Stanislaus County Grand Jury

2006-2007

4 reports

Findings & Recommendations 8 findings
F1: The County Office of Emergency Services coordinates citizen/community/County disaster preparedness.
F2: The Emergency Operations Plan is an all-risk document that addresses natural and man-made disasters. It addresses four phases of emergency management: mitigation, preparation, response and recovery.
F3: The Emergency Operations Plan does not address how to serve the needs of those relocated to the County after a disaster in their region of residence. 1
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: Develop a plan to meet the needs of evacuees coming from surrounding regions when a state of emergency arises.
F4: The Approval Authority for Homeland Security Grant Administration Committee is responsible for administrative oversight of Homeland Security grants, which total about $1,000,000 annually. The committee consists of: · County Public Health Officer · Assistant Director of the Office of Emergency Services/Fire Warden · Stanislaus County Sheriff · City of Modesto Police Chief · City of Modesto Fire Chief
F5: Each of the County’s nine incorporated cities is responsible for its own emergency plan. City representatives serve on the County Operational Area Council. A designee from the County Office of Emergency Services chairs the committee.
F6: There is a lack of centralized coordination and implementation of services provided by volunteer organizations.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: Seek methods to improve the level of collaboration with volunteer organizations.
F7: The County Department of Public Health publishes yearly results of disaster preparedness and public health monitoring of reportable diseases and biological incidents. The results are available online at www.schsa.org.
F8: The Coroner's Facility has inadequate space for autopsies, storage of corpses and supplies and for meetings with staff and greeting families. The ventilation system is inadequate. The data processing, record keeping, computer equipment and communication systems are inadequate. Despite these limitations, the Coroner's Facility personnel are meeting guidelines of the Emergency Operations Plan.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: Update the data processing, record keeping, computer equipment and communication systems in the coroner’s office. It also is recommended that the master plan for an upgrade of the Coroner's Facility become a high priority. RESPONSE REQUIRED per sections 933(c) and 933.05 of the California Penal Code Stanislaus County Office of Emergency Services Stanislaus County Department of Health Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors 2
Findings & Recommendations 4 findings
F1: Recruitment of police officers is a concern of all law enforcement agencies. It would appear that recruitment of qualified candidates is a concern locally, statewide, and nationally.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: It is recommended that law enforcement pool their resources to recruit new law enforcement officers in Stanislaus County.
F2: Retention because of retirement; officers leaving for better working conditions, i.e., pay, education; and officers finding other employment 1 opportunities is an issue of concern for departments where recruitment is already an issue.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: It is recommended that the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors make the condition of the Men’s Jail a priority for replacement.
F3: The following was found about detention facilities: · The Honor Farm was spacious, well kept and full. · Juvenile Hall is well run and seems well organized. Bed space, however, is limited and there is real danger of overcrowding. · The Public Safety Facility is fairly new, spacious, well organized, clean. · The Men’s Facility (Downtown Jail) is old; smelly; overcrowded; out of date (building codes from the 1950’s govern this facility); lacking in space for both staff and inmates.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: It is recommended that the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors extend the capacity of the Public Safety Center to include more bed space to accommodate additional inmates. NO RESPONSE REQUIRED 2
F4: The consensus of law enforcement and criminal justice officials is that collaboration between agencies through various task forces has contributed to reducing crime such as car thefts, home invasion, drugs, and gang involvement. The collaboration has been extremely important in all crime within the County.
Findings & Recommendations 10 findings
F1: There is variation in the quality of training provided to staff.
F2: There are varying response times and professional capabilities. Minimal standards cannot always be met.
F3: Increasing population, new technology, legal mandates, rising equipment costs and unnecessary administrative staff duplication add to the financial burden.
F4: New disaster planning requirements have expanded responsibilities and liabilities requiring closer coordination in the areas of planning and performance.
F5: City expansion by annexation has markedly weakened the financial base of some rural fire districts making it increasingly difficult for these districts to meet their responsibilities.
F6: State training mandates have made recruitment and retention of voluntary firefighters more difficult. Costly full time staff must be used to fill the formerly volunteer positions.
F7: The merger of several smaller districts into fewer but larger areas would offer several benefits. Among them: · Lower administrative costs. The merger of many boards would lower total salary costs of both administrative and professional staff. · More efficient deployment of expensive equipment. Some pieces of equipment would become unnecessary. · More efficient location of fire stations. Given larger areas to protect, stations could be more efficiently placed. · Standardized recruitment and training of personnel. All staff would be held to the same standards of training and competence. · Better use of specialized staff. Specialists in such areas as hazardous materials and fire investigation could be more efficiently deployed.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: The County Board of Supervisors work with the Stanislaus County Fire Chiefs Association and various district boards to achieve appropriate consolidation of present districts consistent with the most effective and efficient use of manpower and resources.
F8: There is need for an unbiased outside facilitator/mediator to work with all districts to change the current delivery system. 2
Related Recommendations (2)
R2: The County Board of Supervisors work with the Stanislaus County Fire Chiefs Association and various district boards to achieve appropriate consolidation of present districts consistent with the most effective and efficient use of manpower and resources.
R3: The County Board of Supervisors share equally the cost of outside expert consultation and/or mediation with the various districts. RESPONSE REQUIRED per Section 933(c) and 933.05 of the California Penal Code Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors 3
F9: No government body has fully accepted the overall responsibility of addressing the need for change in fire and life saving services available to the citizens of Stanislaus County.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: The County Board of Supervisors assume the leadership role of solving the multiple problems in fire and life saving services.
F10: The Civil Grand Jury believes that any consolidation should occur only after full consideration of financial impact, proper planning and consultation/involvement from all concerned parties including the public.
Findings & Recommendations 13 findings
F1: In May 2007, the Public Guardian has a caseload of 165 clients. • 82 – LPS Conservatorship • 59 – Probate Conservatorship • 23 – Representative Payee • 1 – Guardian ad litem 2. 2006-2007 Office of Public Guardian Personnel: • Program Manager II • Deputy Public Guardian II • Behavioral Health Specialist II • Account Clerk III (2) • Stock Delivery Clerk II (3) • Stock Delivery Clerk I • Account Clerk II (extra help) • Chief, BHRS Forensics Services/Public Guardian (39% assignment)
F3: The duties and legal responsibilities of the Public Guardian are listed in the California Probate Code and the California Welfare and Institutions Code.
F4: Limited Agreed-Upon Procedures reports on the Office of Public Guardian were performed by Certified Public Accountants and Management Consultants Bartig, Basler and Ray in 2003 and 2006. 2
F5: Staffing for the Public Guardian has decreased from 17 fulltime employees (FTE) in 2002/2003 to nine FTEs in 2006/2007.
F6: Office of Public Guardian estimates indicate that up to $175,000 in court accounting fees has gone uncollected due to lack of staff. Also undone or not done timely are the following Public Guardian duties: • Fee summaries for court accountings • Inventory and appraisals • Letters to conservatees’ creditors • Filing • Tracking of outside client bank accounts and investments • Client medical bills and the research involved in matching what insurance has paid and what is outstanding • Warehouse audits • Releasing and/or disposing of deceased conservatees’ property • Cleaning of clients’ houses so that they may be sold on a timely basis • Correspondence with IRS to assure that conservatees’ taxes are current
F7: Evidence suggests that eligible persons who have been referred for appraisal to the Public Guardian have not been accepted into the program because of staff limitations.
F8: The 2006 Omnibus Conservatorship and Guardian Reform Act imposes new duties to the California probate system. As a result, additional Public Guardian staff will be needed to accomplish the increased administrative time and effort this new law will require.
F9: The 2006/2007 Public Guardian budget is $965,030 and is funded from three sources: • County match funds • Service revenue from Public Guardian clients • Service revenue from Medi-Cal
F10: The Public Guardian budget decreased from $1,185,310 in 2003/2004 to $1,095,391 in 2005/2006. It then decreased to $965,030 in 2006/2007.
F11: Service revenue from Medi-Cal funds have declined from $182,020 in 2005/2006 to $71,000 in 2006/2007. Limited staffing to bill Medi-Cal and a lower reimbursement rate are two reasons for this decline.
F12: Client funds and Public Guardian funds are commingled in one fund. Software allows tracking of each client’s individual funds. When the Public Guardian bills a client for a service, the transferred funds are placed in the Public Guardian portion of the commingled fund. These transactions are not recorded in the monthly county budget until these funds are transferred to the county treasury each June. 3
F13: Evidence suggests that some client interest revenue is used to offset Public Guardian administrative program costs and not added to individual client accounts.
F14: Interest percentage paid to individual Public Guardian client accounts varies according to the amount in the individual client fund account – the larger the amount, the higher the interest percentage paid. It should be noted that Public Guardian clients who have less than $2,000 are paid no interest due to administrative cost offsets.
Additional Recommendations 2

Not linked to specific findings.

R1: Schedule a full performance audit by an independent firm to assure compliance with federal, state and court requirements.
R2: Schedule an in-depth financial audit by an independent firm to assure that the handling and investments of county and client funds by the Office of Public Guardian are appropriate. RESPONSE REQUIRED per Section 933(c) and 933.05 of the California Penal Code Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors Stanislaus County Behavioral Health and Recovery Services Stanislaus County Office of Public Guardian 5/22/07 4