San Mateo County Grand Jury • 2004-2005

Issue | Background | Findings | Conclusions | Recommendations | Responses | Attachments Patient Safety At The

9 pages
View Original PDF

Findings and Recommendations 4 findings

F1
The Board of Supervisors should immediately begin the search for better facilities for the long-term care of the patients at the Burlingame Long-Term Care Center. This facility, or its replacement facility, should have safe and efficient ingress and egress for non-ambulatory or disabled patients in both emergency and routine situations. Response: Disagree. The San Mateo Medical Center agrees that a better facility would be desirable; however, the feasibility of locating such a large facility (the largest in the County) is prohibitively expensive under current Medi-Cal reimbursement rates and is effectively not possible. The County’s 20-year lease for the current facility is the only practical way these patients can be housed in San Mateo County. This recommendation will not be implemented. Improving Water Quality Flowing to the Ocean and Bay Findings:
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Board of Supervisors should immediately begin the search for better facilities for the long-term care of the patients at the Burlingame Long-Term Care Center. This facility, or its replacement facility, should have safe and efficient ingress and egress for non-ambulatory or disabled patients in both emergency and routine situations. COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence County Manager’s Office DATE: June 7, 2005 BOARD MEETING DATE: June 21, 2005 SPECIAL NOTICE: None VOTE REQUIRED: None TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors FROM: John L. Maltbie, County Manager SUBJECT: 2004-05 Grand Jury Response Recommendation Accept this report containing the County’s responses to the following 2004-05 Grand Jury reports: Improving Water Quality Flowing to the Ocean and Bay, and the Burlingame Long-Term Care Center. VISION ALIGNMENT: Commitment: Responsive, effective and collaborative government. Goal 20: Government decisions are based on careful consideration of future impact, rather than temporary relief or immediate gain. This activity contributes to the goal by ensuring that all Grand Jury findings and recommendations are thoroughly reviewed by the appropriate County departments and that, when appropriate, process improvements are made to improve the quality and efficiency of services provided to the public and other agencies.
F2
Improvement of Storm Water Quality Staff agrees with the finding. The quality of storm water can be improved by frequent street sweeping, using storm drains that dissipate the energy of the water flow to decrease erosion, designing slow water flow in new developments, preventing construction site debris from reaching streams, and providing a means for the public to properly dispose of household hazardous wastes. Environmental Health will continue to offer a means for proper disposal of household hazardous waste through collection events located throughout the County.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Improvement of Storm Water Quality Staff agrees with the finding. The quality of storm water can be improved by frequent street sweeping, using storm drains that dissipate the energy of the water flow to decrease erosion, designing slow water flow in new developments, preventing construction site debris from reaching streams, and providing a means for the public to properly dispose of household hazardous wastes. Environmental Health will continue to offer a means for proper disposal of household hazardous waste through collection events located throughout the County.
F3
Watershed Assessment and Monitoring Staff agrees with the finding. Environmental Health samples various recreational beach areas and has had success in identifying and remediating sources of contaminants. Beach monitoring will be continued and, within existing resources, investigations will be conducted into possible sources of contamination.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Watershed Assessment and Monitoring Staff agrees with the finding. Environmental Health samples various recreational beach areas and has had success in identifying and remediating sources of contaminants. Beach monitoring will be continued and, within existing resources, investigations will be conducted into possible sources of contamination. Recommendations:
F4
The Board of Supervisors should support a request from the Environmental Health Services Division to provide sufficient funding to inspect each septic system every three years. Response: This recommendation requires further analysis. The re-inspection of septic systems has been in place for five years. The inspection program is an important component of the Land Use Program since the only other means for managing septic systems after installation is complaint-based. There are over 5,000 septic systems in the county. Currently, inspections are conducted on a periodic basis at a rate of approximately 700 per year; this roughly equates to an inspection every seven years. The Environmental Health Advisory Committee has prioritized the septic inspection system based on situations where potential failure could cause contamination; i.e., for septic systems where there is a well on the property. Environmental Health will evaluate the staffing required to inspect each septic system every three years. Environmental Health staff will report back to the Board of Supervisors on the results of their findings in a future quarterly update.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The Board of Supervisors should support a request from the Environmental Health Services Division to provide sufficient funding to inspect each septic system every three years. Response: This recommendation requires further analysis. The re-inspection of septic systems has been in place for five years. The inspection program is an important component of the Land Use Program since the only other means for managing septic systems after installation is complaint-based. There are over 5,000 septic systems in the county. Currently, inspections are conducted on a periodic basis at a rate of approximately 700 per year; this roughly equates to an inspection every seven years. The Environmental Health Advisory Committee has prioritized the septic inspection system based on situations where potential failure could cause contamination; i.e., for septic systems where there is a well on the property. Environmental Health will evaluate the staffing required to inspect each septic system every three years. Environmental Health staff will report back to the Board of Supervisors on the results of their findings in a future quarterly update.

Conclusions 1

No Responses Found 1

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

San Mateo County Board of Supervisors Elected County Office