Jail / Detention Facility Recommendations Recommendation 1: The Sheriff’s Department, Probation Department and

Recommendations 23

• R1
  The Sheriff should impose a limit of $500 on the total amount of money an inmate has in his or her account at any given time. If the inmate is booked into custody with a sum greater than $500 in his or her possession, the inmate should be required to draw down on the amount until it falls below $500 before any deposits from outside third parties are accepted.
• R2
  The Sheriff should discontinue and prohibit the practice of allowing an inmate to authorize the release of funds to outside third parties, except for money that was in the inmate’s possession at the time of booking. All money deposited by outside third parties to inmate accounts should only be for use by inmates in purchasing phone cards and items from the jail store.
• R3
  The Sheriff should implement procedures requiring cashier staff to request valid identification from outside third parties making deposits to an inmate’s account, unless the amount is less than a pre-determined nominal sum, such as $100.
• R4
  DCFS, Probation, and DMH should develop a multi-faceted organizational plan including a comprehensive mentoring program that increases each child’s level of trust of the system. At a minimum, we believe the following changes should be considered: 4a) A suitable overlap of mentors should be built into the program to ease a child’s transition to the new mentor. 4b) The training provided to foster families and group home staff should be increased and should include ongoing evaluation, continuous training, and recertification. 4c) The interagency teams should be trained in team building skills to ensure they can make effective group decisions and are able to connect effectively with each child. 4d) Two-way communication with the children should be the norm and to the extent possible the children should be involved in key decisions affecting them. EDUCATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR TAY Youth entering the Probation and Juvenile Hall schools administered by LACOE are given a test to determine their academic level of functioning. During visits to these schools, the CGJ learned from teachers, administrators and observation that students are, on average, one to three years below grade level. In spite of numerous requests, the CGJ could not get data from LACOE substantiating the reported one to three year grade level lag of the students entering their camp and hall classrooms. The State of California requires a core of 140 units for high school graduation leaving the additional coursework to be determined by school districts. Los Angeles Unified School District requires the completion of 230 units for graduation. There program calls for 150 core units leaving 80 units for supplementing core units and electives. Students may request their own transcripts from their schools before scheduling their classes. DCFS, DMH, and Probation acting in loco parentis when parents relinquish or abdicate educational rights, are responsible for guiding the educational choices of their charges. There is latitude within the system to customize high school programs to meet the individual needs of students. We have identified the following specific improvements based on our research, discussion with officials, and feedback from TAY.
• R5
  The directors of DCFS, Probation, DMH, and LACOE should design and implement jointly a curriculum that addresses practical educational skills for all children to better prepare them for independence. 5a) All programs should contain an identified minimum level of understanding on the part of the recipients before the program is considered delivered. 5b) Enhanced study skills and courses on practical living skills should be part of the curriculum of juvenile halls and camps. DCFS should include such courses in the schedules of students attending public schools whenever possible. 5c) Foster children should be encouraged to participate in music, art, and other nonacademic programs. Probation should seek volunteers to provide these services in juvenile halls and camps. 5d) Probation camps and halls should provide vocational training for all detainees utilizing ROP services when possible. DCFS should encourage TAY to enroll in experiential, vocational, and ROP courses. 5e) Probation and DCFS should develop additional apprentice, job training and part-time job programs with all levels of government and business to provide more practical work experience for TAY. 5f) Probation and DCFS should invite representatives from organizations such as the Forestry Service and various branches of the U.S. military to make presentations to youth that fully describe their educational opportunities and obligations. 5i) DCFS and Probation should develop significant incentives and rewards to encourage their wards to obtain high school graduation, or a GED, and high scholastic achievement. POST-EMANCIPATION TAY While 18 may be the age of majority, in our view a large percentage of 18 to 25 year olds currently leaving the system do not have the experience, education, maturity or means to thrive without the emotional and financial support of a family. The financial dimension is particularly difficult in Los Angeles where the cost of living is high and accommodation costs are typically double the national average. The following recommendations will help to mitigate the lack of “a safety net” that most families provide to their 18 to 25 year olds:
• R6
  Under the leadership of the Deputy CEO, DCFS, Probation, DPSS, and DMH, improved programs should be provided to youth 18 – 25 who have left the system. 6a) Either through the development of affordable housing supply and/or direct subsidy, all post transition youth should have access to good quality housing at a reasonable rate. 6b) A wider range of educational supports should be made available to post transition youth including tuition, room & board, books, and other expenses required when they attend school. 6c) Independent living supports should be provided such as health care insurance, transportation assistance, food vouchers, auto insurance subsidies, clothing allowances, and access to community-based support groups. The cost of these services should be partially borne by the post- transition youth based on an income means criterion to be developed by the departments. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS The development of a comprehensive and integrated information system was the most frequently mentioned requirement for improvement by County officials during the Entrance Conference. This requirement, and the need to deal with confidentiality rules to allow information sharing, was raised by last year’s CGJ and the ECC Blueprint. There is no doubt that this will be a costly exercise but the need is as obvious as the need for leadership to ensure the development of a comprehensive system. Our concern is that without comprehensive and integrated information systems, optimal decisions in the best interest of the child are unlikely. During this investigation it was clear that while evidence-based reviews are the mantra, in many programs there were not regular and systematic output-oriented evaluations. According to DCFS and Probation officials, many youth chose not to engage in TAY programs. We understand that teenagers can be difficult but at a minimum the evaluations of each program should include input from all youth to understand why some are not participating. There is evidence that the programs are not getting the results hoped for: - there are high incarceration rates of former system children - there is a high homeless rate - there are high pregnancy rates Conceptually, all of the programs and the resources expended on them are to have a positive impact on this population. Without follow-up data on the children, the evaluation of the real results of a program is not possible. We recognize that once a child leaves the system they are under no legal or other obligation to stay in touch and provide information on how they are doing. The departments need to stop thinking of this as an impassable roadblock and explore ways to obtain high quality follow-up information on former TAY.
• R7
  Under the leadership of the Deputy CEO, DCFS, Probation, and DMH, in consultation with LACOE and other school districts, should develop a plan and a timetable for a comprehensive information system to capture all records on all children in the system. The plan should include: cost estimates to develop and operate the system, a proposal for funding, and a timetable for implementation. Progress on development and implementation should be reported every four months to the Board of Supervisors. In order to facilitate the evaluation of the effectiveness of programs and future programs and policy initiatives: 7a) The new information system should be designed to allow for the tracking of all children once they leave the system. 7b) Appropriate incentives and commitments should be developed to encourage former TAY to remain in contact with the system to facilitate the gathering of information on them. 7c) Until data on former TAY is available routinely, the departments should pursue sampling and other survey methods to gain an understanding of the real results of TAY programs. 7d) Until the new information system is implemented, Probation should have access to all of DCFS’s data systems to help their staff track their youth and improve their services.
• R08
  As such, the department is in the process of issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a vendor to provide routine maintenance services. The current contract does not contain a maximum amount and the department indicated that the new agreement will also not contain such provisions. The Internal Services Department should consider a contract structure more similar to those that have been entered into by other departments and contain a maximum amount. • The Department of Public Works has entered into agreements for routine vehicle maintenance services with 76 vendors. These contracts contain provisions that cap the total expenditures by the department at a maximum amount of $1.5 million. The department expended the maximum amount for routine maintenance in FY 2006-07 and is expected to expend the maximum amount in FY 2007-08. • The Fire Department has entered into agreements with a total of 82 vendors to provide routine vehicle maintenance services for the department for a maximum amount of $3.5 million per year. The actual expenditures for services received through these agreements are the maximum of $3.5 million. • The Sheriff’s Department recently entered into an agreement with a single vendor to provide routine maintenance services for its fleet. This agreement, with the Penske Corporation, is for an amount not to exceed $16.0 million per year. Accident Costs Accident repair costs involve actual payments for County vehicle repairs involved in accidents and, in many instances, the repair costs are not covered by the contracts discussed above. Many of the accidents cost the department additional amounts that vary year-to-year. Complete and verifiable cost information was not readily available from the departments for this audit. However, the table on the next page shows the numbers of accidents as reported by the individual departments. Table 9 Reported Vehicle Accidents in the Four Largest Vehicle Usage Departments FY 2005-06 through March 2008 Ratio of Number of Number of Department Accidents to Number of Accidents* Vehicles** Sheriff’s Department 849 16.0% Public Works Department 747 40.2% Fire Department 132 9.9% Internal Services Department 124 12.8% Total 1,852 – Sources: Los Angeles County Departments * Data is for FY 2005-06 to FY 2007-08. The data for FY 2007-08 is year to date and does not contain the entire year. ** The number of vehicles is based on the totals received from the Auditor-Controller’s Fixed Asset database. The Sheriff’s Department can expect accidents due to vehicle pursuits and other patrol activities, and has implemented several policies and procedures to ensure that accidents are kept to a minimum and thoroughly reviewed. Further, the Risk Management Branch of the County Executive’s Office works with departments by providing “technical support (consultations, training, surveys, etc.)6” to reduce costs associated with vehicle liability. The County Executive Office continues to work with departments to keep accidents to a minimum and thus reduce claim costs and accident repair costs. Acknowledgements We would like to thank the managers and staff from each of the departments included in this study. In virtually every instance, the departments responded to our requests for data and interviews in a timely manner, and provided access to records required to accomplish the study objectives. Even when access to certain records was delayed because of privacy concerns, Sheriff’s Department management and staff worked diligently toward obtaining the information we required for our review. This high level of cooperation permitted us to accomplish a complex study in the timeframe requested by the Civil Grand Jury, and provide recommendations that we believe will assist the departments to improve vehicle usage throughout the County. Chief Administrative Office Risk Management Annual Report, p. 21.
• R8
  Continued training is necessary for DPSS employees dealing with IHSS eligibility and fraud detection, based on the best practices recommended by CWDA and the involved state and county agencies. Also, since the need for repeated in-home visits is demoralizing to the social worker, for which no amount of training will compensate, the social worker should be given the authority to “notice” a recipient to schedule an assessment visit on a certain date, under penalty of payment cutoff.
• R9
  DPSS should consider electronic monitoring as an alternative to a human provider for in-home care. The electronic monitoring systems do not provide “care” as such, but do avoid the need of a little-known provider visiting the home or abode. A half dozen such systems are now on the market. In addition, the Center for Aging Services Technologies in Washington, D.C., as well as the Oregon Health and Science University in Portland are excellent sources of further information.
• R10
  Payment vouchers to IHSS service providers should be made payable to both the recipient of the care and the provider, thus requiring an endorsement from each before the check can be cashed. This safeguard would curtail some of the fraud that is occurring.
• R11
  DPSS must follow the fraud reporting protocols required by the language of SB 1104. Also, in the interests of good management and employee morale, DPSS must provide feedback on fraud investigations to the initiating employee. Claims and excuses that the Department of Health Care Services isn’t providing feedback to DPSS are weak; DPSS senior management must insist on this information in a periodic and timely manner.
• R12
  DPSS should review applicants for IHSS as to whether they are a sponsored immigrant under Section 213a of the Act. If so, their sponsor(s) or co-sponsor(s) should be sought to provide the financial support for the applicant. This recommendation has nothing to do with illegal immigrants or illegal immigration.
• R13
  Since the income cap for receiving EITC in CY 2008 approaches $37,000, it is recommended that an applicant for In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) be asked if he or she has received an EITC last calendar year and is receiving one in the immediate calendar year. If so, note should be made, in the application for IHSS, of the amounts received or to be received in each year. A person receiving the EITC should not be denied eligibility for IHSS, but the amounts received in that credit should be factored into the amount of IHSS services paid for by the recipient, by means of a formula which could be changed yearly.
• R14
  As well as capturing the fingerprints of both the recipient and provider during the intake / application process, as recommended elsewhere, DPSS should require a fingerprint of both the recipient and the provider on each time card, perhaps even in lieu of a signature.
• R15
  DPSS should enforce the requirement that bi-weekly/monthly time cards be submitted. If time cards are not received within ten (10) business days of when due, further payment warrants or direct deposits should be terminated. Direct deposit accounts should be checked quarterly to ascertain their balance. If the balance is substantial (>$5,000), it may indicate the need for an eligibility review.
• R16
  The Department of Social Services should implement the recommended security measures in this report. DPSS needs to validate program providers and recipients more aggressively, by knowing who they are to a certainty (photo and fingerprints), their actual and purported participation in the program, and the exposure of bogus providers and recipients. Reference is also made to the 1998-1999 Civil Grand Jury Final Report that recommended methods to detect and prevent attempted employee fraud, particularly the section on Internal Affairs Investigations, pages 141-152. The IHSS program is not supposed to be a cottage industry for scam artists, especially those embedded within the ranks of DPSS itself. EXPENDITURES TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECIPIENTS OF IN-HOME SUPPORTIVE SERVICES (IHSS) BY FEDERAL, STATE AND LOS ANGELES COUNTY GOVERNMENT Time Frame No. of Recipients Federal State L.A. County TOTAL 2003-04 FY Actual 140,000 $ 12,000,000 $ 139,000,000 $ 79,000,000 $ 230,000,000 2004-05 FY Actual 145,000 $ 21,000,000 $ 181,000,000 $ 58,000,000 $ 260,000,000 2005-06 FY Actual 152,000 $ 27,000,000 $ 226,000,000 $ 37,000,000 $ 290,000,000 2006-07 FY Actual 160,000 $ 42,000,000 $ 229,000,000 $ 76,000,000 $ 347,000,000 2007-08 FY Budget 380,000* $ 46,000,000† $ 272,000,000† $ 65,000,000† $ 383,000,000† *statewide †budgeted †budgeted †budgeted †budgeted 2008-09 FY 400,000* Projected *statewide Source: DPSS; Legislative Analyst; County Welfare Directors Association of California (CWDA) See Notes which follow regarding this spreadsheet.
• R17
  • The LOFT (Larkin Opportunities for Transition) is a licensed transitional-living facility designed to meet the unique needs of underage homeless and runaway youth. • The Ellis Street Apartments supply permanent housing, coupled with an array of support services, including six units specifically reserved for youth diagnosed with HIV/AIDS. • LEASE is a supportive residential program for youth who have emancipated from San Francisco’s foster care system. The program uses scattered-site apartments, and participants are linked to a range of supportive services, including employment, education, and life skills training services. • Larkin Street Youth Services serves more than 3,000 youth and young adults ages 12-23. Approximately 80% of the young people who have completed Larkin Street’s counseling programs have left street life permanently. More than 85% of graduates from Avenues to Independence, a unique transitional-living program for young adults ages 18-23, have secured and retained permanent housing and career-track employment. Of the 84 young people served by the Aftercare Program, which helps young adults ages 18-23 living with HIV/AIDS achieve self-sufficiency, 92% successfully stabilized their lives off the street.” 3) Colorado Department of Human Services, Family Unification Program (FUP) Location: State of Colorado Contact: Valerie Jenkins, Independent-Living Coordinator, Colorado Department of Human Services, 303-866-4539, valerie.jenkins@state.co.us. Target Population: Youth ages 18-21 that left foster care at age 16 or older for housing support program; youth ages 16-21 for mentoring services Purpose: Provide housing assistance and after-care services to former foster youth. Features: Housing vouchers provided to youth through Colorado’s Department of Human Services partnered with Supportive Housing and Homeless Programs. Chafee funding is used to provide aftercare services with Family Tree, Volunteers of America, and Urban Peak – non- profits that provide 18-month aftercare services to young people in this program. “Colorado has also developed a unique partnership with AmeriCorps for youth in transition. AmeriCorps members located at FUP agencies support the development of local partnerships to assist youth ages 16-21 in successfully transitioning to adulthood. Members provide comprehensive mentoring services and help youth obtain employment and educational opportunities.” 4) Connecticut Department of Children and Families, Housing Continuum Location: State of Connecticut Contact: Bill Pinto, Independent-Living Coordinator, Connecticut Department of Children and Families, 860-550-6471, william.pinto@po.state.ct.us. Target Population: Youth up to age 23 Purpose: To assist youth in transitioning to adulthood by providing support to foster youth up to age 23. Features: “Connecticut’s Department of Children and Families provides adolescents in foster care a broad continuum of housing options. Youth move from highly structured, supervised living arrangements to a transitional living program where support is provided while structure and restrictions are decreased. Part of the department’s housing continuum includes a Community Housing Assistance Program, which provides youth with a subsidy to cover living expenses such as rent, food, utilities, telephone, transportation, and clothing. Youth are required to complete the department’s life skills program, be employed and enrolled in an educational or vocational program, and contribute a portion of their income toward expenses and a savings account. The average length of stay in this program is two years. Connecticut allows youth to remain in foster care up to age 23 if enrolled in post-secondary education.” 5) Illinois Dept. of Children and Families, Youth Housing Assistance Program Location: State of Illinois Contact: Ted Ernst, Youth Housing Assistance Coordinator, Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, 312-814-5571, Ternst@idcfs.state.il.us Target Population: Youth who have aged out or are preparing to age out of the foster care system; youth age 17-20 are eligible for housing advocacy services and youth 18-21 for cash assistance services Purpose: Provide housing assistance to youth at risk of becoming homeless who have aged out or are preparing to exit from the foster care system. Features: “Housing advocacy services include assisting youth in obtaining and maintaining stable housing, providing consumer education and budget counseling, linking youth to community-based resources, and follow-up services for a minimum of three months after youth secure housing. Cash assistance services are available to help newly emancipated foster youth or former foster youth before their 21st birthdays when in crisis. Cash assistance may be used for housing and utility deposits, emergency rental assistance, temporary rental subsidies, and necessary furniture or appliances. Sixteen housing advocates throughout the state help youth locate, secure, and maintain affordable housing. Illinois uses 30% of its Chafee funding for room and board services for youth ages of 18-21.” 6) Lighthouse Youth Services Location: Cincinnati, Ohio Contact: Mark Kroner, Director of Self Sufficiency Services, Lighthouse Youth Services, 513- 487-7130, mkroner@lys.org. Target Population: Independent Living Program targets foster youth and juvenile offenders ages 16-19. Transitional Living Program targets homeless youth ages 18-25. Purpose: “Lighthouse is committed to continuously educating public systems about the importance of giving youth opportunities to live on their own and the need for affordable housing at discharge.” Features: “Lighthouse Youth Services prevents youth in child welfare from becoming homeless and prevents young adults in the adult shelter system from remaining homeless through Independent Living and Transitional Living Programs. In 1981, Lighthouse developed a semi- supervised scattered-site apartment model based on the philosophy that young people learn best by doing and that youth should have opportunities to live on their own and develop self- sufficiency skills before discharge from care. The agency has served more than 1,000 youth in its model and averages around 80 youth a day living in their own apartments.” 7) New York City, Section 8 Priority Code Location: New York City Contact: Nancy Martinez, Independent Living Coordinator, New York State Office of Children and Family Services, 518-474-9586, nancy.martinez@dfa.state.ny.us Target Population: Youth aging out of the foster care system Purpose: Provide housing support for youth aging out of the foster care system, with some housing units set aside for those with mental health needs. The Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) and the Office of Housing Policy and Development (HPAD), in cooperation with the New York City Housing Authority provide this program. Features: “This program provides Section 8 vouchers or public housing units to qualified current and former ACS Independent Living clients. As of December 2002, more than 1,700 youth had utilized this program. ACS and HPAD, in conjunction with other private not-for- profit housing developers, continue to support the development of supportive housing for young people aging out of the system. Currently, at least 25 ACS Independent Living clients reside in a permanent supportive housing program by using their Section 8 vouchers, accessed through the Independent Living Priority Code Program. In February 2003, five units of permanent supportive housing were made available to former Independent Living clients with mental health needs.” 8) New Jersey Community Housing Demonstration Program, Shared Living Residence Rental Housing Program Location: State of New Jersey Contact: Bruce Blumenthal, New Jersey Mortgage Finance Agency, 609-278-7449, Bblumenthal@njhmfa.state.nj.us Target Population: “Eligible clients include persons with specials needs over age 18 and adolescents who are referred in writing by the New Jersey Department of Human Services or other DHS-approved sponsors.” Purpose: “The program assists persons with special needs to live independently within the communities of their choice by expanding the supply of affordable and quality housing.” Features: “The New Jersey Community Housing Demonstration Program (NJCHDP) is a partnership between the Department of Human Services and the New Jersey Mortgage Finance Agency (NJMFA). The NJCHDP Shared Living Residence Rental Housing Program provides financing to non-profits, for-profit developers, and municipalities for the acquisition of land and buildings, new construction, or the rehabilitation or conversion of buildings as transitional or permanent rental units for persons with special needs. The entire community residence or a portion of the units (as determined by the appropriate division of the New Jersey Department of Human Services) can be set aside for these individuals.” PROGRAMS THAT PROVIDE EDUCATIONAL/JOB TRAINING/EMPLOYMENT SUPPORT 1) Education and Training Vouchers Program Location: Federal nationwide program Contact: Dottie Ansell, National Resource Center for Youth Development, University of Oklahoma, College of Continuing Education; 918-660-3700; dansell@ou.edu. Target Population: Youth aging out of the child welfare system Purpose: Provide educational assistance to former foster youth in need Features: “Education and Training Voucher (ETV) funds pay for the cost of attending institutions of higher learning. The vouchers cannot exceed $5,000 per year or the actual incurred cost of attendance at the institution. Cost of attendance includes tuition, room and board, and other costs associated with participating in the educational or vocational training program. The ETV Program is federally funded through the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Amendment of 2001, which expanded the John H. Chafee Independence Program to include these funds for educational/vocational assistance. Most vouchers are administered through the state’s Independent Living/Chafee program. Some states have contracted with the Orphan Foundation of America to administer their ETV programs.” 2) Los Angeles Infrastructure Academy Location: Los Angeles, CA Contact: http://www.infrastructureacademy.org/index-1.html Target Population: High school juniors and seniors Purpose: Their mission is “to build a pipeline of diverse, well-qualified, young people to enter the Civil Infrastructure field and place them into careers.” It also helps high school students prepare for a well-paying job that leads to a meaningful career with growth opportunities. In addition, the program should keep kids off the streets and out of gangs. It is scheduled to begin in May 2008. This program was developed by the Office of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the LA Department of Water and Power. Features: “The LA Infrastructure Academy program will consist of a selective, two-year program for young people interested in pursuing a career in civil infrastructure. Students will apply in the second half of their sophomore year of high school and will begin the program in the summer between their sophomore and junior years. The LA Infrastructure Academy will work with students through the employers’ application process and will support them on an ongoing basis during and after the program. Mentoring will be a critical component throughout the entire student-alumni life cycle.” Technical training, hands-on training, leadership training and community services projects are all part of the junior and senior year program. Students participate at least two days per week after school and two Saturdays per month. In addition, paid summer internships, employment assistance, and even college application assistance are made available. 3) Guardian Scholars Program Location: California State University, Fullerton Contact: California State University, Fullerton, Guardian Scholars Program, PO Box 6828 C- 120, Fullerton CA 92834-6828; 714-278-4900; www.fullerton.edu/guardianscholars Target Population: Former foster youth aspiring to attend a 4-year university Purpose: Provide former foster youth the opportunity to attend and graduate from Cal State Fullerton without the fear of running out of money or accumulating sizeable debt. Features: “The innovative Guardian Scholars Program admits several students each semester to California State University. Each scholar receives full tuition and funding for textbooks, supplies, and annual fees. Additionally, the program offers assistance in completing college entrance and financial aid forms; an orientation to university life; year round, on-campus housing and on-campus student employment; one-on-one counseling, academic advising, peer mentoring, and faculty mentoring; a drop-in study center; assistance with off-campus employment in the young person’s career field; and post-graduation career planning.” The program supports 10 new students each year for five years each. Fifty students are in the program at any given time. 4) UPS School-to-Career Partnerships Location: Maryland; Hartford, Connecticut; New York, New York; Oakland, California; Portland, Maine; Providence, Rhode Island; San Antonio, Texas; and San Diego, California. Contact: Mark Giuffre; 502-329-3060; www.community.ups.com/education/school.html. Target Population: Disadvantaged young adults, with recent emphasis on recruiting former foster youth Purpose: To provide career opportunities to disadvantaged youth. “The long-term goal of the UPS Partnership is to establish a best-practices workforce development system that will be expanded in the current service area and replicated with committed employers in other communities nationwide.” Features: “The United Parcel Service (UPS) School-to-Career Partnership for youth is a community-based initiative engaging disadvantaged young adults in a work and learning experience at UPS, Marriott, Bank of America, and other employers to expand their opportunities for career and academic success. The UPS Partnership is a collaborative effort involving the facilitator and funders, employers, referral agencies, and transportation providers. Through UPS, colleges and non-profit agencies collaborate to create programs tailored to the unique educational and employment needs of each community. Some programs work with four- year colleges, while others work with community colleges and technical assistance and trade schools.” 5) San Diego Workforce Partnership, School-To-Career Intermediary Team Location: San Diego, California Contact: School-to-Career Intermediary System, San Diego Workforce Partnership Inc., 3910 University Avenue, Ste. 400, San Diego CA 92105; 866-YCN-SDWP (926-7397), 619-744- 0318; internship@workforce.org, http://sdyouth.sandiegoatwork.com Target Population: Youth Purpose: To provide career support for youth Features: “The Youth Connect Network’s School-to-Career Intermediary System links businesses with students to create rich work-based learning experiences, including job fairs, internships, job shadowing, company tours, and mentoring. This collaboration between local schools and businesses helps create pathways to postsecondary education and career development. The intermediary system is a partnership among the San Diego Workforce Partnership, the San Diego County Office of Education, local school districts, regional community college districts, regional chambers of commerce, business leaders, and other community-based organizations.”
• R19
  Number of items in current 2,000 5,000 1,500 4,500 1,700 751 3,000 warehouse inventory
• R20
  Annual average dollar value of items $2,000,000 $1,900,000 $1,300,000 $6,000,000 $3,000,000 $682,569 $16,000,000 in warehouse inventory “$27,000,000 without textbooks; $90,000,000 to $120,000,000 w/
• R21
  Annual textbooks. Sales of stock $50,000,000 $9,100,000 $4,500,000 Textbooks are $12,400,000 $729,053 $135,000,000 items in FY handled as central 2006-07 warehouse cross- docked items but are not part of inventory.”
• R22
  Average Delivery Time “5 days from the during 10 days 2 days 2-3 days 1-5 days 3 days 2 -3 days Warehouse to normal School/Office times” site 23 Does the warehouse offer a same or next-day delivery option? Six Responses: 6= “Yes” LAUSD: Yes 24 If YES, is there a charge for this service? 25 If YES, what is the amount? Six responses: 6= “No” LAUSD: Yes LAUSD: $9-13 PART IV. Non-Stock Items 26 How do District schools and offices generally purchase non-stock items? Six responses: Method of Non-Stock Requisition or P-Card Other Purchase Purchase Order Number Responding “Yes” 5 6 0 27 If your District uses P-Cards, please answer the questions below. A) What is the maximum number of P-Cards issued per site? Three responses: 1= “1” 1= “Most have 3” 1= ”5” LAUSD: “2” B) Is there a maximum single purchase limit? Five responses: 5= “Yes” LAUSD: Yes If yes, what is it? Five responses: 3= “$500” 1= “$4,999” 1= “Yes” LAUSD: $500 C) Is there a maximum monthly purchase limit? Five responses: 5= “Yes” If yes, what is it? Five responses: 3= “$10,000” 1= “$4,999” 1= ”$1,500” LAUSD: $10,000 D) What controls have been implemented to enforce these provisions? Five responses: Manual Automated Written Review & Review & Periodic P-Card Control Policies & Override of Override of Other? Audits Procedures Certain Certain Purchases Purchases Number Responding 5 3 3 3 1 “Yes” LAUSD (cid:57) (cid:57) (cid:57) Other Response: “Procurement, Accounting and Audit share in monthly reviews.” 28 If your District allows personnel to order non-stock items through requisitions or purchase orders, please indicate to whom such items are submitted: Five Responses: Submitted to a Centralized District Submitted Directly to Vendor Purchasing/Procurement Office 0 responses 5 responses LAUSD= (cid:57) 29 If your District has another method of purchasing non-stock items (other than via P-Cards, requisitions or purchase orders) please describe the method(s): Five Responses: 5= “N/A” LAUSD: No other method 30 Please indicate which statement best characterizes your District’s non-stock purchasing policy: There are NO restrictions on the type of non-stock items that District schools and offices are allowed to purchase: One Response. Restrictions: District schools District schools District schools and offices are District schools and offices are and offices are prohibited from and offices are prohibited from prohibited from purchasing prohibited from purchasing ANY purchasing non- Non-stock SPECIFIED items purchasing non- item that is stock items for purchases are that are stocked stock items for stocked by the which there is a limited to items Policy by the which there is a warehouse functionally specified on an warehouse functionally through the similar (like) item approved through the similar (like) item District’s non- stocked in the product list. District’s non- stocked in the stock warehouse with stock warehouse with purchasing SOME purchasing NO exceptions. processes. exceptions. processes. Number of “Yes” 1 2 1 1 0 Responses LAUSD (cid:57) 31 What controls have been implemented to enforce these non-stock purchasing restrictions? Please check all that apply: Monthly/Annual Manual Review Automated Review Written Audits of Non- and Override of and Override of Control Policies and Other Stock Restricted Non- Restricted Non- Procedures Purchases Stock Purchases Stock Purchases Number of 5 5 5 5 6 Responses Number of “Yes” 5 0 1 1 1 Responses LAUSD (cid:57) (cid:57) Other response: “Evaluation Policy” PART VI. Performance Measurement and Documentation: Which of the following measures does your district use to monitor performance of the warehouse function? 32 Districts reporting: Six responses: Performance Any Performance Performance Customer Service Flow Charts Measure Measures Audits/Reviews Surveys Number of “Yes” 5 4 5 5 Responses LAUSD (cid:57) (cid:57) (cid:57) 256 LOS ANGELES COUNTY REHABILITATION CENTERS 2007-2008 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Investigative Committee Lionel S. Martinez, Chair Judy Hsu James Kaiser Lloyd R. Smith 257 258 LOS ANGELES COUNTY REHABILITATION CENTERS INTRODUCTION As a result of a citizen’s complaint, the 2007-2008 Civil Grand Jury decided to investigate the operation of the Los Angeles County Rehabilitation Centers. According to the complaint a rehab center resident at the time of discharge was so sick that he required emergency ambulance transportation to a hospital. He died later that evening. Finally, the complaint states that all of this occurred with no assistance from rehabilitation center staff. Based on the results of the investigation, the Civil Grand Jury has determined there are areas for improvement in the policies and procedures of the rehabilitation centers. OBJECTIVES and SCOPE The purpose of this report is to investigate the policies and procedures of Los Angeles County Rehabilitation Centers. The primary focus of the investigation was operational procedures as they pertain to residents who become ill or are injured while residing at the rehabilitation centers. The Civil Grand Jury identified two county rehabilitation centers, both of which are administered by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. These centers are : Acton Rehabilitation Center 30500 Arrastre Canyon Road Acton, California Warm Springs Rehabilitation Center 38200 North Lake Hughes Road Castaic, California
• R16-17
  18-19 Overall older EDUCATION I am receiving the education I want. 3.3 3.6 3.3 3.4 I get the assistance I need to succeed in school. 3.2 3.6 3.3 3.4 I get both educational and vocational information and choices. 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.3 I have received good educational guidance. 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.5 I am receiving support and advice for educational options beyond high school. 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 Rating Average Survey Statement 20 or