Santa Cruz County Grand Jury
2000-2001
Findings & Recommendations
27 findings
F1:
The California Planning and Zoning Law (Government Code §65300 et seq.) requires adoption of a comprehensive long-term General Plan that determines the development of the county.
F2:
The Board of Supervisors determines the annual allocation of the maximum number of building permits to be issued in accordance with Measure J’s growth management program. The 2001 building permits allocations are set at 0.5% over the number of housing units on December 31, 2000.
F3:
Land use codes and ordinances are broadly constructed and, therefore, susceptible to multiple interpretations. Review of the Santa Cruz County Planning Department 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Personnel Findings
F4:
The planning staff ’s responsibility is to explain to applicants the limitations imposed on the applicant’s use of their own property by (1) state laws, (2) county codes and (3) county ordinances. Often these rules conflict with the property owner’s desires.
F5:
Political influence by the Board of Supervisors places added pressure on the planning staff. Supervisors act for the best interest of their constituency. When membership on the board changes, direction from the supervisors changes.
F6:
City governments in the county and many neighboring counties pay higher salaries than Santa Cruz County does. Salaries in Santa Cruz County government are based on a nine- county comparison using Contra Costa, Fresno, Marin, Monterey, Napa, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma.
F7:
Employee morale is low and turnover is at an unprecedented high. This resulted from failure in negotiations to successively challenge the nine-county comparison. At the peak, there were 24 vacancies in the department. This necessitated taking staff from the advanced planning section to cover shortfalls in other sections.
F8:
The personnel department has been unable to attract the necessary people with requisite qualifications to fill vacancies in the Planning Department staff. Some vacant positions are difficult to fill because they are classified as temporary positions. The Planning Department requested hiring an outside consultant to assume the recruitment effort.
F9:
According to interviews with employees, workloads continue to be excessive. Also, employee performance evaluations have not been conducted on a consistent basis.
F10:
The department has budgeted 125 computer classes, approximately one day’s training for each employee of the Planning Department. The managers of each section are responsible for budgeting additional training courses for staff as needed to enhance their skills.
F11:
The Planning Director has implemented a program to acquaint new hires with the operations of the department as well as familiarize current employees with functions of other areas within the department. Additional training for new hires is left to other employees in the area where the person works. The responsibility for ensuring that employees obtain continuing or additional training lies with each manager.
F12:
In the fall of 2000, the Planning Director has obtained approval from the Board of Supervisors for a new staff position devoted to training. This staff position will evaluate the training needs of the department and devise strategies and methods to satisfy those needs. Review of the Santa Cruz County Planning Department 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F13:
The Planning Director proposed that employees be assigned to planning teams to be responsible for virtually all the development activity in a particular geographical area. Each team leader will be responsible for acquiring a thorough understanding of the assigned geographic location. Development Review Section Findings
F14:
On January 11, 2001, the City of Capitola and its finance director negotiated the Amended Supplemental Employment Agreement. This amendment superceded the March 23, 2000 amendment in its entirety. This action reinstated the direct supervisory relationship between the city manager and finance director. Item 2 states the current finance director will retire June 30, 2001. Item 6 states: “…The parties expect that the directive of the City Manager will be consistent with the position’s ‘Essential Duties and Responsibilities.’ If the Finance Director believes that a directive of the City Manager cannot be reconciled with the above-quoted duty, he may pursue that as a grievance under the grievance procedures in the Management Employees Compensation Plan.” Investigation of the Reporting Structure between the Capitol City Council and City Manager 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report • Included as an exhibit to the January 11, 2000 agreement, the City of Capitola and the current finance director entered into a Contract for Professional Services commencing September 1, 2001 terminating on June 30, 2003. In this contract, the contractor would give advice, recommendations and drafts on several policies and procedures and perform other non-routine tasks. Under the agreement, the contractor is expressly prohibited from performing day-to-day routine tasks. Item 3, under the Duties heading states: “Contractor shall not be requested to, nor shall Contractor, perform any day-to-day, ongoing, routine accounting or fiscal duties, and Contractor shall not supervise, or be supervised by, any official, employee, or agent of the City.” • In response to a question, the finance director stated in the interview the list of contemplated projects attached to the Contract for Professional Services included some tasks that he characterized as ordinarily the responsibility of a finance director.
F15:
Despite the impending retirement of the finance director, at the close of fieldwork the City of Capitola had not begun its search for a new finance director. Under the Professional Services Agreement signed by the current finance director, the contractor is prohibited from assisting the city in its day-to-day operations after his retirement. This raises the question: Who will act as finance director after June 30, 2001? The Grand Jury was unable to determine the plans of the city regarding this matter.
F16:
In preparing this report, the Grand Jury found it necessary to interview the finance director alone. For six weeks, the Grand Jury attempted to arrange for such a routine interview. This was refused and he was therefore subpoenaed to appear before the Grand Jury. In preparing this report, the Grand Jury found it necessary to conduct a private interview with the finance director. For six weeks, the Grand Jury attempted to arrange for an interview, however, the finance director refused to appear alone. Based on review of the correspondence received from the City of Capitola on this matter, the finance director’s refusal to voluntarily cooperate was supported by the city attorney, mayor and new city manager. A subpoena was subsequently issued and the finance director did appear alone. Penal Code §939 has been interpreted by the courts as operating to prohibit the presence of anyone at a grand jury session other than grand jurors and witnesses actually under examination. The only exceptions are a bailiff, court reporter, or interpreter. Conclusions The city council spent an inordinate amount of time in 2000 discussing and restructuring the reporting relationship of the city manager and finance director that was ultimately returned to its previous state in conformity with Municipal Code. The city council allowed itself to be diverted from crucial city business by the antagonism between these two important city officials, which, in part, led to the resignation of a council member. Instead of using standard government practices to resolve a formal personnel grievance, the city council entered into a contract with one of the parties that contravened its own Municipal Code. A change in the reporting relationship between the city manager and finance director as a quid pro quo agreement for the withdrawal of the grievances presents serious public policy questions. Investigation of the Reporting Structure between the Capitol City Council and City Manager 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F17:
Members of the 2000-01Grand Jury attended board meetings where derogatory remarks were made by one director regarding the general manager’s job performance.
F18:
The BCR&PD operated at a loss for fiscal year 2000-01. This shortfall was covered by district reserves.
F19:
Of 6,136 voters registered within Boulder Creek Recreation and Park District, 4,633 voted on November 7, 2000 in the BCR&PD board of director’s election. This represents greater than 75% voter turnout. Review of Boulder Creek Recreation and Park District 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Conclusions Some incumbent directors demonstrate ill will towards each other that impedes their ability to cooperate. This has had a negative impact on the ability of the district to move ahead with a number of proposed projects, including such simple projects as painting a four square court or hopscotch on asphalt. The lack of a current, comprehensive Policies and Procedures Manual, to which the directors and the general manager adhere, has fostered an atmosphere of extreme animosity at the board meetings. This contributes to endless discussions at board meetings. Updating and editing policies and procedures at meetings of the board of directors is poor utilization of meeting time and is an impediment to handling the business of the district. This approach to updating the policies and procedures has created agendas with an unwieldy amount of unfinished business, most of which is related to changes in policies or procedures. Compilation of updated policies and procedures has been haphazard and there is no way to know what changes have been made. The general manager’s ability to perform is impeded by the lack of an approved job description and the absence of annual performance evaluations. This has intensified the ill will between directors who feel the job is being performed adequately and those who feel it is not. The letter of intent to resign by an incumbent director was made public immediately after election results were posted in November 2000. The Grand Jury questions the timing of this action. This letter states that the general manager withheld knowledge of the incumbent’s intent to resign from the other directors. When this letter was made public, the fact that the general manager had known of the intent to resign was revealed, which gave the appearance of impropriety on the part of both the incumbent director and the general manager. This further undermined the relationship between the general manager and the other directors. Limitation of the public at the podium on any one agenda item has improved the ability of the board to move ahead in meetings.
F20:
After the formation of the SSC, the chairperson’s communications with parents showed a wider variety of communication techniques. Communication Method Frequency School Newsletter 16 Meetings 4 School Bulletin 6
F21:
According to the School Site Council Handbook, “After the SSC is first formed or new members are selected to ongoing councils, the school/district should provide training and ongoing in-service to the members to assist them in carrying out their responsibilities. The training provided to the SSC should be on a regular basis, and the training should be appropriate to the tasks at hand.” Training is not being provided to all site councils in Santa Cruz County.
F22:
In the committee’s interview with the County Superintendent of Schools, it was stated “We are now looking at doing training for participants.” Review of the Organization and Structure of Site Councils in Santa Cruz County Public Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F23:
Upon request, training support is available through the County Office of Education.
F24:
Survey responses revealed that in many cases parity between school personnel and parent/student representatives was not achieved. Parity was reported by18 of 31 principals and 5 of 16 chairpersons.
F25:
Respondents stated that Hispanics and other minorities in many communities are under represented on school site councils.
F26:
Some of the methods used to count votes have the appearance of impropriety. While appearance does not constitute wrongdoing, it can still undermine the integrity of the voting process. Conclusions Communication to parents and the local community regarding the school site council, and nominations in particular, needs to be improved. Even though it is not required by education code, nominations to fill seats on site councils should be conducted in accordance with democratic principles. Security of the voting process is non-existent in some schools. • A secured ballot box is not utilized at each school. • Some parents are eliminated from the voting process by missing an election meeting. • Votes returned by students may get lost in transit or misplaced. • Voting process should be established in accordance with democratic procedures. Training should be provided annually to the school site councils. School site councils are not adequately publicized. Too much dependence is placed on the school newsletter for communication. Most schools indicated that they had difficulty obtaining new SSC members. Participation greatly contributes to the success of a school site council; therefore, in order to stimulate interest, more creative efforts should be used. While the Education Code provides for specific oversight of school plans, it is ambiguous regarding the structure and organization of school site councils.
F27:
Since the establishment of the CPRB, the Internal Affairs investigation reports have increased from a typical 5-page report to a possible 25-page report. These reports must now be written in laymen’s terms for the CPRB members, rather than police terminology. Conclusions The number of complaints made to the Santa Cruz City Police Department is extremely low. The existing training provided to CPRB members does not involve adequate training in the Police Department’s practices and procedures. An established procedure is in place at the Santa Cruz Police Department to investigate citizen complaints and an additional level of review increases the complaint resolution time. The chief of police is not bound by the recommendations of the CPRB but agrees with their findings in most cases. A review board has the potential to provide a new perspective and serve as a checks and balances on the police department’s complaint review process. Page84 Review of the Citizens’ Police Review Board of the City of Santa Cruz 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
Additional Recommendations
17
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The Planning Department should accept credit cards.
R2:
The Planning Department should immediately resolve all complaints classified as a threat to public health and safety.
R3:
The Planning Director should ensure there is strong management in the Code Compliance Section.
R4:
Physical files should include copies of the recorded code violations (Red Tags) and be consistent with the status shown on the computer screen.
R5:
The Planning Department should utilize the existing ALUS code compliance system for tracking the status of code priority classifications until a future system is operational.
R6:
The Planning Department should complete the status of the outside agency’s review in the computer system.
R7:
The Planning Department should develop a system to cross-reference the multiple physical files that exist for a single development permit application.
R8:
The Auditor-Controller’s Office should implement an internal audit system on Planning Department files.
R9:
The Board of Supervisors should update the 1994 General Plan as soon as is feasible. Review of the Santa Cruz County Planning Department 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
R10:
The Board of Supervisors should conduct a formal study to determine the relationship of current salaries to employee retention.
R11:
The Board of Supervisors should consider changing the entities in the nine-county comparison used in salary surveys to include the four cities in the county.
R12:
Immediate priority must be given to training Planning Department personnel.
R13:
Planning Department managers should conduct employee reviews consistent with the stated personnel policy of the department.
R14:
The Planning Department should establish the Aptos/Watsonville Satellite Permit Center.
R15:
The Felton Satellite Permit Center should be available five days a week.
R16:
The General Plan and the code compliance complaint status should be available the internet.
R17:
The following should be added to the web site: • Development approval process • Description of the project • Cross reference to a related building permit • Building permit process • The alpha digit at the end of the permit number is confusing and should not be part of the record number • If a permit has been issued, the status on the web page should not show “READY TO ISSUE” • Withdrawn permits should be shown on the web page • Complete projects should show the date of completion on the web page • Cross reference the building permit to any related development approval Response Required Entity Recommendations Respond Within Board of Supervisors 1 – 17 90 Days Planning Director 1 – 7, 12 – 17 60 Days Review of the Santa Cruz County Planning Department 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Investigation of the Reporting Structure between the Capitol City Council and City Manager
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
27 findings
F1:
The CPRB is a seven-member voluntary board. Each city council member appoints one candidate for a seated position on the CPRB. The term of each member of the CPRB coincides with the term of the nominating city council member. Each member may serve a maximum of 8 consecutive years on the CPRB.
F2:
The board meets on the second Monday of every month for a public, open meeting from 5:30PM to 8:00PM in the city council chambers. In addition, the board meets in closed sessions to discuss confidential police personnel issues. The board met 14 times in 1999 for closed-session reviews.
F3:
Pursuant to CPRB by-laws, to be a member of the CPRB, one must • Be a qualified voter of the City of Santa Cruz • Not be employed by the City of Santa Cruz • Possess a reputation for fairness, integrity and responsibility • Have demonstrated an active interest in public affairs and service Page78 Review of the Citizens’ Police Review Board of the City of Santa Cruz 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F4:
According to California Penal Code §832.5(a) “Each department or agency in this state which employs peace officers shall establish a procedure to investigate citizens’ complaints against the personnel of such departments or agencies, and shall make a written description of the procedure available to the public.”
F5:
A police review board is not mandated by the state. It is a discretionary review process and most cities do not have such a board. Santa Cruz City Police Department is the only law enforcement agency in Santa Cruz County to have a review board.
F6:
The CPRB provides an additional level of police oversight. The Board provides citizens an alternative place to express concerns outside of the police department.
F7:
The Santa Cruz Police Department Citizen Comment Brochure contains the comment form for the use of citizens. The form states that according to California Penal Code §148.6(b), the person making the comment is provided the following instruction: “You have the right to make a complaint against a police officer for any improper police conduct. California law requires this agency to have a procedure to investigate citizens’ complaints. You have a right to a written description of this procedure. This agency may find after investigation that there is not enough evidence to warrant action on your complaint; even if that is the case, you have the right to make the complaint and have it investigated if you believe an officer behaved improperly. Citizen complaints and any reports or finding relating to complaints must be retained by this agency for at least five years. It is against the law to make a complaint that you know to be false. If you make a complaint against an officer knowing that it is false, you can be prosecuted on a misdemeanor charge.”
F8:
Citizen comment forms on the Santa Cruz City Police Department are available at the following locations in the City of Santa Cruz: • Santa Cruz Police Department • Citizens’ Police Review Board • City Clerk’s Office
F9:
Citizens may classify their comment in the following manner: • Commendation • Comment • Request for Mediation Information • Citizen Inquiry • Citizen Complaint
F10:
A commendation is one of the available options that the Santa Cruz City Police Department utilizes in its comment brochure in order to encourage positive feedback. Review of the Citizens’ Police Review Board of the City of Santa Cruz 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F11:
If the citizen chooses to make any comments, each comment is categorized as follows: • A policy with which you agree/disagree • A procedure which was/was not properly followed • A procedure which you agree/disagree • A positive or negative comment regarding attitude, behavior or conduct by a city employee • A possible violation of the law
F12:
Should a citizen request mediation, the CPRB has contracted with the Conflict Resolution Center of Santa Cruz County to provide mediation services. The process can include the following: • Mediation helps the parties communicate and come to agreements that are mutually acceptable. • Either party may request mediation at any time during the review process. • Mediation is voluntary and must be agreed to by all parties involved before it can be implemented. • All requests for mediation must be in writing. • Mediation is conducted at no cost to the parties involved and every reasonable effort will be made to schedule mediation sessions at the convenience of those involved. • Mediation sessions are closed to the public. The Police Chief and the CPRB report that very few complainants request or accept mediation as a recourse to their complaint.
F13:
If a citizen indicates on the comment form that an inquiry is desired, the process is handled immediately by the supervisor of the involved officer. The supervisor is provided with the details of the inquiry. The supervisor is then instructed to immediately review the matter with the officer and provide the appropriate training or counseling or corrective action to prevent any further recurrence. The CPRB does not handle inquiries. Page80 Review of the Citizens’ Police Review Board of the City of Santa Cruz 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F14:
According to the 1999 Annual Report, the CPRB reviewed 27 citizen complaints, some of which contained multiple allegations. The range of allegations included the following: Range of Allegations Conduct Procedural Officer misconduct Unlawful arrest Excessive force Unlawful search Missing/damaged property Improper procedure Discrimination Failure to take action Conduct Allegations Officer Excessive Missing/Damaged Year Conduct Force Property Discrimination Total 1999 22 4 1 0 27 1998 18 7 2 0 27 1997 20 7 1 0 28 Procedural Allegations Unlawful Unlawful Improper Failure To Year Arrest Search Procedure Take Action Policy Total 1999 2 1 31 5 0 39 1998 6 5 12 0 0 23 1997 8 3 22 2 1 36 Review of the Citizens’ Police Review Board of the City of Santa Cruz 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F15:
If the comment form indicates that a complaint is being filed, the process necessitates a formal investigation into the incident by Internal Affairs or the officer’s chain of command. The following will occur: • The case is assigned to the Internal Affairs Investigator. • The Internal Affairs Investigator collects evidence and conduct interviews of the officers and any witnesses. • The Internal Affairs Investigator makes his/her investigation available to CPRB in the form of a report and submits findings to the chief of police. • The CPRB must review the completed investigation. • The CPRB may: @ Ask for further information from the chief of police @ Call for an independent investigation @ Hold hearings @ Subpoena witnesses and take testimony @ Make a ruling on the case as presented by the Internal Affairs report. • The CPRB report is sent to the chief of police stating its findings and
F16:
Prior to the establishment of the CPRB, the process of a complaint involved the following: • The case was assigned to an Internal Affairs Investigator. • The Internal Affairs Investigator collected evidence and conduct interviews of the officers and any witnesses. • An investigator submitted findings to the chief of police. • The chief of police considered the Internal Affairs report prior to his final determination of the outcome of the complaint. • The chief of police notified the complainant and the involved officers of the Chief’s findings and conclusions. Page82 Review of the Citizens’ Police Review Board of the City of Santa Cruz 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F17:
In 1999, the CPRB determined that 94% of allegations were not sustained and the chief of police determined that 97% of the same allegations were not sustained. The CPRB Annual Report defines the term not sustained as “the review fails to disclose sufficient facts to prove the allegation made in the complaint.” CPRB Findings on Allegations Reviewed % Not Year %Sustained Sustained 1999 6 94 1998 11 89 1997 9 91 Chief of Police Findings on Allegations Reviewed % Not Year % Sustained Sustained 1999 3 97 1998 10 90 1997 10 90
F18:
In 1999, 11 out of 28 complaints (one of which was not reviewed in 1999) came from the downtown Santa Cruz area. Out of the 27 complaints reviewed, the Board was unanimous in its findings on 20 of the complaints reviewed, split on findings in 4 complaints, made no findings in 2 complaints, and finding was pending on 1 complaint.
F19:
According to the City of Santa Cruz Information Report for Year-end 1999. The 27 complaints received comprised 0.05% of the total 60,763 calls handled by the police department.
F20:
According to the City of Santa Cruz Citizens’ Police Review Board 1999 Annual Report, “there were only a relatively small number of complaints…the small number supports the overall good effort of the City’s Police Department.”
F21:
In September 1999, the CPRB conducted its first independent investigation. This investigation was in response to community concerns and complaints of excessive force stemming from arrests at an anti-war demonstration. The added expense of an investigator caused the CPRB to spend beyond their 1999 budget.
F22:
Last year, the CPRB held a public hearing on the topic of racial profiling. This hearing was broadcast on Community TV.
F23:
In recent years, fewer complaints at the Santa Cruz City Police Department is attributed by the chief of police as a result of increased departmental training efforts, including mental health, homeless resource and social issues training. Review of the Citizens’ Police Review Board of the City of Santa Cruz 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F24:
The CPRB members are citizens who may not be experienced in police practice and procedures. The CPRB training involves a mandated CPRB orientation and ride-alongs with police personnel.
F25:
Originally, the board had to complete their portion of the investigation review within 30 days. Since the board only meets once a month, they want to increase their review of a complaint from 30 days to 60 days. After the Grand Jury interview, it was discovered that the timeline may now be extended when the CPRB coordinator contacts the city manager.
F26:
The CPRB Chairperson corresponded to the city council. In this document, the CPRB stated that they would like to see the following changes: • Improve officer cooperation in reviewing complaints • Improve ability to gain complainant cooperation • Allow public release of reasons for exoneration of the police officer
F27:
Since the establishment of the CPRB, the Internal Affairs investigation reports have increased from a typical 5-page report to a possible 25-page report. These reports must now be written in laymen’s terms for the CPRB members, rather than police terminology. Conclusions The number of complaints made to the Santa Cruz City Police Department is extremely low. The existing training provided to CPRB members does not involve adequate training in the Police Department’s practices and procedures. An established procedure is in place at the Santa Cruz Police Department to investigate citizen complaints and an additional level of review increases the complaint resolution time. The chief of police is not bound by the recommendations of the CPRB but agrees with their findings in most cases. A review board has the potential to provide a new perspective and serve as a checks and balances on the police department’s complaint review process. Page84 Review of the Citizens’ Police Review Board of the City of Santa Cruz 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
Additional Recommendations
17
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The CPRB and the Police Department should examine the complaint review procedures and streamline the process. The CPRB should prioritize the complaints by their gravity and be allowed discretion over those complaints it investigates. Currently, each and every complaint is reviewed.
R2:
The Santa Cruz City Council should research police review boards in other jurisdictions to study beneficial working relationships between the police department and the citizen police review boards.
R3:
may also apply to local policies and practices followed by Santa Cruz LAFCO. As noted in our response to the findings, we believe that complex public issues deserve a thorough public debate. At this time we are not scheduling any tasks to streamline the local process. If the Grand Jury has any specific suggestions, we would be happy to discuss the feasibility and advisability of streamlining the local process. Again, the Grand Jury is to be commended for its detailed review of how the annexation process was conducted for the Manabe-Burgstrom annexation. Responses to the 1999-2000 Grand Jury Final Report 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Criminal Justice Committee Reports Blain Street Women’s Facility - Respondent: Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Response Received: September 26, 2000 Respondent: Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Office Response Received: September 26, 2000
R4:
Training for the CPRB members should be improved and address the findings of inadequacy in the knowledge of the police policies and procedures.
R5:
The Citizen Comment Brochure should be made available on the CPRB and the Santa Cruz City Police Department’s respective web sites.
R6:
The city should instruct all employees to make themselves available to meet alone with the Grand Jury without the need for approval by any city employee, elected city official or member of the city council.
R7:
The city should review the adequacy of its general fund reserve.
R8:
Next year’s Grand Jury should review the operations of the MBAIF. See the City of Capitola’s fiscal year 2000-01 financial statements, pages 38-39, footnote IV. Response Required Entity Recommendations Respond Within Capitola City Council 1 – 7 90 Days Responses to the 1999-2000 Grand Jury Final Report 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report City of Scotts Valley
R9:
Supply the trial balance for 6-30-99 and 6-30-98.
R10:
Supply a complete chart-of-accounts for your financial system.
R11:
Supply the Budget for the current fiscal year. A separate line-item budget should be submitted if the Budget is not that detailed.
R12:
Supply the Budget for the prior fiscal year.
R13:
Supply a list of departments, entities and trust funds that are under your control or supervision.
R14:
Supply a list of the audits (both internal/external and financial/operational) performed by or for you for the last three years sorted by department/entity. The list should state: The department/entity/trust the audit was done for, the type of audit performed, the date the audit started and the date of the audit was completed.
R15:
Supply a list of the departments/entities/trusts not audited in the last three years and the reason that no audit was performed. Financial Compliance Review of County Entities 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Exhibit B: Information Requested from Special Districts:
R16:
The General Plan and the code compliance complaint status should be available the internet.
R17:
The following should be added to the web site: • Development approval process • Description of the project • Cross reference to a related building permit • Building permit process • The alpha digit at the end of the permit number is confusing and should not be part of the record number • If a permit has been issued, the status on the web page should not show “READY TO ISSUE” • Withdrawn permits should be shown on the web page • Complete projects should show the date of completion on the web page • Cross reference the building permit to any related development approval
Findings & Recommendations
27 findings
F1:
Health Services Agency –
F2:
Division of Public Health – County Clinics –
F3:
Division of Mental Health and Alcohol and Drug Abuse –
F4:
Central Coast Alliance for Health– Community Clinics –
F5:
Coalition for Health Care Outreach –
F6:
Local Hospitals – Health Services Agency The Santa Cruz County Health Services Agency (HSA) is the lead agency responsible for a number of services provided directly to low-income persons or by contract with private health care providers and non-profit organizations. Other providers represent collaborative efforts funded from a mixture of tax resources and philanthropic donations. The responsibilities of the HSA include the following: • Assessing the health status of county residents • Managing the health planning process to meet the needs of the entire community • Setting priorities to meet these needs and to serve as advocate for the poor, the disabled, the aged and the disenfranchised • Assuring the active participation of health service providers, consumers of health services and advocates who display a special concern for one or another aspect of health care delivery • Maximizing the impact of scarce public health resources, setting priorities, avoiding duplication and averting competition when it is counter-productive Based on interviews with other providers, the HSA has the respect of community providers essential to carrying out its unique role. The HSA has been an effective advocate for fulfilling the needs of low-income families. It participates in every available categorical program targeted to the poor. The HSA Comparison of Revenue Sources chart below depicts the ability of HSA to use limited county funds to leverage millions of dollars of outside funding for local programs. In addition, county professional staff has successfully competed for a number of demonstration projects awarded for the purpose of testing innovative approaches to people with special and difficult health problems. Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report The HSA employs an experienced, high caliber staff open to innovation, collaboration and committed to public service. Efforts are made to accommodate diversity in language and culture. Bilingual capability in English and Spanish exists in all clinic locations by staff members at every level. County facilities are located and professional staff are deployed to Health Services Agency Comparison of Revenue Sources (in millions $) $90 $82.00 Gross Budget $80 $74.61 $69.22 $66.20 $70 $63.00 $60.82 $67.64 $60 $54.60 $63.41 $49.96 $48.33 $58.59 Non-County Revenues $50 $56.50 $53.30 $51.34 $40 $44.39 $41.86 $37.81 $30 Net County Costs $20 $14.36 $10.52 $10.22 $9.45 $9.70 $9.70 $10.64 $11.19 $8.09 $10 21.76% 16.20% 18.71% 15.53% 15.40% 14.65% 15.37% 15.00% 17.51% $- 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 Fiscal Year areas where low-income people reside. HSA is engaged with other public agencies that serve individuals in need of health services support. Examples include public schools in low-income areas, probation, welfare, homeless shelters, child protective services and all county-operated detention facilities. Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report HSA is an active member of the Coalition for Health Care Outreach, a group of public and voluntary health and social service agencies. HSA staff assists the Coalition in the following ways: • Identifying and enrolling families eligible for Medi-Cal and other tax-supported health programs • Obtaining federal reimbursements for outreach activities which qualify for financial support • Assessing unmet needs experienced by coalition members • Participating in coordinated planning efforts to attract new health resources to fill gaps in services • Preparing grant applications to both private and public agencies • Providing technical assistance in case management techniques and in making and receiving referrals • Assisting in the training non-professional outreach staff The Director of HSA sits on the Medical Managed Care Commission that governs the county- operated prepaid plan in Santa Cruz County, the Central Coast Alliance for Health. This position helps her to design performance criteria for county contracts with private providers and to track legislative proposals affecting uninsured families. HSA is currently upgrading its Medical Information Management System (MIMS), to comply with a recent federal initiative HIPPA (Health Insurance Privacy and Portability Act). This legislation is intended to protect information on the health status of insured persons and facilitate the portability of health insurance coverage. Compliance is required by April 2002 as a condition of qualification for federal program reimbursements to providers in all tax- supported health programs. The goals of the new MIMS are as follows: • Improve fiscal management of county-operated programs and increase the rate of revenue recovery from third party sources • Modify the determination of eligibility and integrate clinical services to make them more user-friendly and clinically effective • Facilitate evaluation of professional performance and measure outcomes of treatment • Assess specific health problems in the community by utilizing pertinent data from the recent census and special survey results to refine long term health planning Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report The HSA is making every effort to meet its obligations to low-income persons despite the complexities of health care financing The HSA Director is acutely aware of unmet needs in Santa Cruz County that impact low-income families, These include the following: • Lack of access to health care services for working families without health insurance • Lack of dental treatment resources, especially for children, including many of those with Medi-Cal eligibility • Lack of primary mental health care services for families and children • Lack of sufficient resources to accommodate pregnant adolescents who need intensive peri-natal care • Lack of evening hours at county clinics to accommodate working people A recent report to the Board of Supervisors by the HSA, entitled Report on the Uninsured and Access to Health Care, is especially pertinent to those in a position to shape health care in the public arena. The report may be obtained on request from the Health Services Agency or at http://www.santacruzhealth.org/pdf/Uninsured_Access_Rpt.pdf. Physician recruitment efforts demonstrate serious competition from Bay Area Counties and Monterey County. Monterey County has placed physicians in county service into the Public Employment Retirement System (PERS), whose strong benefits have proven attractive. Skilled nurses are in short supply. Local hospitals and long term care facilities are offering higher salaries than the county. Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Division of Public Health The Division of Public Health is organized and operated to assure the integration of public health and preventive measures into primary clinical care. The Health Officer and the Director of Public Health Nursing are responsible for all programs in this divisionDivision that deal with low-income families. These range over a broad spectrum and include • Communicable disease control and immunizations • Peri-natal care for adolescents and other high risk mothers and infants • Health education and nutrition • Case finding, referral and outreach, concentrated on low-income families • Case management for difficult or chronic health problems • Family planning • Education and control of sexually transmitted diseases • Care for high-risk infants and preschool children • Health services for families who are homeless • Intensive case finding and health care for AIDS and TB patients The California Department of Health considers the programs in Santa Cruz dealing with AIDS to be an outstanding model for other counties. Public health nurses are the mainstay of public health practice. Although assigned to categorical programs, these nurses engage in general practice and apply their skills wherever a need is encountered. Their motto is “take care of people instead of paper.” The public health nurses provide critical support to the clinicians who operate county clinics. They make visits to homes for the purpose of assuring that treatment instructions are understood and carried out and that follow-up appointments are kept. They also provide case management services for clients with difficult and recurring problems. When an outbreak of infectious disease threatens, the nursing staff is mobilized to control its spread. A special unit of the department, Homeless Persons Health Project, deals entirely with homeless families and individuals. It operates a clinic at a Santa Cruz shelter, but the nursing staff is frequently on the streets at other locations serving the homeless. This unit is a successful example of attracting funds for demonstration purposes. A recent assessment of this program by federal evaluators drew praise and a conclusion that it should serve as a model for other county public health jurisdictions. Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Other programs in the division reach beyond routine clinical care, including • Vital statistics • Accident prevention especially for children (bicycle helmets-seatbelts etc) • Lead poisoning screening and control • Optimizing immunization rates • Dental disease control and targeted treatment • Tobacco education and cessation of smoking • Hepatitis C and tuberculosis control targeted to new immigrants and HIV patients • Other preventive programs The Health Status Profile, below, shows from 1996 to 1998 this county performed above average in nearly all categories as compared to other California counties and National Objective benchmarks. However, according to the Public Health Officer, there is a high and persistent incidence of alcohol and drug abuse in Santa Cruz County compared to other California counties of similar population. Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Santa Cruz County Health Status Profile 1996-1998 3-Year Average Statewide Average National Objective 2000 Better Worse Better Worse Indicator Than Than Than Than Motor Vehicle Deaths xxxx xxxx Unintentional Injury Deaths xxxx xxxx Firearm Injury Deaths xxxx xxxx Homicide Deaths xxxx xxxx Suicide Deaths xxxx xxxx Deaths, All Cancers xxxx xxxx Lung Cancer Deaths, xxxx xxxx (2nd best in state) Breast Cancer Deaths, Women xxxx xxxx Coronary Heart Deaths xxxx xxxx Cerebrovasicular Dis. (Stroke) Deaths xxxx xxxx Drug-Related Deaths xxxx xxxx AIDS Incidence xxxx xxxx Measles Incidence xxxx xxxx Tuberculosis Incidence xxxx xxxx Syphilis Incidence xxxx xxxx Infant Mortality Rate, All* xxxx xxxx Hispanic Infant Mortality* xxxx none established % Low Birth Weight Infants xxxx equal to national Teen Pregnancy Rates xxxx none established % Onset Prenatal Care, 1st Trimester xxxx xxxx # % Adequate Prenatal Care xxxx xxxx % Breastfeeding/Early Postpartum xxxx xxxx (Best in state) * 1994-1996 3-year average # National Objective for Year 2010 Data/Report released April 3, 1000, California Department of Health Services Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report County Clinics The county operates two primary care clinics, one at the Emeline Health Center of the Health Services Agency and another near downtown Watsonville. These facilities are attractive and well maintained. They provide a dignified environment for the mostly low-income individuals and families who rely on them as their principal source for medical care. At present, clinic operations are confined to daytime schedules with no lunchtime or evening hours. Santa Cruz County Clinics Utilization Statistics Actual Actual Actual Projected FY 97-98 FY 98-99 FY 99-00 FY 00-01 Santa Cruz Clinic Visits Primary Care Clinic* 13,417 13,373 14,402 15,000 Prenatal Clinic 568 254 294 100 Family Planning Clinic 995 1,116 1,217 1,200 Tuberculosis Clinic 351 320 343 325 CHDP Clinic 497 389 577 550 Immunization Services 3,487 3,747 4,000 4,200 Laboratory Procedures 26,968 28,226 28,840 30,000 X-ray Procedures 2,237 2,240 2,329 2,400 Prescriptions Filled 75,297 67,686 63,837 68,000 Watsonville Clinic Visits Primary Care Clinic 11,355 11,406 12,240 12,500 Prenatal Clinic - - - - Family Planning Clinic 3,761 3,758 4,343 4,500 Tuberculosis Clinic 898 732 801 800 CHDP Clinic 1,298 1,290 1,173 1,300 Immunization Services 5,927 6,250 6,436 6,700 Laboratory Procedures 9,644 13,062 14,229 1,400 X-ray Procedures 1,067 1,050 1,202 1,200 Prescriptions Filled - 11,785 23,591 30,000 * Includes Orthopedic Clinic, Travel Clinic, Occupation Health Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Physicians trained in primary care specialties staff the clinics with support from allied health specialists, such as nurse practitioners, physician assistants and technicians. Patients are not assigned a designated primary care provider whose primary purpose is to assure continuity of care. Both clinics enjoy the status of federally qualified health clinics (FQHC), an official federal designation that raises reimbursement rates for services it provides. Renovations are under way to enhance productivity and improve patient traffic within the Emeline County Clinic. A plan is also under consideration to add capacity in mental health services to support the family clinicians Medi-Cruz The Board of Supervisors created this program to supply medical care for those who are without health insurance and without money needed to pay for essential medical care when it becomes a necessity. A complete description of the strategy employed by Medi-Cruz to accomplish a great deal with limited resources is available in the recent report to the Board of Supervisors, Report on the Uninsured and Access to Health Care. Medi-Cruz operates on a tight budget due to repeated reductions of state funds for health care for indigent adults. This reduction in funding places a burden on single indigent adults who reside in the county and do not have access to health insurance. Division of Mental Health Services and Alcohol and Drug Abuse Programs The Division of Mental Health Services and Alcohol and Drug Abuse Programs serves people who suffer severe mental health or substance abuse problems, both acute and chronic. Most of its clients are adults and seriously emotionally disturbed children. The division organizes its interventions as a system of care to cope with major and persistent disabilities associated with mental dysfunction. The staff is organized into treatment teams to fulfill this primary charge in both North and South County. An inpatient facility is operated under contract at Dominican Hospital’s Behavioral Treatment Unit. Individuals in need of voluntary or involuntary commitment for acute mental health or drug detoxification problems are admitted to this unit. Psychiatrists under contract with the Mental Health Division tend county patients. Most of these admissions are short term, with discharge to residential care or follow-up in an outpatient facility. Components of the system include outpatient clinics, residential facilities, and day treatment programs, all of which are supported by a mobile crisis team. The division provides mental health services to each county detention facility. Programs for children are presently confined to seriously emotionally disturbed children. This model program was awarded special demonstration funding. It uses a multidisciplinary approach to troubled children who face the prospect of foster home placement. The program includes personnel from schools, courts, probation department, child protective services, police agencies, drug and alcohol professionals and others. Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report This system of care, now in its tenth year, has demonstrated success in many ways • Reduced costs for state hospital admissions • Extended treatment and case management services provided in the least restrictive environment with mobile crisis support • Lowered utilization of acute mental hospital beds • Improved special education programs • Reduced costs for foster and group home placement • Improved family reunification for children returning home from protective custody Both parents and young people served in this program are very satisfied with its results. Primary mental health services to families and children are unavailable in both county and community clinics. This also holds true with Central Coast Alliance for Health programs because mental health benefits have been removed from coverage in the county prepaid plan. Funding for mental health services is allocated to County Mental Health instead. As a result, individuals with a less serious mental disorder have few options for primary mental health care. There is a critical need for psychiatric evaluations and treatment resources in county and community clinics serving low-income families. In addition, there is a severe shortage of all types of mental health professionals in Santa Cruz County. Skills in short supply are child psychiatry, psychology and other therapeutic modalities dealing with behavioral dysfunctions in the family. Alcohol and Drug Abuse Programs Proposition 36 was passed by voters in 2000. Its intent is to divert convicted drug abusers from detention facilities to supervised treatment programs in their communities. Funds allocated to date under Proposition 36 are being used to plan for diversion of offenders eighteen years old and above. Alcohol and Drug Abuse Programs has been designated as the lead agency since the emphasis of the new law is on treatment. A task force is now at work that includes the courts, probation, district attorney, public defender, the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Programs and providers of local services. In the judgment of the Director of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Programs, the long-range expansion of service capacity will benefit everyone. A significant portion of eligible persons is, in fact, already enrolled in various community treatment programs. He expects that the potential problem of dislocation of non-offenders, if it occurs, will be temporary and can be readily resolved. In addition, he expects the waiting lists that now exist for admission to some treatment programs will grow shorter with the increased treatment capacity expected when Proposition 36 is fully funded. Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Central Coast Alliance for Health The Medi-Cal reform, adopted in the 1970s, was the driving force behind the enrollment of Medi-Cal beneficiaries into prepaid health plans. It took many years of trial and error and cancellation of contracts with providers before reliable prepaid Medi-Cal plans finally emerged and brought tangible benefits to Medi-Cal families. This result required the enactment of statutes to ensure that prepaid contractors under Medi-Cal meet a number of detailed fiscal and health care standards that protect the interests of enrollees. The Central Coast Alliance for Health is a county operated prepaid plan that serves Medi-Cal recipients and families eligible for the Healthy Families Program. The Alliance came into existence in 1996 as a result of growing concern on the part of public health officials and leaders of the local Medical Society over the lack of participation by local physicians in the Medi-Cal program. The Board of Supervisors established the Medical Managed Care Commission (MMCC) to govern the county operated prepaid plans. The commission seats elected officials, public health officers, private providers and beneficiaries enrolled in the plan. The MMCC holds regular public hearings open to all interested parties to present their positions on the Medi-Cal program and to resolve as many problems as possible at the local level. Prior to the creation of the Alliance, a myriad of problems affected local beneficiaries of the Medi-Cal program. Limited choice of private providers resulted in episodic, unsupervised care, over-reliance on hospital emergency rooms, higher rates of hospital admissions and longer hospital stays. This same pattern of utilization now prevails among uninsured low- income families not participating in the Alliance programs. Analyses of Medi-Cal paid claims data prior to the establishment of the Alliance confirm these patterns in the Medi-Cal population Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Some of the accomplishments of the Alliance are highlighted below: • Within the framework of state regulation, policy decisions on Medi-Cal have reverted to local public control. • The state provides per capita prepayments for various classes of people eligible for Medi-Cal. These payments place the Alliance at financial risk for the provision of the extensive benefits covered by Medi-Cal. Cost over-runs cannot be reimbursed by the state. • Plan physicians share this risk. When enrolled, families are assigned to a primary care physician of their choice who provides direct services and authorizes referrals to specialists when indicated. Per capita prepayments are made to the physician to cover all services. • An intake assessment is made of the health status of each enrollee on entry to the plan and periodically thereafter. This enables treatment for any detected abnormality and contributes to the maintenance of good health. • Quality assurance procedures are in continuous operation. These consist of several elements: @ Special studies of patterns in the provision of services to measure conformity with statistical standards set for specific types of primary care @ Collaboration with public health professionals in health education and organized programs of prevention targeted to special needs of enrollees @ An internal quality improvement program to upgrade performance of plan physicians and allied health professionals including biannual site visits @ Case management procedures are emphasized for difficult or chronic conditions to assure compliance with treatment regimens and to help prevent complications. • Patient support services include: @ Medical transportation @ Adaptation to language and cultural diversity @ Consultation by phone @ Outreach by bilingual staff to assist in establishing eligibility @ Review of complaints and prompt adjudication of grievances • Fiscal management of the Alliance includes annual budget development, expenditure tracking and negotiation of contracts with various classes of providers. Audits indicate that fiscal affairs are in good order. The plan has accrued a surplus in each year of operation. Because there is no need for the Alliance to return profits to investors, one of the uses of the surplus has enabled the plan to make additional reimbursements to providers, which helps retain current physicians and encourage other physicians to participate. • The presence of Alliance staff in the community has improved communication between both providers and enrolled members. Inquiries are handled efficiently and responses regarding procedures of the plan are made in a timely fashion. • To foster administrative efficiency, the Alliance expanded coverage to Monterey County in 2000, which is now an integral part of the Alliance. Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report According to Census 2000 data for Santa Cruz County, 26.8% of the population is Hispanic. In their most recent analysis, the Human Resources Agency reported that 49% of Medi-Cal eligible families countywide are Hispanic. Percent of Persons Who Are Hispanic or Latino (any race) Santa Cruz County Census 2000 Map The heaviest concentration of Hispanics is in South County. Persons who are Hispanic or Latino comprise 69% of the population of Freedom and 75% of the population of Watsonville, up from 60% in 1990. The highest rates of growth took place in Watsonville and Scotts Valley. Population Change 1999 – 2000 Santa Cruz County 1990 2000 Increase / % Change % of 1990 % of 2000 Jurisdiction Population Population (Decrease) 1999-2000 Population Population Santa Cruz County 229,734 255,602 25,868 11.3% 100% 100% Capitola 10,171 10,033 (138) -1.4% 4.4% 3.9% Santa Cruz 49,040 54,593 5,553 11.3% 21.3% 21.4% Scotts Valley 8,615 11,385 2,770 32.2% 3.8% 4.5% Watsonville 31,099 44,265 13,166 42.3% 13.5% 17.3% Unincorporated 130,809 135,236 4,517 3.5% 56.9% 52.9% Source: California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit, California State Census Data Center Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report In the course of this review, all providers reported a steady increase in demand for health services by low-income families who lack health insurance. Many are newcomers looking for work in farm-related and service occupations that are unlikely to offer health insurance either to the worker or dependents. South County health care providers and housing officials are concerned that newcomers are low-income Hispanic families without health insurance who live in overcrowded, unhealthy conditions. The extent and severity of these problems will be quantified when the Census 2000 data on family income, occupation, housing and health insurance coverage are released in the fall. Coalition for Health Care Outreach This organization was created several years ago to enroll people who qualify for government subsidized health care programs and insurance plans. It focus is on families and children. It received a grant from the Packard Foundation at a crucial juncture in the organization’s history. The current membership of the coalition is as follows: Above the Line Watsonville Adelante Watsonville All Kids by Two Santa Cruz Blue Cross of California San Francisco Central Coast Alliance for Health Santa Cruz Community Action Board Santa Cruz Community Foundation Santa Cruz County Office of Education Capitola Davenport Resource Center Davenport Dientes Community Dental Clinic Santa Cruz Dominican Hospital Santa Cruz Dominican Foundation Santa Cruz DRSC Davenport Families in Transition Santa Cruz & Watsonville Familia Center Santa Cruz Food & Nutrition Service Aptos Growth & Opportunity Watsonville Health Services Agency Santa Cruz Human Resources Agency Santa Cruz & Watsonville Westside Planned Parenthood Santa Cruz Planned Parenthood Watsonville Pajaro Valley Community Health Trust Watsonville Pajaro Valley Unified School District Watsonville Pajaro Valley Shelter Services Watsonville Primary Access Dental Sacramento Salud Para La Gente Clinic Watsonville Santa Cruz County Mental Health Santa Cruz Santa Cruz County Public Health Santa Cruz Santa Cruz City Schools Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Community Counseling Centers Santa Cruz Youth Services Watsonville Santa Cruz Women’s Health Center Santa Cruz Second Harvest Food Bank Watsonville Sutter Maternity and Surgery Center Santa Cruz United Way Capitola Watsonville Hospital Watsonville WIC Watsonville Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Following is a list of problems being addressed by the Coalition: • Uninsured children whose parents are either unaware of help they may receive or in need of personalized assistance in applying for health programs • Homeless who are in need of help with medical care, mental health disorders or treatment and rehabilitation related to substance abuse • Health screening in Headstart and elementary school health screening and referral • Food and nutrition assistance • Health care assistance to workfare programs • Dental screening and treatment of children • Counseling and case management for a variety of health problems • Residential care programs • Assistance for victims of domestic violence and child abuse Community Clinics We visited three member clinics that provide health care for uninsured, low-income families. • Salud Para La Gente Clinic in Watsonville • Women’s Clinic of Santa Cruz • Dientes Community Dental Clinic in Santa Cruz Salud Para La Gente Clinic This clinic was created during the War on Poverty in the sixties. It is now a primary resource for Spanish-speaking patients in both southern Santa Cruz and northern Monterey Counties. Its family physicians speak fluent Spanish and are sensitive to the cultural characteristics of the people they serve. The clinic is spacious and well maintained. All patients are treated without prior determination of eligibility or inquiry into their legal status. This practice is well known in the community and has significantly reduced the use of the emergency room for primary care during clinic hours. It has also reduced serious complications resulting from delays in seeking attention. Advantages of the clinic include • Continuity of care is an important feature of clinic policy has proven to be popular with patients and providers alike • Clinic physicians attend their own patients during hospitalization at the Watsonville Community Hospital • Organized prevention programs that focus on the problems most commonly encountered by the clinicians • Patients are assisted in making application for public programs for which they are eligible in a caring manner; this has increased the number of participating families • Newcomers to the community are likely to use the clinic especially if they are undocumented families • Patient satisfaction is measured regularly • Complaints are settled immediately and without formality Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Respecting patients and treating them with warmth and dignity is a guiding principle of the clinic. The Women’s Health Clinic of Santa Cruz Findings This clinic specializes in responding to the general health needs of women in a sensitive and caring fashion. Its professional and support staff consists entirely of women, many of whom have worked in the clinic for years. The majority of patients are eligible for Medi-Cal or other tax-supported programs. Their children are also included. A significant percentage of its clients are Spanish-speaking, and most staff members are bilingual. The clinic enjoys strong community support. It has a community board of directors who contribute to both management and fundraising campaigns. Every effort is made to qualify patients eligible for public programs in order to preserve funds expended from its own resources for uninsured people. Clinic administrators meet reporting requirements of city and county government that help finance the clinic. In the words of its director, the administrator are especially adept at “patching together” ways to maximize income from public programs and tailoring them to individual needs. When necessary, clinical support is provided by public health nurses. The Dientes Community Dental Clinic This small clinic provides general dentistry to low-income families in Santa Cruz and enjoys the support of the community. The population it serves is similar to other community clinics. Its director has extensive training in public health. Preliminary discussions are underway between Salud and Dientes for instituting a dental clinic at the Salud facility. Local Hospitals Dominican Hospital Dominican Hospital serves as a principal inpatient resource for Medi-Cal patients from Santa Cruz and north county communities enrolled in the county-operated prepaid plan, the Central Coast Health Alliance. Under contract with the county, it provides the following for uninsured indigents • General hospital admissions • Hospitalization for mental health disorders • Detoxification for substance abuse The emergency service provides patients from both county and community clinics with emergency, urgent and routine medical care at hours when those clinics are closed. Patients admitted through the emergency room are assigned to the on-call physician during their hospital stay. The CEO of Dominican Hospital takes pride in the fact that the hospital has never refused care to anyone over the many years it has served the community. In addition, the hospital operates outpatient clinics to serve low-income mothers and children who choose the hospital as a source of primary care. The prenatal and pediatric outpatient Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report clinics are combined to accommodate this caseload. The Rotary Club and Dominican jointly sponsor a free clinic, “Roto-care”, in Santa Cruz once a week. Dominican Hospital spent $6.774 million dollars on unsponsored community benefits for the year ended June 30, 2000. This represents 5.2% of the hospital’s total operating budget for this period. Approximately $3 million dollars was absorbed by the hospital for unpaid cost of Medicare and other public programs. Although Dominican Hospital is a private institution, its current functions fill the role of county hospital. It integrates low-income individuals and families into all the services it provides. Watsonville Community Hospital This recently opened facility, formally a non profit organization, now owned and operated by a sizable hospital corporation, serves as a principal inpatient resource for Medi-Cal patients in South County. To date, the hospital has pursued an open door policy to accommodate all patients coming to the emergency room and other outpatient services, assigning those needing admission to a physician on call. The hospital has experienced a recent influx of low-income families utilizing its services. Sutter Hospital The hospital administrator was unable to keep a long-standing appointment with the Grand Jury regarding this facility. Time did not permit rescheduling. Conclusions
F7:
There is a pressing need for primary mental health and dental services at county and community clinics and in the county operated prepaid plans. Credentialed mental health professionals can effectively manage common behavioral problems under the guidance of a psychiatrist. Group therapy can be employed to expand access to mental health care. The use of these strategies may eventually improve access to care in the entire community and contribute to an expansion of the pool of mental health professionals available to low- income families.
F8:
The Health Services Agency is the logical entity to close critical gaps in the local community health care system.
F9:
To be effective, the complex network of services to low-income persons requires a high level of mutual trust and cooperation between HSA, private providers and collaborating agencies. The Grand Jury commends the efforts of the HSA.
F10:
The successful recruitment and retention of credentialed health professionals into county service is seriously impaired by the rising costs of housing, goods and services in Santa Cruz County. Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F11:
The Medical Information Management System (MIMS), being developed by the County Health Services Agency, is essential to the improvement of its management of health care programs and the refinement of comprehensive health planning and evaluation.
F12:
The style, reputation and effectiveness of Salud Para La Gente Clinic demonstrates that open access to primary and preventive health services can be both cost effective and compassionate. The Grand Jury commends Salud Para La Gente Clinic for the manner in which they find and enroll eligible families.
F13:
With his experience in public health dentistry, the Dientes Community Dental Clinic director could be a valuable resource to the County in planning and implementing a full service dental program for Medi-Cal eligible individuals.
F14:
The ingenuity and commitment of public health nurses in both case finding and referral and their refusal to be intimidated by the rigidity of the rules and regulations attached to categorical health programs are commended by the Grand Jury.
F15:
Segregation of hospital care for the poor does not exist in Santa Cruz County due to the accommodation of county patients at community hospitals. All participating parties can take credit for this accomplishment which is recognized by this Grand Jury.
F16:
The growing population of uninsured families in South County is having a major impact on the ability of health care providers to continue to offer high quality health care service.
F17:
Members of the 2000-01Grand Jury attended board meetings where derogatory remarks were made by one director regarding the general manager’s job performance.
F18:
The BCR&PD operated at a loss for fiscal year 2000-01. This shortfall was covered by district reserves.
F19:
Of 6,136 voters registered within Boulder Creek Recreation and Park District, 4,633 voted on November 7, 2000 in the BCR&PD board of director’s election. This represents greater than 75% voter turnout. Review of Boulder Creek Recreation and Park District 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Conclusions Some incumbent directors demonstrate ill will towards each other that impedes their ability to cooperate. This has had a negative impact on the ability of the district to move ahead with a number of proposed projects, including such simple projects as painting a four square court or hopscotch on asphalt. The lack of a current, comprehensive Policies and Procedures Manual, to which the directors and the general manager adhere, has fostered an atmosphere of extreme animosity at the board meetings. This contributes to endless discussions at board meetings. Updating and editing policies and procedures at meetings of the board of directors is poor utilization of meeting time and is an impediment to handling the business of the district. This approach to updating the policies and procedures has created agendas with an unwieldy amount of unfinished business, most of which is related to changes in policies or procedures. Compilation of updated policies and procedures has been haphazard and there is no way to know what changes have been made. The general manager’s ability to perform is impeded by the lack of an approved job description and the absence of annual performance evaluations. This has intensified the ill will between directors who feel the job is being performed adequately and those who feel it is not. The letter of intent to resign by an incumbent director was made public immediately after election results were posted in November 2000. The Grand Jury questions the timing of this action. This letter states that the general manager withheld knowledge of the incumbent’s intent to resign from the other directors. When this letter was made public, the fact that the general manager had known of the intent to resign was revealed, which gave the appearance of impropriety on the part of both the incumbent director and the general manager. This further undermined the relationship between the general manager and the other directors. Limitation of the public at the podium on any one agenda item has improved the ability of the board to move ahead in meetings.
F20:
After the formation of the SSC, the chairperson’s communications with parents showed a wider variety of communication techniques. Communication Method Frequency School Newsletter 16 Meetings 4 School Bulletin 6
F21:
According to the School Site Council Handbook, “After the SSC is first formed or new members are selected to ongoing councils, the school/district should provide training and ongoing in-service to the members to assist them in carrying out their responsibilities. The training provided to the SSC should be on a regular basis, and the training should be appropriate to the tasks at hand.” Training is not being provided to all site councils in Santa Cruz County.
F22:
In the committee’s interview with the County Superintendent of Schools, it was stated “We are now looking at doing training for participants.” Review of the Organization and Structure of Site Councils in Santa Cruz County Public Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F23:
Upon request, training support is available through the County Office of Education.
F24:
Survey responses revealed that in many cases parity between school personnel and parent/student representatives was not achieved. Parity was reported by18 of 31 principals and 5 of 16 chairpersons.
F25:
Respondents stated that Hispanics and other minorities in many communities are under represented on school site councils.
F26:
Some of the methods used to count votes have the appearance of impropriety. While appearance does not constitute wrongdoing, it can still undermine the integrity of the voting process. Conclusions Communication to parents and the local community regarding the school site council, and nominations in particular, needs to be improved. Even though it is not required by education code, nominations to fill seats on site councils should be conducted in accordance with democratic principles. Security of the voting process is non-existent in some schools. • A secured ballot box is not utilized at each school. • Some parents are eliminated from the voting process by missing an election meeting. • Votes returned by students may get lost in transit or misplaced. • Voting process should be established in accordance with democratic procedures. Training should be provided annually to the school site councils. School site councils are not adequately publicized. Too much dependence is placed on the school newsletter for communication. Most schools indicated that they had difficulty obtaining new SSC members. Participation greatly contributes to the success of a school site council; therefore, in order to stimulate interest, more creative efforts should be used. While the Education Code provides for specific oversight of school plans, it is ambiguous regarding the structure and organization of school site councils.
F27:
Since the establishment of the CPRB, the Internal Affairs investigation reports have increased from a typical 5-page report to a possible 25-page report. These reports must now be written in laymen’s terms for the CPRB members, rather than police terminology. Conclusions The number of complaints made to the Santa Cruz City Police Department is extremely low. The existing training provided to CPRB members does not involve adequate training in the Police Department’s practices and procedures. An established procedure is in place at the Santa Cruz Police Department to investigate citizen complaints and an additional level of review increases the complaint resolution time. The chief of police is not bound by the recommendations of the CPRB but agrees with their findings in most cases. A review board has the potential to provide a new perspective and serve as a checks and balances on the police department’s complaint review process. Page84 Review of the Citizens’ Police Review Board of the City of Santa Cruz 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
Additional Recommendations
17
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The Board of Supervisors should take the necessary course of action to have the county designated as a demonstration site for the integrated provision of local health services subsidized by state and federal government for counties of similar characteristics.
R2:
The Board of Supervisors should direct the HSA to develop a plan for incremental consolidation and eligibility simplification of categorical health programs as part of the demonstration. • This plan should be based on prepaid capitation payments and a local public commission should govern its operations. • Eligibility requirements should be simplified and extended to a term of at least one year. • Eligibility should be based on family income, rather than assets, and tied to federally designated poverty guidelines. • The entire family, not individual members, should be designated as the beneficiary for health service coverage. • The Central Coast Alliance for Health and its principles of practice should be used as a model for the administration of other categorical health programs. • The Board of Supervisors should urge the state to engage an independent non- governmental entity with credentials in the healthcare field to monitor the demonstration and track its impacts on both program costs and clinical outcomes. The Medical Information Management System should facilitate this tracking. Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
R3:
The Healthy Families Program should include parents in its coverage. Premiums should be set at more affordable levels in order to accelerate enrollment of families without insurance. Coverage should be maintained during short periods of seasonal unemployment. The Central Coast Alliance for Health should approach local employers to continue premium payments for families during short periods of seasonal unemployment to keep insurance coverage from lapsing. It should continue to expand the participation of specialists in its programs.
R4:
In order to assure that appropriate care is provided at the least costly level, the outpatient services of local hospitals need to be reimbursed at a higher percent of reasonable costs. The same is true for on-call private physicians who provide care to indigent patients in need of admission to the hospital. The level of reimbursements to private health service providers must be set at a reasonable percent of costs to assure retention of physicians and hospitals participating in Medi-Cal and Healthy Families Program. Rates should be subject to annual negotiation.
R5:
The Coalition for Health Care Outreach should be supported in the budget of the Health Services Agency upon expiration of the Packard Foundation grant.
R6:
Additional sessions in the evening and through the lunch hour would be a great advantage for family members who now must lose time at work to attend the clinics.
R7:
Full-service dental health programs should be launched in county and community clinics.
R8:
The county should continue to collaborate with community health organizations, local employers and organized labor to expand the numbers of individuals and working families covered by health insurance which includes mental health and dental benefits.
R9:
The total lack of primary mental health services needs to be addressed both in county and community clinics. An intensive program should be mounted to attract mental health professionals to the county with an emphasis on the recruitment of family-oriented therapists to provide primary mental health services in clinics that serve low-income clients.
R10:
County clinics should be reconfigured to family-oriented primary and preventive care, backed by clinical specialties and case-managed group therapy for persons at high risk or suffering chronic and recurring illness. These measures will require the recruitment of full-time county physicians and allied practitioners.
R11:
In the recruitment of health care professionals, salary surveys conducted in nearby agricultural counties are no longer pertinent to this county. In the next round of county salary negotiations, surveys should be conducted that use counties more comparable to the emerging characteristics of Santa Cruz County. Response Required For this report, responses to the Findings are not required. Entity Recommendations Respond Within Board of Supervisors 1 – 11 90 Days Health Services Agency 1 – 11 60 Days Medical Managed Care Commission 1 – 11 60 Days Review of Health Care Services for Low-Income Families in Santa Cruz County
R12:
Immediate priority must be given to training Planning Department personnel.
R13:
Planning Department managers should conduct employee reviews consistent with the stated personnel policy of the department.
R14:
The Planning Department should establish the Aptos/Watsonville Satellite Permit Center.
R15:
The Felton Satellite Permit Center should be available five days a week.
R16:
The General Plan and the code compliance complaint status should be available the internet.
R17:
The following should be added to the web site: • Development approval process • Description of the project • Cross reference to a related building permit • Building permit process • The alpha digit at the end of the permit number is confusing and should not be part of the record number • If a permit has been issued, the status on the web page should not show “READY TO ISSUE” • Withdrawn permits should be shown on the web page • Complete projects should show the date of completion on the web page • Cross reference the building permit to any related development approval
Findings & Recommendations
27 findings
F1:
The Grand Jury found that the facilities and equipment at the fire stations were well maintained.
F2:
Most of the fire departments train together and respond to emergencies using mutual aid that employs the “closest to the incident” policy, which means the nearest firefighting resource will respond regardless of district boundaries. See Map.
F3:
Consistent with most fire departments around the nation, only about 10% of the emergency calls are fire related. The remaining 90% of the emergency calls are • Medical • Vehicle accidents with trapped or injured persons • Other rescue services • Hazardous material spills • Vehicle or residence lock outs involving infants or elderly persons.
F4:
Each fire service within the County of Santa Cruz has programs that teach children fire prevention and safety. The CDFFP has it's “Smokey the Bear” program, which it shares with other departments. Some departments use “Sparky” the dog in their programs. All of these programs are designed to teach children the following: • Not to play with fire • How to report a fire if they see one in their neighborhood • How to escape their home should it catch on fire • How to “stop, drop and roll” should their or someone else’s clothes catch on fire • The importance of smoke detectors, and maintaining them • How to reduce fire hazards in their homes
F5:
The fire protection services also have available two “burn trailers”. These are designed to simulate fires in the home and children can actually practice preventing fires as well as escaping from a burning home. The Scotts Valley Fire Protection District owns one of these burn trailers and the Zayante Fire Protection District owns the other. One of these simulation trailers is usually on display at the Santa Cruz County Fair each year.
F6:
All but two of the fire protection services in the county use volunteer firefighters. Some fire protection departments are almost exclusively supported by volunteer firefighters, with the exception of the Chief and one or two other staff.
F7:
According to newly enacted Regulations of the California Code a minimum of four firefighters, “two-in, two-out”, are required at the scene of a structure fire before firefighters may enter a burning structure. This requirement does not apply where there is an imminent threat to persons inside the structure. Some of the fire protection departments in the County do not have the firefighter staff to satisfy the “two-in, two-out” requirement. Review of Santa Cruz County Fire Protection Services 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F8:
The following were found to be fire service obstacles common to all fire protection services, and therefore serve as the basis for many of the public education and public awareness campaigns waged by them. The education and awareness campaigns stress • Maintaining a safe zone of 30 feet to 100 feet around homes free from flammable vegetation • Private roads be @ cleared of brush @ clear of low hanging branches @ wide enough to accommodate fire engines • Post bridges with the maximum allowable weight limit • Post addresses to ensure visibility from the street • Multiple homes sharing a common private road, where the addresses are clustered at the entrance, should post each address again at the entrance to each property • Roofs and rain gutters should be cleared of flammable debris • Spark arrestors should be installed on all chimneys • Water sources such as pools and water storage tanks must be close enough to the house to be useful • Lack of adequate turn-around space for a fire engine
F9:
Application of Compressed Air Foam uses minimal water, resulting in hoses being lighter and more easily managed, and reducing the amounts of water required to be trucked to remote areas. The use of foam on a structure fire reduces the amount of water damage to the structure and contents.
F10:
The Santa Cruz County Fire Chiefs Association is an active association that promotes cooperation among the various firefighting services. In addition to the fire chiefs, the membership includes associate members from the cooperating fire service agencies such as ambulance service providers, helicopter transport providers, the County’s Emergency Medical Service Agency (EMS) and Cabrillo College. The Santa Cruz County Fire Chiefs Association • Conducts meetings at regular intervals to discuss matters pertinent to county-wide fire service issues • Promotes uniformity of the fire service throughout the county • Provides a medium of exchange of information and ideas among fire service personnel • Develops and coordinates solutions to fire service problems that are common throughout the county • Promotes the general welfare of the public and the fire service
F11:
The Fire Chiefs Association has an operations section that performs countywide training, which • Promotes uniformity of training and operations • Maintains, manages and improves mutual aid and automatic aid programs between agencies • Develops mutual training and drills • Develops solutions to common operational problems Review of Santa Cruz County Fire Protection Services 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F12:
In accordance with a revenue sharing policy adopted in 1978 by the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors, the unincorporated area fire protection services receive a distribution of Proposition 172 funds for projects or items of benefit which have been recommended by the Santa Cruz County Fire Chiefs Association. This annual distribution is equivalent to twelve percent of the growth in Proposition 172 revenue. For fiscal year 2001-02, the Fire Chiefs Association plans to use these funds as follows: • 70% for training and training facility needs • 15% for communication system upgrades • 10% for fire prevention activities • 5% for development of special teams (hazardous materials, confined space rescue, etc.)
F13:
Some fire protection districts with limited resources have devised creative ways to increase their ability to provide services and to augment their annual revenues. For example, one fire protection district contracted with an ambulance service to house its ambulance and the paramedic staff, in exchange for rental income, cross training, night security and extra office assistance. Others hold pancake breakfasts and other community based fundraisers.
F14:
Volunteer firefighting programs provide introductory training and other opportunities to people who want to make firefighting their career or assist their community. When a fire department has an opening for a paid firefighter, it is usually filled from the ranks of the volunteer firefighters. Conclusions The budgets in some fire protection districts are too small to provide for a paid firefighter staff. Without volunteer firefighters in these areas, there would be inadequate fire protection. Volunteer firefighters as well as paid firefighters should be acknowledged for their valuable service to the community. To comply with the new law requirements of “two-in, two-out” in fighting structure fires, firefighters must wait until additional firefighters arrive at the scene before entering a structure. This increases the possibility of losing a structure or human life if a person is unable to make their presence known to the firefighters.
F15:
Job descriptions for the BCR&PD are not uniform in format. Some job descriptions are inadequate and lack basic information regarding the jobs. One job description contains inappropriate information such as committee findings. The job description for the general manager is adequate and in an accepted format, however has not been approved by the board.
F16:
According to the Policies and Procedures Manual, the BCR&PD general manager shall receive a performance evaluation annually. Her most recent evaluation was in December
F17:
Members of the 2000-01Grand Jury attended board meetings where derogatory remarks were made by one director regarding the general manager’s job performance.
F18:
The BCR&PD operated at a loss for fiscal year 2000-01. This shortfall was covered by district reserves.
F19:
Of 6,136 voters registered within Boulder Creek Recreation and Park District, 4,633 voted on November 7, 2000 in the BCR&PD board of director’s election. This represents greater than 75% voter turnout. Review of Boulder Creek Recreation and Park District 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Conclusions Some incumbent directors demonstrate ill will towards each other that impedes their ability to cooperate. This has had a negative impact on the ability of the district to move ahead with a number of proposed projects, including such simple projects as painting a four square court or hopscotch on asphalt. The lack of a current, comprehensive Policies and Procedures Manual, to which the directors and the general manager adhere, has fostered an atmosphere of extreme animosity at the board meetings. This contributes to endless discussions at board meetings. Updating and editing policies and procedures at meetings of the board of directors is poor utilization of meeting time and is an impediment to handling the business of the district. This approach to updating the policies and procedures has created agendas with an unwieldy amount of unfinished business, most of which is related to changes in policies or procedures. Compilation of updated policies and procedures has been haphazard and there is no way to know what changes have been made. The general manager’s ability to perform is impeded by the lack of an approved job description and the absence of annual performance evaluations. This has intensified the ill will between directors who feel the job is being performed adequately and those who feel it is not. The letter of intent to resign by an incumbent director was made public immediately after election results were posted in November 2000. The Grand Jury questions the timing of this action. This letter states that the general manager withheld knowledge of the incumbent’s intent to resign from the other directors. When this letter was made public, the fact that the general manager had known of the intent to resign was revealed, which gave the appearance of impropriety on the part of both the incumbent director and the general manager. This further undermined the relationship between the general manager and the other directors. Limitation of the public at the podium on any one agenda item has improved the ability of the board to move ahead in meetings.
F20:
After the formation of the SSC, the chairperson’s communications with parents showed a wider variety of communication techniques. Communication Method Frequency School Newsletter 16 Meetings 4 School Bulletin 6
F21:
According to the School Site Council Handbook, “After the SSC is first formed or new members are selected to ongoing councils, the school/district should provide training and ongoing in-service to the members to assist them in carrying out their responsibilities. The training provided to the SSC should be on a regular basis, and the training should be appropriate to the tasks at hand.” Training is not being provided to all site councils in Santa Cruz County.
F22:
In the committee’s interview with the County Superintendent of Schools, it was stated “We are now looking at doing training for participants.” Review of the Organization and Structure of Site Councils in Santa Cruz County Public Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F23:
Upon request, training support is available through the County Office of Education.
F24:
Survey responses revealed that in many cases parity between school personnel and parent/student representatives was not achieved. Parity was reported by18 of 31 principals and 5 of 16 chairpersons.
F25:
Respondents stated that Hispanics and other minorities in many communities are under represented on school site councils.
F26:
Some of the methods used to count votes have the appearance of impropriety. While appearance does not constitute wrongdoing, it can still undermine the integrity of the voting process. Conclusions Communication to parents and the local community regarding the school site council, and nominations in particular, needs to be improved. Even though it is not required by education code, nominations to fill seats on site councils should be conducted in accordance with democratic principles. Security of the voting process is non-existent in some schools. • A secured ballot box is not utilized at each school. • Some parents are eliminated from the voting process by missing an election meeting. • Votes returned by students may get lost in transit or misplaced. • Voting process should be established in accordance with democratic procedures. Training should be provided annually to the school site councils. School site councils are not adequately publicized. Too much dependence is placed on the school newsletter for communication. Most schools indicated that they had difficulty obtaining new SSC members. Participation greatly contributes to the success of a school site council; therefore, in order to stimulate interest, more creative efforts should be used. While the Education Code provides for specific oversight of school plans, it is ambiguous regarding the structure and organization of school site councils.
F27:
Since the establishment of the CPRB, the Internal Affairs investigation reports have increased from a typical 5-page report to a possible 25-page report. These reports must now be written in laymen’s terms for the CPRB members, rather than police terminology. Conclusions The number of complaints made to the Santa Cruz City Police Department is extremely low. The existing training provided to CPRB members does not involve adequate training in the Police Department’s practices and procedures. An established procedure is in place at the Santa Cruz Police Department to investigate citizen complaints and an additional level of review increases the complaint resolution time. The chief of police is not bound by the recommendations of the CPRB but agrees with their findings in most cases. A review board has the potential to provide a new perspective and serve as a checks and balances on the police department’s complaint review process. Page84 Review of the Citizens’ Police Review Board of the City of Santa Cruz 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
Additional Recommendations
17
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Board members should become educated on standard procurement practices and procedures.
R2:
The board should revise its purchasing policy to include competitive bidding and other standard safeguards for the following: • professional services • medical equipment or supplies • insurance • public utility services
R3:
Board members should not relinquish their responsibilities to nonelected individuals.
R4:
Board members should be aware of their responsibilities as a Special District’s Board member, including knowledge of the Brown Act. Literature or training on the Brown Act should be available to board members.
R5:
Minutes of board meetings should be thorough and accurate as to the identity of persons speaking, directors’ identities and issues discussed. Minutes and tape recordings of all meetings should be properly retained.
R6:
Tape recordings made at the direction of the district by directors, employees or consultants of public meetings should be considered public record.
R7:
The board should adopt by-laws or policies for governing the Central Fire Protection District. Response Required Entity Recommendations Respond Within Central Fire Protection District Board of Directors 1 – 7 90 Days Investigation of Complaint Concerning the Board of Directors of Central Fire Protection District 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Investigation of Complaint Concerning the Board of Directors of Central Fire Protection District 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Review of Santa Cruz County Fire Protection Services 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Review of Santa Cruz County Fire Protection Services
R8:
The Auditor-Controller’s Office should implement an internal audit system on Planning Department files.
R9:
The Board of Supervisors should update the 1994 General Plan as soon as is feasible. Review of the Santa Cruz County Planning Department 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
R10:
The Board of Supervisors should conduct a formal study to determine the relationship of current salaries to employee retention.
R11:
The Board of Supervisors should consider changing the entities in the nine-county comparison used in salary surveys to include the four cities in the county.
R12:
Immediate priority must be given to training Planning Department personnel.
R13:
Planning Department managers should conduct employee reviews consistent with the stated personnel policy of the department.
R14:
The Planning Department should establish the Aptos/Watsonville Satellite Permit Center.
R15:
The Felton Satellite Permit Center should be available five days a week.
R16:
The General Plan and the code compliance complaint status should be available the internet.
R17:
The following should be added to the web site: • Development approval process • Description of the project • Cross reference to a related building permit • Building permit process • The alpha digit at the end of the permit number is confusing and should not be part of the record number • If a permit has been issued, the status on the web page should not show “READY TO ISSUE” • Withdrawn permits should be shown on the web page • Complete projects should show the date of completion on the web page • Cross reference the building permit to any related development approval
Findings & Recommendations
27 findings
F1:
Federal and State laws pertain directly to educating homeless children. The California Education Code Section 48200 requires persons six to eighteen years of age to attend school. The Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (Public Law 100-77, subtitle VIIB, Education for Homeless Children and Youth, Section 721) sets forth the following policy: • Each state educational agency shall ensure that homeless children have access to the same free, appropriate public education provided to other children and youths. • States shall review and revise laws, practices, regulations, and policies such as compulsory residency requirements, which act as barriers to the enrollment, attendance, and success of homeless children and youths in schools. • Homelessness alone should not be a sufficient reason to separate students from the mainstream school environment. • Homeless children and youths should have access to education and other services that are needed to ensure they have an opportunity to meet the same challenging performance standards as other students.3
F2:
There is no distinction made in the county schools between students from residences and those who are homeless. All students are “mainstreamed” in schools in Santa Cruz County. They are not identified as “homeless” to their peer group. Review of Educational Services Available to Homeless Children in Santa Cruz County Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F3:
Two schools in the County serve homeless youth. One is privately funded and the other is a community school operated by the County Office of Education, serving primarily homeless youth.
F4:
Homeless children have access to public schools in Santa Cruz County.
F5:
Homeless children receive a free public education in Santa Cruz County.
F6:
Homeless children have the opportunity and are expected to meet the same performance standards as other students.
F7:
When possible, the County Office of Education makes an in-take assessment of homeless children. They get background information on the family and the children. They find out what school they are attending and make contact with the teachers. Using Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs they determine which needs are being met and which are unfulfilled. This assessment is shared with the family while confidentiality is protected.4 Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
F8:
Contact between the County Office of Education, Santa Cruz City School District and homeless children is made from direct referrals from various County agencies, counselors, teachers, and other school personnel. The liaison will go to where the homeless child is staying to make the initial contact. 4 9. “Bridge to Success” is the name of the County Office of Education Homeless Program. Its policy is not to identify, stigmatize, segregate or otherwise alienate these children. The County Office of Education wants the children to remain anonymous; therefore, confidentiality is protected. Every effort is made not to single out homeless children.4 Review of Educational Services Available to Homeless Children in Santa Cruz County Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F9:
According to interviews with employees, workloads continue to be excessive. Also, employee performance evaluations have not been conducted on a consistent basis.
F10:
The following services are offered to homeless children in Santa Cruz County4,5: • One-on-one tutoring: 16 UCSC students, recruited and trained by the County Office of Education, work as tutors. • In-class academic support: Tutors assist teachers as classroom aids up to three days a week at elementary schools. They assist the homeless children as well as other students in the class. • Outreach and coordination of services: They work with an extended network of child protective services, shelters, churches and other outreach agencies. There are over 150 agencies working with the homeless. • Case management: They keep rather extensive reports of the young people receiving direct services. They include outcomes, how they are doing in school, anecdotal notes, report cards and reports from tutors. • Outreach to homeless runaway youth: The County Office of Education coordinates a multi-disciplinary team to support youths living on the street. The team consists of a number of County agencies that provide services such as shelters, meals, substance abuse, counseling, and mental and medical care services. • Counseling services: They provide one-on-one, family, drug and alcohol and life skills counseling. • Transportation: The County Office of Education provides bus passes and linkages to other transportation services. • Parent support: The liaison person meets with parents initially and then in follow-up sessions. • Staff development and heightening awareness presentations: Seminars and workshops are presented to teachers, administrators and others outlining special needs of homeless children. • Skills training: Adolescent life skills coaching and peer support groups for homeless teens. • Supplies: The County Office of Education provides backpacks, shoes, school supplies and other materials necessary for success in school. • Enrollment assistance: Schools assist children with “Declarations of Residency” forms and permanent record retrieval. • Medical and dental referral: Children with health problems are referred by a school nurse for available medical services. • Job placement: Schools refer teenagers who are seeking work experience. • Transferring schools: Students transferring to different schools receive assistance.
F11:
Both the County Office of Education and the Santa Cruz City School District have solicited additional funds and materials from the community to augment the McKinney Grant.
F12:
The Santa Cruz County Office of Education was commended for running a “model” program by the National Coalition for Education for Homeless Children and Youth. They have also received commendation from the Federal Document of Promising Practices for Educating Homeless Youth. Review of Educational Services Available to Homeless Children in Santa Cruz County Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F13:
The greatest challenge is “finding the children,” was stated by Jo Ann Allen. If the parents do not enroll the children in school or if they are not referred by local homeless agencies, the children may never attend school. Children who need counseling often find it difficult to attend sessions. Further training is required for educators, administrators and staff to identify homeless children.
F14:
Funding for this homeless program has come in the form of a yearly grant from the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act. It is a federal program that provides “seed” money for lead agencies around the country to set up homeless education programs. As with other “seed” money grants, it is designed to get successful programs started that will eventually develop other sources of funding. Although the County Office of Education has received this grant for 12 years, it was uncertain the grant would continue. To ensure the flow of funds to Santa Cruz County, the County Office of Education recommended that the Santa Cruz City School District apply for the grant as the lead agency.
F15:
The McKinney Grant of $150,000 per year was awarded in late October to the Santa Cruz City School District for a period of three years. The Santa Cruz County Office of Education will continue to be involved in the program as a contractor. The expertise they have developed will still be available to all the public school districts in the County. The grant provides funds to employ an Educational Resource Coordinator.
F16:
The goal is to have all school districts in the County set up their own programs. The increasing numbers of homeless children have been a factor in this decentralization of leadership.
F17:
The Santa Cruz City School District is now the lead agency with the County Office of Education serving as a contractor. Santa Cruz City School District has hired a new program administrator who works closely with the homeless liaison from the County Office of Education.
F18:
The County Office of Education is still working with all schools districts in the county in improving enrollment procedures, providing bus passes, maintaining a donation account, conducting their yearly homeless children survey and providing tutors.
F19:
Other School Districts are encouraged to set up their homeless education program to meet special needs of their own students. Review of Educational Services Available to Homeless Children in Santa Cruz County Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Conclusions The Santa Cruz County Office of Education has demonstrated leadership for developing a model Homeless K-12 Education Program in California. They have done an outstanding job of assisting homeless children in Santa Cruz County. The Grand Jury applauds Jo Anne Allen for her work in developing this model program. After 12 years in the program, Ms. Allen has become the leading authority and local and national spokesperson on educating homeless children. Her enthusiasm, knowledge, and leadership have played a paramount role in the success of this program. Community agencies helping homeless families in Santa Cruz County deserve credit for their financial and human services support for the County Office of Education and homeless children these last 12 years.
F20:
After the formation of the SSC, the chairperson’s communications with parents showed a wider variety of communication techniques. Communication Method Frequency School Newsletter 16 Meetings 4 School Bulletin 6
F21:
According to the School Site Council Handbook, “After the SSC is first formed or new members are selected to ongoing councils, the school/district should provide training and ongoing in-service to the members to assist them in carrying out their responsibilities. The training provided to the SSC should be on a regular basis, and the training should be appropriate to the tasks at hand.” Training is not being provided to all site councils in Santa Cruz County.
F22:
In the committee’s interview with the County Superintendent of Schools, it was stated “We are now looking at doing training for participants.” Review of the Organization and Structure of Site Councils in Santa Cruz County Public Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F23:
Upon request, training support is available through the County Office of Education.
F24:
Survey responses revealed that in many cases parity between school personnel and parent/student representatives was not achieved. Parity was reported by18 of 31 principals and 5 of 16 chairpersons.
F25:
Respondents stated that Hispanics and other minorities in many communities are under represented on school site councils.
F26:
Some of the methods used to count votes have the appearance of impropriety. While appearance does not constitute wrongdoing, it can still undermine the integrity of the voting process. Conclusions Communication to parents and the local community regarding the school site council, and nominations in particular, needs to be improved. Even though it is not required by education code, nominations to fill seats on site councils should be conducted in accordance with democratic principles. Security of the voting process is non-existent in some schools. • A secured ballot box is not utilized at each school. • Some parents are eliminated from the voting process by missing an election meeting. • Votes returned by students may get lost in transit or misplaced. • Voting process should be established in accordance with democratic procedures. Training should be provided annually to the school site councils. School site councils are not adequately publicized. Too much dependence is placed on the school newsletter for communication. Most schools indicated that they had difficulty obtaining new SSC members. Participation greatly contributes to the success of a school site council; therefore, in order to stimulate interest, more creative efforts should be used. While the Education Code provides for specific oversight of school plans, it is ambiguous regarding the structure and organization of school site councils.
F27:
Since the establishment of the CPRB, the Internal Affairs investigation reports have increased from a typical 5-page report to a possible 25-page report. These reports must now be written in laymen’s terms for the CPRB members, rather than police terminology. Conclusions The number of complaints made to the Santa Cruz City Police Department is extremely low. The existing training provided to CPRB members does not involve adequate training in the Police Department’s practices and procedures. An established procedure is in place at the Santa Cruz Police Department to investigate citizen complaints and an additional level of review increases the complaint resolution time. The chief of police is not bound by the recommendations of the CPRB but agrees with their findings in most cases. A review board has the potential to provide a new perspective and serve as a checks and balances on the police department’s complaint review process. Page84 Review of the Citizens’ Police Review Board of the City of Santa Cruz 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
Additional Recommendations
17
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
It is recommended that each school district within the county maintain the same level and quality of support for homeless children as has been provided by the County Office of Education. It is further recommended that the spirit by which that office helped homeless children be carried over in the decentralization process.
R2:
Each school district should develop programs that will meet the challenges of identifying homeless children within their designated boundaries.
R3:
Each school district should develop a plan to meet the special counseling needs of homeless children.
R4:
Each school district should develop a training program that trains its component groups to identify homeless children and understand the special needs of these children.
R5:
Each school district should continue to protect the confidentiality of homeless children.
R6:
The County Office of Education should support the school districts within the county by training staff members and administrators in establishing their district homeless programs and making them successful. Review of Educational Services Available to Homeless Children in Santa Cruz County Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report Response Required Entity Recommendations Respond Within Bonny Doon Union Elementary 2 - 5 60 Days Happy Valley Elementary 2 - 5 60 Days Live Oak School District 2 - 5 60 Days Mountain Elementary 2 - 5 60 Days Pacific Elementary 2 - 5 60 Days Pajaro Valley Unified School District 2 - 5 60 Days San Lorenzo Valley Unified School District 2 - 5 60 Days Santa Cruz City School District 2 - 5 60 Days Scotts Valley Unified School District 2 - 5 60 Days Soquel Union Elementary School District 2 - 5 60 Days County Office of Education 6 60 Days Sources: 1 Santa Cruz County Homeless 2000, Census and Needs Assessment Comprehensive Report, United Way sponsor, Survey conducted by Applied Survey Research, July 2000. School Survey about Homeless Children prepared by the Santa Cruz County Office of Education and distributed to schools within Santa Cruz County, March 2000. Enrolling Students Living in Homeless Situations, California Department of Education, Sacramento, CA, 1999. Interview with Jo Ann Allen, Coordinator of Student Support Services, Santa Cruz County Office of Education, October 18, 2000. Interview with Vicki Downing, School Community Liaison for the Santa Cruz City School District and Patricia Schroeder, Secondary School Social Worker, April 3, 2001. Review of Educational Services Available to Homeless Children in Santa Cruz County Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report This page intentionally left blank. Review of Educational Services Available to Homeless Children in Santa Cruz County Schools
R7:
The Planning Department should develop a system to cross-reference the multiple physical files that exist for a single development permit application.
R8:
The Auditor-Controller’s Office should implement an internal audit system on Planning Department files.
R9:
The Board of Supervisors should update the 1994 General Plan as soon as is feasible. Review of the Santa Cruz County Planning Department 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
R10:
The Board of Supervisors should conduct a formal study to determine the relationship of current salaries to employee retention.
R11:
The Board of Supervisors should consider changing the entities in the nine-county comparison used in salary surveys to include the four cities in the county.
R12:
Immediate priority must be given to training Planning Department personnel.
R13:
Planning Department managers should conduct employee reviews consistent with the stated personnel policy of the department.
R14:
The Planning Department should establish the Aptos/Watsonville Satellite Permit Center.
R15:
The Felton Satellite Permit Center should be available five days a week.
R16:
The General Plan and the code compliance complaint status should be available the internet.
R17:
The following should be added to the web site: • Development approval process • Description of the project • Cross reference to a related building permit • Building permit process • The alpha digit at the end of the permit number is confusing and should not be part of the record number • If a permit has been issued, the status on the web page should not show “READY TO ISSUE” • Withdrawn permits should be shown on the web page • Complete projects should show the date of completion on the web page • Cross reference the building permit to any related development approval
Findings & Recommendations
27 findings
F1:
School site councils are authorized under State Education Codes.
F2:
Education Code §52012 states, “A school site council shall be established at each school that participates in the school improvement program authorized by this chapter. The council shall be composed of the principal and representatives of: teachers selected by teachers at the school; other school personnel selected by other school personnel at the school; parents of pupils attending the school selected by such parents; and, in secondary school, pupils selected by pupils attending the school.” It also states the council shall be constituted to ensure parity between school personnel and parents/students.
F3:
Education Code §52012 states that the term and method of selection and replacement shall be specified in the school improvement plan. It also states that the Superintendent of Public Instruction shall provide examples of selection and replacement procedures that may be considered by school site councils.
F4:
Education Code §52011 states that the district governing board shall provide each principal with information regarding SIP and site councils and ensure that the information is provided to teachers, other school personnel, parents and in secondary schools, pupils.
F5:
Education Code §52034(c) states that the school district governing boards should adopt policies regarding the responsibilities of school site councils and establish communication procedures to ensure reasonable opportunities for each council or its representatives to meet with the governing body.
F6:
Specifications for site council membership are inconsistent within the statutes. For example, according to Education Code §52012 and §52852, SSC “shall be composed of parents of pupils attending the school selected by such parents.” Later these same codes define this segment of the site council members as “parents or other community members selected by parents.”
F7:
Education Code §52870 states, “It is the intent of the State Legislature that, to the extent possible, the members of the school site council represent the composition of the school's pupil population.”
F8:
As set forth in the Education Code, the School Improvement Plan and the School Based Coordinated Program receive numerous reviews resulting in approval or disapproval at the levels of site council, district governing body, and the State Board of Education. In addition, by statute, the principal is responsible for ongoing administration of the plan, and the district superintendent must, upon request, assist with the design and implementation of the plan.
F9:
The Education Code did not reveal any requirements for oversight of the school site council as a body. Review of the Organization and Structure of Site Councils in Santa Cruz County Public Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F10:
Process for nominating parents varied among schools responding. For example, responses from principals included: • “Membership seems to be for anyone who asks up until the number of parents is met.” • “We have a table at Open House in spring with educational materials and encourage people to nominate themselves.” • “Interested parents self-select to run for site council seats.”
F11:
The use of a nominating committee, a standard election practice, was not mentioned in any of the responses from site council chairpersons.
F12:
Twenty percent of the chairpersons’ responses stated they had received a personal invitation to serve on the site council.
F13:
Some principals stated that it was sometimes difficult to get enough parents to serve on site councils. Other principals enjoyed an ample number of volunteers for the required parent seats with additional volunteers to act as alternates.
F14:
Survey results indicated that the three most widely used methods in the election process were: • ballots returned by parents and students • hand vote at a meeting • ballots placed in a secure ballot box
F15:
Survey results indicated that 18 different methods were used to count ballots. The most common counting methods were: • by principal and secretary • by projects coordinator • by staff and site council • by a show of hands or a ballot vote at meeting
F16:
Of 63 respondents (35 Principals and 28 Chairpersons) only 21 reported using more than one method of encouraging individuals to join their school site council. Review of the Organization and Structure of Site Councils in Santa Cruz County Public Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F17:
Respondents were given the opportunity to indicate which method of communication was used. Six options included: • school newsletter • local newspaper • back to school night • school bulletin • student • other Some schools used more than one option. Methods were as follows: Communication Method Frequency School Newsletter 42 Back to School Night 25 School Bulletin 16
F18:
Communication methods not widely used were: • A marquee at the front of the school • A flyer • Word of mouth • A notice to parents hand-carried during child’s pick-up • A parent newsletter • A faculty newsletter • At PTA meetings
F19:
Use of a local newspaper to encourage SSC membership was not indicated on any surveys.
F20:
After the formation of the SSC, the chairperson’s communications with parents showed a wider variety of communication techniques. Communication Method Frequency School Newsletter 16 Meetings 4 School Bulletin 6
F21:
According to the School Site Council Handbook, “After the SSC is first formed or new members are selected to ongoing councils, the school/district should provide training and ongoing in-service to the members to assist them in carrying out their responsibilities. The training provided to the SSC should be on a regular basis, and the training should be appropriate to the tasks at hand.” Training is not being provided to all site councils in Santa Cruz County.
F22:
In the committee’s interview with the County Superintendent of Schools, it was stated “We are now looking at doing training for participants.” Review of the Organization and Structure of Site Councils in Santa Cruz County Public Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F23:
Upon request, training support is available through the County Office of Education.
F24:
Survey responses revealed that in many cases parity between school personnel and parent/student representatives was not achieved. Parity was reported by18 of 31 principals and 5 of 16 chairpersons.
F25:
Respondents stated that Hispanics and other minorities in many communities are under represented on school site councils.
F26:
Some of the methods used to count votes have the appearance of impropriety. While appearance does not constitute wrongdoing, it can still undermine the integrity of the voting process. Conclusions Communication to parents and the local community regarding the school site council, and nominations in particular, needs to be improved. Even though it is not required by education code, nominations to fill seats on site councils should be conducted in accordance with democratic principles. Security of the voting process is non-existent in some schools. • A secured ballot box is not utilized at each school. • Some parents are eliminated from the voting process by missing an election meeting. • Votes returned by students may get lost in transit or misplaced. • Voting process should be established in accordance with democratic procedures. Training should be provided annually to the school site councils. School site councils are not adequately publicized. Too much dependence is placed on the school newsletter for communication. Most schools indicated that they had difficulty obtaining new SSC members. Participation greatly contributes to the success of a school site council; therefore, in order to stimulate interest, more creative efforts should be used. While the Education Code provides for specific oversight of school plans, it is ambiguous regarding the structure and organization of school site councils.
F27:
Since the establishment of the CPRB, the Internal Affairs investigation reports have increased from a typical 5-page report to a possible 25-page report. These reports must now be written in laymen’s terms for the CPRB members, rather than police terminology. Conclusions The number of complaints made to the Santa Cruz City Police Department is extremely low. The existing training provided to CPRB members does not involve adequate training in the Police Department’s practices and procedures. An established procedure is in place at the Santa Cruz Police Department to investigate citizen complaints and an additional level of review increases the complaint resolution time. The chief of police is not bound by the recommendations of the CPRB but agrees with their findings in most cases. A review board has the potential to provide a new perspective and serve as a checks and balances on the police department’s complaint review process. Page84 Review of the Citizens’ Police Review Board of the City of Santa Cruz 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
Additional Recommendations
17
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The educational community needs to communicate to the public the importance of site councils in the improvement of schools. A greater variety of communication methods should be used including “person-to-person,” press releases, local newspapers, radio stations, cable access and local television stations.
R2:
School site councils should use mass media communication techniques to publicize its nomination and election process.
R3:
The County Office of Education should provide, at school district’s request, press releases and distribution methods for publicizing school site councils. Review of the Organization and Structure of Site Councils in Santa Cruz County Public Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
R4:
Special emphasis in the nomination process should be communicated to Hispanic and other minority parents in the school's community to ensure fair demographic representation of student population on site councils.
R5:
School site councils should create nominating committees charged with seeking out new members and ensuring all parents gain knowledge about the school site council functions.
R6:
School site councils by-laws should clearly define and implement the nomination and election process for membership on the site council including a formal vote counting process.
R7:
School site councils should consider expanding voting opportunity via mail, phone, fax or e-mail.
R8:
A centralized training and follow-up program should be provided on a regular basis.
R9:
School administrators should become fully acquainted with all sections of the Education Code pertaining to school site councils.
R10:
Parents and community residents should be made aware of the great value provided by school site councils.
R11:
Schools need to ensure parity among school personnel and parent/student representatives in the composition of its school site council membership.
R12:
Schools need to improve representation in the school site council to reflect the demographic characteristics of the school population.
R13:
Planning Department managers should conduct employee reviews consistent with the stated personnel policy of the department.
R14:
The Planning Department should establish the Aptos/Watsonville Satellite Permit Center.
R15:
The Felton Satellite Permit Center should be available five days a week.
R16:
The General Plan and the code compliance complaint status should be available the internet.
R17:
The following should be added to the web site: • Development approval process • Description of the project • Cross reference to a related building permit • Building permit process • The alpha digit at the end of the permit number is confusing and should not be part of the record number • If a permit has been issued, the status on the web page should not show “READY TO ISSUE” • Withdrawn permits should be shown on the web page • Complete projects should show the date of completion on the web page • Cross reference the building permit to any related development approval