Score: +10 (18/12/8)

Contra Costa County Grand Jury • 2019-2020

Contact: Anne Granlund Foreperson

Published: October 09, 2019 14 pages

View Original PDF

⚠️ 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 15 findings

As of the date of this report, the County does not have a comprehensive operational PSPS response Master Plan for County departments.

Related Recommendations (1)

By December 31, 2020, the Board of Supervisors should consider commencing the development of a unified approach to PSPS events to be used by all County departments which includes: requirements for backup power, communications, Community Resource Center coordination, and training of additional staff to support essential activities.

Not all County departments have formalized PSPS plans.

Related Recommendations (1)

The County Office of Emergency Services has a supporting plan to the Contra Costa County Emergency Operations Plan dated June 16, 2015, that is used for long-term power outages.

No recommendations for this finding

There is no evidence that all County departments have used the County Office of Emergency Services plan as a guide for the development of their departments’ specific PSPS plan.

Related Recommendations (1)

During the October 9 and 26, 2019 PSPS events, PG&E did not provide the County departments with accurate descriptions of impacted areas in real time.

Related Recommendations (1)

By December 31, 2020, the Board of Supervisors should consider directing County departments to develop a list of real-time information to be required of PG&E before initiation and during PSPS events.

With cell, cable, and internet phone service impacted by the loss of power, Health Services could not easily communicate with at-risk residents.

Related Recommendations (2)

By December 31, 2020, the Board of Supervisors should consider directing Contra Costa Health Services to have a protocol in place for working with PG&E to ensure that CCHS receives the information it requires to notify medical base-line customers of a PSPS event.

By December 31, 2020, the Board of Supervisors should consider evaluating alternative communication coverage during a PSPS event to address service disruption to cell sites, internet, and cable providers dependent on the PG&E power distribution system.

With cell, cable, and internet phone service impacted by the loss of power, there were communication issues among the staff of public safety departments.

Related Recommendations (1)

There were not enough emergency generators pre-positioned for adequate backup to essential County services during the October events.

No recommendations for this finding

During the PSPS event of October 9, 2019, the PG&E Community Resource Center location in San Ramon was not close to areas most impacted by the shutdown. The locations of the Community Resource Centers were improved in the second event on October 26.

No recommendations for this finding

F10

The interface between some County entities and the resource facility providers was not clearly established. Therefore, the County did not have enough information about available services at non-PG&E resource facility locations.

No recommendations for this finding

F11

As of the date of this report, the Grand Jury has found no evidence that the County has a process for tracking its labor costs and other expenses directly associated with a PSPS event.

Related Recommendations (1)

The Board of Supervisors should consider directing the County Administrator to establish a means of tracking PSPS costs

F12

As of the date of this report, the Grand Jury has found no evidence that the total fiscal impact of the two October 2019 PSPS events has been provided.

Related Recommendations (1)

By December 31, 2020, the Board of Supervisors should consider establishing a requirement that a final After-Action Report and a fiscal impact report be completed no later than 60 days after a PSPS event.

F13

Grant opportunities for County PSPS support are available through various State and Federal agencies.

Related Recommendations (1)

The Board of Supervisors should consider developing a plan to take advantage of funding available for PSPS events from various programs at State and Federal levels

F14

The County may be able to use existing and pending State of California legislation to mitigate negative impacts of a PSPS on the County and its residents.

Related Recommendations (1)

By December 31, 2020, The Board of Supervisors should consider tracking and communicating to County departments the status of existing and pending legislation which may mitigate the effects of a PSPS event on the County and its residents.

F15

As of the date of this report, the County’s After-Action Report for the two October 2019 PSPS events has not been made publicly available.

Related Recommendations (1)

Agency Responses 3

Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.

Board of Supervisors

June 30, 2021 • 22 pages • 12 responses • Score: +9 (+10, 1, -1) View Details ▾

PDF

12 responses to findings and recommendations

As of the date of this report, the County does not have a comprehensive operational PSPS response Master Plan for County departments.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. F2. In Contra and effectiveness of programs is not available due to a lack of a case management system. Response: Agree. F3. The Probation Department and other Contra Costa County agencies such as Behavioral Health Services are not able to share data when coordinating post-release care for youth, due to the lack of a case management system in the Probation Department. Response: Agree. F4. The percentage of mental health diagnoses in Contra Costa County juvenile detention facilities is between 35% and 50% of the youth population in detention. Response: Agree. F5. Post-release, youth and ...

Response: Will Implement

Score: +1

The recommendation will be implemented by September 2021. The County has tentatively identified a proposed vendor and will be finalizing the contract in the coming months, with development efforts commencing Fall 2020. The Probation Department and Public Defender Office case management systems will need to go live at the same time; work orders have been submitted for the necessary data exports. System is expected to go live in September 2021. The Superior Court plans to go live with their new system in December of 2021, and the Probation and the Public Defender are scheduled to go live prior t...

Not all County departments have formalized PSPS plans.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. F3. The Probation Department and other Contra Costa County agencies such as Behavioral Health Services are not able to share data when coordinating post-release care for youth, due to the lack of a case management system in the Probation Department. Response: Agree. F4. The percentage of mental health diagnoses in Contra Costa County juvenile detention facilities is between 35% and 50% of the youth population in detention. Response: Agree. F5. Post-release, youth and families may have to wait up to a month to access mental health services provided by Behavioral Health Services and a com...

The County Office of Emergency Services has a supporting plan to the Contra Costa County Emergency Operations Plan dated June 16, 2015, that is used for long-term power outages.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. F4. The percentage of mental health diagnoses in Contra Costa County juvenile detention facilities is between 35% and 50% of the youth population in detention. Response: Agree. F5. Post-release, youth and families may have to wait up to a month to access mental health services provided by Behavioral Health Services and a community-based organization called Community Options for Family and Response: Agree. F6. In 2016, cognitively based programs for anger management, drug and substance abuse, and positive social skill development were initiated at both Juvenile Hall and Orin Allen Youth...

Response: Requires Analysis

Score: 0

The recommendation requires further analysis. By November 27, 2020, the Health Services Department will review the wait times for postrelease mental health services and will assess staffing needs or if other action could be taken to reduce the wait time or to expand availability. R4. The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors consider directing the Contra Costa County Probation Department to evaluate the propriety of relocating girls in detention with low-level offences to Orin Allen Youth rehabilitation Facility, by June 30, 2021. Response: The recommendation will not be implemen...

There is no evidence that all County departments have used the County Office of Emergency Services plan as a guide for the development of their departments’ specific PSPS plan.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. F5. Post-release, youth and families may have to wait up to a month to access mental health services provided by Behavioral Health Services and a community-based organization called Community Options for Family and Response: Agree. F6. In 2016, cognitively based programs for anger management, drug and substance abuse, and positive social skill development were initiated at both Juvenile Hall and Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility. Response: Agree. F7. All residents at both Juvenile Hall and Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility have access to these cognitively based programs. ...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable. Relocating low-level female detainees to Orin Allen Rehabilitative Facility is cost prohibitive. Significant physical and structural renovations as well as programmatic revisions would be required to safely operate a co-ed facility at that location. Furthermore, the population of girls that are in the Juvenile Hall continues to decline, and we anticipate this trend to continue as additional diversion and detention alternatives are implemented throughout Contra Costa County.

During the October 9 and 26, 2019 PSPS events, PG&E did not provide the County departments with accurate descriptions of impacted areas in real time.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. F6. In 2016, cognitively based programs for anger management, drug and substance abuse, and positive social skill development were initiated at both Juvenile Hall and Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility. Response: Agree. F7. All residents at both Juvenile Hall and Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility have access to these cognitively based programs. Response: Agree. F8. All girls in juvenile detention in Contra Costa County are housed at Juvenile Hall. Response: Agree. F9. Work experience programs at Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility such as carpentry, landscaping, food s...

With cell, cable, and internet phone service impacted by the loss of power, Health Services could not easily communicate with at-risk residents.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. F7. All residents at both Juvenile Hall and Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility have access to these cognitively based programs. Response: Agree. F8. All girls in juvenile detention in Contra Costa County are housed at Juvenile Hall. Response: Agree. F9. Work experience programs at Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility such as carpentry, landscaping, food service, and small engine repair are unavailable to girls in detention at Juvenile Hall. Response: Agree. Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility only houses male youth. RECOMMENDATIONS - California Penal Code Section 933.05(b...

With cell, cable, and internet phone service impacted by the loss of power, there were communication issues among the staff of public safety departments.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. F8. All girls in juvenile detention in Contra Costa County are housed at Juvenile Hall. Response: Agree. F9. Work experience programs at Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility such as carpentry, landscaping, food service, and small engine repair are unavailable to girls in detention at Juvenile Hall. Response: Agree. Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility only houses male youth. RECOMMENDATIONS - California Penal Code Section 933.05(b) requires a response to the designated recommendations of the Grand Jury. R1. The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors consider directi...

There were not enough emergency generators pre-positioned for adequate backup to essential County services during the October events.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. F9. Work experience programs at Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility such as carpentry, landscaping, food service, and small engine repair are unavailable to girls in detention at Juvenile Hall. Response: Agree. Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility only houses male youth. RECOMMENDATIONS - California Penal Code Section 933.05(b) requires a response to the designated recommendations of the Grand Jury. R1. The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors consider directing the Contra Costa County Probation Department to acquire and install a case management system to compil...

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility only houses male youth. RECOMMENDATIONS - California Penal Code Section 933.05(b) requires a response to the designated recommendations of the Grand Jury. R1. The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors consider directing the Contra Costa County Probation Department to acquire and install a case management system to compile data on recidivism and program effectiveness by June 30, 2021. The system would also facilitate coordination of post-release services for youth with other agencies. Response: The recommendation will be implemented ...

Board of Supervisors

June 23, 2020 • 23 pages • 5 responses • Score: +4 (+4, 0, 0) View Details ▾

PDF

5 responses to findings and recommendations

Response: Will Implement

Score: +1

Recommendation 1 for consideration by the Board of Supervisors, which clearly specifies: whether a finding or recommendation is accepted or will be implemented; if a recommendation is accepted, a statement as to who will be responsible for implementation and by what definite target date; a delineation of the constraints if a recommendation is accepted but cannot be implemented within a six-month period; and the reason for not accepting or adopting a finding or recommendation.

Not all County departments have formalized PSPS plans.

Response: Unknown Score: 0

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable. Each law enforcement agency has their own unique recruitment and hiring practice, along with corresponding budgets for recruitment efforts. Consolidating several unique recruitment practices and policies across several law enforcement agencies into a consolidated countywide outreach program is not economically feasible. Page 2 of 2

With cell, cable, and internet phone service impacted by the loss of power, Health Services could not easily communicate with at-risk residents.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. F7. Negative perceptions of policing and the availability of less dangerous job opportunities contribute to fewer applicants for law enforcement positions. Response: Agree. F8. Each Contra Costa police agency (except those that contract with the Sheriff's Office) conducts its own recruiting program to attract potential applicants. Response: Agree. Each city police agency is a separate legal entity distinct from Contra Costa County each with their own separate governing body (i.e. City Council) and unique recruitment and hiring practice. Page 1 of 2 RECOMMENDATIONS - California Penal Co...

With cell, cable, and internet phone service impacted by the loss of power, there were communication issues among the staff of public safety departments.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. F8. Each Contra Costa police agency (except those that contract with the Sheriff's Office) conducts its own recruiting program to attract potential applicants. Response: Agree. Each city police agency is a separate legal entity distinct from Contra Costa County each with their own separate governing body (i.e. City Council) and unique recruitment and hiring practice. Page 1 of 2 RECOMMENDATIONS - California Penal Code Section 933.05(b) requires a response to the designated recommendations of the Grand Jury. R1. The Board of Supervisors should consider identifying funds to develop a cou...

There were not enough emergency generators pre-positioned for adequate backup to essential County services during the October events.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. Each city police agency is a separate legal entity distinct from Contra Costa County each with their own separate governing body (i.e. City Council) and unique recruitment and hiring practice. Page 1 of 2 RECOMMENDATIONS - California Penal Code Section 933.05(b) requires a response to the designated recommendations of the Grand Jury. R1. The Board of Supervisors should consider identifying funds to develop a countywide outreach program to attract more applicants to police agencies in Contra Costa County, by June 30, 2021. Response: The recommendation will not be implemented because it ...

Board of Supervisors

June 16, 2015 • 23 pages • 22 responses • Score: -3 (+4, 11, -7) View Details ▾

PDF

22 responses to findings and recommendations

As of the date of this report, the County does not have a comprehensive operational PSPS response Master Plan for County departments.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Agree. The County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), supporting De-energization Plan, and Continuity of Operation Planning template currently serve as the comprehensive operational response plans for all County departments. F2. Not all County departments have formalized PSPS plans. Response: Agree. F3. The County Office of Emergency Services has a supporting plan to the Contra Costa County Emergency Operations Plan dated June 16, 2015, that is used for long-term power outages. Response: Agree. F4. There is no evidence that all County departments have used the County Office of Emergency Services ...

Response: Will Not Implement

Due: December 31, 2020 Scheduled: within 60 days Score: -1

The recommendation has already been implemented. The County responds to PSPS events through a unified system shared by County departments. In compliance with State and Federal law, Contra Costa County follows the organizational structure of the Incident Command System, and the Strategic Emergency Management System. This approach is shared by each County in the State and is consistent with best practices in emergency management. The County De-energization plan is based on this approach. With respects to requirements for backup power and communications, County OES identified an issue with one ce...

Not all County departments have formalized PSPS plans.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Agree. F3. The County Office of Emergency Services has a supporting plan to the Contra Costa County Emergency Operations Plan dated June 16, 2015, that is used for long-term power outages. Response: Agree. F4. There is no evidence that all County departments have used the County Office of Emergency Services plan as a guide for the development of their departments' specific PSPS plan. Response: Agree. F5. During the October 9 and 26, 2019 PSPS events, PG&E did not provide the County departments with accurate descriptions of impacted areas in real time. Agree. F6. With cell, cable, and internet...

By December 31, 2020, the Board of Supervisors should consider directing County departments to develop a list of real-time information to be required of PG&E before initiation and during PSPS events.

Response: Will Not Implement

Due: December 31, 2020 Scheduled: within 60 days Score: -1

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable.In 2018, County OES requested system maps and detailed information about areas targeted for de-energization including critical infrastructure and the locations of baseline medical customers. County OES requested that the County shall be notified ahead of any planned outage, and whenever an unplanned outage occurred affecting more than 1000 people. PG&E fulfilled this request by notifying County OES for multiple unplanned outages during 2018 and 2019, and during the PSPS events of 2019. During the 2019 P...

The County Office of Emergency Services has a supporting plan to the Contra Costa County Emergency Operations Plan dated June 16, 2015, that is used for long-term power outages.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Agree. F4. There is no evidence that all County departments have used the County Office of Emergency Services plan as a guide for the development of their departments' specific PSPS plan. Response: Agree. F5. During the October 9 and 26, 2019 PSPS events, PG&E did not provide the County departments with accurate descriptions of impacted areas in real time. Agree. F6. With cell, cable, and internet phone service impacted by the loss of power, Health Services could not easily communicate with at-risk residents. Response: Agree. F7. With cell, cable, and internet phone service impacted by the lo...

Response: Will Not Implement

Due: December 31, 2020 Scheduled: within 60 days Score: -1

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable. PG&E now includes medical base-line customer data accessible through the PG&E PSPS Portal. Contra Costa Health Services will now access medical base-line customer information upon notification of a PSPS incident via the PSPS Portal. R4. By December 31, 2020, the Board of Supervisors should consider evaluating alternative communication coverage during a PSPS event to address service disruption to cell sites, internet, and cable providers dependent on the PG&E power distribution system. Response: The rec...

There is no evidence that all County departments have used the County Office of Emergency Services plan as a guide for the development of their departments’ specific PSPS plan.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Agree. F5. During the October 9 and 26, 2019 PSPS events, PG&E did not provide the County departments with accurate descriptions of impacted areas in real time. Agree. F6. With cell, cable, and internet phone service impacted by the loss of power, Health Services could not easily communicate with at-risk residents. Response: Agree. F7. With cell, cable, and internet phone service impacted by the loss of power, there were communication issues among the staff of public safety departments. Response: Agree. F8. There were not enough emergency generators pre-positioned for adequate backup to essen...

Response: Will Not Implement

Due: December 31, 2020 Scheduled: within 60 days Score: -1

The recommendation has already been implemented. County plans for alternative communication coverage in the event of a power disruption. Alternative communication coverage includes a satellite phone system, backup satellite communication system, portable radio repeaters, and other contingency plans for first responder communications throughout the County. The effectiveness of backup communications plans is critical, where pre-positioning resources and deploying alternative systems prevented significant disruption to public safety communications during extensive power outages. The primary publ...

During the October 9 and 26, 2019 PSPS events, PG&E did not provide the County departments with accurate descriptions of impacted areas in real time.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Agree. F7. With cell, cable, and internet phone service impacted by the loss of power, there were communication issues among the staff of public safety departments. Response: Agree. F8. There were not enough emergency generators pre-positioned for adequate backup to essential County services during the October events. Response: Agree. F9. During the PSPS event of October 9, 2019, the PG&E Community Resource Center location in San Ramon was not close to areas most impacted by the shutdown. The locations of the Community Resource Centers were improved in the second event on October 26. Response:...

The Board of Supervisors should consider directing the County Administrator to establish a means of tracking PSPS costs

Response: Will Not Implement

Due: December 31, 2020 Scheduled: within 60 days Score: -1

The recommendation has already been implemented. The means for tracking PSPS personnel costs exists through ICS 214 forms. In addition to the ICS 214 forms, during known disasters the County Administrator Office will assign a unique County Organization Number to code and track PSPS expenses. R6. By December 31, 2020, the Board of Supervisors should consider establishing a requirement that a final After-Action Report and a fiscal impact report be completed no later than 60 days after a PSPS event. Response: The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasona...

With cell, cable, and internet phone service impacted by the loss of power, Health Services could not easily communicate with at-risk residents.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Response: Will Not Implement

Due: December 31, 2020 Scheduled: within 60 days Score: -1

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable. The County is required to submit an After-Action Report and supplemental fiscal impact report to the California Office of Emergency Services within 60 days of a proclaimed emergency to seek reimbursement funding. The Board of Supervisors works with this understanding when an emergency is proclaimed. R7. The Board of Supervisors should consider developing a plan to take advantage of funding available for PSPS events from various programs at State and Federal levels by December 31, 2020. Response: The r...

With cell, cable, and internet phone service impacted by the loss of power, there were communication issues among the staff of public safety departments.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Agree. F8. There were not enough emergency generators pre-positioned for adequate backup to essential County services during the October events. Response: Agree. F9. During the PSPS event of October 9, 2019, the PG&E Community Resource Center location in San Ramon was not close to areas most impacted by the shutdown. The locations of the Community Resource Centers were improved in the second event on October 26. Response: Agree. F10. The interface between some County entities and the resource facility providers was not clearly established. Therefore, the County did not have enough information ...

The Board of Supervisors should consider developing a plan to take advantage of funding available for PSPS events from various programs at State and Federal levels

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable. It is already a regular practice for the County to seek and apply for funding available for PSPS event from various State and Federal programs. R8. By December 31, 2020, The Board of Supervisors should consider tracking and communicating to County departments the status of existing and pending legislation which may mitigate the effects of a PSPS event on the County and its residents. Response: The recommendation will be implemented by December 31, 2020.

There were not enough emergency generators pre-positioned for adequate backup to essential County services during the October events.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Agree. F9. During the PSPS event of October 9, 2019, the PG&E Community Resource Center location in San Ramon was not close to areas most impacted by the shutdown. The locations of the Community Resource Centers were improved in the second event on October 26. Response: Agree. F10. The interface between some County entities and the resource facility providers was not clearly established. Therefore, the County did not have enough information about available services at non-PG&E resource facility locations. Response: Agree. F11. As of the date of this report, the Grand Jury has found no evidence...

Response: Will Implement

Score: +1

The recommendation will be implemented by December 31, 2020.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Agree. F10. The interface between some County entities and the resource facility providers was not clearly established. Therefore, the County did not have enough information about available services at non-PG&E resource facility locations. Response: Agree. F11. As of the date of this report, the Grand Jury has found no evidence that the County has a process for tracking its labor costs and other expenses directly associated with a PSPS event. Response: Partially agree. The County tracking personnel costs exists through ICS 214 activity logs. In addition to the ICS 214 forms, during known disas...

F10

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Agree. F11. As of the date of this report, the Grand Jury has found no evidence that the County has a process for tracking its labor costs and other expenses directly associated with a PSPS event. Response: Partially agree. The County tracking personnel costs exists through ICS 214 activity logs. In addition to the ICS 214 forms, during known disasters the CAO's office would assign a unique County Organization Number to code and track PSPS expenses. F12. As of the date of this report, the Grand Jury has found no evidence that the total fiscal impact of the two October 2019 PSPS events has been...

F11

As of the date of this report, the Grand Jury has found no evidence that the County has a process for tracking its labor costs and other expenses directly associated with a PSPS event.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Partially agree. The County tracking personnel costs exists through ICS 214 activity logs. In addition to the ICS 214 forms, during known disasters the CAO's office would assign a unique County Organization Number to code and track PSPS expenses. F12. As of the date of this report, the Grand Jury has found no evidence that the total fiscal impact of the two October 2019 PSPS events has been provided. Response: Agree. Grant opportunities for County PSPS support are available through various State and Federal agencies. Response: Agree. F14. The County may be able to use existing and pending Sta...

F12

As of the date of this report, the Grand Jury has found no evidence that the total fiscal impact of the two October 2019 PSPS events has been provided.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. Grant opportunities for County PSPS support are available through various State and Federal agencies. Response: Agree. F14. The County may be able to use existing and pending State of California legislation to mitigate negative impacts of a PSPS on the County and its residents. Response: Agree. F15. As of the date of this report, the County's After-Action Report for the two October 2019 PSPS events has not been made publicly available. Response: Agree. RECOMMENDATIONS - California Penal Code Section 933.05(b) requires a response to the designated recommendations of the Grand Jury. R1. ...

F14

The County may be able to use existing and pending State of California legislation to mitigate negative impacts of a PSPS on the County and its residents.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. F15. As of the date of this report, the County's After-Action Report for the two October 2019 PSPS events has not been made publicly available. Response: Agree. RECOMMENDATIONS - California Penal Code Section 933.05(b) requires a response to the designated recommendations of the Grand Jury. R1. By December 31, 2020, the Board of Supervisors should consider commencing the development of a unified approach to PSPS events to be used by all County departments which includes: requirements for backup power, communications, Community Resource Center coordination, and training of additional sta...

F15

As of the date of this report, the County’s After-Action Report for the two October 2019 PSPS events has not been made publicly available.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree. RECOMMENDATIONS - California Penal Code Section 933.05(b) requires a response to the designated recommendations of the Grand Jury. R1. By December 31, 2020, the Board of Supervisors should consider commencing the development of a unified approach to PSPS events to be used by all County departments which includes: requirements for backup power, communications, Community Resource Center coordination, and training of additional staff to support essential activities. Response: The recommendation has already been implemented. The County responds to PSPS events through a unified system shared...

No Responses Found 3

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

Contra Costa County Sheriff Elected County Office

Contra Costa Fire Protection District Fire District

County of Contra Costa Agency