Santa Clara County Grand Jury • 2023-2024

A Disjointed System:

Published: June 12, 2024 49 pages
View Original PDF

Findings and Recommendations 10 findings

F1
The continuum of care for justice-involved people who have committed low-level crimes due to their behavioral health disorder is disjointed between BHSD, CBOs, community programs, the Court, and Custody Health. The County and its partners’ programs and services are too siloed, resulting in a lack of coordinated care.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
BHSD staff in Collaborative Court and Custody Health do not systematically collaborate to support the clients they have in common, resulting in clients spending unnecessary time in custody.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
BHSD staff in Collaborative Court and Custody Health should establish more effective systems of collaboration. Some examples could include: • Custody Health being present in Collaborative Court to ensure collaboration in client support. • Have BHSD staff from FDR and Custody Health attend mutually relevant trainings together. This recommendation should be implemented
F3
The current system does not allow for discharge planning for people accused of low-level offenses with behavioral health disorders soon after arrest and booking.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Appropriate County agencies should create a system that allows for the possibility of discharge planning for appropriate individuals to occur much earlier in the process. This recommendation should be implemented
F4
The current countywide system is not conducive to justice-involved clients with behavioral health disorders establishing a personal connection with a service provider who can help them navigate all available services for the long-term. Such a personal connection could increase the likelihood of clients participating in treatment plans and transitioning more smoothly to the community.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The County should coordinate systems of care more effectively to make it easier for clients to establish personal connections. Some examples could include: • Increased in-reach services to County Jails (peer navigators, social workers, etc.) to work with clients to build trust and form a relationship to smoothly transition into community programs. • A more coordinated system of communication among service providers countywide regarding clients’ history and needs. This recommendation should be implemented
F5
County services do not have a central repository for client digital records. This impedes coordination of care.
Related Recommendations (2)
R5a
To the maximum extent legally allowable, the County should develop an initial plan of how to improve coordination of client digital records across its currently disparate network of data systems in different service areas, beginning with the following agencies: • Custody Heath • BHSD and the CBOs • EPS • Collaborative Court • And other related agencies This recommendation should be implemented
R5b
Once a coordination plan is established, the County should have regular meetings every 6 months to monitor progress and implementation of the plan. This recommendation should be implemented
F6
Collaborative Court judges are often forced to rely on clients bringing paper copies of their CSRs to court to be able to assess their adherence to program requirements. This is a cumbersome barrier toward program graduation and reentry into the community.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
BHSD should devise a reliable and user-friendly system to provide electronic copies of CSRs to judges in advance of each client’s court date. This recommendation should be implemented
F7
Insufficient staffing and an increased workload of BHSD in FDR has negatively impacted staff morale and led to longer wait times for clients who are incarcerated to enter treatment programs.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
BHSD should prioritize staffing and resources in Collaborative Court and FDR. This recommendation should be implemented
F8
Innovative programs such as PARR successfully reduce time incarcerated for their clients.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8
The County should prioritize the current PARR program and the proposed expansion of this program for people with behavioral health disorders ensuring an earlier possible referral to Collaborative Court. This recommendation should be implemented
F9
Custody Health’s current procedure for mental health screening and assessment allows too many incarcerated people with non-acute behavioral health disorders to go undiagnosed and untreated.
Related Recommendations (2)
R9a
Custody Health should review its procedures for behavioral health disorder screening of newly booked clients to determine why so many are passing through without getting flagged. This recommendation should be implemented
R9b
Once the County determines the issues related to flagging clients the County should fix the screening process. This recommendation should be implemented
F10
Custody Health does not consistently check clients’ court schedules, leading to scheduling conflicts of court dates and medical appointments.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10
Custody Heath should consult the Court calendar using a system such as the Inmate Finder website to view court dates to ensure they do not schedule a client’s medical appointments at the same time as their court date. This recommendation should be implemented

Conclusions 15

No Responses Found 1

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

County of Santa Clara Agency