⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 1 findings
F1
Not having the full complement of additional security guards has had an indeterminate effect on the reduction of reported behavior problems.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
It is recommended that the PHF security staff be increased to 4.0 FTEs per the August 2019, authorization.
Additional Recommendations 1
These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.
-
R2It is recommended the PHF staff continue to collect data and analyze the impact of additional security staff.
Commendations 4
-
CM1If the respondent disagrees wholly or partially with an item, the respondent must elaborate on the portion of the item that they disagree with, and provide an explanation.
-
CM2If a respondent notes that an item will be implemented in the future, the response must include a timeframe for implementation.
-
CM3If a respondent notes that an item requires further analysis, the agency must include in the response an explanation of and the scope of what will be studied and the timeframe needed for the study. The timeframe for follow-up from the agency cannot exceed six months.
-
CM4If the item will not be implemented or is not reasonable, the respondent is required to provide a detailed explanation. 933.05. Findings and Recommendations (a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: Submitted October 2, 2020 6 (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) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, 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 timeframe for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe 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 timeframe 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. Presiding Judge Grand Jury Presiding Judge Jacquelyn H. Duffy San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Superior Court of California P.O. Box 4910 1035 Palm Street Room 355 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 Submitted October 2, 2020 7
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
San Luis Obispo County
County