San Joaquin County Grand Jury

2000-2001

11 reports

Findings & Recommendations 1 findings
F1: case has four stages, which are handled by four different case workers. They are intake, court, placement, and facility staff. CPS procedures in respect to the placement of this child were followed. The court appointed a psychologist to do an in-depth bonding study. The results of the study found that the child in question did not bond well with most relatives. The biological mother s parental rights were relinquished in court, which also terminated the rights of all relatives. The child is now in the process of being adopted by the foster parents. CONCLUSIONS The procedures of CPS were followed.

Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.

Findings & Recommendations 5 findings
F1: After reviewing the policy and procedures of the Regional Occupational Program, the Grand Jury finds there is no written policy in regards to the vehicle repairs. There is a practice that any vehicle can be repaired, if the students do not have their own vehicle. The owner of the vehicle being repaired purchases all parts.
F2: After interviewing the Superintendent of Manteca Unified School District and the Automotive Instructor, the Grand Jury finds that the Superintendent feels it to be reasonable for the Principal to evaluate the Automotive Instructor.
F3: After reviewing the admission records of students enrolled, interviewing the Superintendent and Asst. Superintendent of Manteca Unified School District, the Grand Jury finds no evidence of misuse of the School to Career Grant or the SAPID Grant.
F4: After receiving the written policy on the use of district vehicles and conducting interviews with the Superintendent and the Asst. Superintendent of Manteca Unified School District, the Grand Jury finds Manteca Unified School District has a written policy that provides for mileage reimbursement and use of a district vehicle for district travel. The district has a practice that provides a district vehicle to administrators and permits personal use of their vehicles.
F5: After comparing the Manteca Unified School District's vehicle policy and practice to Tracy, Stockton, Lincoln and Lodi Unified School Districts, the Grand Jury finds: a. Tracy Unified School District has no written policy. The district has vehicles available to administrators on occasion. When a vehicle is needed, one can be assigned for the day. The director of maintenance is the only position that is assigned a vehicle, to insure a quick response anytime of the day or night. The district does not permit personal use of their vehicles. b. Stockton Unified School District has no written policy. The district has vehicles available to administrators on occasion. When a vehicle is needed, one can be assigned for the day. The SUSD Chief of Police and Asst. Chief of Police are the only two positions that are assigned vehicles, to insure a quick response anytime of the day or night. The district does not permit personal use of their vehicles. c. Lincoln Unified School District has a written policy, and no district vehicles. d. Lodi Unified School District has a written policy that the district follows. When a vehicle is needed, one can be assigned for the day. The district does not permit personal use of their vehicles. Manteca is the only district that has a policy that differs from the practice. No other district reviewed allows personal use of their vehicles, or supplies vehicles to the administrators. CONCLUSION The Grand Jury concludes that the vehicles repaired for the Principal by the Automotive Repair class is the acceptable practice of the District. However this can leave the appearance of partiality when the person whose vehicle is being repaired is responsible for the evaluations of the Instructor. The Grand Jury concludes there was no misuse of the School to Career or SAPID Grant in question. The Grand Jury concludes that the personal use of district vehicles is consistent with the acceptable practice at Manteca Unified School District.
Additional Recommendations 1

Not linked to specific findings.

R1: The Superintendent of Manteca Unified School District shall report to the Presiding Judge of the San Joaquin Superior Court, in writing and within 90 days of the publication of this report. That Statute requires that as to each finding in the report, the response indicate one of the following: a. The respondent agrees with the finding. b. The respondent disagrees with the finding with an explanation of reasons therefore. Section �933.05 also requires as to each recommendation, the response indicate one of the following: a. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary of action taken. b. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be, with a time frame for implementation. c. The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation of the scope of the analysis and a time frame not to exceed 6 months. d. The recommendation will not be implemented, with an explanation therefore.

Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.

Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.

Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.

Findings & Recommendations 2 findings
F1: Mandated State and Federal laws are not adhered to. No Smoking signs posted in the Mental Health Building courtyard are ignored. Current Employment and Discrimination regulations are to be prominently posted in a central location for employees. The only posting found in the Conservator's office was a 1993 Federal regulation. It is the belief of the SJCCGJ that the issues stated above leave an overall impression of lack of direction from top management. The San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors has a responsibility to see that the appropriate department responds to audit recommendations. No response was made regarding the June 2000 Audit to the Controller's office. Only after repeated attempts to determine if a response had been sent to the Board Supervisors was the Grand Jury successful. Had the recommendations of the Audit been implemented (W/P# K2), "All payment claims must always be approved by the Public Conservator or his deputy", the alleged embezzlement may not have taken place.
F2: Mandated State and Federal laws are not adhered to. No Smoking signs posted in the Mental Health Building courtyard are ignored. Current Employment and Discrimination regulations are to be prominently posted in a central location for employees. The only posting found in the Conservator's office was a 1993 Federal regulation. It is the belief of the SJCCGJ that the issues stated above leave an overall impression of lack of direction from top management. The San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors has a responsibility to see that the appropriate department responds to audit recommendations. No response was made regarding the June 2000 Audit to the Controller's office. Only after repeated attempts to determine if a response had been sent to the Board Supervisors was the Grand Jury successful. Had the recommendations of the Audit been implemented (W/P# K2), "All payment claims must always be approved by the Public Conservator or his deputy", the alleged embezzlement may not have taken place.

Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.

Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.

Additional Recommendations 2

Not linked to specific findings.

R1: Develop a written policy approved by the board regarding the use of phone recording equipment. Include in the policy a procedure in the redirection of "sensitive calls" to secured lines.
R2: Develop and implement an annual certification of acknowledgment of telephone recording policy to be maintained in the Human Resources Department.

Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.