San Luis Obispo County 2001-2002 - California Grand Jury Reports

July 02, 2002 — final-2001-2002*

24 pages 18 findings 10 recommendations

Findings & Recommendations 18 findings

F1: The Department's current Operation Manual (Section 22-101.2) is not DSS case workers (16)

Related Recommendations (2)

R2: All workers at the Department should be trained in the use of Procedure 22-101.2 of the DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES Operations Manual and the implemented changes that have been adopted from Grand Jury Recommendations. 3433 South Higuera Street, P.O. Box 8119, San Luis Obispo, Ca 93403-8119 Response: DATE: May 21, 2002 The Department has trained all Social Workers and Social Work Supervisors in the new procedures as of March 31, 2002. Honorable Board of Supervisors, County of San Luis Obispo TO:

R7: DSS Administrative Handbook Memorandum Section 22-101.2 titled

F2: Correctional Officers (COs) reported that they are subjected daily to

F3: Four female staff members interviewed stated that they had

F4: Three male officers reported that they have been injured when on

F5: Testimony given by female COs and records revealed there were

F6: Complaints were made by COs who reported that vile and disgusting threats made by wards to them, when reported to management staff,

Related Recommendations (6)

R1: Revise the complaint procedure to establish: The Grand Jury recommends that parents be advised 1995-1996 of a Standing Review Panel which may be convened a.) Informal Complaints: Those not required to be logged. Should be resolved within concerning their case. Instructions should include three working days. what constitutes their action, and rules concerning Formal Complaints: A complaint becomes formal when an official complaint b.) their attendance at the proceedings. Include this form is completed and received. A complaint is to be logged and assigned a number to be tracked to resolution. A receipt letter is to be mailed to complainant information in the Pink Book entitled Parent's within seven working days. These complaints should be resolved within thirty Guide to Dependency Proceedings (May 1992). calendar days. Extension beyond thirty days is only allowed with the approval of the Director. If the complaint is not resolved within thirty days or if the resolution The Grand Jury recommends that CPS rewrite is not acceptable to the parent, the parent may then request their complaint be Section 22-200F to expand on the CPS Standing reviewed by the Standing Review panel. Review Panel process. This should include the Complaints must be filed within ninety calendar days when the complainant knew new instructions to parents referred to above or should have known of an action or inaction that caused the complaint. regarding the Pink Book as well as formal guidance to members of the Standing Review Response: Panel. The Department has revised its administrative handbook section 22-101.2, effective February 28, 2002, incorporating these changes

R3: Lee Collins, Director: Department of Social Services From The Department should revise its complaint form implemented September 10, 2001 as Revised Board of Supervisors' Response to the 2001-2002 Grand Jury Report on SUBJECT: indicated in Exhibit 1. "Complaint Resolution at the Children's Welfare Services Division of the Department of Social Services" Response: RECOMMENDATION The Department incorporated the Grand Jury's recommendations in revising its "Service Satisfaction Statement," form DSS 340, effective March 5, 2002. That the Board of Supervisors adopt the Department of Social Services revised response in Attachment (1) as the Board of Supervisors' response to the 2001-2002 Grand Jury Report on

R4: "Complaint Resolution at the Children's Welfare Services Division of the Department of Social All complaints should be logged and tracked including status and disposition Services," and forward these responses to the Presiding Judge. in a networked database by a designated person.

R5: order to provide a more accurate historical record. All current clients of the Department should receive a copy of the new complaint OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT brochure. The Department of Social Services' completed, revised response is attached. (Attachment 1) Response: FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS All current participants in Child Welfare Services programs received a copy of the new Approval of this revised Grand Jury Response will not result in an additional financial impact on the complaint brochure by April 12, 2002. County

R6: RESULTS The Department should convene the Standing Review Panel and implement the Approval of this Grand Jury response, as revised, assures the County's compliance with the following changes. California Penal Code and promotes a more accurate historical record. (1) Department of Social Services Revised Response Attachment: a.) The Standing Review Panel should consist of five members: One appointed by the SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION Department; One appointed by CASA, Voices for Children; One appointed by the Superintendent for County Schools; One appointed by Behavioral Health May 22, 2002 was established as a deadline for information received Services; One member of the community appointed by the Standing Review Panel. b.) The Standing Review Panel should convene within thirty calendar days of a request by a related to this report. parent. The Standing Review Panel should issue their findings and recommendations in c.) Meetings: writing to the Director within fifteen calendar days of concluding their Four members of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors. investigation of the complaint. The Director should respond to the Standing Review Panel and parent within ten d.)

R8: The Grand Jury interviewed DSS workers and supervisors to determine if the revised complaint process was in effect and staff was knowledgeable. The Board of Supervisors should approve funding for the Standing Review Panel as deemed necessary. The Grand Jury re-interviewed the available staff they had questioned in Response: gathering information for the report issued in January 2002. The department of Social Services and the Board of Supervisors determined that a

F7: Testimony by COs and documents indicate that gang affiliations and

F8: Chemical spray is a primary means used to quell fights and It was apparent to the 2001-2002 San Luis Obispo Grand Jury during its disturbances between wards and to protect COs against assaults by inspection and subsequent investigation into the El Paso de Robles CYA wards. Statistics show 1,595 incident reports were made in 2001. Most facilities, that while some serious problems exist, progress in other areas is are one-on-one incidents. Many of the major incidents are racially impressive. motivated, with others being gang involved. Testimony from staff and former staff interviewed by the Grand Jury and

F9: The Grand Jury received information that injuries suffered by COs examination of records provided indicated that in some instances their caused disabilities and resignations that resulted in staff shortages. supervisors do not support COs. These shortages result in forced mandatory overtime by staff. Such The Grand Jury believes that past and current litigations have resulted in conditions lower staff morale. restricting the ability of the Supervisors and COs to manage ward conduct

F10: Testimony revealed that COs have been prosecuted for using and thus maintain control of the facility. excessive force. State CYA Administration has issued disciplinary policies that are difficult

F11: A female CO stated that she had complained to her supervisor about a to enforce and also place site administrators in a position that makes it co-worker who had shown videos with a sexual content to wards. The difficult to issue orders to promptly and adequately discipline offending video was brought from outside the facility by the CO. This is a wards. violation of CYA regulations. Subsequent interviews revealed that other The Grand Jury feels strongly that the wards at CYA El Paso de Robles videotapes were brought in also. The female CO stated that the should be treating the COs with respect; the Grand Jury feels that the complaint was ignored. Management stated that they were unaware of wards must earn respect. This can be brought about by the COs having this complaint. the ability to bring swift and direct punishment. It should be reiterated that the wards are youths who have been convicted of criminal offenses, many of which are of a very serious nature. A separate report is required for each ward exposed in an incident, even if they were bystanders.

F15: Records disclosed that the population of the CYA in Paso Robles is

F16: Management stated that the policy and procedures are in place to sexual and physical harassment. respond to disciplinary problems.

F17: The vocational facilities at CYA are not being utilized to their fullest confrontations with wards who have threatened, upon their release, to potential. The woodshop area was cluttered and unclean. The seek them out and subject them to rape, sodomy, and forced oral upholstery shop course has been closed because a credentialed copulation. teacher is not available.

F18: Educational programs start and stop based on the expertise of repeated occasions they have been required to stave off physical available staff at any particular time. Proven beneficial programs have assaults by wards. been dropped.

F19: Further cuts in teaching staff are being implemented and will be wards who stripped nude and masturbated in their presence as an act completed by July 1, 2002. These cuts are necessary due to declining of defiance. population at the facility, which will result in further program loss due to budget cuts.

F20: The school is accredited by the Western Association of Schools and were told, "It is part of your job". Colleges.

F21: State CYA administration states that the wards should be treated with ethnic differences of wards are the cause of frequent clashes and fights respect. with resulting injuries to wards and to COs who are required to control them. CONCLUSIONS

Additional Recommendations 2

Not linked to specific findings.

R12-15: minutes, b) individual testimony to three minutes, and c) speakers representing organized groups to five minutes. Persons The Grand Jury determined that overall, the responsible agencies and the speaking should focus testimony on the most important parts of the governing bodies identified in the 1997-1998 Grand Jury Final Report have proposal. Do not repeat points made by others. No applauding made a good faith effort in implementing commitments made regarding during testimony should be attempted or permitted. recommendations by that Grand Jury.

R20-20: Vision Statement RECOMMENDATIONS ASSESSOR AUDITOR-CONTROLLER Total Total Number of Precincts Number of Precincts 237 237237 100.00%

* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.