HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11051996 - D8 D.
TO: BOARD GF SUPERVISORS F&HS-05 -----
,L...o� Contra
FROM: FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Costa
County
DATE: September 23, 1996 `°rrq C0sN `P
SUBJECT: FINAL REPORT FROM THE BLUE RIBBON TASK FORCE
ON CHILD ABUSE ISSUES
SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. EXPRESS the Board's deep appreciation for the dedication of the members
of the Task Force, all of whom gave of their own time to serve on the Task
Force.
2. EXPRESS the Board's thanks to all of the County staff who cooperated with
the Task Force in providing information regarding how the child abuse system
works in Contra Costa County.
3. DIRECT the County Administrator to forward the final report of the Blue
Ribbon Task Force on Child Abuse Issues to those department heads over
whom the Board of Supervisors has jurisdiction and who are affected by the
recommendations contained in the report and ask that they review, prioritize
and comment on the recommendations, particularly those which appear to be
able to be implemented with little or no additional cost. These comments
should, for each recommendation, include a statement to the effect that the
recommendation either should or should not be implemented, along with the
reason for that judgment and an assessment of the likely cost of implementing
the recommendation or at least the factors which would have to go into
costing out the implementation of the recommendation. Where the
recommendation requires State legislation or regulatory changes, the
Department Head should comment on whether he or she would recommend
that the Board of Supervisors sponsor or support the efforts of others to
sponsor the necessary legislation or regulatory change.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMI
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURES
ACTION OF BOARD ON APP OVED AS RECOMMENDED X_ OTHER X
APPROVED the recommendations as set forth above; PRESENTED awards to the members of the Blue Ribbon Task Force
on Child Abuse Issues upon completion of their work; and ACCEPTED the recommendations of the Family and Human
Services Committeeereport on the final report of the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Child Abuse Issues.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
X_UNANIMOUS(ABSENT "---""- ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED November 5- 1996
Contact: PHIL ATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
CC: OBU
NTY A IN TRATO
See Page 4
LI
DI
F&HS-05
4. DIRECT the County Administrator to forward the final report of the Blue
Ribbon Task Force on Child Abuse Issues to those agencies over which the
Board of Supervisors does not have direct jurisdiction, including the Courts,
District Attorney, Sheriff and outside agencies which are affected by the
recommendations contained in the report and ask that they review and
comment on the recommendations which apply to their agency. The request
should ask that these comments include a statement regarding why the
agency does or does not believe the recommendation can or should be
implemented, including an assessment of the likely cost of implementing the
recommendation where that information is available. Where the
recommendation requires State legislation or regulatory changes, the agency
should be asked to comment on whether it would recommend that the Board
of Supervisors sponsor or support the efforts of others to sponsor the
necessary legislation or regulatory change.
5. AUTHORIZE Supervisor DeSaulnier and/or the Social Service Director to
forward copies of the report to appropriate community-based organizations,
police agencies and other appropriate groups asking for their review and
comment on the report and its recommendations.
6. REQUEST the County Administrator to consolidate the comments and
responses from all of the Department Heads and agencies, determine the cost
of implementing the highest priority recommendations and provide
recommendations to the 1997 Family and Human Services Committee on
possible sources or mechanisms for financing the highest priority
recommendations. This report should also provide a consolidated report on
the responses from those departments and agencies which responded with
their comments, priorities and recommendations.
7. REFER the final report from the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Child Abuse
Issues to the 1997 Family and Human Services Committee with a request that
the Committee meet on this subject and provide at least a status report back
to the Board of Supervisors by March 31, 1997.
BACKGROUND:
In September 1995, the Board of Supervisors established a Blue Ribbon Task Force
on Child Abuse Issues and charged its members with the responsibility of making
recommendations designed to improve the system that deals with child abuse and
family court issues in Contra Costa County. The Task Force was broadly
representatives of the various County departments which have some element of
responsibility for child abuse and family law issues. The Task Force also included
outside experts from the law enforcement, medical, psychological and labor fields
as well as parents and representatives of the general community. The Task Force
also included representatives from the private nonprofit community which addresses
the problems of child abuse and family law in Contra Costa County.
The Task Force has met regularly throughout the past year, has held public forums
at which the public could express its concerns about the system, has educated itself
about the systems and processes which are in place to address these issues and
has formulated some 78 recommendations for action by the Board of Supervisors.
-2-
F&HS-05
On September 23, 1996, our Committee met with Paul Crissey, Chair of the Task
Force; Helen Hansel, a member of the Task Force; Karen Mitchoff, Staff to the Task
Force and Supervisor DeSaulnier's Chief of Staff; John Cullen, Social Service
Director; Danna Fabella, Assistant Social Service Director; Terry Starr, County
Probation Officer; Victor J. Westman, County Counsel; Suzanne Strisower, staff to
Supervisor Smith; Lynda Kilday, staff to Supervisor Bishop; Art Miner, Executive
Director, Private Industry Council; and members of the 1996-97 Grand Jury, and
reviewed the attached final report from the Task Force.
Mr. Crissey reviewed with our Committee the report and the process the Task Force
followed in doing its work. The report contains 78 recommendations in the areas of
Reporting, Investigation, Adjudication, and Accountability. The recommendations can
generally be divided into five categories:
Recommendations over which the Board of Supervisors has jurisdiction and
which can be implemented at little or no cost.
Recommendations over which the Board of Supervisors has jurisdiction but
which clearly have fiscal implications that must be addressed.
Recommendations over which the Board of Supervisors has no jurisdiction,
which appear to have little or no fiscal implications and which need to be
addressed to the appropriate office or jurisdiction.
Recommendations over which the Board of Supervisors has no jurisdiction,
which clearly have fiscal implications where the Board of Supervisors may be
asked to pay for implementation of the recommendation, and which need to
be addressed to the appropriate office or jurisdiction.
Recommendations which require State legislation, regulatory changes or other
action by one or more State agencies.
The attached chart was prepared by staff to our Committee to provide at least an
initial sense of the nature of the recommendation and the extent to which the Board
of Supervisors has jurisdiction over the actions required to implement the
recommendation. Some of these categorizations can obviously be argued with, but
they provide a beginning point from which to begin to implement the
recommendations made in the report. One of the major problems with this particular
subject matter is that no one agency or governmental jurisdiction has control over
the entire process or system, meaning that the voluntary cooperation of many
jurisdictions is necessary in order to achieve the level of change which is envisioned
by the Task Force.
Because none of the agencies which are responsible for various pieces of the child
abuse system have had an opportunity to comment on the final form of the report,
we believe that it is essential to initially get the comments and recommendations
from each of the County Departments and other agencies which are responsible for
individual pieces of the system. While we had initially hoped to have at least the
initial evaluation of the recommendations completed by the end of 1996, the report
was delayed while final changes were being made to the report by the Task Force.
Thus, we are only now making a report which we heard in September. As a result,
we clearly cannot expect to get any reasonable sense of the comments from various
departments and agencies before the end of 1996. We are, therefore, asking that
-3-
F&HS-05
this matter be referred over to the 1997 Family and Human Services Committee,
which is being asked to provide at least a status report to the Board of Supervisors
by March 31, 1997.
cc: County Administrator
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
Superior Court Executive Officer
District Attorney
Sheriff-Coroner
Public Defender
Social Service Director
County Probation Officer
Health Services Director
Blue,Ribbon Task Force on Child Abuse Issues
(Via Supervisor DeSaulnier's Office)
-4-
M
c� o� rn cn r� w n� n
M cn � w K) o z
O
x x x x x
x x x x x x iv o
D
m
x x w 0
x x x x x x x x
x x cn
m
O
ic
c
m
z
m
v
v
0
z
4 O L" � W N W CO -I. O Cn .P W N O W Co
x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x
X x x x
x
N
�l O 0 A W N O 0 -N W N O 0 W
X
X X
X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X X X X X
X X
w
V —I -I —I -i -I -I —1 O O O O O M O O O O Ln Cn
4 O Cn -A W N O C0 W v O Cn .A W N O W w
X X X X X X
X X
X X X X X X X X X X
X X
X X
. �
_2
_ ] m E X X ; E w
CD• 0 k 2 0 7 0 0 0 co A C 00
] 77 ] E § ] ] 0 �$
] = 22 a2 ] ] _ mcD
S
CD = # a k = § q g
w m M (n 0) 0. CL jw 0 0
0 020 _a0 & -4. « �
o 0) o = o 0 0
8 a= cn 0 0 G 8 0 - o x
2 ° ° � l< '
$ ° % / % 2 2 CD = m
co / ca � °
(D.] n n ? ? f 0
ƒ » g CD
7 o ] m Mm » & 7 �
@ § m a) £ 2 m m £
CD k k 0 7 7 \0
E CL
° 0 0 � o /
CD0 ƒ � � � 7. E
& g 2 2 / ƒ c 3 ID
m - m ƒ K / 2 2 7 2
CD 00 � 00cc k0
w jj � _ = = 2 / /
§ § J k / . � n
g
cr ƒ \ \ � §
Ln
m ) $ K = , 2 k k A 3.
\ w & / K \ \ %
Ch 2 a$ 0 0 R q 0 �
« « m2 = m $ E
21 E a K =
7
\ ¢ � / t � EE
2 ƒ Co ¢ 0 / /
\� $ k ƒ g / 0
CL
_ ° _0 CD � m
« CD
\
CD /
mw 7 7
0 CL0 a < $ $ 0
M uaD
' %
3
—
] B = 2 = 03 2 \
2 E3 $ 7 & 7
n 0 7 E 2 w
@ »& m CD = m
/
\ 0 CD
o / CD
\ 2 ■ ] / / 0 f
'a =r o o °
$ 0 A 2 7 \ j f
$ � CD a K o § \
. m -'w o a
o a) $ E A & & CD
CD 7 cn
� §
q0 CL E 2CL .
ƒ $ / a
CL CD % ) 0
ƒ '
0
0
k k
Request to Speak Form
( THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) 0 .
Complete this form and place h in the box near the speakers' rostrum
before addressing the Board.
Name:
address: City: CAq
C
1 am speaking for myself_or organization: I el—y �yn OUJU
4 mw of or�nis�tion)
ONE:
wish to speak on Agenda Item #_ Date: C(— —9 '
My col will be: general _for_,aBait
1 wish to speak on the subject
_ 1 do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board
to consider:
Request to, Speak FormZ �
( THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum
before addressing the Board.
Name:
Phone:
D , ��1�, -
Address. � ��� � city.
1 am speaking for myself_ or organization:
(name of organization)
CHECK ONE:
_,5/ 1 wish to speak on Agenda Item #—j2L Date:
My comments will be: general for against .
1 wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board
to consider:
Request to Speak Form
( THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place It In the box near the speakers' rostrum
before addressing the Board.
r/jS'hones --f�
0tY'
I am speaking for mwso- f,
_� or aeganbaflom"
DUCK ONE:
�e d asantzttoN
1 wish to speak an Agendafie: I I
ken
My commalts will for
t wish to speak on the subject
I do not wish to speak but leave these comms for the Board
to consider:
Request to Speak Forp,
( THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum
before addressing the Board. 7 S
Mame: � ger--f rhone: 7�8 ' n 77'S�
Address;_
1 am speaking for myself or organiutioro
carne Of
CHIC ONE:
1 wish to speaak on Agenda Item � pat
My con will be: general
I wish to speak on the abject
1 do not wish to speak but leave these conunertts for the Board
to consider:
Request to Speak Form -04�
( THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place It in the box near the speakers' rostrum
before addressing the
Name:
phone•
A,aarew
I am speabng for myseior organizabon. R �1 �\
imine of o�sn�tioN
CHECK ONE:
I wish to speak on Agenda Ron #_LL Date: (I-S --R 1
My comments will be: general for.�ai .
I wish to speak on the subject of_�7\,p�1���,5� • oc .
do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board
to
t
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
01 VIA I
i�.0 41U
t
t`
Report of the
BLUE PJBBON 'T`A.S
K Fa�% E
ON CHILD ABUSE
IS-SUES
t
NOVEMBER, 1996
1
t t
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
5 E�L-•0�,
,
co
� '� " .• :moi
Report of the
BLUE RIBBON TASK FORCE
ON CHILD ABUSE ISSUES
NOVEMBER, 1996
1 � 1
.���.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Jim Rogers, District I
Jeff Smith, District II
' Gayle Bishop, District III
Mark DeSaulnier, District IV
Tom Torlakson, District V
' Family and Human Services Committee
Mark DeSaulnier, Chair
Jeff Smith, Member
r
r
' SPECIAL ACI24OWLEDGMENT
The Blue Ribbon Task Force on Child Abuse Issues extends its appreciation to Task Force member Chief
Michael Phalen, his personnel, and the Pleasant Full Police Department, for the use of the community
conference room in hosting Task Force meetings.
Task Force members also thank Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier and his Chief Assistant, Karen Mitchoff,
for providing staff support to the Task Force.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
FORWARD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
' REPORTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
' MANDATED REPORTING4
REPORTS FROM INDIVIDUALS . . . . . . . . . . 5
CROSS-REPORTING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 5
tINVESTIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
TRAINING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
' MEDICAL/PSYCHOLOGICAL PRACTITIONERS : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
SCHOOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
LAW ENFORCEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
MULTIPLE INTERVIEWS OF CHILD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
SPECIFIC AGENCIES INVOLVED IN;THE INVESTIGATORY PROCESS . . . . . . 10
CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
FAMILY COURT SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
' COORDINATION BETWEEN RESPONDING/INVESTIGATING AGENCIES . . . . 11
CENTRAL RESOURCE PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES INDIFFERENT JURISDICTIONS . . . 12
' ADJUDICATION . . . 14
' ACCOUNTABILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
GENERAL 17
AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
' GLOSSARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
- ii
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
' BLUE RIBBON TASK FOR ON CHILD ABUSE ISSUES
1995-96
' Paul M. Crissey, Chair
Brian Baker, Deputy District Attorney
' Matt Barnes, Member at Large
Irene Bergamini, Supervising Probation Officer
Cheryle Bernard-Shaw, Attorney at Law, Parent/Consumer Representative
James Carpenter, M.D., Pediatrician
Donice Davis, LVN, Parent/Consumer Representative
Danna Fabella; Assistant Director, Social Service Department
' Olivia Gallardo, Teacher
Judge Lois Haight, Contra Costa County Juvenile Court
Helen Hansel, Child Abuse Systems Review Committee
Beatrice Hill, Casework Specialist, SEIU Local 535 Representative
Carol Lee, Ph.D." Clinical Psychologist
Denise Nolan, Assistant Public Defender (Alternate Defender Office)
Chief Mike Phalen, Pleasant Hill Police Department
' Judge Peter Spinetta, Contra Costa County Superior Court
Jennifer Summerton& Eileen DeMaria, Child Abuse Prevention Council
For additional information or questions, please contact
Karen Mitchoff in Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier's Office
at 510-646-5763
iii
' In creating this Task Force, the Board of Supervisors determined that specific
components needed representation. Some of those components would appoint a representative
directly; applicants for other positions would be interviewed by the Board's Family and Human
' Services (FHS) Committee_for appointment by the Board of Supervisors. The process utilized
for selecting individuals to fill positions in the second category was advertising in the media,
sending letters of invitation to apply to various cultural and ethnic organizations, and then
interviewing candidates who met the criteria.
The FHS Committee interviewed individuals for the following positions:
' • an individual from the general public, independent of county government, who is
concerned about family and children's issues; this individual would also serve as chair;
• two parent/consumer representatives who had contact with the Juvenile Court and/or
Superior Court-Family Law Department in Contra Costa County, particularly in regard
' to child custody and/or child abuse allegations;
• a member at large,
• a representative from a non-profit agency which provides services to families and
children;
• a representative from the educational system with a particular interest in family and
children's issues;
' • a representative from the medical profession with a particular background in child abuse
detection and treatment; and
• a representative of the private psychological or psychiatric community with background
and a particular interest in cases of child abuse;
' The following positions were selected as noted:
• representative of the Superior Court - Family Law Department to be named by the
Superior Court;
• representative of the Juvenile Court Department to be named by the Superior Court;
• the District Attorney or his designee;
• a law enforcement representative to be nominated by the Contra Costa Police Chiefs'
Association;
• Social Service Department representative to be named by the Social Service Director;
' • County Probation Officer or his designee;
' • the Public Defender or his designee;
• a representative from SEIU Local 535 to be named by Local.535; and
• a representative from the Child Abuse Systems Review Committee to be named by that
j committee.
' iv
PREFACE
This report sets forth our observations regarding this county's child abuse system and
our recommendations for improving that system.
Not all of our members agree with each observation or recommendation made in this
report. Some believe the report is not sufficiently critical of various components of our system;
others, that it is too critical.
Still others believe that the focus of this report should have been on the causes and
remedies of child abuse, rather than on ways for the system to better deal with it.
Given the number and diversity of our members, it is not surprising that there should
be differing views.
' It needs to be stressed, however, that each of the observations and recommendations
contained in this report enjoys the support of the majority of our members (albeit the
composition of that majority may be an ever-changing one). Moreover, we believe that our
' emphasis on improving the existing child abuse system is in accord with our specific mandate,
although we do not oppose--and indeed, urge--that other aspects of child abuse in this county
be the subject of further study.
Lastly, we wish to acknowledge and express our special gratitude to Paul Crissey, our
chairperson, and Karen Mitchoff, our staff person, for their extraordinary efforts in guiding us
through this project. Without their patience and dedication, this report would not have been
possible.
1
' v
INTRODUCTION
' In September of 1995, the Contra`Costa Board of Supervisors established a Blue Ribbon
Task Force on Child Abuse Issues and charged its members with the responsibility of making
recommendations designed to improve the system that deals with child abuse issues in Contra
Costa County. This Report is the result of the Task Force's year-long effort to meet that
mandate.
During the past year, the members of the Task Force met on a regular basis and spent
many hours together. Our combined personal and professional histories and experiences
represented a broad cross-section of constituencies and perspectives. We worked and
deliberated very hard in an effort to ensure this document helps to promote the well-being of
children and families in Contra Costa County.
We heard extensively from people working in county departments, courts and
community-based agencies dealing with child abuse and family court issues in this county and
developed a deeper understanding of how the resulting system operates, including the successes
and frustrations of people working to identify, investigate, prosecute, and treat cases of child
abuse. We also heard extensively from people who became involved in the child abuse and
family court systems and raised serious concerns and criticisms of its impact on children and
families.
A great deal of dialogue, debate and passion went into writing this report. We have
concluded that the recommendations contained in it constitute a plan that will substantially
' improve the response to child abuse in Contra Costa County. We ask that these
recommendations be accepted and implemented as soon as possible.
The Task Force members acknowledge the initial efforts of many parents which resulted
in the formation of the Task Force. We also acknowledge the exceptional work of many people
within the child abuse and family court systems in this county to protect children from abuse.
We appreciate the Board of Supervisors establishing and supporting the Task Force. We
particularly wish to thank everyone who took the time and effort to bring their ideas and
concerns to the attention of the Task Force.
BL R BBON TASK F CE N CHILD
Al� SE SSUE
i
P i M. rissey air
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Blue Ribbon Task Force on Child Abuse Issues was formed by the Contra Costa
County Board of Supervisors with the following charge:
' ...to identify all parties involved in receiving, investigating and processing
child abuse complaints.
' ...to outline the process which is followed in receiving, investigating and
processing child abuse complaints.
...to receive testimony from individuals and organizations who wish to provide
evidence to the Task Force.
...to identify areas in which the child abuse investigation and processing
system may need improvement, who should be responsible for implementing
the improvements, to define insofar as possible the cost of the recommended
changes, and possible sources of funding those improvements in the system.
...to make recommendations to responsible policy makers for improvements in
the child abuse reporting and processing system.
...where additional action by the State Legislature is required in order to
implement the Task Force's recommendations, to identify the need for
additional legislation.
The Task Force met 39 times over a 12-month time frame. It heard presentations from
major departments, agencies and disciplines involved in responding to child abuse. Public
hearings were held in the east, central, west and south-central geographic areas in the county.
Members then met weekly over the summer(8 times) to produce the recommendations in this
final report. It is conservatively estimated that an average of 150 hours of time was
contributed to the work of this Task Force by each member.
This Report is ,organized into four primary sections: Reporting, Investigation,
r Adjudication and Accountability. Each section contains specific recommendations.
Recommendations are designed to increase the professional expertise of those working
within the system; to promote cooperation, collaboration and communication among people
working in different agencies, departments and disciplines; to improve the ability of the public
to understand and access services; to clarify the process for reporting, investigating, and
adjudicating child abuse cases;.and to increase the accountability for the actions of people
working within the system.
' The Task Force members believe that the adoption and implemention of these
recommendations will improve the lives of children and families in Contra Costa County.
2
' FORWARD
' This Task Force-was directed to review the responses to the child abuse system within
this county and offer suggestions on how to improve it. However, this Report would be
incomplete without a commentary on the most successful response to child abuse, which is the
prevention of abuse and neglect in the first place.
Child abuse prevention is accomplished in various ways and by many organizations and
' agencies in Contra Costa County too numerous to mention here. The Task Force wishes to
acknowledge a publication by the Child Abuse Prevention Council entitled "Surviving
Parenthood" as a resource tool to access many of these agencies.
These organizations and agencies dedicated to preventing child abuse deserve the full
support of everyone in Contra Costa County and should be nurtured, supported and expanded
to better serve the needs of our community.
Education of the public regarding child abuse, neglect, child development, and parenting
is far more effective before a child has been abused than after abuse occurs.
1. Recommendation: Schools, religious institutions and other community organizations
are encouraged to take leadership roles in developing and teaching curricula regarding
thealthy parenting, illegal drug use, alcohol abuse, and violence prevention.
Many of the recommendations made will require additional funding, and the Task force
recognizes there currently is no funding base for these activities. However, we strongly believe
that funding should not be a barrier for implementation of any recommendation contained in
this Report.
2. Recommendation: In order to fund the recommended additional resources, there be
a dedication of a percentage of tax dollars in this county to services for children. This
would be similar to the model implemented in San Francisco to ensure that children's
services are adequately funded.
3. Recommendation: Contra Costa County should study and consider the establishment
of an ombudsman position based on the model being implemented in Santa Clara County
and other counties across the country. The County Administrator or another appropriate
resource'within county government should be designated to complete this study and
make a report to the Board of Supervisors within six months of the acceptance of this
Report.
The Task Force recognizes that the legal and ethical issues regarding confidentiality
have an impact on the system's responses to child abuse concerns. The application of
confidentiality varies from agency to agency within a county, and from county to county within
' the state, as it relates to reporters, victims, perpetrators and service providers.
Confidentiality within the child abuse system is particularly complex.
Individual rights to privacy must be weighed against concerns about the safety of
children. Those involved in following through on all of the recommendations of the
Task Force will need to carefully consider confidentiality in their planning.
3
REPORTING
The Task Force looked at ways in which child abuse allegations come to the attention of
investigating agencies. Several different sources of reports were discussed. Many child abuse
reports are made by mandated reporters, professionals who are required by law to report
' suspected child abuse. Investigations are also prompted by reports from individuals in the
community. A third area which the Task Force considered was cross-reporting, which is the
sharing of initial reports between investigative agencies, particularly law enforcement and social
services.
I. .MANDATED REPORTING
State law requires certain professionals who have contact with children through their
work to report suspected child abuse to either Child Protective Services or a law enforcement
agency. Reports must be made by phone immediately and in writing within 36 hours of learning
r about the suspected abuse. Reports are made based on reasonable suspicion, and professionals
can face legal sanctions if they fail to report.
All of the professionals mandated by law to report need to have knowledge in the
identification of child abuse and of reporting requirements and procedures.
In addition, medical personnel and other mandated reporters may be reluctant to report
suspicion of abuse due to fears about testifying, violating confidentiality or damaging their
alliance with patient.
4. Recommendation: Increase training of mandated professionals. Training should
include more information to mandated reporters regarding referral telephone numbers
and resources; i.e., SCAN teams, CPS, etc.
Yet another concern of the Task Force is that training for mandated reporters may be
limited in scope and can be costly.
6. Recommendation: Request the Child Abuse Prevention Council to review training
resources, including materials and programs provided through the state, which are
' available for professionals, and make recommendations for training.
Training requirements for mandated reporters currently vary according to discipline, and
reporters may receive only minimum training. Training should be consistent and extensive
across disciplines.
6. Recommendation: Establish local certification process(es) for mandated reporters who
receive significant training in child abuse identification and reporting.
The law requires a broad group of professionals (e.g., day care providers, teachers,
therapists, firemen, clergy, animal control officers, etc.) to report suspected child abuse. This,
combined with limited training of mandated reporters, has led to a significant increase in
reports to investigative agencies which are then determined as not requiring investigation.
4
7. Recommendation: Encourage the Legislature to establish a statewide task force to
review mandated reporting legislation and make recommendations for changes. Develop
legislation to provide additional funding for impacted services each time new mandates
increase the number of professionals required to report.
II. REPORTS FROM INDIVIDUALS
A significant number of reports of child abuse are made by family members, friends,
neighbors and community members. The majority of these reflect genuine concern over the
treatment of a child. However, there are some false allegations made, and the ramifications of
false reports can be devastating to children and families. There are also cases in family court
settings where allegations are made during the course of a custody dispute and never proven.
These allegations may increase as the conflict between parents escalates.
Individuals who knowingly file false reports need to be held accountable to the extent the
law allows.
8. Recommendation: Encourage the District Attorney's Office and others as may be
g Y Y
identified to vigorously report, investigate and prosecute anyone, whether.acting
individually or on behalf of an agency, who files a false child abuse report when such
charges of a false report can be substantiated.
One of the critical areas the Task Force considered was the reporting of child abuse
allegations within the context of custody disputes. In some custody disputes, child abuse
allegations are made and embellished upon as the conflict between parents escalates. Policies
must be in place to address these allegations.
9. Recommendation: Encourage the courts to establish policies and procedures to ensure
that cases in which child abuse allegations arise in child custody proceedings are referred
to law enforcement and the Department of Social Services for investigation.
10. Recommendation: Develop mandatory education for parents involved in custody/
visitation disputes on the impact of false abuse allegations on children as part of current
parent education program in family court.
I L Recommendation: In cases where child abuse allegations have been made, require
parents to attend an extensive education program on both child abuse and the effects of
false abuse allegations on children.
1I1. CROSS-REPORTING
Agencies responsible for investigating child abuse (CPS, law enforcement, District
Attorney's Office) are required by law to share child abuse reports with each other. This process
helps ensure that the correct investigating agency is informed of abuse allegations.
' The cross-reporting process can be cumbersome, and some cases which require
investigation may get lost in the referral process. The time lines for submitting paperwork
should be realistic and the process streamlined.
12. Recommendation: Law enforcement and the Social Service Department form a joint
work group to review and streamline the cross-reporting process.
5
' INVESTIGATION
The investigation stage of the child abuse reporting process begins at the point that the
responding agency receives an allegation of abuse. This stage ends at the point that the
responding agency makes a decision regarding what should occur next; i.e., filing a dependency
petition, forwarding the results to the District.Attorney's Office for filing of a complaint or no
further action. There may be additional investigation after the initiation of the court process
up until the time the judge makes a decision regarding the initial allegations.
' The four courts that handle child abuse cases are defined below:
* Family Law Court
The investigation process begins at the point that one of the participants files an Order
to Show Cause or Notice of Motion setting forth allegations regarding what abuse or neglect has
occurred and requests that the court make orders based on those allegations. The investigation
process may involve mediation or evaluation by Family Court Services or other professionals.
The investigation stage continues up until the time that the court makes a decision about
custody and visitation, either based on the recommendations of the mediator or the evaluator
or at an evidentiary hearing based on testimony.
* Juvenile Court
The investigation stage starts when a report, either by phone call or reporting form, is
received by CPS. The investigation stage continues until the department makes a decision
whether or not a petition should be filed in the dependency court. Some other resolution may
be reached, either a determination that the allegations are unfounded, unsubstantiated or a
voluntary agreement to accept services. CPS may continue their investigation process up until
the time that the matter proceeds to court hearing and the participants either reach an
agreement regarding the court's involvement or the court makes a determination, based on the
evidence presented to it, whether the petition is true and whether the court should assume
jurisdiction over the children.
* Probate Court
The investigation process begins upon the filing of a Petition for Temporary and/or
Permanent Guardianship by a person on behalf of a minor(s) with notification to the court
investigator (Probation Officer). The court investigator addresses the need for guardianship
based on the allegations and the appropriateness of the proposed guardian(s). Information is
garnered through interviews with the minor(s), proposed guardian(s), any person filing
objections to the Petition, and other collateral resources pertinent to the case.
Background/criminal history checks are obtained as needed for the protection of the minor.
' A Report and Recommendation is prepared and submitted to the Probate Commissioner
with copies to the involved parties. If the Petition is contested and cannot be resolved by
mutual agreement of the involved parties, the case is sent to the master calendar for trial, and
an attorney is appointed for the minor. Some probate guardianship petitioners are filed after
the case has been"assessed out" by CPS.
' 6
' Criminal Court
This investigation stage begins when the law enforcement agency receives a report of
abuse or neglect and continues until the time that the law enforcement agency makes a
determination that it is appropriate to forward the matter to the District Attorney's Office for
filing, or that there is not enough evidence to support a criminal complaint at that time. Once
a complaint is filed in criminal court, there may be additional investigation conducted by the
Police Department or the District Attorney's Office up until the time that the defendant pleads
guilty or a trial is conducted and the court renders a verdict or decision.
The investigation process includes many different tasks. One of the main tasks is that
of interviewing people. Interviewing may include the victim, as well as the complaining witness,
parents, children, siblings, and alleged perpetrators. A forensic examination in the investigation
stage may be conducted. This may be an examination done by medical professionals, or by
mental health professionals. In addition, in certain investigations there may be other experts
who are involved in examining either the participants or physical evidence in order to give an
' opinion regarding the expertise. Investigation may also involve reviewing records relating to
the allegations. Those records may include medical and psychological records, school records,
and work records of different participants.
A concern in the investigation stage is what happens to the contents of an investigation.
If the investigation leads to a court process being initiated, then the contents of that
investigation are generally subject to discovery procedures (subject to confidentiality exclusions
by law). The contents will be available to the parents, county, and child's attorney in the
juvenile court system; to the prosecution and defendants attorney in the criminal procedure, and
in the family law procedure available to the parties upon appropriate request.
The Task Force is very concerned about what happens to the contents of that
investigation which does not lead to court action. If CPS does an investigation and decides that
there is not an adequate reason to file a juvenile court action, what happens to all of the
interviews and information that has been gathered by CPS? No system structure is in place
that allows information gathered by one responding agency to be easily accessed by another
agency and with the appropriate confidentiality protections. There is also. concern that there
may be a lack of follow up to participants if there is no filing in court at the conclusion of the
investigation.
In evaluating all of the presentations and the public testimony, the Task Force identified
several critical areas in the system where significant and consistent difficulties occurred and
made initial recommendations for improvementin these areas. The critical areas were 1)
training, 2) multiple interviews of the child, 3) recommendation for some of the specific
responding agencies, 4) coordination among the responding agencies.
1. TRAINING
Main areas identified by the Task Force requiring attention were the education, training
and experience of all participants in all responding agencies and professionals involved in the
investigation stage of the child abuse reporting process. Several of the concerns noted by the
Task Force which needed attention would apply to all component agencies in this process. The
specific concerns are set forth below.
Investigators should have the ability to work with multi-cultural families and an.
awareness of diverse cultures and specific problems of dealing with an investigation when the
' participants and/or witnesses are from another culture or speak a different language than the
investigator.
13. Recommendation: Urge the Legislature to mandate training in the area of cultural
diversity for all investigators, including law enforcement, CPS, family court services,
medical and psychological professionals.
14. Recommendation: Recruit participants of different cultural backgrounds in all
agencies.
15. Recommendation: Explore ways to expedite, and possibly coordinate, the use of
interpreters or translators in the various agencies' investigative process.
The legal and court process is very complex, and it is very important that information
be shared throughout the course of the investigation. The Task Force envisions a person with
knowledge of the juvenile, family law, criminal and probate court functions, able to answer
questions about the process and how it works as well as identifying areas where there may be
a limitation as to what can occur. Information regarding resources and referral sources in the
community would be available for participants. Additionally, there would be educational video
. tapes describing what occurs in each of the different courts available through some central
county source to assist participants in understanding the system.
16. Recommendation: Create a resource staff position to assist individuals entering the
system.
17. Recommendation: Establish an educational video tape library in order to assist
parents in increase understanding and information about the child abuse and family
court systems in dealing with child abuse issues.
Communications between investigator(s) and family(ies) should be clear, and family(ies)
should be treated.with respect and courtesy throughout the course of the investigation.
' 18. Recommendation: Professionals who participate in the investigative aspects of this
process should receive training in and develop their own protocol in how to ensure that,
the parties, whatever their role in the system may be, are treated with respect and with
rconsideration. Priority should be given to ensure that the participants understand the
system and how it is intended to work.
The Task Force also recognizes that employees who provide investigative services at CPS
and Family Court Services are in very difficult, sometimes confrontational situations.
19. Recommendation: Stress management training be made available to all employees,
as well as other resources of relief which may be identified in this area.
The Task Force also recommends training in three child-abuse-system components.
A. MEDICAL/PSYCHOLOGICAL PRACTITIONERS
Medical/psychological professionals are not receiving adequate training and exposure to
the medical/psychological aspects of child abuse, including identification, management,
prevention and reporting. Resources for in-service training in the medical/psychological aspects
of child abuse are available within Contra Costa County.
8
20. Recommendation:'Promote training in the recognition, management, prevention and
reporting of child abuse in medical schools, nursing schools, residencies (especially
pediatrics, family practice, dentistry, emergency medicine, and mental health).and for
all health care providers.
21.. Recommendation: SCAN teams should be utilized and created so that each medical
facility within Contra Costa County that serves and/or treats children has access to the
case review and consultation services of a SCAN team.
22. Recommendation: The SART team in west county should be supported, along with the
formation of other SART teams in the future to serve other parts of the county.
23. Recommendation: The MDIC concept should be fostered to allow for the best initial
forensic interview of child victims.
B. SCHOOLS
The Task Force heard testimony regarding concerns of inadequate training of teachers
and other mandated reporters at school locations on recognizing and reporting child abuse.
Concurrently, there was a public concern that the school district was not taking appropriate
action to respond to the complaints of parents and students at their facilities.
24, Recommendation: School districts should be encouraged to provide training to all staff
at the school district level to address child abuse issues.
25. Recommendation: Provide cross training among personnel of various responding
agencies, including school districts.
26. Recommendation: School district personnel should cross train.with CPS to provide
education and training for school district personnel to promote greater understanding
of child abuse issues.
27. Recommendation: School files should contain information on whom to contact should
an agency need to locate alternative family members for child placement as the result
' of a child abuse investigation.
C. LAW ENFORCEMENT
Often it is the beat officer who responds initially to the scene and who may:have Iimited
training and experience. This can have significant impact on information in the initial interview
of the child. Law enforcement investigators are sometimes not trained in all aspects of child
abuse matters. In addition, many law enforcement agencies do not appear to have a specific
person designated to deal with investigations in the area of child abuse.
' 28. Recommendation: Provide local training by county agencies for police investigators
and officers. This training should occur with CPS personnel so that there is a clarity of
what information is needed and education as to the appropriate roles and functions of
CPS and law enforcement.
29. Recommendation: Modify state regulations and laws affecting training for law
enforcement investigators to require that they receive training in the recognition and
investigation of all child abuse matters, not just child sexual abuse.
9
tII. MULTIPLE INTERVIEWS OF CHILD
There is a strong concern about the lack of interagency coordination on minimizing the
number of interviews for children. There is concern that the caliber and expertise of the
interviews varies greatly throughout different agencies in the county.
30. Recommendation: Encourage the local committee which is,pursuing an MDIC to
continue its work. This Task Force supports the development of the MDIC with the
expectation that it would minimize the number of interviews of a child and allow that
child to form a relationship with one interviewer who would be available for any future
interviews should they be required.
31. Recommendation: The Board of Supervisors needs to provide the necessary funds to
establish an MDIC and ensure funding for same on an annual basis.
32. Recommendation: Protocols should be established for the appropriate use of audio
and/or video taping of interviews. (A minority of the Task Force recommends that all
interviews be.audio and video taped.)
III. SPECIFIC AGENCIES INVOLVED IN THE INVESTIGATORY PROCESS
A. CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES (CPS)
' The Task Force is concerned that the removal of a child from a family setting may be
traumatic for the child. This may occur because of the abrupt nature of the removal, the fact
that the investigation lasts too long, or the lack of or limited contact with family members. The
Task Force is specifically concerned about the impact on a child of even temporary placement.
CPS makes every effort to place children with family members, if appropriate, in order to
minimize the trauma to the child.
33. Recommendation: All appropriate statutes and regulations must be followed in
respect to removal of children.
34. Recommendation: Establish a policy to allow a parent(s) a supervisory and/or
administrative review of their concerns regarding the removal of their child.
35. Recommendation: Encourage coordination or cross-referencing with schools regarding
sharing of information for resources for children, since most school districts have
emergency numbers available to them which may allow CPS to make contact with
relatives that they do not know about or the parents refuse to disclose.
When the department's investigation determines that CPS intervention is not required,
the family has already been significantly disrupted and may be in need of services to deal with
the experience. This may be particularly painful and distressing if the removal of a child or
disruption of the family is based on inaccurate information.
Families may feel they have been victimized by the investigation and/or removal of the
child(ren) and may be traumatized when there is no clear explanation of procedures provided
to the family.
36. Recommendation: When appropriate, CPS shall meet with the family to review what
happened in the course of the investigation,. explain why the Department is not
. 10
' proceeding and provide the family with an opportunity to respond to the Department in
order to reach closure.
37. Recommendation: Parents and caretakers shall be informed of the grievance
procedure, at both the local and state levels, at their initial contact with the Department
of Social Service.
38. Recommendation: CPS should provide information on community and counseling
referrals as appropriate to the family to deal with the effects of the intervention.
Additionally, there is concern regarding sharing the contents of the investigation. If CPS
has decided that it is not appropriate to intervene in a case, the Task Force is concerned that
all of the information which was obtained in the course of its investigation be provided to Family
Court Services or other agencies that may become responsible for resolving the disputes that
have arisen in the family.
' However, there could be issues of confidentiality that CPS would have to address before
providing the contents of its investigation to Family Court Services or other agencies.
39. Recommendation: Develop a structure for sharing information among all agencies
involved in the child abuse and family court systems in the county.
' Another concern is preventing duplication of investigative efforts so that the limited
resources now available in the county do not become overloaded. Cross-training is needed
between CPS and Family Court Services, as well as for any other agency(ies) which interacts
' with CPS or Family Court Services.
40. Recommendation: Develop a protocol to ensure that any one investigating a report of
' child abuse ask, as part of the initial, interview, whether;the family has had any
involvement within the last two years with Family Court Services or CPS.
' B. FAMILY COURT SERVICES
The Task Force is concerned that there be sufficient factual information available to
Family Court Services in the course of its investigation and that litigants be given adequate
opportunity to present their facts and information. In addition, the Task Force is concerned
with the length of time it takes to prepare Family Court Service evaluations. Further, the
concerns previously raised about training applies as well in the area of Family Court Services
' evaluations and investigations.
41. Recommendation: Family Court Services should be provided sufficient personnel to
better enable it to conduct thorough and more expeditious investigations and
evaluations.
IV. COORDINATION BETWEEN RESPONDING/INVESTIGATING AGENCIES
The Task Force is concerned that agencies involved in the child abuse and family court
systems in the county may not know what other agencies are doing. As a result, there may be
duplication of services or no provision of a service based on an erroneous assumption that some
other agency is providing it. Additionally, there was a concern that some of the agencies in the
county do not have a complete understanding of what occurs with other agency(ies) or have a
reluctance to learn additional information about the work of another agency(ies) due to a
' 11
' concern that additional demands may be made on their time or further paperwork may be
required.
A. CENTRAL RESOURCE PROGRAM
The Task Force noted that many members of the public had concerns about how the
system works and felt that they didn't know how or where to access information regarding the
system, how it worked, where to make complaints, and how to address issues of modifying,
changing or enforcing orders that are currently in effect.
There was also a feeling that there was a lack of clarity in communication between
participants in the investigation system and members of the public or persons who come in
contact with the system, either voluntarily or involuntarily, about how the system works.
' complex, im ortant that information
The legal and court processes are very and rt is very p
be shared throughout the course of the investigation.
' 42. Recommendation: An information and resourcep osition be created as it relates to
family law, juvenile, criminal and probate courts'processes and procedures. The Task
Force envisioned this would be a person who had knowledge of juvenile, family law,
criminal and probate court functions and would be able to answer questions about
process and how it works as well as identifying areas where there may be a limitation
' as to what can occur, and having resources and referral sources in the community
available to provide to participants. Additionally, there would be educational video tapes
describing what occurs in each of the different courts available through some central
county source to assist participants in understanding the system.
43. Recommendation: That there be a resource staff position created in the county to
' assist the public in educating themselves on the process. Part of the resources available
could be videotapes of the various different court systems. (This recommendation is also
made in the Training section.)
' B. LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES IN DIFFERENT JURISDICTIONS
A problem peculiar to a child abuse investigation by a law enforcement agency arises
when the report or allegation of abuse occurred in one geographic jurisdiction and the
participants, including the alleged perpetrator or victim, reside in'a different jurisdiction.
' The Task Force is aware that in these times of limited resources, if it is not an
immediate problem and is not clear whose jurisdiction the case is, the law enforcement agency
receiving the initial report may need to rely on another law enforcement agency to assist them
in a follow up on the investigation. There is no protocol currently on how the agencies will
interact in the investigation.
44. Recommendation: There should be a cooperative protocol developed for law
enforcement agencies in the county to assist them in making determinations as to which
agency is responsible for which portion of the investigation. The protocol should include
the sharing of information obtained in the course of the investigation and which
responsibilities should be divided up in a cooperative manner.
The Task Force also recognized that there may be a need for a state-wide protocol to be
developed since some of the geographical areas may be separated by several hundred miles.
12
' 45. Recommendation: Urge the Legislature to mandate the development of a state-wide
protocol to assist law enforcement agencies in cooperating on performing reciprocal
investigations and interviews for other agencies when some of the witnesses or
participants may reside in another agency's jurisdiction.
1
13
' ADJUDICATION
The majority of participants at the public hearings held throughout the county testified
about their frustrations involving family law matters. Specific concerns identified by the
participants were: 1) lack of understanding how the family court system works; 2) insufficient
time allotted to their case; 3) inappropriate decisions by the court; 4) inadequate training and/or
lack of information to make decisions; and 5) the overall issue of insuring that the child(ren)'s
best interests were the basis for all court orders.
It is recognized that the aforementioned participants constitute a small number of all those
appearing before, not to mention affected by, our family law courts. This Task Force was not
mandated nor is it in a position to determine whether their views are more widely shared. Nor
rdid this Task Force undertake to determine whether any of these views are well founded. Given
the expressed concerns and to hopefully provide participants in the family law court with
avenues to address these concerns, the Task Force makes the following recommendations. .
Child abuse cases should be accorded high priority and resolved expeditiously.
46. Recommendation: The courts of this county are urged to strictly adhere both to the
letter and the spirit of statutes mandating the early trial and disposition of criminal,
juvenile and custody cases involved child abuse issues.
47. Recommendation: Family Court Services is requested to substantially expedite its
custody evaluations and especially those involving child abuse issues.
' 48. 1 Recommendation: The courts of this county are encouraged to continue to promote the
use of joint experts in cases involving children's issues and to employ other litigation
practices calculated to shorten litigation without sacrificing the parties' due process
rights.
More judicial resources need to be dedicated to dealing with cases involving child abuse
and other children's issues.
49. Recommendation: The Superior Court of this county is requested to allocate a
sufficient number of qualified judicial officers to its juvenile and family law departments
and to provide them with staff, facilities and equipment necessary for the proper
discharge of their assignment.
50. Recommendation: Family law judicial officers are urged to allocate a sufficient portion
of their work time to cases involving custody and, in particular, child abuse issues.
51. Recommendation: The courts of our county are urged to provide child-friendly waiting
rooms for children participating or attending court proceedings.
Care should be taken to ensure that children involved in court proceedings not be unduly
traumatized by the experience.
14 .
r 52. Recommendation: The courts of our county should spearhead the creation of a multi-
disciplinary task force, composed of members from both interested county agencies and
the public, to research policies and programs in effect elsewhere in the state and
throughout the nation designed to protect, children from trauma during court
proceedings. The best of these policies and proceedings should be adopted and
implemented along with such excellent programs as CASR already in place in this
' county.
Judicial officers dealing with children and children's issues, especially child abuse, should
' be adequately trained in those issues, as well as in strategies for better understanding and
effectively communicating with children.
53. Recommendation: Request the California Legislature to enact legislation requiring
all judicial officers dealing with children's issues, and especially those assigned to
juvenile and family law departments, to attend training relating tot hose issues, as well
as child communication.
54. Recommendation: In the interim, the courts of this county are urged to identify
appropriate sources of training and, with such assistance, provide educational programs
1 designed to ensure their judicial officers are adequately trained in children's issues and
child communication.
' 55. Recommendation: The presiding judges of our courts are urged not to assign cases
involving children's issues to untrained judges.
' Cases involving children's issues require close monitoring.
56. Recommendation: The courts of this county are urged to provide automatic, periodic
review, as appropriate in each case, of its orders affecting children.
Court-appointed attorneys for minors, especially those representing children in juvenile,
family law, and probate matters, should be well-versed in the processes and issues affecting
' their clients.
57. Recommendation: The courts of this county are urged to formulate and adopt criteria
' designed to ensure that attorneys appearing before them on children's issues pursuant
to appointment are sufficiently trained and experienced with regard to the applicable
law and court processes affecting their clients.
58. Recommendation: The State Bar of California should consider developing a
specialization for attorneys in the area of children's issues, just as it has for other areas
of law practice.
The courts need to ensure that evaluators and other experts regarding children's issues
be qualified.
59. Recommendation: The courts of this county are urged to formulate and adopt criteria
designed to ensure that evaluators and other experts appointed regarding children's
issues be adequately educated, trained, and otherwise qualified.
Court-appointed attorneys for minors need to spend sufficient time with their clients to
effectively represent them.
15
60. Recommendation: Willingness to devote such time with their clients as is necessary
to effectively represent them should be made a criterion for appointment as minor's
counsel, and the courts of this county are urged to make clear that failure to do so will
result in counsel receiving no further appointments.
' Given the great impact of cases relating to children's issues, as well as the number of
litigants representing themselves in such cases, there is a special need for persons involved in
such cases to be duly informed as to the nature of the court proceedings and the role and rights
of all participants.
61. Recommendation: The judicial officers of this county are urged to fully explain their
decisions in cases involving children's issues, clearly stating the factual and legal basis
of such decisions in language understandable to lay persons.
r62. Recommendation: Judicial officers should inform pro per litigants (individuals who
represent themselves without benefit of legal counsel) that they may have a right to
appeal their decisions or have other rights of review.
' 63. Recommendation: The courts of this county should make available to litigants
information on where to file complaints concerning inappropriate judicial performance.
64. Recommendation: Family Court Services is urged to institute a mandatory orientation
program for child custody.litigants and to provide, as a component of such program,
pertinent information relating to court proceedings and the role and rights of the
participants in such proceedings. Such program should also address the potential impact
on children of custody litigation.
r
16
ACCOUNTABILITY
' The Task Force recognizes the excellent work being done by many dedicated people
working in all areas of the child abuse systems in Contra Costa County. The Task Force also
recognizes that the reporting, investigation and intervention, adjudication and treatment of
child abuse, by their very nature, require actions and decisions that deeply affect children and
families. All those who have the authority and responsibility to take such actions and make such
decisions must be held accountable for the integrity and quality of their work.
It is clear from the testimony the Task Force received that there are people whose lives
' have been affected by the actions and decisions of people in the child abuse system who feel that
they have been victimized by the system. They feel they have had little or no opportunity to be
heard or to have decisions reviewed.
The Task Force makes no judgment on any individual case or the actions of any specific
individuals working within the system. The Task Force does believe that there must be
improved access to airing grievances, recourse to reconsideration of decisions, and ways to
ensure that the system and those working in it are accountable for their actions and decisions.
I. GENERAL
Every written complaint against an agency or an individual working for an agency in the
child abuse system should receive a response.
' 65. Recommendation: Require all county departments under the jurisdiction of the Board
of Supervisors to establish a written policy that all complaints be responded to within
' an appropriate time frame.
66. Recommendation: All such written policies shall include a review process to ensure
that such policy for responding to complaints is adhered to.
67. Recommendation: Encourage all others in the system to establish a written policy for
' responding to complaints.
68. Recommendation: All such policies shall be posted in a public location in each
department and in the appropriate courts.
Employees in the system should feel confident to report concerns with the conduct or
decisions of co-workers and superiors without retribution.
69. Recommendation: Require all county departments under the jurisdiction of the Board
of Supervisors to establish internal systems for assuring the safety of reporting such
' concerns.
70. Recommendation: Encourage those components of the child abuse system outside the
control of the Board of Supervisors to establish such systems.
17
T. �
' n appropriate Accountability would be better promoted if reliable and app riate statistics were p
developed.
71. Recommendation: Require all county departments under the jurisdiction of the Board
of Supervisors to prepare annual reports reflecting the number and outcome of
complaints.
72. Recommendation: Encourage those components of the child abuse system outside the
control of the Board of Supervisors to prepare such reports.
73. Recommendation: Such reports should be scrutinized by the Child Abuse Systems
Review Committee.
Complaints about specific case decisions should be considered by those involved in the
1 decision-making process.
74. Recommendation:All appropriate departments should be required to develop a process
for formal case review.
II. AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS
CPS workers must be competent to perform their duties.
75. Recommendation: Request the California Department of Social Services to develop
a system of certification for CPS workers.
The public must feel confident that grievances against specific workers within the system
will be taken seriously.
76. Recommendation: Require all appropriate county departments under the jurisdiction
of the Board of Supervisors to develop written policies for handling grievances pertaining
t to an individual(s). These grievance policies shall be communicated to all clients at the
beginning of each case.
' 77. Recommendation: Encourage all others in the system to establish a grievance policy
for responding to complaints pertaining to an individual(s).
' 78. Recommendation: All clients instituting grievances shall be informed of the authority
of any appropriate state agency/department to review cases.
r
� 18
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Recommendation: Schools, religious institutions and other community organizations
are encouraged to take leadership roles in developing and teaching curricula regarding
healthy parenting, illegal drug use, alcohol abuse, and violence prevention.
2. Recommendation: In order to fund the recommended additional resources, there be
a dedication of a percentage of tax dollars in this county to services for children. This
would be similar to the model implemented in San Francisco to ensure that children's
services are adequately funded.
' 3. Recommendation: Contra Costa County should study and consider the establishment
of an ombudsman position based on the model being implemented in Santa Clara.County
and other counties across the country. The County Administrator or another appropriate
resource within county government should be designated to complete this study and
make a report to the Board of Supervisors within.six months of the acceptance of this
Report.
4. Recommendation: Increase training of mandated professionals. Training should
include more]information to mandated reporters regarding referral telephone numbers
and resources; i.e., SCAN teams, CPS, etc.
b. Recommendation: Request the Child Abuse Prevention Council to review training
resources, including materials and programs provided through the state, which are
available for professionals, and make recommendations for training.
6. Recommendation: Establish local certification process(es) for mandated reporters who
receive significant training in child abuse identification and reporting.
7. Recommendation: Encourage the Legislature to establish a statewide task force to
review mandated reporting legislation and make recommendations for changes. Develop
legislation to provide additional funding for impacted services each time new mandates
increase the number of professionals required to report.
' 8. Recommendation: Encourage the District Attorney's Office and others as may be
identified to vigorously report, investigate and prosecute anyone, whether acting
' individually or on behalf of an agency, who files a false child abuse report when such
charges of a false report can be substantiated.
9. Recommendation: Encourage the courts to establish policies and procedures to ensure
that cases in which child abuse allegations arise in child custody proceedings are referred
to law enforcement and the Department of Social Services for investigation.
10. Recommendation: Develop mandatory education for parents involved in custody/
visitation disputes on the impact of false abuse allegations on children as part of current
parent education program in family court.
19
11. Recommendation: In cases where child abuse allegations have been made, require
parents to attend an extensive education program on both child abuse and the effects of
' false abuse allegations on children.
12. Recommendation: Law enforcement and the Social Service Department form a joint
work group to review and streamline the cross-reporting process.
13. Recommendation: Urge the Legislature to mandate training in the area of cultural
diversity for all investigators, including law enforcement, CPS, family court services,
medical and psychological professionals.
14. Recommendation: Recruit participants of different cultural backgrounds in all
agencies.
15. Recommendation: Explore ways to expedite, and possibly coordinate, the use of
interpreters or translators in the various agencies' investigative process.
16. Recommendation: Create a resource staff position to assist individuals entering the
system.
17. Recommendation: Establish an educational video tape library in order to assist
parents in increase understanding and information about the child abuse and family
court systems in dealing with child abuse issues.
18. Recommendation: Professionals who participate in the investigative aspects of this
process should receive training in and develop their own protocol in how to ensure that
the parties, whatever their role in the system may be, are treated with respect and with
consideration. Priority should be given to ensure that the participants understand the
system and how it is intended to work.
19. Recommendation: Stress management training be made available to all employees,
as well as other resources of relief which may be identified in this area.
20. Recommendation: Promote training in the recognition, management, prevention and
' reporting of child abuse in medical schools, nursing schools, residencies (especially
pediatrics, family practice, dentistry, emergency medicine, and mental health) and for
all health care providers.
21. Recommendation. SCAN teams should be utilized and created so that each medical
facility within Contra Costa County that serves and/or treats children has access to the
case review and consultation services of a SCAN team.
22. Recommendation: The SART team in west county should be supported, along with the
formation of other SART teams in the future to serve other parts of the county.
23. Recommendation: The MDIC concept should be fostered to allow for the best initial
forensic interview of child victims.
20
24. Recommendation: School districts should be encouraged to provide training to all staff
at the school district level to address child abuse issues.
25. Recommendation: Provide cross training among personnel of various responding
agencies, including school districts.
26. Recommendation: School district personnel should cross train with CPS to provide
education and training for school district personnel to promote greater understanding
of child abuse issues.
27. Recommendation: School files should contain information on whom to contact should
an agency need to locate alternative family members for child placement as the result
of a child abuse investigation.
28. Recommendation: Provide local training by county agencies for police investigators
rand officers. This training should occur with CPS personnel'so that there is a clarity of
what, information is needed and education as to the appropriate roles and functions of
CPS and law enforcement.
29. Recommendation: Modify state regulations and laws affecting training for law
enforcement investigators to require that they receive training in the recognition and
investigation of all child abuse matters, not just child sexual abuse.
30. Recommendation: Encourage the local committee which is pursuing an MDIC to
continue its work. This Task Force supports the development of the MDIC with the
expectation that it would minimize the number of interviews of a child and allow that
child to form a relationship with one interviewer who would be available for any future
interviews should they be required.
31. Recommendation: The Board of Supervisors needs to provide the necessary funds to
establish an MDIC and ensure funding for same on an annual basis.
32. Recommendation: Protocols should be established for the appropriate use of audio
and/or video taping of interviews. (A minority of the Task Force recommends that all
interviews be audio and video taped.)
33. Recommendation: All appropriate statutes and regulations must be followed in
' respect to removal of children.
34. Recommendation: Establish a policy to allow a parent(s) a supervisory and/or
administrative review of their concerns regarding the removal of their child.
35. Recommendation: Encourage coordination or cross-referencing with schools regarding
sharing of information for resources for children, since most school districts have
emergency number_-, available to them which may allow CPS to make contact with
relatives that they do not know about or the parents refuse to disclose.
21
T)•
36. Recommendation: When appropriate, CPS shall meet with the family to review what
happened in the course of the investigation, explain why the Department is not
proceeding and provide the family with an opportunity to respond to the Department in
order to reach closure.
37. Recommendation: Parents and caretakers shall be informed of the grievance
procedure, at both the local and state levels, at their initial contact with the Department
of Social Service.
38. Recommendation: CPS should provide information on community and counseling
referrals as appropriate to the family to deal with the effects of the intervention.
39. Recommendation: Develop a structure for sharing information among all agencies
involved in the child abuse and family court systems in the county.
40. Recommendation: Develop a protocol to ensure that any one investigating a report of
child abuse ask, as part of the initial interview, whether the family has had any
involvement within the last two years with Family Court Services or CPS.
41. Recommendation: Family Court Services should be provided sufficient personnel to
better enable it to conduct thorough and more expeditious investigations and
evaluations.
42. Recommendation: An information and resource position be created as it relates to
family law, juvenile, criminal and probate courts' processes and procedures. The Task
Force envisioned this would be a person who had knowledge of juvenile, family law,
criminal and probate court functions and would be able to answer questions about
process and how it works as well as identifying areas where there may be a limitation
as to what can occur, and having resources and referral sources in the community
available to provide to participants. Additionally, there would be educational video tapes
describing what occurs in each of the different courts available through some central
county source to assist participants in understanding the system.
43. Recommendation: That there be a resource staff position created in the county to
' assist the public in educating themselves on the process. Part of the resources available
could be videotapes of the various different court systems. (This recommendation is also
made in the Training section.)
44. Recommendation: There should be a cooperative protocol developed for law
enforcement agencies in the county to assist them in making determinations as to which
agency is responsible for which portion of the investigation. The protocol should include
the sharing of information obtained in the course of the investigation and which
responsibilities should be divided up in a cooperative manner.
' 45. Recommendation: Urge the Legislature to mandate the development of a state-wide
protocol to assist law enforcement agencies in cooperating on performing reciprocal
investigations and interviews for other agencies when some of the witnesses or
participants may reside in another agency's jurisdiction.
22
46. Recommendation: The courts of this county are urged to strictly adhere both to the
letter and the spirit of statutes mandating the early trial and disposition of criminal,
juvenile and custody cases involved child abuse issues.
47. Recommendation: Family Court Services is requested to substantially expedite its
custody evaluations and especially those involving child abuse issues.
48. Recommendation: The courts of this county are encouraged to continue to promote the
use of joint experts in cases involving children's issues and to employ other litigation
practices calculated to shorten litigation without sacrificing the parties' due process
rights.
' 49. Recommendation: The Superior Court of this county is requested to allocate a greater
number of qualified judicial officers to its juvenile and family law departments and to
provide them with staff, facilities and equipment necessary for the proper,discharge of
' their assignment.
50. Recommendation: Family law judicial officers are urged to allocate a greater portion
of their work time to cases involving custody and, in particular, child abuse issues.
51. Recommendation: The courts of our county are urged to provide child-friendly waiting
rooms for children participating or attending court proceedings.
52. Recommendation: The courts of our county should spearhead the creation of a multi-
disciplinary task force, composed of members from both interested county agencies and
the public, to research policies and programs in effect elsewhere in the state and
throughout the nation designed to protect children from trauma during court
proceedings. The best of these policies and proceedings should be adopted and
implemented along with such excellent programs as CASR already in place in this
county.
53. Recommendation: Request the California Legislature to enact legislation requiring
all judicial officers dealing with children's issues, and especially those assigned to
juvenile and family law departments, to attend training relating tot hose issues, as well
as child communication.
54. Recommendation: In the interim, the courts of this county are urged to identify
appropriate sources of training and, with such assistance, provide educational programs
designed to ensure their judicial officers are adequately trained in children's issues and
child communication.
55. Recommendation: The presiding judges of our courts are urged not to assign cases
involving children's issues to untrained judges.
56. Recommendation: The courts of this county are urged to provide automatic, periodic
review, as appropriate in each case, of its orders affecting children.
23
57. Recommendation: The courts of this county are urged to formulate and adopt criteria
designed to ensure that attorneys appearing before them on children's issues pursuant
to appointment are sufficiently trained and experienced with regard to the applicable
law and court processes affecting their clients.
58. Recommendation: The State Bar of California should consider developing a
specialization for attorneys in the area of children's issues, just as it has for other areas
of law practice.
t59. Recommendation: The courts of this county are urged to formulate and adopt criteria
designed to ensure that evaluators and other experts appointed regarding children's
issues be adequately educated, trained, and otherwise qualified.
60. Recommendation: Willingness to devote such time with their clients as.is necessary
' to effectively represent them should be made a criterion for appointment as minor's
counsel, and the courts of this county are urged to make clear that failure to do.so will
result in,counsel receiving no further appointments.
61. Recommendation: The judicial officers of this county are urged to fully explain their
decisions in cases involving children's issues, clearly stating the factual and legal basis
of such decisions in language understandable to lay persons.
62. Recommendation: Judicial officers should inform pro per litigants (individuals who
represent themselves without benefit of legal counsel) that they may have aright to
appeal their decisions or have other rights of review.
63. Recommendation: The courts of this county should make available to litigants
information on where to file complaints concerning inappropriate judicial performance.
64. Recommendation: Family Court Services is urged to institute a mandatory orientation
program for child custody litigants and to provide, as a component of such program,
pertinent information relating to court proceedings and the role and rights of the
participants in such proceedings. Such program should also address the potential impact
on children of custody litigation.
65. Recommendation: Require all county departments under the Jurisdiction of the Board
of Supervisors to establish a written policy that all complaints be responded to within
an appropriate time frame.
66. Recommendation: All such written policies shall include a review process to ensure
that such policy for responding to complaints is adhered to.
67. Recommendation: Encourage all others in the system to establish a written policy for
responding to complaints.
68. Recommendation: All such policies shall be posted in a public location in each
department and in the appropriate courts.
24
69. Recommendation: Require all county departments under the J`urisdiction of the Board
of Supervisors to establish internal systems for assuring the safety of reporting such
concerns.
70. Recommendation: Encourage those components of the child abuse system outside the
control of the Board of Supervisors to establish such systems.
71.. Recommendation: Require all county departments under the jurisdiction of the Board
of Supervisors to prepare annual reports reflecting the number and outcome of
complaints.
72. Recommendation: Encourage those components of the child abuse system outside the
control of the Board of Supervisors to prepare such reports.
73. Recommendation: Such reports should be scrutinized by the Child Abuse Systems
Review Committee.
74. Recommendation:All appropriate departments should be required to develop a process
for formal case review.
75. Recommendation: Request the California Department of Social Services to develop
a system of certification for CPS workers. .
76. Recommendation: Require all appropriate county departments under the jurisdiction
of the Board of Supervisors to develop written policies for handling grievances pertaining
to an individual(s). These grievance policies shall be communicated to all clients at the
beginning of each case.
77. Recommendation: Encourage all others in the system to establish a grievance policy
for responding to complaints pertaining to an individual(s).
78. Recommendation: All clients instituting grievances shall be informed of the authority
of any appropriate state agency/department to review cases.
25
1
dJ
1
GLOSSARY
California Department of Social Service (State)
A governmental agency of the State of California dealing with issues concerning adults,
children and/or families as it relates to protection of children and adults, and financial
assistance to families in need.
Child Abuse Systems Review Committee (CASRC)
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors established a CASRC in 1982 to identify
gaps and deficiencies in the various systems that interplay in the child abuse cascade.
Membership is multidisciplinary. Its process includes case review, fact finding and
advocacy.
Child Protective Services (CPS)
A division of the county's Social Service Department which is responsible for receiving
and investigating reports of alleged child abuse. This division is also responsible for
making reports, which include suggested recommendations, to the court for its use in
deciding cases involving placement of children, providing services to families to prevent
removal of children, and to assist with reunifying families.
1, Confidentiality
The legal mandate directed to each component of the child abuse and family court
systems which defines who has the right and need to know information with regard to
child abuse investigations.
Court-Appointed Special Representative (CASR)
A non-profit organization composed of individuals who volunteer their time and are
trained in issues dealing with children and families. CASR's are appointed by the court,
and agree to work with a child(ren) or family as their case moves through the court
1 process.
Death Review Team (DRT)
' This team reviews deaths of children in the community. Identification of trends and
preventable causes of death can help prioritize prevention and intervention programs.
This is a subcommittee of the CASRC, and membership is multidisciplinary. There has
been a DRT in Contra Costa County since 1987. It meets every other month.
District Attorney
The county office.that reviews investigations referred to it by law enforcement to decide
whether to file criminal charges; prosecutes all cases that are filed. There is a special
Sexual Assault Unit within the District Attorney's Office that reviews and prosecutes
child abuse cases.
Evaluation
A process of interviewing both parents, which may include observation of parent/child
interactions, in determining child custody and visitation.
26
1
d
Family at Court Mediation
A process whereby psychological professionals, either private or employed by Family
Court. Services, meet with all parties in a family law matter in order to determine the
best course of action for the child(ren) regarding custody and. visitation through
agreement of the parents.
The process for mediation in the Juvenile Court is a different process.
Family Court Services
A division of the Superior Court, Family Law Department, which employs psychological
professionals who meet with adults and children in order to make recommendations to
judges regarding custody and visitation issues.
Law Enforcement
A police or sheriffs department agency, or any individual employed by such agency.
MDI C
An-acronym for Multidisciplinary Interview Center, which provides a forensically and
developmentally-trained professional to interview a child victim of physical and/or sexual
abuse. The interview is videotaped and observed by representatives from law
enforcement, the district attorney and CPS who can communicate with the interviewer
as the interview occurs. Such a center has the advantage of gaining better information,
sparing a child from multiple interviews, and determining credibility immediately.
Public Defender and Alternate Public Defender
The Public Defender and his staff represent individuals who cannot afford an attorney
in specific cases. The Alternate Public Defender's Office is a division of the Public
Defender's Office. As mentioned in this Report, attorneys employed in this department
represent individuals involved in cases regarding removal of a child(ren) from the home
or who are charged with criminal behavior against children.
SART
An acronym for Sexual Abuse Response Team, an entity staffed by nurse examiners who
perform adult and child sexual assault examinations.
SCAN Team
An acronym for Suspected Child Abuse and Neglect Team, a hospital-based team who
reviews reported and suspected cases of child abuse or neglect. A team may be composed
of a medical doctor, a nurse, a Social Worker, a CPS worker, a law enforcement officer,
and a mental health professional. The team can be called upon to provide consultation
and case review as well as in-service education to other professionals.
Social Service Department(County)
The county department which deals with issues concerning adults, children and/or
families as it relates to protection of children and adults, and financial assistance to
individuals and families in need.
27
i
APPEND
At the beginning of our work, Task Force members agreed that any member who wished
to add comments on the Report could do so in writing and that those written comments would
be included in an Appendix at the conclusion of the Report.
28
October 14, .1996
Blue Ribbon Task Force
Study Child Abuse
Reply to the "Report of the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Child Abuse-Issues"
Members of the Board, the Blue Ribbon Task Force and the County of Contra Costa
The many hours spent by the Task Force to study the many problems have to be recognized as
the tremendous and caring effort that was put forth. The county is fortunate to have persons who
care enough to make the report possible. However some members of the Panel failed to recognize
that every problem regarding a complaint of Abuse of Children, WILL AFFECT those families
involved with that complaint.
I have been involved with the Task Force for the past year as a Parent Representative. The Task
Force has now submitted their.report to the Board with recommendations, guidance and
suggestions to resolve various problems of Child Abuse we have been asked to address.
The Blue Ribbon Panel was appointed by the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors to study"Child
Abuse"problems, due to concerns and complaints by parents AND the Grand Jury Reports that
for the past five (5)years, cited "Bureaucratic Child Abuse Problems". "Bureaucratic complaints
of Abuse" and incompetence has adversely affected children and their families by many of the
decisions made by Judges and other County Administrators who have ignored, manipulated or
misinterpreted the laws.
The biggest outcry has been the problems in Family and Juvenile Courts and the Department of
Social Services, primarily Child Protective Service (CPS).
1993-94
Grand Jury Report:4 (Partial Excerpt)
No.
9405
The Social Service Department Adoption Unit negatively exaggerates some children's
limitations by branding them as"ugly"and having few social skills, thus keeping these
adoptable children in the more expensive and less nurturing environment of foster care
limbo."
'Every level of management, up to and including the Board of Supervisors have been
informed of numerous problems with the Social Service Department and have failed
to act."
As the Parent Representative I took the time to meet with parents and Parent Groups who were
concerned of the many problems they were involved in. It is for this reason.I have taken the time
to make my comments and those of other parents heard.
I had been a member on the Panel for five months and I had expressed myself very candidly and
frankly of the complaints (problems) of the parents. It was obvious to me that my complaints
were NOT welcome by certain members of the Panel. In April 1996 my husband and I were
charged with the same type of Bureaucratic Abuse by CPS, that many parents and the Grand
Jury had reported. My husband and I as well as our five children experienced FRUSTRATION,
t29
r
' TERROR and FUTILITY when ever request we made for su ort and investigation of th
Y �1 pp g e
UNFOUNDED charges were ignored.
The study and recommendations made by this panel will ONLY BEGIN to address these
problems. I believe it is imperative of this panel to UNDERSCORE the importance of continuing
to police and monitor the system. Every clerical position, up to and including judges,
commissioners and referees appointed and elected to these very important and sensitive
positions, cannot underestimate this responsibility. The importance of their responsibility as
Public Servants is to serve and protect the children AND parents in the county,
The report to the Board will be incomplete without addressing the original purposes that the
parents in this county ORIGINALLY asked, when the Task Force was formed. The Task Force
should correctly be named, "The Task Force to study FAMILY ABUSE.
Respectfully,
r. -
Donice Davis
Parent Task Force Representative,
For the Parents of Contra Costa County
r
r -
r
r
r
30
r