Report 2015-115 Recommendation 17 Responses

Report 2015-115: Dually Involved Youth: The State Cannot Determine the Effectiveness of Efforts to Serve Youth Who Are Involved in Both the Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice Systems (Release Date: February 2016)

Recommendation #17 To: Alameda County

To identify their population of dually involved youth, Alameda County's CWS and probation agencies should provide guidance or training to staff on recording joint assessment hearing information consistently within the designated system.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2020

On October 12, 2020, the Alameda County Probation Department's Juvenile Division launched our state-of-the-art caseload management system known as Tyler Supervision. It is our intent to continue to track crossover youth through the use of Tyler Supervision, which will allow increased data collection, as well as an avenue to analyze and track outcomes for our youth. Staff have been trained in the use of the system and have knowledge of how to identify those who have documented child welfare history. In addition, Tyler Supervision performs a host of functions, including the ability to record joint assessment hearing information. Our department works in conjunction with our court system to ensure that the information is communicated accurately, and results are subsequently entered into our identified case management system.

ALAMEDA COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY

When CDSS procures a new database Alameda County Department of Children and Family Services will provide training and guidance to their staff to insure all fields regarding joint assessment hearings will be adequately input.

  • Completion Date: October 2020

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

Alameda County Probation Department's Juvenile Division provided evidence that it has implemented a new case management system, which it intends to use for recording joint assessment hearing information. However, it could not demonstrate that it provided guidance or training to staff on recording joint assessment hearing information within this new system.

  • Auditee did not substantiate its claim of full implementation
  • Auditee did not address all aspects of the recommendation

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2018

Alameda County did not provide an updated response to this recommendation.

  • Estimated Completion Date: Unknown

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: No Action Taken

Alameda County did not provide an updated response to this recommendation.


Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2017

When the "New System" database is complete Alameda County Department of Children and Family Services will provide training and guidance to their staff to insure all fields regarding joint assessment hearings will be adequately input.

  • Estimated Completion Date: TBD by CDSS

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

Per Alameda County's response, its implementation of this recommendation is currently pending.


1-Year Agency Response

Alameda County stated that it will not provide any responses to the audit.

  • Estimated Completion Date:
  • Response Date: April 2017

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Will Not Implement

We stand by our recommendation to Alameda County's CWS and probation agencies that they should provide guidance or training to staff on recording joint assessment hearing information consistently within the designated system. As we noted on page 24 of our report, Alameda County could not accurately identify its population of crossover youth because it did not track the total number of cases with joint assessment hearings or the results of those hearings. As a result, any observations on how frequently the hearings result in youth's formal involvement with the juvenile system might be reflective of errors, rather than differences in the counties' processes. Thus, the State cannot perform a robust comparison between the population of dually involved youth in dual status and nondual status counties.


6-Month Agency Response

Alameda County stated that it will not provide any responses to the audit.

  • Estimated Completion Date:
  • Response Date: December 2016

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Will Not Implement

We stand by our recommendation to Alameda County's CWS and probation agencies that they should provide guidance or training to staff on recording joint assessment hearing information consistently within the designated system. As we noted on page 24 of our report, Alameda County could not accurately identify its population of crossover youth because it did not track the total number of cases with joint assessment hearings or the results of those hearings. As a result, any observations on how frequently the hearings result in youth's formal involvement with the juvenile system might be reflective of errors, rather than differences in the counties' processes. Thus, the State cannot perform a robust comparison between the population of dually involved youth in dual status and nondual status counties.


60-Day Agency Response

Alameda County stated that it will not provide any responses to the audit.

  • Estimated Completion Date:
  • Response Date: May 2016

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Will Not Implement

We stand by our recommendation to Alameda County's CWS and probation agencies that they should provide guidance or training to staff on recording joint assessment hearing information consistently within the designated system. As we noted on page 24 of our report, Alameda County could not accurately identify its population of crossover youth because it did not track the total number of cases with joint assessment hearings or the results of those hearings. As a result, any observations on how frequently the hearings result in youth's formal involvement with the juvenile system might be reflective of errors, rather than differences in the counties' processes. Thus, the State cannot perform a robust comparison between the population of dually involved youth in dual status and nondual status counties.


All Recommendations in 2015-115

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.