Gran Jurado del Condado de Yolo
2013-2014
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
14 hallazgos
F1:
Because the regulations and templates pertaining to LCFF and LCAP are still being developed by the State of California, it is too early to determine if YCOE and the five school districts will successfully implement the new K-12 financial reforms.
F2:
The five school districts and YCOE are on schedule with implementing the Common Core State Standards.
F3:
The Coroners’ Division has developed a successful intern program that assists the Division in meeting its staffing needs while providing an excellent learning opportunity for interns.
F4:
The Agreement for Provision of Forensic Pathology Services No. 13-115, recently approved by the Board of Supervisors, does not set forth clear compliance measures that can be used to monitor the FMG sole source contract as required by Yolo County Contracting and Purchasing Policies. For example, the requirements that autopsies be performed “as soon as possible” and that forensic pathology services be performed “in a manner satisfactory to the Sheriff or his designee” are too vague to be enforceable.
F5:
Recently the performance of FMG has been inconsistent in the timely completion of autopsies and autopsy reports. There is an unacceptable backlog in autopsy reports from FMG. 33 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT: INVESTIGATIONS 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT Yolo County Coroner’s Division
F6:
In some instances, the Coroner’s Division has authorized payment to FMG for autopsy services which, according to the contract, include both autopsy and report, before the autopsy report has been received.
F7:
Yolo County does not require as part of its contract with FMG, nor does it independently verify, the medical licensing or board certification of FMG physicians who perform autopsies in Yolo County.
F8:
The Sheriff failed to observe County Code Section 2-6.44 Nepotism Policy by hiring immediate family members and determining their salaries, promotions, assignments, performance evaluations and discipline. 71 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT: INVESTIGATIONS 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT Yolo County Sheriff: Leadership Practices from the Wild, Wild West
F9:
The Sheriff was unaware of the contents and intent of the State of California Public Service Ethics AB 1234.
F10:
The Grand Jury was unable to determine the County’s compliance with the State of California Public Service Ethics AB 1234 mandated training for 2006-2011 for the Sheriff.
F11:
HR manages harassment and ethics online training courses for all employees to comply with state and federal laws. These outdated and repetitious trainings are found to be inadequate and ineffective.
F12:
The HR Department serves in an advisory role and lacks appropriate oversight and accountability of personnel matters at the Sheriff’s Department.
F13:
The CAO and HR have insufficiently monitored and audited the Sheriff’s Department compliance with County Codes and Policies and Procedures.
F14:
The CAO conducts a 360 degree evaluation for all appointed Department Heads. This evaluation process currently excludes elected officials.
Recomendaciones adicionales
9
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R1:
By December 1, 2014, YCOE should develop and execute a program to keep the residents of Yolo County advised on the progress of implementing the new K-12 financial reforms.
R2:
The Agreement for Provision of Forensic Pathology Services should be amended to include clear measures to be used by the Coroner’s Division to monitor the FMG sole source contract and a requirement that FMG physicians who perform autopsies for Yolo County provide proof of licensing and board certification in forensic pathology or another similar specialty.
R3:
Coroner’s Division should require FMG to take immediate measures to clear the backlog of autopsy reports.
R4:
Coroner’s Division should withhold payment for autopsy services until autopsy reports are received.
R5:
Because the expertise and professional competence of FMG’s physicians are central to the ability of the Coroner’s Division to perform its mandated duties, the County should require FMG physicians who perform autopsies for Yolo County to present proof of medical licensing and board certification in forensic pathology or another specialty acceptable to the County.
R6:
In 2015, if the Coroner’s Division decides to contract for autopsy services using a sole source, the sole source justification must include, but not be limited to, the following: (cid:131) Performance standards for completion of autopsies and autopsy reports; (cid:131) Documentation supporting the board certification of staff performing autopsies; (cid:131) Cost analysis of alternative contract sources and provision of in-house services. 34 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT: INVESTIGATIONS 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT Yolo County Coroner’s Division
R7:
By December 1, 2014, HR shall review and update Harassment and Ethics online training programs and implement a training program that includes classroom (in- person) training.
R8:
By November 1, 2014, the CAO shall revise and extend the current 360 degree evaluation process to include an opportunity for all elected department heads to participate.
R9:
The Grand Jury recommends that elected public officials submit themselves to the 360 degree evaluation process used by all other department heads in the County.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
14 hallazgos
F1:
Yolo County currently operates according to Personnel Rules and Regulations that have been in draft form for a number of years. There is no definite timeline for completion by HR, review by employee union groups or adoption by the Board of Supervisors.
F2:
Although the oral interview is required and is one of the most important events in a departmental promotion process, Yolo County has no written rules, regulations or guidelines covering the selection or training of oral interview panelists, the confidentiality of interview materials or feedback to selected and non-selected candidates.
F3:
HR provides no oversight of department promotion practices unless requested to do so by a department. In this area, HR acts in an advisory role and assumes county departments are conducting promotional practices in a fair manner unless it learns otherwise. 16 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT: INVESTIGATIONS 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT Yolo County Promotion Practices: Need for Standards and Oversight
F4:
Human Resources has failed to adopt rules and regulations addressing departmental promotion processes. As a result, HR’s role in the departmental promotional process has been solely advisory.
F5:
In the absence of countywide rules and HR oversight, department hiring managers develop their own methods for conducting the oral interview and promotion selection process, which vary widely.
F6:
The department promotion process within Roads Division lacks written minimum standards for selection and training of oral interview panelists, method for recusal for bias, requirements for confidentiality or a process for meaningful feedback to non- selected candidates.
F7:
Although Roads Division has not violated any policy or code relating to promotions, the lack of standards, consistency and transparency in Roads Division’s promotion practices has led to a perception among some employees that the promotion process itself is unfair and biased.
F8:
Development of countywide policies covering promotion practices, including use of objective screening criteria, along with more HR oversight for policy compliance, would ensure a standardized promotional process, improving uniformity between departments, increasing fairness and decreasing potential legal risk to the county.
F9:
HR has taken steps to meet the need for more oversight of County promotions by offering elective courses through Yolo Training Academy in 2014.
F10:
Currently, HR reviews department promotion practices only if a problem is reported. HR has no prescribed complaint process that requires investigation, accountability and communication of investigation results to concerned employees.
F11:
HR manages harassment and ethics online training courses for all employees to comply with state and federal laws. These outdated and repetitious trainings are found to be inadequate and ineffective.
F12:
The HR Department serves in an advisory role and lacks appropriate oversight and accountability of personnel matters at the Sheriff’s Department.
F13:
The CAO and HR have insufficiently monitored and audited the Sheriff’s Department compliance with County Codes and Policies and Procedures.
F14:
The CAO conducts a 360 degree evaluation for all appointed Department Heads. This evaluation process currently excludes elected officials.
Recomendaciones adicionales
9
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R1:
Within the next 90 days, HR should conduct a survey of each department’s current promotion practices to identify problem areas and to learn from departments that have created successful internal models that address promotional processes.
R2:
By October 1, 2014, HR should use the information obtained from the survey to develop and adopt, as part of its Personnel Rules and Regulations, unified policies that create minimum written standards for department promotion processes. These policies 17 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT: INVESTIGATIONS 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT Yolo County Promotion Practices: Need for Standards and Oversight should address selection and training of oral interview panelists, confidentiality and feedback to selected and non-selected candidates.
R3:
HR should work with Roads Division immediately to create comprehensive written guidelines covering department promotion and hiring and to provide training to department hiring managers and oral interview panelists. These guidelines should be shared with Roads Division employees to restore transparency and trust that the department promotion process is operating in a fair manner.
R4:
HR should ensure that courses recently added to the Yolo Training Academy on how to properly conduct hiring or promotional interviews become part of the Academy’s permanent curriculum and that all county staff participating in hiring or promotion interviews be required to attend.
R5:
Within the next 60 days, HR should develop and publicize a process by which complaints regarding personnel issues can be reviewed, evaluated and acted upon with results reported to complainants.
R6:
By December 1, 2014, HR should complete the Personnel Rules & Regulations and develop a specific timeline for review by employee union groups and adoption by the Board of Supervisors. HR should report bi-monthly to the Board of Supervisors on its progress until such time as the Rules & Regulations are finally adopted.
R7:
By December 1, 2014, HR shall review and update Harassment and Ethics online training programs and implement a training program that includes classroom (in- person) training.
R8:
By November 1, 2014, the CAO shall revise and extend the current 360 degree evaluation process to include an opportunity for all elected department heads to participate.
R9:
The Grand Jury recommends that elected public officials submit themselves to the 360 degree evaluation process used by all other department heads in the County.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
14 hallazgos
F1:
ADMH does treat clients in mental health crisis in their clinics; however, access to ADMH clinics is limited by hours of operation, location, and availability of psychiatrists.
F2:
Statistics show that an increasing number of Yolo County people in mental health crisis enter the treatment system through Emergency Rooms or through law enforcement contact and involuntary 5150 holds.
F3:
There is a need for more CIT-trained law enforcement officers to respond to the increasing number of 5150 calls in Yolo County.
F4:
The recent ADMH grant should help provide enhanced crisis treatment to Yolo County residents.
F5:
Recently the ADMH updated its webpage to provide a direct link to its 24 hour crisis line for English, Spanish and Russian. However, the site does not contain links to community-based organizations that provide mental health crisis treatment and resources.
F6:
ADMH has not adequately publicized its relationship with, or the supplemental services provided by, the community-based organizations with which it contracts.
F7:
It is too early to determine whether the pending merger of ADMH, DESS and Yolo County Health Department will streamline services to the mentally ill.
F8:
Development of countywide policies covering promotion practices, including use of objective screening criteria, along with more HR oversight for policy compliance, would ensure a standardized promotional process, improving uniformity between departments, increasing fairness and decreasing potential legal risk to the county.
F9:
HR has taken steps to meet the need for more oversight of County promotions by offering elective courses through Yolo Training Academy in 2014.
F10:
Currently, HR reviews department promotion practices only if a problem is reported. HR has no prescribed complaint process that requires investigation, accountability and communication of investigation results to concerned employees.
F11:
HR manages harassment and ethics online training courses for all employees to comply with state and federal laws. These outdated and repetitious trainings are found to be inadequate and ineffective.
F12:
The HR Department serves in an advisory role and lacks appropriate oversight and accountability of personnel matters at the Sheriff’s Department.
F13:
The CAO and HR have insufficiently monitored and audited the Sheriff’s Department compliance with County Codes and Policies and Procedures.
F14:
The CAO conducts a 360 degree evaluation for all appointed Department Heads. This evaluation process currently excludes elected officials.
Recomendaciones adicionales
9
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R1:
Given the increase in 5150 calls in Yolo County, law enforcement agencies should develop a plan by October 1, 2014 to provide more officers with Crisis Intervention Training or departmental in-service training to help them respond to calls involving mental health issues.
R2:
By October 1, 2014, Yolo County law enforcement agencies should develop an integrated response plan so certified Crisis Intervention Training officers are the first responders on calls involving individuals in mental health crisis.
R3:
By September 1, 2014, the ADMH home page on the Yolo County website should be updated to make it easier to navigate and to provide more useful content, including a section for Frequently Asked Questions and links to community-based mental health resources. 52 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT: INVESTIGATIONS 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT Mental Health Crisis Services in Yolo County
R4:
By July 1, 2015, Yolo County Health Department, ADMH, and the Department of Employment and Social Services should develop a method to measure and report, to the Board of Supervisors, whether the merger of the departments results in streamlined services for people with mental health issues.
R5:
By January 1, 2015, ADMH should prepare a plan to address the barriers to accessing mental health treatment caused by difficulty in understanding insurance coverage, cultural and transportation issues.
R6:
By December 1, 2014, HR should complete the Personnel Rules & Regulations and develop a specific timeline for review by employee union groups and adoption by the Board of Supervisors. HR should report bi-monthly to the Board of Supervisors on its progress until such time as the Rules & Regulations are finally adopted.
R7:
By December 1, 2014, HR shall review and update Harassment and Ethics online training programs and implement a training program that includes classroom (in- person) training.
R8:
By November 1, 2014, the CAO shall revise and extend the current 360 degree evaluation process to include an opportunity for all elected department heads to participate.
R9:
The Grand Jury recommends that elected public officials submit themselves to the 360 degree evaluation process used by all other department heads in the County.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
14 hallazgos
F1:
Favoritism, nepotism and preferential treatment of employees have adversely affected employee morale of the Sheriff’s Department. These practices by the Sheriff involve hiring, promotion, assignments and discipline.
F2:
The Sheriff uses or creates provisional or extra help positions to employ personal friends and relatives.
F3:
The Sheriff has engaged in hiring immediate family, authorizing their assignments, determining their promotions and salary, and using final authority to determine disciplinary actions.
F4:
The HR Department conducted three ineffective investigations related to allegations of harassment and poor morale at the Sheriff’s Department.
F5:
The Sheriff’s Department, a military-like structure, with a clear and rigid chain of command operates with minimal external administrative resources, particularly the County HR Department and labor organizations.
F6:
The Sheriff’s micromanagement reduces Department supervisors’ and managers’ authority to lead and evaluate staff.
F7:
The Sheriff’s Department operates with unwritten work standards for deputies who are evaluated by these standards on a monthly and annual basis. These standards are inconsistently applied by supervising staff.
F8:
The Sheriff failed to observe County Code Section 2-6.44 Nepotism Policy by hiring immediate family members and determining their salaries, promotions, assignments, performance evaluations and discipline. 71 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT: INVESTIGATIONS 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT Yolo County Sheriff: Leadership Practices from the Wild, Wild West
F9:
The Sheriff was unaware of the contents and intent of the State of California Public Service Ethics AB 1234.
F10:
The Grand Jury was unable to determine the County’s compliance with the State of California Public Service Ethics AB 1234 mandated training for 2006-2011 for the Sheriff.
F11:
HR manages harassment and ethics online training courses for all employees to comply with state and federal laws. These outdated and repetitious trainings are found to be inadequate and ineffective.
F12:
The HR Department serves in an advisory role and lacks appropriate oversight and accountability of personnel matters at the Sheriff’s Department.
F13:
The CAO and HR have insufficiently monitored and audited the Sheriff’s Department compliance with County Codes and Policies and Procedures.
F14:
The CAO conducts a 360 degree evaluation for all appointed Department Heads. This evaluation process currently excludes elected officials.
Recomendaciones adicionales
9
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R1:
By September 30, 2014, the HR Department shall review and revise the County nepotism policies and existing practices including prevention, monitoring and reporting of conflicts of interest.
R2:
The HR department will annually review nepotism practices in the Sheriff’s Department. Such a review shall ensure ethical standards are established and a procedural firewall exists between related employees. This annual review will be presented to the Board of Supervisors with findings and recommendations by December 1, 2014 and each following year.
R3:
By September 30, 2014, the CAO shall review and revise the County’s mandated training requirements and compliance with the State of California Public Service Ethics as directed by AB 1234.
R4:
By November 30, 2014, the Sheriff’s Department in collaboration with HR shall review and revise the evaluation standards (written and unwritten) used for all department job classifications to establish a fair and objective set of written guidelines.
R5:
By September 30, 2014, the Sheriff’s Department in collaboration with HR shall develop a plan to reinforce the authority of the command staff. This plan shall define 72 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT: INVESTIGATIONS 2013 - 2014 YOLO COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT Yolo County Sheriff: Leadership Practices from the Wild, Wild West the level of authority of supervisors and managers for supervising, evaluating and effectively recommending personnel actions for the staff they oversee.
R6:
By June 30, 2015, the leadership of the Sheriff’s Department, in collaboration with HR, shall develop and implement an internal training program to promote and encourage upward mobility within the department up to and including the elected official’s position. Such a training program will serve as a blueprint for department succession planning.
R7:
By December 1, 2014, HR shall review and update Harassment and Ethics online training programs and implement a training program that includes classroom (in- person) training.
R8:
By November 1, 2014, the CAO shall revise and extend the current 360 degree evaluation process to include an opportunity for all elected department heads to participate.
R9:
The Grand Jury recommends that elected public officials submit themselves to the 360 degree evaluation process used by all other department heads in the County.