📋
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 and Recommendations 25 findings
F1
Page 187
The pedestrian screening areas located at the entrances to the Central Justice Center are heavily used and become congested during high traffic times. Pedestrian crowding prevents the Sheriff’s Special Officers from having an adequate view of persons entering the facility.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Page 188
The Orange County Sheriff should make best efforts to coordinate with the Court Facilities Manager no later than September 2017 to determine which space designation (County, Court, or Common) applies to points of ingress and egress at the county’s courthouses to help determine fiscal responsibility for security/safety improvements. (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5)
F2
Page 187
The industrial/office grade partitions used in the Central Justice Center’s screening areas to channel the public entering and departing the facility do not provide ballistic protection for Sheriff’s Special Officers in the case of an active shooter emergency.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Page 188
The Orange County Sheriff should make best efforts to coordinate with the Court Facilities Manager no later than September 2017 to determine which space designation (County, Court, or Common) applies to points of ingress and egress at the county’s courthouses to help determine fiscal responsibility for security/safety improvements. (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5)
F3
Page 187
There is no system for regulating or channeling the public in order to prevent crowding at the scanning stations. Sheriff’s Special Officers must use verbal commands in order to maintain public order and organization.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Page 188
The Orange County Sheriff should make best efforts to coordinate with the Court Facilities Manager no later than September 2017 to determine which space designation (County, Court, or Common) applies to points of ingress and egress at the county’s courthouses to help determine fiscal responsibility for security/safety improvements. (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5)
F4
Page 187
None of the County jail or court facilities visited uses full body scanners to prevent the public from bringing non-metallic weapons, tools or other contraband into the facility.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1
Page 188
The Orange County Sheriff should make best efforts to coordinate with the Court Facilities Manager no later than September 2017 to determine which space designation (County, Court, or Common) applies to points of ingress and egress at the county’s courthouses to help determine fiscal responsibility for security/safety improvements. (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5)
R11
Page 189
The Orange County Sheriff should develop a plan by January 2017 for the funding, purchase and installation of Full Body Scanners for each courthouse entrance. (F4)
F5
Page 187
The current security/surveillance camera system on the exterior of the Harbor Justice Center is not adequate and until completion of on-going upgrades, does not provide for sufficient monitoring.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1
Page 188
The Orange County Sheriff should make best efforts to coordinate with the Court Facilities Manager no later than September 2017 to determine which space designation (County, Court, or Common) applies to points of ingress and egress at the county’s courthouses to help determine fiscal responsibility for security/safety improvements. (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5)
R4
Page 188
The Orange County Sheriff should continue best efforts to coordinate with the Court Facilities Manager by January 2017 to support the current project to upgrade and expand the video surveillance system at the Harbor Justice Center. (F5)
F6
Page 187
The roll-up doors located at the Harbor Justice Center do not prevent some observation of inmates arriving and departing the court by the Sheriff’s transportation vehicles.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
Page 187
The Command Center at John Wayne Airport uses outdated surveillance equipment.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
Page 187
The K-9 office located at John Wayne Airport is in need of repair or replacement.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
Page 189
The Orange County Sheriff should coordinate with the Airport Director for John Wayne Airport to develop a plan by September 2017 for the funding, and repair or replacement of the K-9 Staff Office at John Wayne Airport. (F8)
F9
Page 187
The Harbor Patrol Marine Operations Bureau does not have waterproof dashboard or handheld video cameras for use at all three harbors in its patrol area.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
Page 187
Adequate long-range surveillance equipment is not available to Dana Point deputies performing harbormaster duties. 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury 9582813_GJ_text_document_Final.indd 185 7/7/16 8:06 AM Sheriff’s Temporary Detention/Holding Areas, Patrol Areas and Special Services
Related Recommendations (1)
R9
Page 189
The Orange County Sheriff should develop a plan by September 2017 to fund and equip the REPORT harbormaster deputies with long-range surveillance equipment. (F10) 5
F11
Page 188
The outside parking/equipment staging area located at the Aliso Viejo Sheriff’s Station provides inadequate protection along the rear of the enclosed area. No barrier exists to prevent unencumbered access onto Sheriff’s property.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10
Page 189
The Orange County Sheriff should coordinate with the City of Aliso Viejo by January 2017 to develop a plan for the funding and construction of a wall or fence along the entire rear of the Aliso Viejo Sheriff’s Station facility. (F11)
F12
Page 241
The Office of the District Attorneydemonstrated questionable leadership when a newly hired temporary employee was promoted into a leadership position, resulting in the new hire managing the staff memberswho were still providing orientation training for the new hire.
No recommendations for this finding
F13
Page 241
The Public Administrator’sOffice has no established mentorship training or leadership program in place for developingtalented current employees. This has resulted in experienced Public Administratoremployees being passed over for promotional and leadership opportunities. Case Management System (E-CMDS)
No recommendations for this finding
F14
Page 241
The E-CMDS case management system is antiquated, unreliable, does not have the ability to quickly and accuratelycull reliable data, anddoes not meet the current business needs of the Public Administrator/Public Guardian deputies. Although there have been several attempts to replace the current E-CMDS, each has failed to produce tangible results.
No recommendations for this finding
F15
Page 241
The PublicAdministrator’s Officeis considering pursuing the purchase of a case management system that will be completely separate from whatever case management system the Public Guardian pursues, which has the potential to result in fragmented communication and duplicative processes when cases are handed over from the Public Guardianto the Public Administrator. Training and Certification: 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury age 44 P 9582813_GJ_text_document_Final.indd 239 7/7/16 8:06 AM Changing of the Guardian: Life After the Reorganization of the PA and PG Offices
No recommendations for this finding
F16
Page 242
The Public Guardian’s Office does not have a reliable system for tracking Public Guardiandeputy training and membership status to ensure guardians maintain certification as stated in Probate Code.
No recommendations for this finding
F17
Page 242
ThePublic Guardian’s Officedoes not hold deputystaff accountable for adhering to Policy 1.01-Public Guardian Certification and Continuing Education. This has resulted in the majority of deputies being out of compliance with certification which could have negativeconsequences and/or impact their ability to best serve their clients.
No recommendations for this finding
F18
Page 242
The Public Guardian’s Officehas not provided clear guidance or assistance to ensure deputies understand the financial reimbursement process, resulting in deputies not pursuing recertification. REPORT 6 Policy & Procedure
No recommendations for this finding
F19
Page 242
The Public Guardian’s Officehas worked diligently to update policies and procedures, however, some of the staff responsible for implementingthese policies do not agree with some of the content, are not aware that they have been completed, and/or do not intend to comply with the policies.
No recommendations for this finding
F20
Page 242
ThePublic Guardian’s Officehas not effectively communicated theexpectationthat deputy staff are required to adhere to updated Public Guardianpolicies.
No recommendations for this finding
F21
Page 242
Behavioral Health Services has a policy review structure in place. Although it is the intentionto integrate the Public Guardian Office into Behavioral Health Services processes, two years have gone by without this integration occurring. Behavioral Health Services is not knowledgeable about Public Guardianprocesses and can only review Public Guardianspecific policies for style and format compliance.
No recommendations for this finding
F22
Page 242
Public Guardianpolicies are not reviewed and revised on a regular basis andthere is no clear system in place for distribution of new or revised policies.
No recommendations for this finding
F23
Page 242
The Public Guardianstaff is expected to follow general Behavioral Health Services policies, which address over-arching expectations for all Behavioral Health Services staff. However, some Public Guardianstaff do not feel like they are an integral part of the Behavioral Health Services culture and do not acknowledge that Behavioral Health Services policies are relevant to their job. The Public Guardianmanual, which is the primary reference for deputies, does not include several policies that would be considered as staples for most organizations. Quality Assurance:
No recommendations for this finding
F24
Page 242
The Public Guardian’s Office has no internal Quality Assurance unit, and thedepartment is not represented or included in Behavioral Health Services quality assurance activities 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury age 45 P 9582813_GJ_text_document_Final.indd 240 7/7/16 8:06 AM Changing of the Guardian: Life After the Reorganization of the PA and PG Offices two years after the reorganization of the Public GuardianOffice. The Public Guardian’s Officedependsupon external audits to evaluate their performance.
No recommendations for this finding
F25
Page 243
The Public Guardian’s Officedoes not initiate anyinternal quality assurance activities to measure job performance, or adherence to Probate Codes and Best Practices to ensure excellent customer service.
No recommendations for this finding
Additional Recommendations 19
These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.
-
R2Page 81FA majority 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury 9582813_GJ_text_document_Final.indd 79 7/7/16 8:06 AM 9582813_GJ_text_document_Final.indd 80 7/7/16 8:06 AM LIGHT RAIL: IS ORANGE COUNTY ON THE RIGHT TRACK? , GRAND JURY 2015-2016 GRAND JURY 2015-2016 9582813_GJ_text_document_Final.indd 81 7/7/16 8:06 AM 9582813_GJ_text_document_Final.indd 82 7/7/16 8:06 AM Light Rail: Is Orange County on the Right Track? Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.....................................................................................................3 REPORT 3 BACKGROUND......................................................................................................................4 Light Rail Defined................................................................................................................4 Light Rail in Southern California.......................................................................................4 Los Angeles County’s Metro Rail System..........................................................................6 South San Diego County and the San Diego Trolley........................................................6 North San Diego County and the Sprinter Light Rail System.........................................7 Prior Grand Jury Reports on Light Rail Development in Orange County....................7 Scope and Focus of This Report.........................................................................................8 METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................................9 INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS....................................................................................9 Orange County and Light Rail Development, Analysis and Political Reality................9 Orange County and Light Rail Development, a Change in Leadership and Focus.....12 Return on Investment Expectations.................................................................................13 The OC Streetcar Project Connecting Santa Ana and Garden Grove.........................16 The City of Anaheim and the Anaheim Rapid Connection (ARC) Project..................18 The City of Fullerton’s Efforts to Study Use of Light Rail............................................21 COMMENDATIONS............................................................................................................23
-
R3Page 81came from Sheriff-Cor. CEO/ITR1 WBI Will be presented to IT Exec C in FY14/15 for approval
-
R5Page 81WBI 2015 for mods to be approved by BoS Prior to expiration of current East Basin Ops Agrmt in
-
R6Page 81WBI in FY14/15 Committee underway to determine if it makes sense to centralize County IT Services under the CEO office of
-
R8Page 81WBI Feb2021, a cost analysis will be done for both basins Improving The County of Orange Contract Policy Manual will undergo thorough review in Government’s Multi-Billion Dollar 2015 for mods to be approved by BoS. See above where Contracting Operations 1314BoS R1 FA same response was a WBI Contract Policy Manual will undergo thorough review in 2015 for mods to be approved by BoS. See above where CEO R2 FA same response was a WBI Juvenile Offenders and Recidivism: Agree, grant funds & donations to be solicited. Probation Orange County Solutions 1314BoS R3 WBI Dept to take the lead. Orange County Information Technology Management:Good Job Overall; Disaster Recovery Must Be Addressed 1314BoS R2 WBI Joint reply with CEO/IT. Will be implemented in FY14/15 CEO never replied on behalf of BoS on this. Only reply
-
R12Page 244The District Attorney’s Officeshould coordinate with County Centralized Human Resources to develop and initiatetraining to ensure the District AttorneyHuman Resources Department complies withthe Merit Selection Rules (MSR)for both temporary and permanent positions by December 31, 2016.(F.9, F.11)
-
R13Page 244The District Attorney’s Officeshould instruct the District AttorneyHuman Resources Department todevelop and implement a formal process for validating that candidates meet all minimum qualifications for anyPublic Administrator position advertised, as well as validating work experience relevant to anyPublic Administratorposition advertised, regardless of whether the position is temporary or permanent with such process to be in place by December 31, 2016.(F.10)
-
R14Page 244The District Attorney’s Officeshould develop a plan to implement a mentorship/leadership program for Public Administratordeputies by December 31, 2016. (F.13)
-
R15Page 244The Public Administratorand Public GuardianOffices,in conjunction with the IT Project Manager,should meet with the County Executive Office (CEO)by December 31, 2016 to recommend to the Board of Supervisors thepurchase of a new case management system 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury age 47 P 9582813_GJ_text_document_Final.indd 242 7/7/16 8:06 AM Changing of the Guardian: Life After the Reorganization of the PA and PG Offices that will meet the business needs and interface with both the Public Administrator and Public Guardian deputy staff. (F.14)
-
R16Page 245ThePublic Administrator and Public Guardian Officesshould re-establish a steering committee, with a designated Project Manager, by December 31, 2016 to acquire a replacement case management system. (F.14, F.15)
-
R17Page 245The Public Administrator and Public Guardian Offices should work together with the IT Project Manager to ensure the new case management system meets the Public Administrator and Public Guardian business needs through a comprehensive report function that can accurately track data and produce meaningful reports by June 30, 2017. (F.14) REPORT
-
R18Page 245The Public Guardian Office should initiate a process to ensure Public Guardian training 6 records coincide with the California Association of Public Administrators Public Guardians Public Conservators Association (CAPAPGPC) records, that deputies are current with their training and certification, and that consequences for not being in compliance are clearly communicated and addressed by December 31, 2016. (F.16, F.17)
-
R19Page 245The Public Guardian Office should develop clear guidelines, with examples, for Public Guardian deputies to utilize when requesting reimbursement for training and membership dues. The Public Guardian Office should provide training on the guidelines and provide a designated manager to assist in the process by December 31, 2016. (F.18)
-
R20Page 245The Public Guardian Office should develop a process to reimburse Public Guardianstaff within 30 working days of submission for reimbursement of out-of-pocket costs for training and membership dues by December 31, 2016. (F.18)
-
R21Page 245The Public Guardian Office should provide immediate training on all new and revised Public Guardianpolicies as well as Behavioral Health Servicespolicies that pertain to Public Guardian staff. Training should include management expectations on adherence to policies, along with a question and answer period for deputies to express any concerns about the accuracy of policies or their ability to carry out the policies. The training should be implemented by December 31, 2016. (F.19, F.20)
-
R22Page 245The Public Guardian Office should ensure Public Guardianpolicies are reviewed and revised on a regular basis, including solicitation of knowledgeable staff input to ensure accuracy. The assigned manager/supervisor should ensure communication of new or revised policies, as well as initiate documented Public Guardian staff training on new and revised policies to ensure understanding and compliance by December 31, 2016. (F.21, F.22)
-
R23Page 245The Public GuardianOffice should ensure that Behavioral Health Services policies that pertain to Public Guardian deputies are easily accessible to them by December 31, 2016. (F.23) 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury age 48 P 9582813_GJ_text_document_Final.indd 243 7/7/16 8:06 AM Changing of the Guardian: Life After the Reorganization of the PA and PG Offices
-
R24Page 246The Public GuardianOffice should integrate a Public Guardianmanager or supervisor into the Behavioral Health Servicesquality assurance structure, with a defined role of initiating quality assurance and risk management activities,includingregularly conducted internal auditsspecific to the Public Guardian role by December 31, 2016. (F.24, F.25)
-
R30-35Page 342days. F.9. Data demonstrates that the Collaborative and Community Courts provide effective treatment services for mentally ill offenders who qualify for the programs. F.10. Collaborative Courts save the County a significant amount of money in decreased incarceration and recidivism rates. REPORT F.11. The current number of jail psychiatrists is not sufficient to meet the needs of the general 8 inmate population diagnosed with mental illness. This shortage has resulted in extended periods of time inmates spend in safety cells, as well as a lack of psychiatric services in all but a very small portion of the Orange County Jails. The Department of Justice findings support the concern that therapeutic treatment may not reach prisoners who may be quite ill, but are not the most obviously in need of mental health care. F.12. Orange County has become a model for successful implementation of Laura’s Law in the State of California. Behavioral Health Services keeps comprehensive statistics on all aspects of Laura’s Law and therefore can effectively analyze the program’s strengths and weaknesses. F.13. Correctional Health Services does not provide therapeutic treatment services to inmates with a chronic mental health diagnosis in most parts of Mod L or in any of the general jail housing. This small concentration of service supports the Department of Justice concern that the jail does not provide for a cohesive system of therapy and treatment. F.14. There is a lack of adequate classroom space to conduct educational classes for inmates who would benefit from participation in inmate services programs. F.15. Correctional Health Services has no written guidelines, no formal course of study, and no specific training for case managers or nursing staff who conduct group therapy sessions on Mod L Crisis Stabilization Unit. 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury 9582813_GJ_text_document_Final.indd 340 7/7/16 8:06 AM