📋
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 8 findings
F1
Page 172
1 There is no set of regional interagency goals or objectives to address gang reduction in Los Angeles County.
F2
Page 136
1.1 The number and professional skills of staff and funding allocations to the Hub Clinics vary considerably between facilities, resulting in wide variations in cost-effectiveness, equitable caseloads and productivity.
F3
Page 137
1 Foster parents and caregivers have expressed to Hub Clinic staff the need for a summary fact sheet listing age specific developmental stages and instructions for the care of normal children.
F4
Page 138
1.1 DHS’s oversight of the Hub Clinics has resulted in variations and omissions in key management systems including the absence of a strategic plan, goals and objectives, outcome measures for the Hub Clinic system and budgets for each clinic. 128 2008-2009 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Report
F5
Page 140
1.1 At least two Hubs currently have comprehensive assessment capacity. In some cases, they are duplicating aspects of the assessments conducted by MAT providers and the Department of Mental Health.
F6
Page 142
1.1 The new LAC+USC Medical Center has fewer licensed pediatric beds than the old facility had though the number of budgeted beds actually being used is approximately the same.
F7
Page 149
A site visit was conducted at the Probation Department’s new pilot Day Reporting Center in South Los Angeles. 2008-2009 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Report 137
F8
Page 150
Many of the data sources on gang reduction in Los Angeles County were reviewed including: • “Citywide Gang Activity Reduction Strategy,” (The Advancement Project, Los Angeles City County ad hoc Committee on Gang Violence and Youth Development 2007) • “Blueprint for a Comprehensive Citywide Anti-Gang Strategy,” (Los Angeles City Controller’s Office, 2008) • “Follow-up Audit on the Blueprint for a Comprehensive City-wide Anti-Gang Strategy,” (City Controller Laura Chick, 2009) • “The Comprehensive Collaboratives Addressing Youth Gangs,” (Urban Insti- tute, 2008) 138 2008-2009 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: GANG REDUCTION EFFORTS IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office estimates that there are 1,400 crimi- nal street gangs in Los Angeles County. There are reportedly at least 41,000 members in the City of Los Angeles alone and a countless number of youth at risk of gang in- volvement. The Los Angeles Police Department reported that the total number of gang- related crimes in 2008 was 6,877, of which 167 were homicides;4 an untold number of innocent by-standers were victimized as well. The collateral damage to stressed fami- lies, trauma-exposed children and vulnerable communities are immeasurable. None of the data collected for this investigation permitted segregation of reported gang membership by level of involvement or other factors. Anecdotal comments, however, made by individuals during the course of this investigation suggest that gang members involved in violent criminal activities represent a very small portion of the County’s youth and they are largely related to street drug trade, turf wars and revenge. Unfortunately, there is no universal definition of gang membership and some statistics on gang involvement count everything from young people who dress like gang members to international drug traffickers. It has also been estimated that the most violent criminal gangs in Los Angeles County represent less than 20 per cent of the total gang membership. This means that 80 per cent of the youth involved in gangs are not career criminals or engaged in violent activities. Consequently, gang reduction, as the City of Los Angeles maintains, must include a multi-faceted strategy. The Mayor’s office will continue to give priority to controlling violence through suppression tactics, while also providing prevention and intervention services to at-risk youth. To address the youth gang problem, programs related to gang prevention, intervention, suppression, and re-entry are housed in several agencies, both public and private, throughout the Los Angeles region. Law enforcement, education, social services and health agencies offer a variety of public and private programs that range widely in degree of gang focus and level of risk targeted. These programs and services were the focus of this Civil Grand Jury investigation. LAUSD is in a position to have a very positive anti-gang impact on its students. The District is in the process of compiling an inventory of gang reduction programs in its schools but will not have completed its survey until March 2010, and will not move forward on a comprehensive anti-gang strategy until all statistics have been analyzed. LACOE, the Los Angeles County Office of Education, is intimately involved in the education of children already identified as being at-risk but has only one employee, a Safety Coordinator in the Safe Schools Division, dedicated to regional gang reduction efforts. 4 “Citywide Gang Crime Summary, December 2008” Los Angeles Police Department, Gang and Opera- tions Support Division, January 8, 2009. 2008-2009 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Report 139 Key findings and recommendations: Fiscal Accountability and Interagency Coordination of Gang Reduction Programs County-wide is Lacking.
Recommendations 8
-
R1Page 1721.1 – Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors By December 31, 2009, the Board of Supervisors should establish an independent, regional coordinating commission to develop regional interagency goals and objectives to coordinate gang reduction efforts. It should include representation of city- and school board-level officials, along with appointed leaders of departments key to gang reduction as well as representation of community-based and faith-based organizations.
-
R2Page 1361 – The Director of the Department of Health Services The Director of the Department of Health Services should, by June 2010, establish staffing, service level, funding, service mix and outcome standards for the Hub Clinics using formulae based on the number and nature of patient visits and services, with input from Hub Clinic directors and the Department of Children and Family Services.
-
R3Page 1371 – The Director of the Department of Children and Family Services The Director of the Department of Children and Family Services should direct the CSWs and PHNs to create age-specific information sheets to be given to foster parents or caregivers at the time the detained child is placed in their care. These sheets should be sized for easy access, such as for posting on a refrigerator or note-board, and give in- formation listing normal behavior and expectations and also what steps should be taken in emergencies.
-
R4Page 1391 – The Director of the Department of Health Services The Director of the Department of Health Services should delegate management oversight responsibility to an existing manager for all Hub Clinic operations to include development of: a) a County-wide strategic plan; b) system-wide policies and procedures and outcome measures; c) individual facility budget tracking systems; and d) a capacity tracking system. Hub Clinic directors should report directly to this manager in addition to their clinical reporting relationships.
-
R5Page 1401.1 – The Directors of the Departments of Children and Family Services, Health Services and Mental Health The Directors of the Departments of Children and Family Services, Health Services and Mental Health should enter into an agreement wherein the Hub Clinics with the professional capabilities would become DMH-contracted MAT Providers and perform 130 2008-2009 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Report MAT assessments for children they see, whenever possible to be implemented
-
R6Page 1421.1 – The Director of the Department of Health Services The Director of the Department of Health Services should direct senior staff to collaborate with DCFS and LAC+USC management to prepare alternative plans to ensure sufficient and appropriate pediatric inpatient capacity at the facility given the projected pediatric patient population in coming years, including more foster youth using the Hub Clinics.
-
R7Page 149A site visit was conducted at the Probation Department’s new pilot Day Reporting Center in South Los Angeles. 2008-2009 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Report 137
-
R8Page 149Many of the data sources on gang reduction in Los Angeles County were reviewed including: • “Citywide Gang Activity Reduction Strategy,” (The Advancement Project, Los Angeles City County ad hoc Committee on Gang Violence and Youth Development 2007) • “Blueprint for a Comprehensive Citywide Anti-Gang Strategy,” (Los Angeles City Controller’s Office, 2008) • “Follow-up Audit on the Blueprint for a Comprehensive City-wide Anti-Gang Strategy,” (City Controller Laura Chick, 2009) • “The Comprehensive Collaboratives Addressing Youth Gangs,” (Urban Insti- tute, 2008) 138 2008-2009 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: GANG REDUCTION EFFORTS IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office estimates that there are 1,400 crimi- nal street gangs in Los Angeles County. There are reportedly at least 41,000 members in the City of Los Angeles alone and a countless number of youth at risk of gang in- volvement. The Los Angeles Police Department reported that the total number of gang- related crimes in 2008 was 6,877, of which 167 were homicides;4 an untold number of innocent by-standers were victimized as well. The collateral damage to stressed fami- lies, trauma-exposed children and vulnerable communities are immeasurable. None of the data collected for this investigation permitted segregation of reported gang membership by level of involvement or other factors. Anecdotal comments, however, made by individuals during the course of this investigation suggest that gang members involved in violent criminal activities represent a very small portion of the County’s youth and they are largely related to street drug trade, turf wars and revenge. Unfortunately, there is no universal definition of gang membership and some statistics on gang involvement count everything from young people who dress like gang members to international drug traffickers. It has also been estimated that the most violent criminal gangs in Los Angeles County represent less than 20 per cent of the total gang membership. This means that 80 per cent of the youth involved in gangs are not career criminals or engaged in violent activities. Consequently, gang reduction, as the City of Los Angeles maintains, must include a multi-faceted strategy. The Mayor’s office will continue to give priority to controlling violence through suppression tactics, while also providing prevention and intervention services to at-risk youth. To address the youth gang problem, programs related to gang prevention, intervention, suppression, and re-entry are housed in several agencies, both public and private, throughout the Los Angeles region. Law enforcement, education, social services and health agencies offer a variety of public and private programs that range widely in degree of gang focus and level of risk targeted. These programs and services were the focus of this Civil Grand Jury investigation. LAUSD is in a position to have a very positive anti-gang impact on its students. The District is in the process of compiling an inventory of gang reduction programs in its schools but will not have completed its survey until March 2010, and will not move forward on a comprehensive anti-gang strategy until all statistics have been analyzed. LACOE, the Los Angeles County Office of Education, is intimately involved in the education of children already identified as being at-risk but has only one employee, a Safety Coordinator in the Safe Schools Division, dedicated to regional gang reduction efforts. 4 “Citywide Gang Crime Summary, December 2008” Los Angeles Police Department, Gang and Opera- tions Support Division, January 8, 2009. 2008-2009 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Report 139 Key findings and recommendations: Fiscal Accountability and Interagency Coordination of Gang Reduction Programs County-wide is Lacking.