Riverside County Grand Jury
2003-2004
From the annual report
The consolidated year-end volume. The individual investigations it contains are listed separately below.
📑 Year-End Report
The full consolidated volume; individual reports are listed below.
Individual reports (13)
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
13 findings
F1:
During the period January through May 2004, Riverside County officials received approximately 100 citizens’ complaints regarding the Indio Shelter concerning the treatment of animals and the negative attitude of employees toward the public and rescue organization representatives.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Riverside County Animal Control Department develop and revise kennel operating policies and procedures that specifically apply to the Indio Shelter addressing the following areas: a. Field Service responsibilities and practices. b. Administrative and Office Record System. c. Vehicle maintenance and operation. d. Care of injured and/or sick animals. e. Euthanasia.
F2:
Only 22 of the 2,720 animals impounded in FY 2002-2003 at the Indio Animal Control Shelter were transported to a veterinarian for treatment of their injuries or illness. 2
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Indio Animal Control Management install shelves in the metal shed to store administrative records that are currently on the floor in the metal storage shed and in a bathroom.
F3:
The disposition of impounded animals from the Indio Animal Control Shelter representing seven (7) months in the FY 2003- 2004 are reflected below: DISPOSITION OF IMPOUNDED ANIMALS Held over FY 2003-2004 And Impounded FY 2002-2003 (7/1/03 – 2/29/04) FY 2001-2002 2,720 1,731 Euthanasia 1,879 69.1% 1,152 66.5% Adopted 477 17.5% 244 14.1% Return to Owner 364 13.4% 335 19.4% *Note: Fiscal Year starts July 1st through June 30th.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Management at the Indio Animal Shelter provide soft foods for young, elderly and/or sick animals and store all animal food properly in the food storage locker.
F4:
According to current policy dogs are held (5) days post-impound before the public or rescue organizations can adopt.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Indio Animal Control Services Supervisor establish an effective work schedule that focuses on managing the operations at the Indio facility.
F5:
Currently, the Indio Animal Control Shelter has working relationships with only the following three (3) rescue organizations and a private citizen: • Save-a-Pet • Yucaipa Animal Placement Service • Orphan Pet Oasis • Private Citizen
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Replace all missing drain covers to prevent injury to small dogs.
F6:
Evidence shows that the Director of Riverside County Animal Control Services Department rarely visited the Indio Animal Control Shelter and was not well informed regarding the operations of the Indio Animal Shelter.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Formal disciplinary action be taken against employees who fail to take injured, sick or suffering animals to the veterinarian or abuse or neglect impounded animals.
F7:
The management for the Animal Control Shelter in Indio failed to utilize an independent and unbiased citizen complaint process to address the public’s issues and concerns.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Indio Animal Control Service Supervisor and staff attend appropriate training classes that emphasize public relations and effective communications with rescue organizations. 6
F8:
During a visit at the Indio Animal Control Shelter, the Grand Jury observed the following conditions: a. Most of the 30 dog kennels were dirty with strong unpleasant odor of feces and/or vomit on the floor. (Photographs 1 and 2). 3 b. Soft canned food for very young, elderly or sick animals was unavailable. c. Towels, blanket or paper to create a more comfortable environment for puppies, kittens, and older or sick animals was unavailable. d. Upper fencing on some kennels that would prevent larger dogs from jumping into another kennel was missing. (Photograph 3) e. Drain holes (6-8” in diameter) in the kennel floors were uncovered. (Photographs 4 and 5) f. Freezer containing euthanized animals was unlocked and accessible to anyone on the property. g. An outdoor run for overflow had no protective covering to reduce exposure from the sun. h. The condition of the building showed a need for repairs and has not been repainted since 1974. i. Cooling misters that surround the outside animal quarantine area were inoperative. j. Administrative and animal records were observed to be scattered on the floor and spilling out of file boxes in a metal shed that also contained bags of dog and cat food. (Photograph 6) k. Two (2) of the animal control vehicles do not have the circulating roof swamp coolers on them. l. Upon reviewing the Riverside County Policy and Procedure Manual there are no procedures for implementation of spay/neuter programs. 4
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
Create a schedule of operating hours (staying within budget) at the Indio Animal Shelter to accommodate the working public for increased access to reclaim lost pets and promote adoptions.
F9:
Prior to the euthanasia of animals, the Indio Kennel Attendants do not obtain the name and phone number of private citizens and rescue organizations who have placed a “Hold” on an animal for adoption and therefore, are not in compliance with the Indio Animal Shelter’s Policy Number 326. This policy states, “If there are any holds on an animal (even if they are expired), an attempt will be made, via phone to the person or persons to confirm they are not interested in the animal.”
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
Develop an effective program to increase pet adoptions, returning lost pets back to their owners, reduce euthanasia by: (cid:131) Implementation of an aggressive spay/neuter program. (cid:131) Distribute educational materials to the public regarding pet adoption and the need for spay/neuter. (cid:131) Aggressive networking with rescues organizations that could incorporate offsite adoptions. (cid:131) Maintain and update “website” to promote adoptions.
F10:
Many animals impounded at the Indio Animal Shelter are not receiving needed veterinary care. This practice is in violation of California Civil Code Section 1834.4(a) and (b) which states, “impounded animals must receive appropriate veterinary care” and also violates Section 559d (a) and (b) of the California Penal Code, which require that “no adoptable or treatable animal be killed”.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
Indio Animal Control Shelter establish contracts and expand working relationships with rescue organizations to increase the number of pet adoptions.
F11:
In accordance with Riverside County Animal Service Policy Number 335, all animals deemed suitable for adoption are administered Bordatella vaccination as well as the 5 in 1 injection. Although this information is recorded on the Animal Cage Card, the rescue organization’s representatives and private citizens are not notified of the vaccinations when adopting the animals.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
The Director of Animal Control provide a staff member, with experience in public relations, to serve as the Indio Animal Service Liaison to establish coordination with rescue organizations and pet adoptions.
F12:
The Supervising Animal Control Officer at the Indio Animal Shelter was unable to provide documentation or clearly articulate the qualifications, behavioral standards, problem solving skills and human relations skills for the Animal Control Officers Position.
Related Recommendations (1)
R12:
In FY 2004-2005 the Indio Animal Shelter establish and promote a pet adoption program with the goal to reduce by at least twenty-five percent (25%) the number of animals euthanized.
F13:
In April 2003, a person present at the Indio Animal Shelter, documented the following acts of cruelty to animals: a. “Kennel attendants kicking and punching dogs like they were punching bags that were in the process of being euthanized. b. Newborn kittens (a week old) were not fed and were allowed to starve to death. c. Kennel attendants using their animal control sticks to drag cats to the edge of the cage for the purpose of euthanasia. 5 d. Kennel attendants hitting cats with their animal control stick to calm them prior to moving to another cage or euthanasia.”
Related Recommendations (1)
R13:
Revise the current complaint process through implementing a three-part (3) Citizen’s Animal Service Complaint Form with a tracking number and copies furnished to:
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R14:
The Director of Community Health Agency submit a quarterly report to the Board of Supervisors, which includes a copy of the complaint and corrective action taken. 7
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
13 findings
F1:
During the period January through May 2004, Riverside County officials received approximately 100 citizens’ complaints regarding the Indio Shelter concerning the treatment of animals and the negative attitude of employees toward the public and rescue organization representatives.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Riverside County Animal Control Department develop and revise kennel operating policies and procedures that specifically apply to the Indio Shelter addressing the following areas: a. Field Service responsibilities and practices. b. Administrative and Office Record System. c. Vehicle maintenance and operation. d. Care of injured and/or sick animals. e. Euthanasia.
F2:
Only 22 of the 2,720 animals impounded in FY 2002-2003 at the Indio Animal Control Shelter were transported to a veterinarian for treatment of their injuries or illness. 2
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Indio Animal Control Management install shelves in the metal shed to store administrative records that are currently on the floor in the metal storage shed and in a bathroom.
F3:
The disposition of impounded animals from the Indio Animal Control Shelter representing seven (7) months in the FY 2003- 2004 are reflected below: DISPOSITION OF IMPOUNDED ANIMALS Held over FY 2003-2004 And Impounded FY 2002-2003 (7/1/03 – 2/29/04) FY 2001-2002 2,720 1,731 Euthanasia 1,879 69.1% 1,152 66.5% Adopted 477 17.5% 244 14.1% Return to Owner 364 13.4% 335 19.4% *Note: Fiscal Year starts July 1st through June 30th.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Management at the Indio Animal Shelter provide soft foods for young, elderly and/or sick animals and store all animal food properly in the food storage locker.
F4:
According to current policy dogs are held (5) days post-impound before the public or rescue organizations can adopt.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Indio Animal Control Services Supervisor establish an effective work schedule that focuses on managing the operations at the Indio facility.
F5:
Currently, the Indio Animal Control Shelter has working relationships with only the following three (3) rescue organizations and a private citizen: • Save-a-Pet • Yucaipa Animal Placement Service • Orphan Pet Oasis • Private Citizen
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Replace all missing drain covers to prevent injury to small dogs.
F6:
Evidence shows that the Director of Riverside County Animal Control Services Department rarely visited the Indio Animal Control Shelter and was not well informed regarding the operations of the Indio Animal Shelter.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Formal disciplinary action be taken against employees who fail to take injured, sick or suffering animals to the veterinarian or abuse or neglect impounded animals.
F7:
The management for the Animal Control Shelter in Indio failed to utilize an independent and unbiased citizen complaint process to address the public’s issues and concerns.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Indio Animal Control Service Supervisor and staff attend appropriate training classes that emphasize public relations and effective communications with rescue organizations. 6
F8:
During a visit at the Indio Animal Control Shelter, the Grand Jury observed the following conditions: a. Most of the 30 dog kennels were dirty with strong unpleasant odor of feces and/or vomit on the floor. (Photographs 1 and 2). 3 b. Soft canned food for very young, elderly or sick animals was unavailable. c. Towels, blanket or paper to create a more comfortable environment for puppies, kittens, and older or sick animals was unavailable. d. Upper fencing on some kennels that would prevent larger dogs from jumping into another kennel was missing. (Photograph 3) e. Drain holes (6-8” in diameter) in the kennel floors were uncovered. (Photographs 4 and 5) f. Freezer containing euthanized animals was unlocked and accessible to anyone on the property. g. An outdoor run for overflow had no protective covering to reduce exposure from the sun. h. The condition of the building showed a need for repairs and has not been repainted since 1974. i. Cooling misters that surround the outside animal quarantine area were inoperative. j. Administrative and animal records were observed to be scattered on the floor and spilling out of file boxes in a metal shed that also contained bags of dog and cat food. (Photograph 6) k. Two (2) of the animal control vehicles do not have the circulating roof swamp coolers on them. l. Upon reviewing the Riverside County Policy and Procedure Manual there are no procedures for implementation of spay/neuter programs. 4
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
Create a schedule of operating hours (staying within budget) at the Indio Animal Shelter to accommodate the working public for increased access to reclaim lost pets and promote adoptions.
F9:
Prior to the euthanasia of animals, the Indio Kennel Attendants do not obtain the name and phone number of private citizens and rescue organizations who have placed a “Hold” on an animal for adoption and therefore, are not in compliance with the Indio Animal Shelter’s Policy Number 326. This policy states, “If there are any holds on an animal (even if they are expired), an attempt will be made, via phone to the person or persons to confirm they are not interested in the animal.”
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
Develop an effective program to increase pet adoptions, returning lost pets back to their owners, reduce euthanasia by: (cid:131) Implementation of an aggressive spay/neuter program. (cid:131) Distribute educational materials to the public regarding pet adoption and the need for spay/neuter. (cid:131) Aggressive networking with rescues organizations that could incorporate offsite adoptions. (cid:131) Maintain and update “website” to promote adoptions.
F10:
Many animals impounded at the Indio Animal Shelter are not receiving needed veterinary care. This practice is in violation of California Civil Code Section 1834.4(a) and (b) which states, “impounded animals must receive appropriate veterinary care” and also violates Section 559d (a) and (b) of the California Penal Code, which require that “no adoptable or treatable animal be killed”.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
Indio Animal Control Shelter establish contracts and expand working relationships with rescue organizations to increase the number of pet adoptions.
F11:
In accordance with Riverside County Animal Service Policy Number 335, all animals deemed suitable for adoption are administered Bordatella vaccination as well as the 5 in 1 injection. Although this information is recorded on the Animal Cage Card, the rescue organization’s representatives and private citizens are not notified of the vaccinations when adopting the animals.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
The Director of Animal Control provide a staff member, with experience in public relations, to serve as the Indio Animal Service Liaison to establish coordination with rescue organizations and pet adoptions.
F12:
The Supervising Animal Control Officer at the Indio Animal Shelter was unable to provide documentation or clearly articulate the qualifications, behavioral standards, problem solving skills and human relations skills for the Animal Control Officers Position.
Related Recommendations (1)
R12:
In FY 2004-2005 the Indio Animal Shelter establish and promote a pet adoption program with the goal to reduce by at least twenty-five percent (25%) the number of animals euthanized.
F13:
In April 2003, a person present at the Indio Animal Shelter, documented the following acts of cruelty to animals: a. “Kennel attendants kicking and punching dogs like they were punching bags that were in the process of being euthanized. b. Newborn kittens (a week old) were not fed and were allowed to starve to death. c. Kennel attendants using their animal control sticks to drag cats to the edge of the cage for the purpose of euthanasia. 5 d. Kennel attendants hitting cats with their animal control stick to calm them prior to moving to another cage or euthanasia.”
Related Recommendations (1)
R13:
Revise the current complaint process through implementing a three-part (3) Citizen’s Animal Service Complaint Form with a tracking number and copies furnished to:
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R14:
The Director of Community Health Agency submit a quarterly report to the Board of Supervisors, which includes a copy of the complaint and corrective action taken. 7
Findings & Recommendations
9 findings
F1:
Evidence clearly shows that staffing shortages have plagued the Auditor-Controller’s Office since 1990. This matter has been brought to the attention of the Board of Supervisors in six (6) past Riverside County Grand Jury Reports. (1990, 1992, 1993, 1996, 1997 and 2001) In 2001 the Riverside County Grand Jury issued a report on the Riverside County Internal Audit Unit, concluding that the IAU was inadequately staffed. In May 2002, the Board of Supervisors allocated funds to the IAU for three (3) additional senior auditors, bringing the total number of senior auditors to six (6). In February 2004, an eight percent (8%) budget cut was decreed by the Board of Supervisors resulting in the loss of twenty-three (23) positions, eleven (11) staff, and twelve (12) temporary positions in the Auditor-Controller’s Office. In May 2004, one senior auditor resigned, reducing the senior auditing positions to five (5). 1
F2:
The Riverside County Board of Supervisors have utilized the county’s comprehensive annual financial report (CAFR), to meet the requirements of Government Code Section 25250 and Board of Supervisors’ Resolution 83-338. The CAFR audit is not an in- depth analysis of county operations. Without an in-depth audit, this deprives the Board of Supervisors, County Executive Officer and Department Directors of information necessary to make sound fiscal evaluations and decisions.
F3:
A severe staffing shortage has resulted in: • Non-compliance with laws, regulations, policy and procedure. • Difficulty in performing operational audits or special audits without adversely impacting the two-year auditing cycle. • Inability to perform routine financial functional and operational audits. • Failure to provide the taxpayers with accountability in spending public funds.
F4:
Riverside County has the largest average number of county employees and the fourth largest budget with a disproportionate auditing staff as shown in chart below: TOTAL AVERAGE # COUNTY TOTAL # COUNTY FISCAL OF COUNTY OF BUDGET YEAR EMPLOYEES AUDITORS San Bernardino 16 $2,378,800,251 2003-2004 16,000 Orange 17 $5,086,921,444 2003-2004 17,000 San Diego 20 $3,414,398,000 2002-2003 14,000 Ventura 7 $641,215,000 2003-2004 8,000 Riverside 5 $2,211,371,850 2003-2004 19,000 2
F5:
Frequent auditing requests from county department directors for internal audits, are causing limited audit resources to be diverted from other needed areas or the requests cannot be met.
F6:
There are thirty-eight (38) departments in Riverside County whose budgets are required to be audited by the Auditor- Controller. Approximately twenty-two (22) departments have not had an in-depth audit, within the last five (5) years, as well as the County Board of Supervisors and the County Treasurer’s Office.
F7:
A shortage of internal auditors has hampered the process of performing risk based audits, resulting in a selected review of higher risk areas in the departments and use of a system control audit approach with limited testing.
F8:
Outside CPA firms, used by county departments to perform the function that the Auditor-Controller is elected to do, results in duplication of costs and waste of taxpayer’s dollars.
F9:
The Auditor-Controller is not afforded the option to have any input as to the selection of CPA firms, type of audits performed or fees incurred for the outside audits.
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
To be comparable with surrounding counties, the Board of Supervisors immediately fund the County Auditor-Controller a minimum of six (6) additional Senior Internal Auditor positions. Increase positions requested by the Auditor-Controller through Fiscal year 2009.
R2:
To comply with Board of Supervisors’ Resolution 83-338 and Government Code Section 25250, the Auditor-Controller utilize outside auditing firms only when critical need arises. 3
R3:
Outsourced audits must be procured and approved by the Auditor-Controller’s Office. The Auditor-Controller’s Office post all outsourced audits for general public information that will include, department name, cost incurred and reason for outsourcing. 4
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
10 findings
F1:
Blythe CPS Office does not have reasonable access to community services and county support systems that are required to implement the vision and missions of the Children’s Service Division. Although money has been appropriated in the budget, the following services and support systems are not available in the Blythe Community: (cid:131) Foster Care Facility (cid:131) Temporary Shelter (cid:131) Sufficient number of staff (cid:131) Necessary Mental Health Department Support
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Department of Social Services immediately hire or reassign the required number of social workers, as budgeted, in Blythe to adequately support the mission of Children’s Service Division.
F2:
The CPS, Blythe Office, does not have security-warning devices installed nor does it utilize an on-site security officer to provide protection for the staff. In more than one instance, angry parents or family members have threatened social workers.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Establish a temporary public shelter or contract with a local provider to provide temporary shelter of placement children who are removed from their homes during late evening or early morning hours.
F3:
Children who are removed from their home during late evening or early morning hours due to neglect or abuse are held in the CPS Office due to the unavailability of temporary shelters or Foster Care Facilities. A staff member must remain awake to ensure the child’s safety and well-being.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Establish new Foster Care provider contracts and/or reactivate contracts with former Foster Care providers for child placement, with the approval of Community Care Licensing.
F4:
In Blythe there are no temporary shelters or Foster Care Facilities for child placement. Children who are removed from a home in Blythe, are transported by CPS staff members to Indio or more distance locations within Riverside County; i.e. Moreno Valley, Corona and Riverside. These trips can take up to 6-8 hours.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Repair, update and maintain the teleconferencing system in the Blythe CPS Office to reduce the number of trips for staff training.
F5:
Blythe CPS staff, which transport children (mid-day to late evening) to cities in Western Riverside County, are expected to work their normal work schedule the following day without sufficient rest. 3
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Riverside County Fleet Service Department elevate vehicle maintenance standards for county vehicles used by the Blythe Children’s Service staff members to ensure reliable mechanical operations and maximum safety.
F6:
In 2003, Blythe CPS staff recorded 228 trips out of Blythe. Approximately seventy percent (70%) of these trips were made to seven (7) cities in Riverside County including Indio (85), Moreno Valley (17), Corona (12), Cathedral City (12), Desert Hot Springs (11), Rancho Mirage (10), and Riverside (11). The purpose of the trips were for: (cid:131) Family Visits (cid:131) Child Placement (cid:131) Court Appearances (cid:131) Staff Training
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
The Department of Mental Health develop and implement a tracking system in Blythe to monitor the effectiveness of the Substance Abuse and other Mental Health counseling services provided to family members.
F7:
Children, who are removed from their home in Blythe due to neglect or abuse, linger in the Foster Care System while their parents enter Department of Mental Health programs for counseling to become more responsible parents, as required by the courts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Install security devices (panic buttons, alarms, interface barriers between staff and public) to alert the staff and law enforcement of possible danger and provide protection for the clerical staff.
F8:
Blythe CPS staff were using vehicles later to be found defective to transport children to placement locations in Riverside County. On two (2) separate occasions while transporting children and family members CPS staff experienced major mechanical problems, including brake malfunction and parts falling off the vehicle.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
The Department of Mental Health in Blythe, provide the court required Substance Abuse counseling and other needed Mental Health Services for family members prior to returning the child to their home. Report Issued: 06/23/04 Report Public: 06/25/04 Response Due: 09/21/04 5
F9:
Blythe CPS teleconferencing system, which is utilized for training and would reduce traveling to Indio, has been inoperative for approximately two years.
F10:
The Blythe CPS Office budgeted position and actual staffing are shown in the chart below: Positions Title Budgeted Actual Social Worker 5 3 Office Assistant 1 1 Receptionist 1 0 Social Service Assistant 1 1 Total 8 5 4
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
10 findings
F1:
Blythe CPS Office does not have reasonable access to community services and county support systems that are required to implement the vision and missions of the Children’s Service Division. Although money has been appropriated in the budget, the following services and support systems are not available in the Blythe Community: (cid:131) Foster Care Facility (cid:131) Temporary Shelter (cid:131) Sufficient number of staff (cid:131) Necessary Mental Health Department Support
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Department of Social Services immediately hire or reassign the required number of social workers, as budgeted, in Blythe to adequately support the mission of Children’s Service Division.
F2:
The CPS, Blythe Office, does not have security-warning devices installed nor does it utilize an on-site security officer to provide protection for the staff. In more than one instance, angry parents or family members have threatened social workers.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Establish a temporary public shelter or contract with a local provider to provide temporary shelter of placement children who are removed from their homes during late evening or early morning hours.
F3:
Children who are removed from their home during late evening or early morning hours due to neglect or abuse are held in the CPS Office due to the unavailability of temporary shelters or Foster Care Facilities. A staff member must remain awake to ensure the child’s safety and well-being.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Establish new Foster Care provider contracts and/or reactivate contracts with former Foster Care providers for child placement, with the approval of Community Care Licensing.
F4:
In Blythe there are no temporary shelters or Foster Care Facilities for child placement. Children who are removed from a home in Blythe, are transported by CPS staff members to Indio or more distance locations within Riverside County; i.e. Moreno Valley, Corona and Riverside. These trips can take up to 6-8 hours.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Repair, update and maintain the teleconferencing system in the Blythe CPS Office to reduce the number of trips for staff training.
F5:
Blythe CPS staff, which transport children (mid-day to late evening) to cities in Western Riverside County, are expected to work their normal work schedule the following day without sufficient rest. 3
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Riverside County Fleet Service Department elevate vehicle maintenance standards for county vehicles used by the Blythe Children’s Service staff members to ensure reliable mechanical operations and maximum safety.
F6:
In 2003, Blythe CPS staff recorded 228 trips out of Blythe. Approximately seventy percent (70%) of these trips were made to seven (7) cities in Riverside County including Indio (85), Moreno Valley (17), Corona (12), Cathedral City (12), Desert Hot Springs (11), Rancho Mirage (10), and Riverside (11). The purpose of the trips were for: (cid:131) Family Visits (cid:131) Child Placement (cid:131) Court Appearances (cid:131) Staff Training
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
The Department of Mental Health develop and implement a tracking system in Blythe to monitor the effectiveness of the Substance Abuse and other Mental Health counseling services provided to family members.
F7:
Children, who are removed from their home in Blythe due to neglect or abuse, linger in the Foster Care System while their parents enter Department of Mental Health programs for counseling to become more responsible parents, as required by the courts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Install security devices (panic buttons, alarms, interface barriers between staff and public) to alert the staff and law enforcement of possible danger and provide protection for the clerical staff.
F8:
Blythe CPS staff were using vehicles later to be found defective to transport children to placement locations in Riverside County. On two (2) separate occasions while transporting children and family members CPS staff experienced major mechanical problems, including brake malfunction and parts falling off the vehicle.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
The Department of Mental Health in Blythe, provide the court required Substance Abuse counseling and other needed Mental Health Services for family members prior to returning the child to their home. Report Issued: 06/23/04 Report Public: 06/25/04 Response Due: 09/21/04 5
F9:
Blythe CPS teleconferencing system, which is utilized for training and would reduce traveling to Indio, has been inoperative for approximately two years.
F10:
The Blythe CPS Office budgeted position and actual staffing are shown in the chart below: Positions Title Budgeted Actual Social Worker 5 3 Office Assistant 1 1 Receptionist 1 0 Social Service Assistant 1 1 Total 8 5 4
Quick View
Full Details →
Additional Recommendations
11
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The City of Norco agrees with the recommendation. The City does and will continue to adhere to existing environmental policies and will adopt new policies as appropriate for development, in order to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and with Section 65962.5(f) of the California Government Code. This Code section requires that the City acquire a signed statement from the applicant indicating whether the project is located on the list of hazardous waste and substances sites. The City continues to enforce applicable codes, make periodic inspections and ensure compliance with the permit requirements. In accordance with CEQA regulations, the City continues to require mandatory testing when CEQA regulations warrant such testing. It is important to note that various regulatory agencies other than the City of Norco perform significant environmental regulation functions with respect to their jurisdictions and authority.
R2:
The City of Norco agrees with the recommendation and has implemented a link to the DTSC electronic database www.dtsc.ca.gov/database/Calsites/Cortese List.cfm. Since May 2003, the City has placed information relative to the project on the City’s Internet site at www.ci.norco.ca.us/wyle.htm.
R3:
The City of Norco agrees with the recommendation and continues to work with property owners, community groups, regulatory agencies, and the City’s environmental consulting firm regarding off-site testing and groundwater contamination. As indicated in Response 2 above, information regarding the project site has been placed on the City’s Internet site. In addition, extensive reports were prepared and presented at City Council meetings on May 7, 2003, June 4, 2003 and July 2, 2003. A representative of the City is now serving on the DTSC citizens advisory group (CAG) and several CAG meetings have been held in City facilities using City resources. In addition, DTSC is providing public information in this regard, with the City of Norco interacting with DTSC and the CITY COUNCIL FRANK HALL HERB HIGGINS KATHY AZEVEDO HAL CLARK HARVEY SULLIVAN Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Council Member Council Member Council Member City’s environmental consultant providing technical review. A standing report is placed on each agenda of the Norco City Council providing an update to the public on the status of this issue. In addition, the City is working with the established CAG to facilitate dissemination of information to the community. Currently, information is being placed in the City’s water bills.
R4:
The City of Norco agrees with the recommendation. The City has contracted with Kleinfelder, Inc. to analyze testing reports and work plans from DTSC for additional testing. The City has allocated funds for use in the event that the consultant determines that additional off-site soil and ground water testing is necessary. In the event that it is determined to be necessary, the City will participate in “split sampling” in conjunction with other regulatory agencies. However, it should be noted that DTSC is the lead regulatory agency evaluating data quality objectives. The City of Norco’s environmental consulting firm will be providing technical assistance and guidance on data quality, data gaps and appropriateness of split sampling.
R5:
The City of Norco disagrees with this recommendation. DTSC is the lead agency for oversight regarding investigation and cleanup of the Wyle site; however, the City will cooperate fully with DTSC and other regulatory agencies. DTSC has developed an Interim Removal Action Workplan to contain and control identified groundwater contamination. In addition, DTSC has approved a site boundary assessment to identify migration of potential contaminated groundwater. Final cleanup standards for the site have not yet been developed and will be subject to subsequent approval by DTSC. As part of this project, DTSC will make determinations as to the appropriateness of preparing environmental assessment of activities for cleanup, including actions taken to mitigate or eliminate the release, or threat of release, of hazardous waste or substances. It is inappropriate for the City of Norco to prepare an EIR when the City is not the Lead Agency for cleanup. For proposed development of the site, the City will function as the Lead Agency, making appropriate environmental determinations. A Notice of Preparation has been issued for a proposed residential development on the Wyle site, with a draft EIR under preparation at this time.
R6:
The City of Norco agrees with the recommendation. The City will send a letter to the California Cancer Registry asking for a review of the reported cancer cases and to update its report for the subject period. The California Department of Health Services (DHS) is evaluating data provided by DTSC and will determine the need for and direction of these follow-up health investigations. The City will fully cooperate with DHS. In reviewing the Grand Jury report, there are several items on which the City would like to comment. The City’s comments are included as an attachment. The City of Norco appreciates the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury report. Please contact Mr. Jeff Allred, City Manager at (909) 270-5611 if you require any additional information. Sincerely, /s/ Charles Skaggs, Fire Chief /s/ James E. Daniels, Director of Community Development /s/ Joseph Schenk, Director of Public Works/City Engineer /s/ Steve King, Senior Planner Attachment: City of Norco’s comments relating to the Grand Jury report /dlm — 49977 Comments from the City of Norco on the 2003-04 Grand Jury report relative to the soil and water contamination: A. In reference to Tables 2a and 2b, comments from the City’s environmental consulting firm, Kleinfelder, Inc., are as follows:
R7:
The reported concentration of lead of ND is correct. The MCL should be an AL.
R8:
Kleinfelder did not find reference to liquid samples containing 9.2 ppb benzene analysis; however benzene was reported from the samples of sludge collected from septic tanks 6 and 9. The MCL of 5 ppb refers to USEPA; CDHS has a MCL of I ppb.
R9:
Kleinfelder did not find reference to liquid samples containing PCBs of 1.5 ppb during our review. All reported results are below the laboratory reporting limits, however the reporting limits are above the MCL. The MCL for PCBs is correct.
R10:
The reference to the highest NDMA concentrations of 7.2 ppb is in error. The concentration is in nanograms per liter or parts per trillion (ppt) and is equivalent to 0.0072 ppb. The reported MCL for NDMA should be an AL and is correct at 0.01 ppb.
R11:
The highest concentration for hydrazine of 14 ppb is incorrectly reported and is actually 0.014 ppb. The statement of no established MCL is correct. B. In reference to Item 9 listed on , the City issued a detonation permit in the unlikely event that Wyle Laboratories needed to detonate something to react to its client needs. WyIe’s last permitted detonation occurred in June of 2001. The detonation permit issued by the City to WyIe Laboratories stipulated that a maximum of ten (10) pounds of explosive material could be used at ground level or fifty (50) pounds below the surface. In contrast, detonations performed by a housing developer on the southern portion of its development in Norco during grading contained between 25,000 to 130,000 pounds of explosive. Furthermore, the comments do not indicate that the testing done by WyIe in 2002 consisted of deflagration testing (mixing of hydrogen gas and air) which does not fall within the City’s Municipal Code definition of blasting. Wyle Laboratories did not require a permit for deflagration testing and would have continued with the testing whether or not the detonation permit was issued. C. In reference to Item 10a listed on , the City contracts with Riverside County to provide health services including the documentation of hazardous sites. Any time environmental documents are prepared, the City is required to use the list generated by the County Department of Environmental Health of identified hazardous materials sites and the City sends an NOP/IS to the County in accordance with CEQA regulations. When the NOP/IS was issued, there were no hazardous sites identified by the County in Norco. When the County received the NOP/IS, the City was informed that the Wyle site was listed on a SARWQCB investigations and cleanup list. As recommended by the State Clearinghouse, the City subsequently issued a second NOP/IS with revised data. The City followed standard procedure on the issuance of an NOP/IS. The City obtained information on WyIe Labs after the County responded to the NOP/IS. The City believes there was no deficiency as proper procedures were followed. With regard to the reference in Item 10a concerning the “Calsites” database, it should be noted that, at that time, DISC determined that the site, as it was identified on the Calsites list, was not a candidate site for the National Priority List for cleanup. DTSC determined that “No Further Action” was required and its determination was forwarded to the County of Riverside Health Department. D. In reference to Item 10b listed on , the City’s Community Development Department distributed the NOP/IS to the State Clearinghouse pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15205 and 15206, to ensure that all responsible agencies were identified and notified. The State Clearinghouse circulates the NOP/IS to any additional agencies that the state determines might be a responsible agency. Two state agencies (DISC and SARWQCB) determined that there were issues that needed to be addressed in the Draft EIR. The two state agencies also determined that the NOP/IS should reflect that the site had been identified on the SARWQCB Investigations list, and on a DTSC investigations list, wherein DISC determined that “No Further Action” was necessary. The two state agencies forwarded the information to the State Clearinghouse in response to the NOP/IS. The State Clearinghouse then forwarded the information to the City and, as previously noted, the City sent out a second NOP/IS with the revised data. The City followed state and federal requirements as required by CEQA and the NOP/IS process worked exactly as it is intended. E. In reference to Item 10c listed on , it should be noted that the purpose and scope of an NOP/IS is to identify issues and topics that would be addressed in the draft EIR. An NOP/IS is not intended to address specific cleanup and remediation activities. F. In reference to Item 13 listed on , the comments combine two separate actions taken by the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency on June 4, 2003 and on June 18, 2003. On June 4, 2003, the Redevelopment Agency directed staff to solicit bids for a geologist to do an assessment, to look at the report submitted by Wyle, to look at the run-off areas and to speak with long-term residents. On June 18, 2003, the City Council allocated $50,000 in the FY 2003- 04 budget to conduct testing if necessary. An environmental consulting firm, Kleinfelder, Inc., has been retained by the City and is currently engaged in assessing the circumstances. G. In reference to Item 14 on and Item 11 on of the Grand Jury report, residents living near Wyle Labs advised the City Council on January 16, 2002 of health risk concerns related to the site (listed in the Jury report as January 17, 2002). The convening of the Town Hall meeting within 30 days of being advised of the concerns was timely considering the number of agencies that were contacted to participate in the meeting. Representatives from the South Coast Air Quality Management District; the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health, Hazardous Materials Management; the State of California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control, Statewide Compliance Division; the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region; the Office of Hazardous Materials Enforcement, Western Region; and the Riverside County Sheriff Department, Hazardous Device Team were all present at the Town Hall meeting of February 16, 2002 to provide information in response to the concerns expressed on January 16, 2002. H. Due to the fact that Wyle Laboratories began operations in 1957, seven years prior to the City’s incorporation, the City did not issue any initial permits or approvals for this facility.
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
Traffic signs erected without the approval of the City Traffic Engineer are not enforceable.
F2:
The City Traffic Engineer Department does not have procedures and/or policies in place to remove traffic control markings, signs, and signals, which have been erected without the approval of the City Traffic Engineer.
Related Recommendations (3)
R2:
The City Traffic Engineer must develop procedures and policies regarding the request for the placement or removal of traffic control markings, signs and signals.
R3:
Procedures and policies for placement or removal of traffic control markings, signs and signals are made available to the general public and law enforcement.
R4:
City of Indio Police Department develop procedures and policies to insure that all City of Indio Police Officers follow proper procedures for placement of enforceable traffic control signs. 3
F3:
Employees of the Desert Sands Unified School District, acting upon the request of an Indio Police Department Patrol Officer, placed a “Right Turn Only” sign at the single lane exit leading from the Johnson Elementary School to the intersection of Clinton and Alberta Streets in Indio. A “Right Turn Only” sign was also placed at the double exit lane leading from the Johnson Elementary School to the intersection of Clinton and Palmyra Streets. Neither sign was authorized by the City Traffic Engineer.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The City Traffic Engineer should remove or formally approve the unauthorized traffic control markings, signs or signals at Johnson Elementary School in accordance with state law.
F4:
Properly authorized and painted traffic flow markers at the double exit lanes from the Johnson Elementary School were altered without the approval of the City Traffic Engineer.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The City Traffic Engineer should remove or formally approve the unauthorized traffic control markings, signs or signals at Johnson Elementary School in accordance with state law.
F5:
A third exit from the Johnson Elementary School onto Clinton Street also has an unauthorized “International” no left turn sign.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The City Traffic Engineer should remove or formally approve the unauthorized traffic control markings, signs or signals at Johnson Elementary School in accordance with state law.
F6:
A school district bus driver was cited for violating one of these unauthorized signs. Although the citation was later dismissed, the bus driver incurred inconvenience and considerable expense.
F7:
The City Traffic Engineer allowed the signs to remain in place, once learning of their existence. 2
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
26 findings
F1:
There is a considerable lack of shelter administrative leadership regarding implementation of policies, procedures, and protocols; adversely affecting the overall function of the department.
F2:
In June 2003, shelter administration instituted an impound fee for “unaltered” stray dogs without the approval of the Board of Supervisors. This action is in direct violation of Riverside County Ordinance 630.9 Section 11a (1), (2) and (3).
F3:
The shelter administration is severely deficient in keeping personnel abreast of local and state mandates pertaining to animals. 2
F4:
Shelter administration has been indifferent in addressing internal discord between management and staff.
F5:
Numerous grievances and complaints have been filed with Riverside County Human Resources from shelter management and staff, indicating obvious dissension and low morale.
F6:
A new work schedule for weekend personnel was implemented by shelter management during mid October 2003. This schedule has reduced the feeding time for all animals resulting in thirty- three (33) hours or longer between feedings. This action is in direct violation of California Penal Code Section 597(e) and California Civil Code Section 1834.
F7:
Shelter management does not actively pursue alternative avenues for acquiring grants to supplement projected revenues.
F8:
No procedure exists that promotes solicitations for donations from pet food companies, resulting in added financial obligations to the shelters’ services and supplies. At the request of the 2003-2004 Riverside County Grand Jury, an emergency audit was performed by the Office of County Auditor-Controller. The findings and recommendations from said audit are incorporated into this report, as listed in Findings 9-12 and Recommendations 7-10. 9. “Adequate controls have not been established to ensure unclaimed spay and neuter deposits were used in accordance with State Food and Agriculture Code 30503. Review results revealed, general ledger accounts and procedures have not been established to ensure funds that should be restricted for spay and neuter programs were segregated from County General Funds, and that expenditures and unused balances were monitored and reconciled periodically.” “Donations: The Auditor-Controller’s Office identified $11,183 posted to the donation revenue account during fiscal year 2002/03 and an additional $7,200 posted to date for fiscal year 2003-04. Monetary donations range from 5 cents to $500 with the exception of a single $1,000 donation that was made in July
F11:
Develop a procedure to review all written suggestions made by the shelter veterinarian and paid staff.
F12:
Reinstall time clock.
F13:
On August 24, 2003, the shelter’s veterinarian submitted a proposal of areas that needed change for general health improvement of the animals. As of November 2003, none of the veterinarian’s suggestions have been addressed or implemented.
F14:
For the month of September 2003, the shelter’s veterinarian was away from the shelter premises. During his absence unregistered kennel personnel were permitted by shelter management to administer medications both orally and by injection, to the animals on a daily basis. This practice is in direct violation of California Business and Professions Code, Section 4826(c) of the Veterinary Practice Act.
F15:
Due to an inoperative time clock, hourly employees are responsible for recording their own time sheets. It has become evident that some employees are receiving preferential treatment from shelter management staff.
F16:
Employee’s duties that include assignment to euthanize animals must perform this duty for a 30-day period and up to six hours daily, causing substantial emotional stress.
F17:
Due to inadequate software and poorly trained personnel, the shelter’s adoption website is not current. Therefore, the majority of the animals pictured on the website will have already been euthanized.
F18:
Although shelter management has assigned an employee to contact various rescue organizations, communications are sporadic, resulting in excessive and unnecessary euthanasia.
F19:
According to Riverside County Euthanasia Protocol and Procedures, at no time should one animal be euthanized in front of another animal in the euthanasia room. Therefore, a towel or shade must be placed over the face of the holding cages. As of November 13, 2003, there are no shades or curtains being utilized in this area.
F20:
Riverside County Euthanasia Protocol and Procedures manual states “Routine euthanasia procedures should be completed by the time the shelter opens for business.” It is evident that on multiple occasions, animals had been euthanized during business 5 hours, contrary to Riverside County Euthanasia Protocol and Procedures.
F21:
Records indicate that as many as eighty (80) animals have been euthanized in a single day. A significant number of these euthanasia’s appear to be due to: a) Arbitrary carelessness and indifference with regard to following Riverside County Protocol and Procedures. b) Negligence in not contacting the animal’s owner. c) Overall complacency in promoting adoption programs. d) Disregard for rescue organizations and individual animal sponsors.
F22:
Some euthanasia records are inaccurate and incomplete, violating California Food and Agricultural Code Section 32003(b).
F23:
The court assigns many people convicted of minor offenses to a work release program. Some offenders are required to work at the animal shelter on a daily basis, performing specific duties such as cleaning kennels and food containers. It appears that on weekends, supervisory personnel are not scheduled to work resulting in “work release” persons: a) Having access to unattended and unsecured hypodermic needles in the receiving area and the euthanasia room. b) Working along with one or two kennel employees, possibly jeopardizing their safety. c) Interacting with the general public. d) Inability to account for animals disappearing from the general kennel population. e) Not being trained in the proper methods of cleaning and disinfecting cages and food containers.
F24:
There is no accountability or inventory control of the shelter’s unsecured hypodermic needles, resulting in possible abuse or theft. 6
F25:
Air conditioners in the animal compartments on several animal control vehicles are defective. This has resulted in animal control officers having to make frequent returns to the shelter, demonstrating an inefficient use of personnel time and resources.
F26:
For a period of one week, the shelter had substituted the cat litter with “Oil Dri”, an absorbent material specified for industrial use only. This product contains respirable crystalline silica, which is known to the State of California to cause cancer.
F27:
There is evidence to show that in one instance an elected Riverside City official received preferential treatment from the shelter administration, by having the required return to owner fees reduced for their impounded animal.
F28:
In 1998, the Board of Supervisors appointed a group of volunteer citizens as members of the Blue Ribbon Committee. The committee was formed to amend and create county ordinances relating to dogs and cats. There is evidence to show that one member of the committee has been allowed by shelter administration to influence the shelter’s daily operations.
Findings & Recommendations
14 findings
F1:
In 1983, the Facility was added to the State’s Abandoned Site List due to a lack of information concerning activities conducted at the site and the high level of security that limited access. In 1986, a California Department of Health Services (DHS) staff member was reviewing old department records, including phone books (1968-1972), and discovered a listing for the Facility and confirmed they were still doing business. 1
F2:
In May 1988, the California DHS conducted a Preliminary Assessment (PA) of the Facility and recommended a low priority site inspection. Additionally, DHS recommended that the California Environmental Protection Agency (California EPA) take no further action based on the following factors: a. Low waste quantity. b. Low ground water target population. c. Lack of surface water target population. d. Low potential for airborne release.
F3:
Residents living near the Facility since 1985 fear that the hazardous materials tested and the cancer-causing pollutants (volatile organic chemicals) found in the Facility’s soil and ground water may be linked to a higher incidence of thyroid cancer cases in the community.
F4:
At the request of the City of Norco, a Cancer Epidemiologist at Region Five (5) of the California Cancer Registry reviewed the number of reported cancer cases from two (2) 1990 census tracts (0407.01 and 0408.03) and four (4) census tracts (0407.01-0407.03 and 0408.03) between the period January 1, 1988 – December 31, 2000. The report concluded that: “The number of new thyroid cancer cases observed in the area of Norco where concerns were raised does not reveal significant differences from the number expected when considering age, sex and race/ethnicity distribution and population size.”
F5:
During a joint Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) and Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) complaint investigation on June 12, 2001, soil and ground water samples were collected at the Facility. A certified testing laboratory analysis showed lead levels in one (1) sample to be approximately seven (7) times higher than the threshold for hazardous waste. This level indicated the need for further soil and ground water characterization at the Facility to delineate the scope of cleanup and abatement. 2
F6:
In 1985, Riverside County adopted Ordinances #615 and #651 that authorized the County of Riverside DHS Hazardous Material Division to issue permits and inspect business that: a. Maintained underground storage tanks. b. Generated and stored hazardous waste. Table 1a and 1b show the inspection and enforcement activities conducted since 1993 by DHS at the Facility. Table 1a INSPECTIONS AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES Riverside County Department of Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Management Division DATE AGENCY ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION July 1993 Hazardous Materials Handler Hazardous Waste Generator and inspection of a 4,000-gallon Underground Storage Tank (UST). August – December Hazardous Materials Handler Granted facility an extension for compliance with violations noted 1993 July 1993. December 1993 Hazardous Materials Handler Follow-up on July 1993 inspection. March 1995 Hazardous Materials Handler Hazardous Waste Generator and Underground Storage Tank Inspection. April 1995 Blasland, Bouck & Lee Consultant hired by Industrial Testing Facility owners to conduct an environmental due diligence inspection. June 1996 Blasland, Bouck & Lee Provided oversight (at consultant request) of site remediation related to the environmental contamination. July – October 1996 HMMD Reviewed additional requirements for proposed site remediation. October – November HMMD Referred concerns regarding possible groundwater contamination to 1996 the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The RWQCB issued a clearance letter indicating data did not present a threat to groundwater. November 1996 – HMMD Reviewed preliminary closure report, additional requirements, November 1997 remediation and confirmation sample oversight. August 1997 Hazardous Materials Handler Hazardous Waste Generator and UST. October 1997 HMMD Granted facility extension for compliance with violations noted during August 1997 inspection. November 1997 HMMD Received a letter from facility owners certifying violation compliance noted during the August 1997 inspection. Table 1b INSPECTIONS AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES Riverside County, Department of Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Management Division DATE AGENCY ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION June 1998 HMMD Received final closure report for site remediation, issued clearance letter after extensive review. Sent copy of clearance letter to RWQCB. October 1998 HMMD Issued clearance letter to facility for closure of UST. UST properly closed and removed. No evidence of contamination found. June 2001 RWQCB RWQCB received complaints regarding contamination at the Testing Facility. A joint inspection with HMMD, Department of Toxic Substance Control. Source: Riverside County, Department of Environmental Health, And Hazardous Materials Management Division. Tables’ 1a and 1b show the inspections and enforcement activities conducted at the Industrial Testing Facility by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health, Hazardous Material Management Division. 5
F7:
Soil and ground water contamination has been found on the Facility’s property. The map and tables 2a and 2b show the types and levels of contaminates found.
F8:
A number of homes have existed northwest and west of the Facility’s property for many years. Expansion of residential developments began to encircle the site (See Vicinity Map). Since 1988, the following residential developments have been constructed or planned: a. In 1988, Norco Hills was built immediately to the south. b. In 2000, Stoneridge Estates was constructed along the Facility’s southern boundary. c. In 2002, the owners of the Facility sold the property to a developer for subsequent residential use. Plans have been submitted to the City of Norco Planning Department for the Creekside Ranch Development, a planned community consisting of 372 single-family units. Table 2a CONTAMINANTS FOUND IN GROUND WATER AT INDUSTRIAL TESTING FACILITY MAXIMUM SUBSTANCE DESCRIPTION SITES FOUND HIGHEST CONTAMINATION AMT FOUND LEVEL TCE SOLVENT USED TO DEGREASE TRICHOLOROETHYLENE EQUIPMENT. FIVE TEST WELLS 3,4,5,9,10 8,500 ppb 5 ppb EXCEEDED DRINKING WATER STANDARDS CIS-1,2-DCE FLAMMABLE COLORLESS LIQUID USED AS A SOLVENT; ALSO A 2,3,4,5,9,10 140 ppb 6 ppb CIS-1,2- BREAKDOWN PRODUCT OF TCE. DICHLOROETHYLENE EIGHT TESTING WELLS EXCEEDED ALLOWABLE LIMITS FOR DRINKING WATER TRANS-1,2- DCE FLAMMABLE COLORLESS LIQUID USED AS A SOLVENT; ALSO A 3,10 100 ppb 10 ppb TRANS-1,2- BREAKDOWN PRODUCT OF TCE. DICHLOROETHYLENE TWO TEST WELLS EXCEEDED DRINKING WATER ALLOWABLE LIMITS. VINYL CHLORIDE CREATED WHEN TCE BREAKSDOWN. TWO TEST WELLS 4,10 15 ppb 2.0 PPB EXCEEDED DRINKING WATER ALLOWABLE LIMITS. PCE SOLVENT USED TO DEGREASE TETRACHLOROETHYLENE EQUIPMENT. DETECTED IN THREE 3,5,10 79 ppb 5 ppb TEST WELLS AND SOIL. PERCHLORATE A SALT USED IN ROCKET FUEL AND MUNITIONS TESTED ABOVE 5,6 7.9 ppb 4.6 ppb REPORTABLE LEVELS AT TWO TEST WELL SITES. FOUND IN TWO SEPTIC SYSTEMS 7 Table 2b CONTAMINANTS FOUND IN GROUND WATER INDUSTRIAL TESTING FACILITY MAXIMUM SUBSTANCE DESCRIPTION SITES FOUND HIGHEST CONTAMINATION AMT FOUND LEVEL (MCL) LEAD NATURALY OCCURING METAL 1,2,3,4, None reported USED IN FOSSIL FUELS, 5,6,7,8 For water. 15 pbb AMMUNITIONS AND SOME 10 METALS. FOUND IN 13 SEPTIC SYSTEMS. BENZENE ROCKET FUEL COMPONENT. 3,4 9.2 ppb 5 pbb FOUND IN 2 SEPTIC SYSTEMS PCB OILY LIQUID OR SOLID; USED TO 8 1.5 ppb 0.50 ppb LUBRICATE OR COOL ELECTRICAL POLYCHLORINATED EQUIPMENT FOUND IN SOIL. BIPHENYLS NDMA YELLOW LIQUID, A COMPONENT 3,10 7.2 ppb .0.01 ppb OF ROCKET FUEL. DETECTED IN TWO TEST WELLS. HYDRAZINE LIQUID ROCKET FUEL 3,10 14 ppb A maximum FOUND IN TWO TEST WELLS. contamination Level not established Sources Regional Water Quality Control Board and Consultants Report. (ppb – Parts per billion.) This table show the types and concentrations of hazardous materials found in groundwater at the Industrial Testing Facility. 8 9 10
F9:
Since 1990, the Facility was required to apply annually for renewal of its detonation permit. In 2002, numerous citizens expressed concerns to the Norco City Council regarding noise and vibrations coming from the Facility, which frightened children, horses and pets. On June 21, 2002, the Norco City Council, in spite of the citizen’s requests, approved the renewal and re-issued the detonation permit.
F10:
In compliance with state law, the City of Norco was the lead agency for the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Creekside Ranch Residential Development. The Norco City Planning Department prepared the Notice of Preparation / Initial Study (NOP/IS) and the Specific Plan (March 2003) that was negligent in following the state and federal requirements. The following three deficiencies are noted: a) Correct identification of the hazardous status of the site. The NOP/IS incorrectly states that the project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to California Code (Government Code Section 65962.5) the project is identified in two databases that constitute the aforementioned list: • The site is listed on the DTSC “Calsites” database as a hazardous waste facility. • The site is listed on the SARWQCB’s “Spills, Leak and investigations and Cleanup List” (SLIC) for volatile organic compounds and hydrocarbons. b) The proper notification of appropriate state agencies. The NOP/IS was not properly distributed by the City of Norco to two responsible state agencies (DTSC and SARWQCB) in accordance with California Code (Public Code Section 21080.4a). 11 c) Cleanup and remediation information. The NOP/IS did not provide necessary information regarding the cleanup and remediation activities that would be necessary before the proposed development could occur.
F11:
During the Norco City Council Meeting on January 17, 2002, residents who live near the Facility advised the Norco City Council that they fear health risks from contaminants exposed to the air, soil and water during the 40+ (plus) years of testing hazardous materials and conducting explosions. The residents requested Norco City Council provide information regarding past and present activities at the site. The City of Norco did not possess the requested information. Therefore, a group of residents formed a community action group named INSIST (Involved Neighbors Seeking Information, Safety and Truth). This group contacted the appropriate regulatory agencies (DTSC, SARWQCB and California EPA), which provided information regarding past and present conditions that may have impact, and proposed future activities (cleanup) that could threaten public health.
F12:
Through Grand Jury interviews with Norco City Council, reviewing regulatory agency reports and Norco City Council Minutes, it was discovered that an offer had been made in June and July 2003, to the Norco City Manager by a representative from California EPA that was not communicated to the Norco City Council. The offer was an opportunity to participate in “Split Sampling”* as an efficient and cost effective method for testing offsite locations for soil and ground water contaminants. *Split Sampling is a method for collecting a single sample from the same specified locations, which is divided into two (2) samples and sent to different certified testing laboratories for analysis
F13:
After several meetings with concerned citizens, the Norco City Council approved funding on June 4, 2003 to conduct random sampling and testing of soil and ground water contamination in offsite locations along Hillside Avenue. 12
F14:
The review of regulatory agency reports, Norco City Council Minutes, interviews with Norco City Council and department heads, expressed little knowledge of the level of soil and ground water contamination on the Facility and to what extent contaminants may have traveled offsite. They were not convinced that the level of pollution was sufficient for any regulatory agency (federal, state or county) to order an immediate or crisis intervention. Consequently, the Norco City Council was not timely in convening a Community Town Hall Meeting with regulatory agencies and residents to update them on the status of soil and ground water contamination at the Facility. During the Community Town Hall Meeting on February 16, 2002, regulatory agency’s representatives and Facility representatives made presentations regarding the site’s past and present level of contamination, testing activities and inspections.
Additional Recommendations
6
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The Norco City Council and department heads develop strict environmental policies for business, as appropriate, that mandates: a. Mandatory testing with periodic reporting. b. Enforcement of applicable codes. c. Periodic Inspections. d. Compliance with appropriate state and federal laws. e. Compliance with permit requirements. 13
R2:
The Norco City Council provide for the development of an electronic database, or linking to an existing database, to capture and disseminate information provided by regulatory agencies. (Federal, state and county).
R3:
The City of Norco work with property owners and community groups to provide education and recommendations to avoid and resolve the issue regarding random off-site testing of soil and ground water contamination.
R4:
The City of Norco implement a cost effective “split sampling” strategy with the appropriate regulatory agencies for conducting off-site soil and ground water testing.
R5:
The City of Norco Planning Department prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) that assess the nature and extent of: a) The contamination at the industrial testing facility site. b) Proposed site remediation activities. c) Potential effects of any cleanup activities on surrounding areas (include schools and residences). d) Potential effects of residual contamination on future project inhabitants and the surrounding community.
R6:
The City of Norco request the California Cancer Registry to review reported cancer cases from the City of Norco census tracts during the period January 1, 2001 – December 31, 2003, and update their report. Report Issued: 01/26/04 Report Public: 01/28/04 Response Due: 04/26/04 14
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
17 findings
F1:
On February 3, 2003, the Office of the Public Guardian recommended that the Client be placed at Villa La Roe (VLR), describing that facility as “a facility that provides care and treatment for persons suffering from dementia and need assistance with their daily living activities”. The officer making that
F2:
As required under Title 22, Article 6, Section 87584 (Functional Capabilities) the RCFE did not assess the Clients need for care and ability to perform the function of daily living. The Client was hard of hearing, had no dentures, stopped eating, drinking and taking medication. The RCFE Administrator and staff did not report these changes to the DMH Case Manager, conservator or physician.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
The Office of the Public Guardian be held responsible to insure that RCFE’s are adequately equipped with qualified staff and are also in compliance with Title 22, Article 8, Section 87724 for the clients placed in their facilities.
F3:
In mid-June 2003, a Clinical Nurse from the Hemet Mental Health Clinic temporarily replaced the Client’s regularly assigned RN/Case Manager. On June 16, 2003, this Clinical Nurse called the Facility’s Administrator to discuss the Client’s condition. The Facility Administrator reported that the Client was “stable, doing well, eating okay and taking prescribed medication.”
F4:
On June 23, 2003, a Clinical Nurse, and a Behavioral Health Specialist from the Hemet Mental Health Clinic made an unannounced visit to the VLR to meet the Client and Facility Administrator. Pursuant to Welfare & Institution Code, a Clinical Nurse is a mandated reporter. (a) “Any person who has assumed full or intermittent responsibility for care or custody of an elder or dependent adult, whether or not that person receives compensation, including administrators, supervisors, and any licensed staff of a public or private facility that provides care or services for elder or dependent adults, or any elder or dependent adult care 5 custodian, health practitioner, or employee of a county adult protective services agency or a local law enforcement agency is a mandated reporter.” Source: Welfare & Institutions Code, Chapter 11, Article 3, Section 15630 Mandated Reporter. They were greeted by an 18-year old male staff member, who escorted them to the Client’s room. The male staff member informed the nurse, “The Client had not eaten for 4-5 days”. The Clinical Nurse and Behavioral Health Specialist entered the Client’s room and observed the following conditions: a. No bedding. b. Client lying half off the bed on right side, legs dangling on floor. c. Nude from waist down. d. Disoriented. e. Client moaning, “I’m in pain, I’m diabetic”. f. A bowl of applesauce on the dirty un-vacuumed carpet. g. Feces smeared towels littered on the bathroom floor.
F5:
The Clinical Nurse immediately called “911” and the Client was transported by ambulance to SGMH for emergency medical care. The Clinical Nurse did not report the conditions described in 4a – 4g despite provisions of Mental Health Policy #218, that required reporting of possible elder abuse and neglect.
F6:
The emergency room physician at SGMH stated that the Client had “severe urinary tract infection (urosepis) with mild dehydration and possible neglect and abuse”.
F7:
After the emergency room physician evaluated the Client and established a diagnosis, the Client was admitted to SGMH for treatment and care. The Client’s medical condition did not improve and subsequently died on July 1, 2003.
F8:
The social worker at SGMH reported the possible neglect and abuse. Adult Protective Services did not intervene.
F9:
VLR Administrator and staff failed to seek medical attention for the Client even after staff observed that the Client would not eat, drink or take medication and was losing weight rapidly. 6
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Upon a conservatee entering a RCFE, the Office of Public Guardian and Department of Mental Health provide a list of service expectations and communication requirements for a conservatee. The following must be provided: a. Notify the Public Guardian immediately when a conservatee experiences an accident or injury. b. Notify the Public Guardian and/or caseworker when a conservatee refuses to eat, drink or take medication. c. Notify the Public Guardian when the health of the conservatee dramatically changes. d. Notify the Public Guardian when a conservatee is taken to the hospital emergency room for treatment or admitted to the hospital as a patient.
F10:
The Department of Mental Health failed to advise the Office of the Public Guardian that Dementia Probate Conservatorship had been approved for the Client on March 27, 2003.
F11:
The Office of the Public Guardian neglected to consult with CCL regarding the licensee status or suitability of placement for dementia residents at VLR (RCFE).
Related Recommendations (4)
R2:
Community Care Licensing develop and implement a computer based RCFE rating system that would be accessible to the PG and DMH staff to assist them in selecting the appropriate RCFE that would best meet the conservatee’s needs.
R3:
Placement of a conservatee shall not be made by the PG and DMH until a suitable and qualified RCFE is selected.
R4:
Public Guardian - Conservatorship Branch personally visit selected placement RCFE’s prior to submitting a recommendation to the County Counsel and the Superior Court and on a regular scheduled basis thereafter.
R10:
That formal disciplinary action be taken against the person or persons responsible for placing the Client into a RCFE that did not have trained staff to handle dementia patients or a “Dementia Waiver”.
F12:
Evidence shows that the Policies and Operating Procedures that were established in 1988 in the PG’s Policy and Procedure Manuals have not been updated since 1998. Current Operating Procedures are not reflected in the manual.
Related Recommendations (2)
R7:
Office of the Public Guardian revise and/or update all job descriptions and hold each staff member accountable for maintaining the performance standards within the scope of their duties and responsibilities.
R11:
The Department of Mental Health and Office of the Public Guardian take the lead to initiate an annual workshop that bring together representatives from the following agencies: • Community Care Licensing • Mental Health Nurses and caseworkers • Public Guardian Deputies and Nurses • Adult Protective Services The purpose of this annual workshop is to share ideas, establish and/or recommend policy changes, improve communication, and share data so that the service delivery to the elderly clients in RCFE’s will be maintained at the highest quality and delivered with dignity and compassion. Report Issued: 06/14/04 Report Public: 06/16/04 Response Due: 09/13/04 15
F13:
VLR violated Article 3, Section 87227 of the CCL Manual Policies and Procedures by failing to surrender all cash (from Client’s spending account) resources, personal property and valuables to the Office of the Public Guardian upon the death of Client.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Public Guardian RCFE’s to submit a quarterly spending account report to the Office of the Public Guardian and surrender any cash upon the death of the conservatee. 14
F14:
On July 7, 2003, a CCL Licensed Program Analyst conducted an investigation at Villa La Roe and substantiated “client neglect care” allegations through the examination of RCFE documents.
F15:
The following data summarizes deficiencies documented by CCL at Villa La Roe from February 14, 2002 through September 19, 2003. . 7
Related Recommendations (2)
R6:
Community Care Licensing enforce the RCFE licensing and certification standards for licensees and administrators to be in strict compliance with all licensing requirements.
R8:
CCL reinforce policies and implement stiffer monetary penalties for RCFE’s non-compliance with licensing laws by establishing criteria and consequences based on the severity of the deficiency and/or repeated recurrence of the same deficiency.
F16:
Table I summarizes the deficiencies that were found by Licensed Program Analyst (LPA), CCL. Table 1 FACILITY DEFICIENCIES OBSERVED BY CCL DURING UNANNOUNCED VISITS AND INSPECTIONS DATE CODE VIOLATION INSPECTION DEF DESCRIPTION TYPE 2/14/02 87101 (r)(4) Case A Non-Compatible Residents Management Exceeded the number of allowed adults (ages 18-59) living in this elderly facility. 3/25/02 87575 (h)(2) Case A Medication & Centrally Stored Management Medication Records Prescribed medication for one resident was found on the top of a filing cabinet in an office with the door unlocked. 87575 (a)(6) A The RCFE did not consistently or adequately monitor a resident’s self- administered medication. A A bubble pack prescription for one resident had pills missing. The RCFE was not consistent in assisting residents with self-administered medication. 87575 (h)(6) A A resident’s medication was not A,B,C,D,E,F properly documented on the Centrally Stored Medication Record. DATE CODE VIOLATION INSPECTION DEF DESCRIPTION TYPE 4/5/02 87703 (b)(3)(B) Case A Oxygen Administration Management The RCFE does not have the required signs posted which reads “No Smoking Oxygen in Use”. 87703 (b)(3)(E) A Four (4) oxygen tanks were placed in bedroom #2 without being secured in a stand or to the wall. 87575 (b)(3)(F) A An unauthorized extension to the standard seven (7) foot plastic tubing from nasal cannula on mask to the main source of the oxygen tank 11/08/02 87691 (i)(A)(B)(C) Annual A Maintenance and Operations The signal system in a resident’s bedroom was inoperative. 87691 (a) A The Carpeting in a resident’s room and throughout the common areas of the facility was dirty and stained. 87691 (a) A Toilet seat in a resident’s bedroom was loose and not secured to the toilet seat. 87691 (a)(b) A Door leading to the outside of a resident’s room was not properly fitted to the frame, allowing cold air to enter. DATE CODE VIOLATION INSPECTION DEF DESCRIPTION TYPE Maintenance and Operations 11/08/02 87691 (a)(b) Annual A Cold Air coming through the vents of the air conditioning units located in a resident’s window. 87691 (a)(e)(5) B The floor mats in a majority of the resident’s bath tub/shower were dirty and worn. A Freezer in hallway blocking the exit to a resident’s bedroom. Personal Rights 03/01/03 87572 (a)(1,2,3) Case A An elderly resident was sharing a Management room with an adult resident (under 60) who was loud, confrontational and intimidating with other residents. Definitions: “Residential Care Facility for the Elderly” 87101 (r) (4) A The facility exceeded the number of adults (ages 18-59) allowed to be living with the elderly. Personal Accommodation & Services 03/10/03 87677 (A)(2)(C) Case A One resident was using another Management resident’s bedroom as a passageway to the bedroom and toilet. Limitations 87582 (B)(6) A Three adult residents yelled, cursed, threatened staff, and intimidated the elderly population living in the RCFE. Care of Persons with Dementia 03/11/03 87724 (c) A An elderly resident was not able to demonstrate with mental competence or physical ability that she could exit the facility in case of an emergency. Medical Assessment 07/07/03 87569(a)(b)(1)(2)(4) Complaint Facility transfer document on files Investigation dated 2/27/03 revealed that EM had a diagnosis of diabetes and was prescribed” sliding scale insulin” yet medical assessment on file at facility completed by the physician makes no mention of diabetes or what diabetic care is required Incidental Medical & Dental Care 07/02/03 87575 (a)(1) Complaint A The RCFE administrator and/or staff Investigation failed to seek appropriate medical care for the resident EM when she stopped eating, drinking and taking medication. Observation of Resident 87591 Resident A The RCFE did not provide appropriate Observation assistance in a timely manner when a resident’s condition was deteriorating and she was loosing weight. Maintenance & Operations 09/10/03 87691 (1) Case A The RCFE’s stove/oven in the kitchen Management was not in proper working condition. The oven thermostat was inoperative resulting in incorrect oven temperature. Provisions & Upkeep of Regulations 09/10/03 Health & Safety Code Case A There was no proof on file that the 1569.155 Management licensee subscribed to an appropriate regulation subscription services. Food Service 87576 (b)(26) B There was an insufficient supply of perishable food on hand to meet the needs of 14 residents for two (2) days. Maintenance & Operations 09/19/03 87691 (a) B The flooring in one resident’s bedroom had numerous missing tiles and the area where the tiles were missing was dirty. 09/19/03 87691(a) The carpeting in six (6) resident’s bedrooms was dirty, worn and stained. A citation for this violation was issued on 11/08/02. Type A: Deficiency Violations of the regulations and/or Health and Safety Codes, that if not corrected, has a direct and immediate risk health, safety and personal rights or clients in care. Type B: Deficiency Violations of the regulations and/or the Health and Safety Codes that, without correction, could become a risk to the Health, safety or personal rights of clients, a record keeping violation that would impact the care of clients and/or protections of their resources, or a violation that would impact those services required to meet the client’s needs. 13
F60:
who was loud, confrontational and intimidating with other residents. Definitions: “Residential Care Facility for the Elderly” 87101 (r) (4) A The facility exceeded the number of adults (ages 18-59) allowed to be living with the elderly. Personal Accommodation & Services 03/10/03 87677 (A)(2)(C) Case A One resident was using another Management resident’s bedroom as a passageway to the bedroom and toilet. Limitations 87582 (B)(6) A Three adult residents yelled, cursed, threatened staff, and intimidated the elderly population living in the RCFE. Care of Persons with Dementia 03/11/03 87724 (c) A An elderly resident was not able to demonstrate with mental competence or physical ability that she could exit the facility in case of an emergency. Medical Assessment 07/07/03 87569(a)(b)(1)(2)(4) Complaint Facility transfer document on files Investigation dated 2/27/03 revealed that EM had a diagnosis of diabetes and was prescribed” sliding scale insulin” yet medical assessment on file at facility completed by the physician makes no mention of diabetes or what diabetic care is required Incidental Medical & Dental Care 07/02/03 87575 (a)(1) Complaint A The RCFE administrator and/or staff Investigation failed to seek appropriate medical care for the resident EM when she stopped eating, drinking and taking medication. Observation of Resident 87591 Resident A The RCFE did not provide appropriate Observation assistance in a timely manner when a resident’s condition was deteriorating and she was loosing weight. Maintenance & Operations 09/10/03 87691 (1) Case A The RCFE’s stove/oven in the kitchen Management was not in proper working condition. The oven thermostat was inoperative resulting in incorrect oven temperature. Provisions & Upkeep of Regulations 09/10/03 Health & Safety Code Case A There was no proof on file that the 1569.155 Management licensee subscribed to an appropriate regulation subscription services. Food Service 87576 (b)(26) B There was an insufficient supply of perishable food on hand to meet the needs of 14 residents for two (2) days. Maintenance & Operations 09/19/03 87691 (a) B The flooring in one resident’s bedroom had numerous missing tiles and the area where the tiles were missing was dirty. 09/19/03 87691(a) The carpeting in six (6) resident’s bedrooms was dirty, worn and stained. A citation for this violation was issued on 11/08/02. Type A: Deficiency Violations of the regulations and/or Health and Safety Codes, that if not corrected, has a direct and immediate risk health, safety and personal rights or clients in care. Type B: Deficiency Violations of the regulations and/or the Health and Safety Codes that, without correction, could become a risk to the Health, safety or personal rights of clients, a record keeping violation that would impact the care of clients and/or protections of their resources, or a violation that would impact those services required to meet the client’s needs. 13
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
17 findings
F1:
On February 3, 2003, the Office of the Public Guardian recommended that the Client be placed at Villa La Roe (VLR), describing that facility as “a facility that provides care and treatment for persons suffering from dementia and need assistance with their daily living activities”. The officer making that
F2:
As required under Title 22, Article 6, Section 87584 (Functional Capabilities) the RCFE did not assess the Clients need for care and ability to perform the function of daily living. The Client was hard of hearing, had no dentures, stopped eating, drinking and taking medication. The RCFE Administrator and staff did not report these changes to the DMH Case Manager, conservator or physician.
F3:
In mid-June 2003, a Clinical Nurse from the Hemet Mental Health Clinic temporarily replaced the Client’s regularly assigned RN/Case Manager. On June 16, 2003, this Clinical Nurse called the Facility’s Administrator to discuss the Client’s condition. The Facility Administrator reported that the Client was “stable, doing well, eating okay and taking prescribed medication.”
F4:
On June 23, 2003, a Clinical Nurse, and a Behavioral Health Specialist from the Hemet Mental Health Clinic made an unannounced visit to the VLR to meet the Client and Facility Administrator. Pursuant to Welfare & Institution Code, a Clinical Nurse is a mandated reporter. (a) “Any person who has assumed full or intermittent responsibility for care or custody of an elder or dependent adult, whether or not that person receives compensation, including administrators, supervisors, and any licensed staff of a public or private facility that provides care or services for elder or dependent adults, or any elder or dependent adult care 5 custodian, health practitioner, or employee of a county adult protective services agency or a local law enforcement agency is a mandated reporter.” Source: Welfare & Institutions Code, Chapter 11, Article 3, Section 15630 Mandated Reporter. They were greeted by an 18-year old male staff member, who escorted them to the Client’s room. The male staff member informed the nurse, “The Client had not eaten for 4-5 days”. The Clinical Nurse and Behavioral Health Specialist entered the Client’s room and observed the following conditions: a. No bedding. b. Client lying half off the bed on right side, legs dangling on floor. c. Nude from waist down. d. Disoriented. e. Client moaning, “I’m in pain, I’m diabetic”. f. A bowl of applesauce on the dirty un-vacuumed carpet. g. Feces smeared towels littered on the bathroom floor.
F5:
The Clinical Nurse immediately called “911” and the Client was transported by ambulance to SGMH for emergency medical care. The Clinical Nurse did not report the conditions described in 4a – 4g despite provisions of Mental Health Policy #218, that required reporting of possible elder abuse and neglect.
F6:
The emergency room physician at SGMH stated that the Client had “severe urinary tract infection (urosepis) with mild dehydration and possible neglect and abuse”.
F7:
After the emergency room physician evaluated the Client and established a diagnosis, the Client was admitted to SGMH for treatment and care. The Client’s medical condition did not improve and subsequently died on July 1, 2003.
F8:
The social worker at SGMH reported the possible neglect and abuse. Adult Protective Services did not intervene.
F9:
VLR Administrator and staff failed to seek medical attention for the Client even after staff observed that the Client would not eat, drink or take medication and was losing weight rapidly. 6
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Upon a conservatee entering a RCFE, the Office of Public Guardian and Department of Mental Health provide a list of service expectations and communication requirements for a conservatee. The following must be provided: a. Notify the Public Guardian immediately when a conservatee experiences an accident or injury. b. Notify the Public Guardian and/or caseworker when a conservatee refuses to eat, drink or take medication. c. Notify the Public Guardian when the health of the conservatee dramatically changes. d. Notify the Public Guardian when a conservatee is taken to the hospital emergency room for treatment or admitted to the hospital as a patient.
F10:
The Department of Mental Health failed to advise the Office of the Public Guardian that Dementia Probate Conservatorship had been approved for the Client on March 27, 2003.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
The Department of Mental Health and Office of the Public Guardian take the lead to initiate an annual workshop that bring together representatives from the following agencies: • Community Care Licensing • Mental Health Nurses and caseworkers • Public Guardian Deputies and Nurses • Adult Protective Services The purpose of this annual workshop is to share ideas, establish and/or recommend policy changes, improve communication, and share data so that the service delivery to the elderly clients in RCFE’s will be maintained at the highest quality and delivered with dignity and compassion. Report Issued: 06/14/04 Report Public: 06/16/04 Response Due: 09/13/04 15
F11:
The Office of the Public Guardian neglected to consult with CCL regarding the licensee status or suitability of placement for dementia residents at VLR (RCFE).
Related Recommendations (6)
R2:
Community Care Licensing develop and implement a computer based RCFE rating system that would be accessible to the PG and DMH staff to assist them in selecting the appropriate RCFE that would best meet the conservatee’s needs.
R3:
Placement of a conservatee shall not be made by the PG and DMH until a suitable and qualified RCFE is selected.
R4:
Public Guardian - Conservatorship Branch personally visit selected placement RCFE’s prior to submitting a recommendation to the County Counsel and the Superior Court and on a regular scheduled basis thereafter.
R9:
The Office of the Public Guardian be held responsible to insure that RCFE’s are adequately equipped with qualified staff and are also in compliance with Title 22, Article 8, Section 87724 for the clients placed in their facilities.
R10:
That formal disciplinary action be taken against the person or persons responsible for placing the Client into a RCFE that did not have trained staff to handle dementia patients or a “Dementia Waiver”.
R11:
The Department of Mental Health and Office of the Public Guardian take the lead to initiate an annual workshop that bring together representatives from the following agencies: • Community Care Licensing • Mental Health Nurses and caseworkers • Public Guardian Deputies and Nurses • Adult Protective Services The purpose of this annual workshop is to share ideas, establish and/or recommend policy changes, improve communication, and share data so that the service delivery to the elderly clients in RCFE’s will be maintained at the highest quality and delivered with dignity and compassion. Report Issued: 06/14/04 Report Public: 06/16/04 Response Due: 09/13/04 15
F12:
Evidence shows that the Policies and Operating Procedures that were established in 1988 in the PG’s Policy and Procedure Manuals have not been updated since 1998. Current Operating Procedures are not reflected in the manual.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Office of the Public Guardian revise and/or update all job descriptions and hold each staff member accountable for maintaining the performance standards within the scope of their duties and responsibilities.
F13:
VLR violated Article 3, Section 87227 of the CCL Manual Policies and Procedures by failing to surrender all cash (from Client’s spending account) resources, personal property and valuables to the Office of the Public Guardian upon the death of Client.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Public Guardian RCFE’s to submit a quarterly spending account report to the Office of the Public Guardian and surrender any cash upon the death of the conservatee. 14
F14:
On July 7, 2003, a CCL Licensed Program Analyst conducted an investigation at Villa La Roe and substantiated “client neglect care” allegations through the examination of RCFE documents.
F15:
The following data summarizes deficiencies documented by CCL at Villa La Roe from February 14, 2002 through September 19, 2003. . 7
Related Recommendations (2)
R6:
Community Care Licensing enforce the RCFE licensing and certification standards for licensees and administrators to be in strict compliance with all licensing requirements.
R8:
CCL reinforce policies and implement stiffer monetary penalties for RCFE’s non-compliance with licensing laws by establishing criteria and consequences based on the severity of the deficiency and/or repeated recurrence of the same deficiency.
F16:
Table I summarizes the deficiencies that were found by Licensed Program Analyst (LPA), CCL. Table 1 FACILITY DEFICIENCIES OBSERVED BY CCL DURING UNANNOUNCED VISITS AND INSPECTIONS DATE CODE VIOLATION INSPECTION DEF DESCRIPTION TYPE 2/14/02 87101 (r)(4) Case A Non-Compatible Residents Management Exceeded the number of allowed adults (ages 18-59) living in this elderly facility. 3/25/02 87575 (h)(2) Case A Medication & Centrally Stored Management Medication Records Prescribed medication for one resident was found on the top of a filing cabinet in an office with the door unlocked. 87575 (a)(6) A The RCFE did not consistently or adequately monitor a resident’s self- administered medication. A A bubble pack prescription for one resident had pills missing. The RCFE was not consistent in assisting residents with self-administered medication. 87575 (h)(6) A A resident’s medication was not A,B,C,D,E,F properly documented on the Centrally Stored Medication Record. DATE CODE VIOLATION INSPECTION DEF DESCRIPTION TYPE 4/5/02 87703 (b)(3)(B) Case A Oxygen Administration Management The RCFE does not have the required signs posted which reads “No Smoking Oxygen in Use”. 87703 (b)(3)(E) A Four (4) oxygen tanks were placed in bedroom #2 without being secured in a stand or to the wall. 87575 (b)(3)(F) A An unauthorized extension to the standard seven (7) foot plastic tubing from nasal cannula on mask to the main source of the oxygen tank 11/08/02 87691 (i)(A)(B)(C) Annual A Maintenance and Operations The signal system in a resident’s bedroom was inoperative. 87691 (a) A The Carpeting in a resident’s room and throughout the common areas of the facility was dirty and stained. 87691 (a) A Toilet seat in a resident’s bedroom was loose and not secured to the toilet seat. 87691 (a)(b) A Door leading to the outside of a resident’s room was not properly fitted to the frame, allowing cold air to enter. DATE CODE VIOLATION INSPECTION DEF DESCRIPTION TYPE Maintenance and Operations 11/08/02 87691 (a)(b) Annual A Cold Air coming through the vents of the air conditioning units located in a resident’s window. 87691 (a)(e)(5) B The floor mats in a majority of the resident’s bath tub/shower were dirty and worn. A Freezer in hallway blocking the exit to a resident’s bedroom. Personal Rights 03/01/03 87572 (a)(1,2,3) Case A An elderly resident was sharing a Management room with an adult resident (under 60) who was loud, confrontational and intimidating with other residents. Definitions: “Residential Care Facility for the Elderly” 87101 (r) (4) A The facility exceeded the number of adults (ages 18-59) allowed to be living with the elderly. Personal Accommodation & Services 03/10/03 87677 (A)(2)(C) Case A One resident was using another Management resident’s bedroom as a passageway to the bedroom and toilet. Limitations 87582 (B)(6) A Three adult residents yelled, cursed, threatened staff, and intimidated the elderly population living in the RCFE. Care of Persons with Dementia 03/11/03 87724 (c) A An elderly resident was not able to demonstrate with mental competence or physical ability that she could exit the facility in case of an emergency. Medical Assessment 07/07/03 87569(a)(b)(1)(2)(4) Complaint Facility transfer document on files Investigation dated 2/27/03 revealed that EM had a diagnosis of diabetes and was prescribed” sliding scale insulin” yet medical assessment on file at facility completed by the physician makes no mention of diabetes or what diabetic care is required Incidental Medical & Dental Care 07/02/03 87575 (a)(1) Complaint A The RCFE administrator and/or staff Investigation failed to seek appropriate medical care for the resident EM when she stopped eating, drinking and taking medication. Observation of Resident 87591 Resident A The RCFE did not provide appropriate Observation assistance in a timely manner when a resident’s condition was deteriorating and she was loosing weight. Maintenance & Operations 09/10/03 87691 (1) Case A The RCFE’s stove/oven in the kitchen Management was not in proper working condition. The oven thermostat was inoperative resulting in incorrect oven temperature. Provisions & Upkeep of Regulations 09/10/03 Health & Safety Code Case A There was no proof on file that the 1569.155 Management licensee subscribed to an appropriate regulation subscription services. Food Service 87576 (b)(26) B There was an insufficient supply of perishable food on hand to meet the needs of 14 residents for two (2) days. Maintenance & Operations 09/19/03 87691 (a) B The flooring in one resident’s bedroom had numerous missing tiles and the area where the tiles were missing was dirty. 09/19/03 87691(a) The carpeting in six (6) resident’s bedrooms was dirty, worn and stained. A citation for this violation was issued on 11/08/02. Type A: Deficiency Violations of the regulations and/or Health and Safety Codes, that if not corrected, has a direct and immediate risk health, safety and personal rights or clients in care. Type B: Deficiency Violations of the regulations and/or the Health and Safety Codes that, without correction, could become a risk to the Health, safety or personal rights of clients, a record keeping violation that would impact the care of clients and/or protections of their resources, or a violation that would impact those services required to meet the client’s needs. 13
F60:
who was loud, confrontational and intimidating with other residents. Definitions: “Residential Care Facility for the Elderly” 87101 (r) (4) A The facility exceeded the number of adults (ages 18-59) allowed to be living with the elderly. Personal Accommodation & Services 03/10/03 87677 (A)(2)(C) Case A One resident was using another Management resident’s bedroom as a passageway to the bedroom and toilet. Limitations 87582 (B)(6) A Three adult residents yelled, cursed, threatened staff, and intimidated the elderly population living in the RCFE. Care of Persons with Dementia 03/11/03 87724 (c) A An elderly resident was not able to demonstrate with mental competence or physical ability that she could exit the facility in case of an emergency. Medical Assessment 07/07/03 87569(a)(b)(1)(2)(4) Complaint Facility transfer document on files Investigation dated 2/27/03 revealed that EM had a diagnosis of diabetes and was prescribed” sliding scale insulin” yet medical assessment on file at facility completed by the physician makes no mention of diabetes or what diabetic care is required Incidental Medical & Dental Care 07/02/03 87575 (a)(1) Complaint A The RCFE administrator and/or staff Investigation failed to seek appropriate medical care for the resident EM when she stopped eating, drinking and taking medication. Observation of Resident 87591 Resident A The RCFE did not provide appropriate Observation assistance in a timely manner when a resident’s condition was deteriorating and she was loosing weight. Maintenance & Operations 09/10/03 87691 (1) Case A The RCFE’s stove/oven in the kitchen Management was not in proper working condition. The oven thermostat was inoperative resulting in incorrect oven temperature. Provisions & Upkeep of Regulations 09/10/03 Health & Safety Code Case A There was no proof on file that the 1569.155 Management licensee subscribed to an appropriate regulation subscription services. Food Service 87576 (b)(26) B There was an insufficient supply of perishable food on hand to meet the needs of 14 residents for two (2) days. Maintenance & Operations 09/19/03 87691 (a) B The flooring in one resident’s bedroom had numerous missing tiles and the area where the tiles were missing was dirty. 09/19/03 87691(a) The carpeting in six (6) resident’s bedrooms was dirty, worn and stained. A citation for this violation was issued on 11/08/02. Type A: Deficiency Violations of the regulations and/or Health and Safety Codes, that if not corrected, has a direct and immediate risk health, safety and personal rights or clients in care. Type B: Deficiency Violations of the regulations and/or the Health and Safety Codes that, without correction, could become a risk to the Health, safety or personal rights of clients, a record keeping violation that would impact the care of clients and/or protections of their resources, or a violation that would impact those services required to meet the client’s needs. 13
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
9 findings
F1:
The FY 2003-2004 budget for TAP was set at twenty five million dollars ($25,000,000), 37 funded employees and 1035 inventory part-time personnel, reflecting an increase of five hundred percent (500%) over that of FY 1998-1999. Based on the Business Plan (Form 11) submitted to the Board of Supervisors the budget increase over 5 years would be twenty percent (20%) for a budget of $6,428,400.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Human Resources reduce the size and budget of TAP to its FY 1998-1999 size including the increased projected by the March 1998 Business Plan, resulting in a budget of $6,428,400. The Form 11 and supporting documents submitted to the Board of Supervisors for the establishment of the TAP Program stated that a twenty percent (20%) increase was projected for the five year period following FY 1998-1999. This translates into a budget of six million, four hundred twenty eight thousand dollar ($6,428,020) for FY 2003-2004. If one used the Cost of Living Index for the Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Riverside area of sixteen percent (16%) for the same period, the figure would be about two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) less.
F2:
Since its inception in 1998, the TAP function has not been audited.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The County Auditor-Controller conduct a full audit of the TAP function within the Department of Human Resources. 4
F3:
County employment has grown from approximately 12,000 employees in 1998 to over 19,000 in 2003. During this period, 2,659 temporary employees were transferred to permanent status. In addition, 12,374 employees were hired through the Resumix System. The Resumix System is a computer based program matching resumes to job descriptions. A total of 8,000 employees transitioned out of the County, resulting in an employee turnover rate of forty-two percent (42%).
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Since the Auditor-Controller performs fiscal audits only, it is recommended an independent managerial auditing firm be hired to conduct a study to report on the following: a) The County employee turnover rate. b) High incidence of temporary employee unemployment insurance claims. c) Whether the use of temporary employees was required by an operational necessity or unanticipated event.
F4:
Each time a person terminates and a new hire is brought in to fill the position, the County incurs additional cost. Based upon information provided by the Riverside County Assistant Director of Human Resources, and by Advantage Hiring, Inc., during the period 1998 through 2003 this cost was fourteen hundred forty dollars ($1,440) per employee for a total of eleven million five hundred twenty thousand dollars ($11,520,000). Note: “True turnover costs are more complex than simply figuring out the average cost of replacement. The costs of losing a good performer are greater than the costs of losing an average performer. The true cost of losing a key seasoned player is hard to estimate. There is the investment in development of the employee, the value of the knowledge and experience gained, 2 and the lost productivity that also have to be considered to arrive at a true cost figure.” Advantage Hiring Inc.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Human Resources establish a database so all departments can access current and former employees records for tracking all TAP employees’ records and those who have transitioned to permanent status as County employees. The capability already exists within County Information Technology.
F5:
The County Department of Human Resources has projected that unemployment compensation claims from temporary hires in FY 2003-2004 will approach six million, six hundred thousand dollars ($6,600,000) or approximately ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per claimant. This accounts for more than one-third of such claims filed by all County employees.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Human Resources establish specific policies defining the circumstances under which a manager may request the hiring of temporary staff and impose limitations on the number of temporary hires authorized at any given time within each department.
F6:
Sixty eight percent (68%) of permanent County employees currently staffing the TAP function within the Human Resources Department began County employment as temporary hires. This situation creates a duplication of efforts and additional costs to the County.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Departments shall not exceed their temporary hire quotas unless the Chief Executive Officer personally authorizes such a hiring increase based upon the existence of a temporary emergency or other non-recurrent necessity.
F7:
On January 24, 2004, the Board of Supervisors ordered all departments to cut spending across the board by eight percent (8%). In spite of the directive, on Sunday, February 22, 2004, a local newspaper carried a County TAP advertisement for new temporary hires in more than thirty (30) positions.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Human Resources require that all departments comply with the hiring freeze ordered by the Board of Supervisors.
F8:
Through interviews and documents, it was established that employment decisions were not completely based on merit in the hiring of temporary personnel through TAP. It was found that, in some cases, relatives of supervisory, managerial, or administrative permanent employees were afforded employment consideration not available to other applicants; for example: a) A temporary employee file was found in the archive with a “post-it” note attached stating that the file contained the application of a permanent TAP employee’s daughter. This applicant was immediately hired. b) The spouse of a supervising permanent County employee submitted an application for temporary employment for work that the applicant was not qualified to perform. It was made clear to the employee reviewing the application, that this person would be hired even if the document had to be altered. 3 c) During the course of this inquiry, the Grand Jury physically inspected the employment files of temporary employees in pre-selected alphabetical categories corresponding to the surnames of certain persons known to have been hired by TAP. The alphabetically maintained employment records of some persons known to be related to permanent County employees serving in supervisory capacities could not be located. The records were produced by TAP employees only after specific name requests were made.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
All TAP applications be amended to require the applicant to disclose the name and permanent duty assignment of any of his or her relatives employed by the County.
F9:
Several employees interviewed stated fears of management retaliation were they to speak candidly with the Grand Jury.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
TAP permanent employees shall not review, make any recommendation, or take any action, with respect to an employment application submitted by a family member. ATTACHMENT “D” ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION AMENDMENTS TRANSFER OF FUNDS It is requested the Board approve the following: 1) By Ordinance, amend the Table and Index of Ordinance #440 to add the following classification: CLASS CODE CLASS TITLE SALARY RANGE 13871 Temporary Assistant 0 ($5.75 - $125.00 per hour) 2) By Resolution, amend Ordinance 440, Section 49 (a) Personnel to add the following positions: NUMBER CLASS CODE CLASS TITLE SALARY RANGE +1 74774 Senior Personnel Analyst 350 ($41,787 - $51,750) +1 15915 Accounting Technician I 273 ($27,664 - $34,278) +2 13868 Supervising Office Assistant II 241 ($23,317 - $28,870) 3) By Resolution, amend Ordinance 440, Section 49 (a) Personnel – TEMPORARY to add the following positions: NUMBER CLASS CODE CLASS TITLE SALARY RANGE +200 13817 Temporary Assistant 0 ($5.75 - $125.00 per hour) To be effective on the date of approval. 4) An advancement/transfer of funds of $600,000 to the Personnel Department, Temporary Assistance Program, Fund 706, Organization 951, to fund the initial period of the Temporary Assistance Pool including staff salaries, initial physicals/drug and alcohol testing, hardware and software requirements for testing, tracking and billing, etc. It is anticipated these monies and staff will be transferred to an approved Internal Services Fund, and that the $600,000 will be paid back by June 30, 2000. 5) The budget for the Temporary Assistance Program be set up and the Board approve the recommended appropriations and estimated revenue as attached. 6 1997-1998 APPROPRIATIONS 1-10101 Regular Salaries (+10% increase) $120,000 (1) Senior Personnel Analyst, (1) Accounting Technician, and (2) Supervising OA II positions. 1-11101 Temporary Salaries 1,026,000 Temporary Assistance Pool employees’ salaries 1-20101 Budgeted Benefits/mandated costs 30,500 2-30003 Accounting Services 10,000 RIFMIS for billings/payments to/from departments. 2-35303 Insurance Liability 5,000 Insurance Charge based on employees & mileage driven 2-42101 Office Expense 40,000 Computer hardware and software, printing services, advertisements, etc. 2-42109 Temporary Services 4,000 Paid to external services (and guarantee to cover first 8 hours of TAP employees) 2-43809 Drug Testing 10,000 Physical and drug & alcohol testing per policy 2-50202 Car Pool Mileage 2,000 Staff, when monitoring employees at departments and reviewing departments’ needs, and TAP employees, (mileage billed to/reimbursed by departments) 2-50203 Private Mileage 2,000 Mileage when using personal car is more advantageous 2-50206 Registration/Conference Fees 500 Registration for human resources conferences 2-50208 Meals 0 Meals when out of the area visiting departments or resolving problems TOTAL $ 1,250,000 7 REVENUE 7246 Charges for Current Services/Personnel Services Reimbursement from user departments: $1,250,000 8 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET JUSTIFICATION 1-10101 Regular Salaries $ 195,525 (1) Senior Personnel Analyst, (1) Accounting Technician, and (2) Supervising OA II positions. 1-11101 Temporary Salaries 4,000,000 Temporary Assistance Pool employee’s salaries 1-20101 Budgeted Benefits/mandated costs 211,756 TAP = $116,000/Staff = $51,756 + offset of certain employees who work over 1,000 hours 2-30003 Accounting Services 60,000 RIFMIS for billings/payments to/from departments. 2-35303 Insurance Liability 15,000 Insurance Charge based on employees & mileage driven 2-42101 Office Expense 140,000 Computer hardware and software, printing services, advertisement, etc. 2-42109 Temporary Services 459,000 Paid to external services (and guarantee to cover first 8 hours of TAP employees) 2-43809 Drug Testing 35,200 Physical and drug & alcohol testing per policy 2-50202 Car Pool Mileage 2,000 Staff, when monitoring employees at departments and reviewing departments’ needs and TAP employees, (mileage billed to/reimbursed by departments) 2-50203 Private Mileage 2,000 Mileage when using personal car is more advantageous 2-50206 Registration/Conference Fees 500 Registration for human resources conferences 2-50208 Meals Meals when out of the area visiting departments 19 or resolving problems 3-64102 Interest on loan 36,000 REPAY LOAN (1/3 of $600,000) 200,000 (After payback of loan, this amount will be placed in reserve for future computer software purchases, including computer software/hardware for training and testing.) TOTAL $ 5,357,000 9 REVENUE Reimbursement from user departments: Salaries of TAP employees $4,000,000 22.9% markup 916,000 Temporary Services 400,000 $1.00 per hour administrative fee 40,000 Mileage reimbursement for TAP employees 1,000 TOTAL $5,357,000 10
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
9 findings
F1:
The FY 2003-2004 budget for TAP was set at twenty five million dollars ($25,000,000), 37 funded employees and 1035 inventory part-time personnel, reflecting an increase of five hundred percent (500%) over that of FY 1998-1999. Based on the Business Plan (Form 11) submitted to the Board of Supervisors the budget increase over 5 years would be twenty percent (20%) for a budget of $6,428,400.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Human Resources reduce the size and budget of TAP to its FY 1998-1999 size including the increased projected by the March 1998 Business Plan, resulting in a budget of $6,428,400. The Form 11 and supporting documents submitted to the Board of Supervisors for the establishment of the TAP Program stated that a twenty percent (20%) increase was projected for the five year period following FY 1998-1999. This translates into a budget of six million, four hundred twenty eight thousand dollar ($6,428,020) for FY 2003-2004. If one used the Cost of Living Index for the Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Riverside area of sixteen percent (16%) for the same period, the figure would be about two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) less.
F2:
Since its inception in 1998, the TAP function has not been audited.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The County Auditor-Controller conduct a full audit of the TAP function within the Department of Human Resources. 4
F3:
County employment has grown from approximately 12,000 employees in 1998 to over 19,000 in 2003. During this period, 2,659 temporary employees were transferred to permanent status. In addition, 12,374 employees were hired through the Resumix System. The Resumix System is a computer based program matching resumes to job descriptions. A total of 8,000 employees transitioned out of the County, resulting in an employee turnover rate of forty-two percent (42%).
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Since the Auditor-Controller performs fiscal audits only, it is recommended an independent managerial auditing firm be hired to conduct a study to report on the following: a) The County employee turnover rate. b) High incidence of temporary employee unemployment insurance claims. c) Whether the use of temporary employees was required by an operational necessity or unanticipated event.
F4:
Each time a person terminates and a new hire is brought in to fill the position, the County incurs additional cost. Based upon information provided by the Riverside County Assistant Director of Human Resources, and by Advantage Hiring, Inc., during the period 1998 through 2003 this cost was fourteen hundred forty dollars ($1,440) per employee for a total of eleven million five hundred twenty thousand dollars ($11,520,000). Note: “True turnover costs are more complex than simply figuring out the average cost of replacement. The costs of losing a good performer are greater than the costs of losing an average performer. The true cost of losing a key seasoned player is hard to estimate. There is the investment in development of the employee, the value of the knowledge and experience gained, 2 and the lost productivity that also have to be considered to arrive at a true cost figure.” Advantage Hiring Inc.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Human Resources establish a database so all departments can access current and former employees records for tracking all TAP employees’ records and those who have transitioned to permanent status as County employees. The capability already exists within County Information Technology.
F5:
The County Department of Human Resources has projected that unemployment compensation claims from temporary hires in FY 2003-2004 will approach six million, six hundred thousand dollars ($6,600,000) or approximately ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per claimant. This accounts for more than one-third of such claims filed by all County employees.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Human Resources establish specific policies defining the circumstances under which a manager may request the hiring of temporary staff and impose limitations on the number of temporary hires authorized at any given time within each department.
F6:
Sixty eight percent (68%) of permanent County employees currently staffing the TAP function within the Human Resources Department began County employment as temporary hires. This situation creates a duplication of efforts and additional costs to the County.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Departments shall not exceed their temporary hire quotas unless the Chief Executive Officer personally authorizes such a hiring increase based upon the existence of a temporary emergency or other non-recurrent necessity.
F7:
On January 24, 2004, the Board of Supervisors ordered all departments to cut spending across the board by eight percent (8%). In spite of the directive, on Sunday, February 22, 2004, a local newspaper carried a County TAP advertisement for new temporary hires in more than thirty (30) positions.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Human Resources require that all departments comply with the hiring freeze ordered by the Board of Supervisors.
F8:
Through interviews and documents, it was established that employment decisions were not completely based on merit in the hiring of temporary personnel through TAP. It was found that, in some cases, relatives of supervisory, managerial, or administrative permanent employees were afforded employment consideration not available to other applicants; for example: a) A temporary employee file was found in the archive with a “post-it” note attached stating that the file contained the application of a permanent TAP employee’s daughter. This applicant was immediately hired. b) The spouse of a supervising permanent County employee submitted an application for temporary employment for work that the applicant was not qualified to perform. It was made clear to the employee reviewing the application, that this person would be hired even if the document had to be altered. 3 c) During the course of this inquiry, the Grand Jury physically inspected the employment files of temporary employees in pre-selected alphabetical categories corresponding to the surnames of certain persons known to have been hired by TAP. The alphabetically maintained employment records of some persons known to be related to permanent County employees serving in supervisory capacities could not be located. The records were produced by TAP employees only after specific name requests were made.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
All TAP applications be amended to require the applicant to disclose the name and permanent duty assignment of any of his or her relatives employed by the County.
F9:
Several employees interviewed stated fears of management retaliation were they to speak candidly with the Grand Jury.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
TAP permanent employees shall not review, make any recommendation, or take any action, with respect to an employment application submitted by a family member. ATTACHMENT “D” ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION AMENDMENTS TRANSFER OF FUNDS It is requested the Board approve the following: 1) By Ordinance, amend the Table and Index of Ordinance #440 to add the following classification: CLASS CODE CLASS TITLE SALARY RANGE 13871 Temporary Assistant 0 ($5.75 - $125.00 per hour) 2) By Resolution, amend Ordinance 440, Section 49 (a) Personnel to add the following positions: NUMBER CLASS CODE CLASS TITLE SALARY RANGE +1 74774 Senior Personnel Analyst 350 ($41,787 - $51,750) +1 15915 Accounting Technician I 273 ($27,664 - $34,278) +2 13868 Supervising Office Assistant II 241 ($23,317 - $28,870) 3) By Resolution, amend Ordinance 440, Section 49 (a) Personnel – TEMPORARY to add the following positions: NUMBER CLASS CODE CLASS TITLE SALARY RANGE +200 13817 Temporary Assistant 0 ($5.75 - $125.00 per hour) To be effective on the date of approval. 4) An advancement/transfer of funds of $600,000 to the Personnel Department, Temporary Assistance Program, Fund 706, Organization 951, to fund the initial period of the Temporary Assistance Pool including staff salaries, initial physicals/drug and alcohol testing, hardware and software requirements for testing, tracking and billing, etc. It is anticipated these monies and staff will be transferred to an approved Internal Services Fund, and that the $600,000 will be paid back by June 30, 2000. 5) The budget for the Temporary Assistance Program be set up and the Board approve the recommended appropriations and estimated revenue as attached. 6 1997-1998 APPROPRIATIONS 1-10101 Regular Salaries (+10% increase) $120,000 (1) Senior Personnel Analyst, (1) Accounting Technician, and (2) Supervising OA II positions. 1-11101 Temporary Salaries 1,026,000 Temporary Assistance Pool employees’ salaries 1-20101 Budgeted Benefits/mandated costs 30,500 2-30003 Accounting Services 10,000 RIFMIS for billings/payments to/from departments. 2-35303 Insurance Liability 5,000 Insurance Charge based on employees & mileage driven 2-42101 Office Expense 40,000 Computer hardware and software, printing services, advertisements, etc. 2-42109 Temporary Services 4,000 Paid to external services (and guarantee to cover first 8 hours of TAP employees) 2-43809 Drug Testing 10,000 Physical and drug & alcohol testing per policy 2-50202 Car Pool Mileage 2,000 Staff, when monitoring employees at departments and reviewing departments’ needs, and TAP employees, (mileage billed to/reimbursed by departments) 2-50203 Private Mileage 2,000 Mileage when using personal car is more advantageous 2-50206 Registration/Conference Fees 500 Registration for human resources conferences 2-50208 Meals 0 Meals when out of the area visiting departments or resolving problems TOTAL $ 1,250,000 7 REVENUE 7246 Charges for Current Services/Personnel Services Reimbursement from user departments: $1,250,000 8 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET JUSTIFICATION 1-10101 Regular Salaries $ 195,525 (1) Senior Personnel Analyst, (1) Accounting Technician, and (2) Supervising OA II positions. 1-11101 Temporary Salaries 4,000,000 Temporary Assistance Pool employee’s salaries 1-20101 Budgeted Benefits/mandated costs 211,756 TAP = $116,000/Staff = $51,756 + offset of certain employees who work over 1,000 hours 2-30003 Accounting Services 60,000 RIFMIS for billings/payments to/from departments. 2-35303 Insurance Liability 15,000 Insurance Charge based on employees & mileage driven 2-42101 Office Expense 140,000 Computer hardware and software, printing services, advertisement, etc. 2-42109 Temporary Services 459,000 Paid to external services (and guarantee to cover first 8 hours of TAP employees) 2-43809 Drug Testing 35,200 Physical and drug & alcohol testing per policy 2-50202 Car Pool Mileage 2,000 Staff, when monitoring employees at departments and reviewing departments’ needs and TAP employees, (mileage billed to/reimbursed by departments) 2-50203 Private Mileage 2,000 Mileage when using personal car is more advantageous 2-50206 Registration/Conference Fees 500 Registration for human resources conferences 2-50208 Meals Meals when out of the area visiting departments 19 or resolving problems 3-64102 Interest on loan 36,000 REPAY LOAN (1/3 of $600,000) 200,000 (After payback of loan, this amount will be placed in reserve for future computer software purchases, including computer software/hardware for training and testing.) TOTAL $ 5,357,000 9 REVENUE Reimbursement from user departments: Salaries of TAP employees $4,000,000 22.9% markup 916,000 Temporary Services 400,000 $1.00 per hour administrative fee 40,000 Mileage reimbursement for TAP employees 1,000 TOTAL $5,357,000 10