Orange County Grand Jury • 2012-2013

Detention Facilities Report: (part II -juvenile) HOW DO WE Know IF WE ARE Taking Care of OUR At-risk Juveniles?

Published: December 17, 2012 19 pages
View Original PDF

Findings and Recommendations 7 findings

F1
Juvenile Hall units M and O have very old windows. Also, the old toilet stalls in these units do not provide privacy.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Probation Department management will budget for replacement windows and toilet stalls in Units O and M at Juvenile Hall. The toilet stalls, in particular, require an inordinate amount of repair. Replacement is needed to provide privacy without compromising security. (F1)
F2
Juvenile Hall and the other juvenile residential facilities have programs and activities to reduce recidivism. Most are not data-driven except Thinking for a Change, A.R.T. and some drug programs. The length of stay in these facilities, in most cases, is about 30 days; therefore, success rates are not documented by the Probation Department. The Research Department has dropped from 14 researchers to approximately 4.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The Orange County Probation Department will approach the University of California, Irvine Criminology and Sociology Departments to create a data base to track programs and activities used in the detention centers; then decide if they reduce recidivism. (F2)
F3
All the budgets in the juvenile detention facilities have high variances in the food and “other” categories. These variances reflect poor financial accountability.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Administration of the detention facilities will adhere to their budget or explain the variances in detail. (F3)
F4
At Joplin, there were 103 classroom incidents, 8 described as serious in 2012. This is very high considering the student population is about 50 boys. There were 202 incidents with 23 considered serious in 2011.
Related Recommendations (2)
R4
The Orange County Superintendent of Schools/Department of Education will prioritize their budget to provide a part-time on-site Assistant Principal at Joplin High School a minimum of three times a week. (F4, F5)
R5
The Orange County Superintendent of Schools/Department of Education will not use a lead teacher to do the work of a Principal or Assistant Principal at any of the juvenile detention schools. (F4, F5)
F5
The Orange County Superintendent of Schools/Department of Education does not provide a full time certificated Principal or assistant Principal at Rio Contiguo High School or Joplin High School. However, the Orange County Superintendent of Schools/Department of Education uses the Average Daily Attendance money generated by Youth Guidance Center and Joplin students’ in seat attendance.
Related Recommendations (2)
R4
The Orange County Superintendent of Schools/Department of Education will prioritize their budget to provide a part-time on-site Assistant Principal at Joplin High School a minimum of three times a week. (F4, F5)
R5
The Orange County Superintendent of Schools/Department of Education will not use a lead teacher to do the work of a Principal or Assistant Principal at any of the juvenile detention schools. (F4, F5)
F6
The incident between a male and a female detainee at Juvenile Hall in February, 2012, was investigated immediately by the Orange County Probation Department with oversight from the Office of Independent Review. Some of the juvenile correctional officers that were implicated were experienced officers.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
The Orange County Probation Department will require experienced juvenile correctional officers to attend professional development seminars on the importance of monitoring themselves, juveniles, and new juvenile correctional officers while on duty. Refresher classes should be available at a minimum of every two years. (F6)
F7
Orange County spends $349,677 on a lease facility which is unoccupied.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
The Board of Supervisors must take action to either utilize the Los Pinos property or eliminate or minimize the expense of this vacant facility. (F7) REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS: The California Penal Code §933 requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such comment shall be made to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section §933.05 (a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making aspects of the

Additional Recommendations 11

These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.

Comments 6