officer with only CIT training. (FA-05, FA-11, FA-12, FA-18) Recommendations
No recommendations for this finding
F09
Thirty-one BERs resulted in a call to law enforcement. Twenty-three (74%) were from Phoenix schools.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
For the period July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015, Phoenix-Airport placed 102 “calls for service” to law enforcement – an average of two to three per school week. Phoenix-Los Nogales made 54 calls and Phoenix-Moorpark made 39 calls for the same period. None of the calls for service resulted in an arrest.
No recommendations for this finding
F11
Per the National Education Association, there are best practices for school safety that emphasize “…relationships are key to school safety and [it] advises its members to foster safe schools by creating partnerships with law enforcement and social services agencies.” The VCOE has acknowledged the need for stronger collaboration with law enforcement. (Ref-08)
No recommendations for this finding
F12
According to the National Association of School Resource Officers (NASRO), “…school resource officers also known as a “school safety liaison,” or “campus police,” refers to commissioned law-enforcement officers selected, trained, and assigned to protect and serve the education environment.” School Resource Officer (SRO) duties may include acting in the role of mentor, educator, and law enforcer. NASRO training includes 40 hours of classes on a variety of subjects including: understanding special needs students SRO as an informal counselor/mentor threat response: preventing violence in school settings (Ref-08, Ref-09)
No recommendations for this finding
F13
According to the National Education Association, “The decision about whether to place an SRO in a school building should be part of an overall community-developed plan to prevent violence against our children and ensure access to counseling, social services, and mental health services for any and all who need them.” (Ref-10)
No recommendations for this finding
F14
According to a 2012 study conducted at Mississippi State University and Eastern Kentucky University, “SROs who spend more time as law-related educators have more positive attitudes towards special education students than those who see themselves primarily as law enforcers.” (Ref-11)
No recommendations for this finding
F15
As stated by the Los Angeles Times, “Across the nation, campus officers are facing criticism that they’re pushing children into a “school-to-prison- pipeline” with citations, arrests and excessive force for issues that could be resolved by other means. National studies show that one arrest doubles a student’s odds of dropping out.” (Ref-12) Phoenix School Safety 5
No recommendations for this finding
F16
The position of the Ventura County Office of Education is that the presence of a dedicated SRO on a Phoenix campus would escalate, rather than defuse, volatile situations and could result in arrests.
No recommendations for this finding
F17
An SRO was assigned to the Phoenix-Airport school and a neighboring school for the school year 2009-2010. The SRO position was not a dedicated officer, but was filled by various Camarillo police officers who volunteered to work overtime. (Ref-13)
No recommendations for this finding
F18
Approximately 74% of Ventura County Sheriff’s deputies have received 40 hours of Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) training. CIT training is designed to educate officers about mental illness, developmental disability, and conflict resolution skills. This training protects both the mentally ill and responding officers from potential violence. The CIT training is a collaborative effort of Ventura County Behavioral Health and County law enforcement. (Ref-14, Ref-15) Findings
No recommendations for this finding
Commendations 3
-
CM1 Page 9The Grand Jury commends the personnel of the Ventura County Special Education Local Plan Area, Ventura County Office of Education, and Phoenix schools for their dedication in teaching positive behaviors and communication skills to the Phoenix staff and students. The Grand Jury also commends the Ventura County Sheriff for his leadership and diligent efforts to provide Crisis Intervention Team training for all deputy sheriffs. References Ref-01. Ventura County Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA), http://www.venturacountyselpa.com/ (accessed March 30, 2016). Phoenix School Safety 7
-
CM2 Page 10Ref-02. U.S. Department of Education, http://www.ideapartnership.org/index.php?option=com_content&view= article&id=846&oseppage=1 (accessed March 30, 2016). Ref-03. California Welfare & Institutions Code, Section 5600-3, www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=wic&group=05001- 06000&file=5600-5623.5 (accessed March 30, 2016). Ref-04. Ventura County Special Education Local Plan Area –SELPA-, “Local Plan Guidelines & Procedures for Special Education 2015”, Section 6: Social/Emotional Behavior Supports, http://www.venturacountyselpa.com/Portals/45/usersdata/Local%20Pla n/Section%206%20Social%20Emotional.pdf (accessed March 30, 2016). Ref-05. Ventura County Office of Education, Schools, http://www.vcoe.org/Schools/Special-Education-Schools (accessed April 1, 2016). Ref-06. CPI [Crisis Prevention Intervention], “Non crisis intervention training”, http://www.crisisprevention.com/Specialties/Nonviolent-Crisis- Intervention (accessed March 30, 2016). Ref-07. Sprick, Randy, “Safe & Civil Schools”, CHAMPS-Classwide Positive Behavior Support (PBS), http://www.safeandcivilschools.com/services/classroom_management.p hp (accessed March 30, 2016). Ref-08. Canady, M., James, B., and Nease, J., “To Protect & Educate: The School Resource Officer and the Prevention of Violence in Schools,” National Association of Resource Officers, 2012, p29, https://nasro.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/NASRO-To-Protect- and-Educate-nosecurity.pdf (accessed March 30, 2016). Ref-09. National Association of School Resource Officers, “Basic SRO Course”, https://nasro.org/basic-sro-course (accessed February 27, 2016). Ref-10. Van Roekel, D., “NEA [National Education Association] Letter to Vice President Biden on Reducing Gun Violence,” January 4, 2013, http://www.nea.org/home/54026.htm (accessed March 30, 2016). Ref-11. May, D., Rice, C., and Minor, K., “An Examination of School Resource Officers’ Attitudes Regarding Behavioral Issues among Students Receiving Special Education Services,” Current Issues in Education, Volume 15, No.3, 2012, http://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/viewFile/863/367 (accessed December 29, 2015). Ref-12. Watanabe, Teresa, “A SOFT APPROACH,” Los Angeles Times, November 30, 2015, http://www.latimes.com/local/la-todays-paper-20151130- htmlstory.html (accessed March 31, 2016). 8 Phoenix School Safety
-
CM3 Page 11Ref-13. Knight, Michelle, “Agreement between police department and continuation school will make campus safer”, The Camarillo Acorn, April 9, 2010, http://www.thecamarilloacorn.com/news/2010-04- 09/Schools/Agreement_between_police_department_and_continuati.ht ml (accessed March 30, 2016). Ref-14. 2011-2012 Ventura County Grand Jury, “Crisis Intervention Team,” 2011-2012 Ventura County Grand Jury Final Report, June 13, 2012, http://vcportal.ventura.org/GDJ/docs/reports/2011- 12/Crisis_Intervention_Team.pdf (accessed April 5, 2016) Ref-15. Wikipedia, Crisis Intervention Training https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_intervention_training (accessed February 23, 2016).
Agency Responses 2
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
No Responses Found 2
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Ventura County County Superintendent of Schools
Elected County Office