Oversight_Panel
2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 JUSTICE AND COURAGE OVERSIGHT PANELMINUTES
January 28, 2003
City Hall, Room 408
10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.
Oversight Panel Members in Attendance
Roll call was taken by the interim secretary/clerk, Justine McGonagle. Barbara Brooten-Job was excused. Patti Chang was absent. Manual Vasquez arrived at 10:20.
Action: The meeting was called to order by Co-Chair Leal at 10:09 a.m.
Adoption of the Agenda
Adopted the agenda of the January 28, 2003 meeting of the Justice and Courage Oversight Panel.
Action: Adopted.
Approval of Minutes
Adopted minutes of the meeting held November 19, 2002
Action: Adopted.
Status of Violence Against Women (VAW) Grant Money
Ms. Taylor-McGhee stated the Department on the Status of Women has funding for a VAW Justice and Courage Project Coordinator position. The job description is posted on the Department’s website. The application deadline is February 10, 2003. Co-Chair Leal asked for public comment. There was none. Voted to move to committees’ status report prior to Gregg Lowder’s presentation.
Action: Department on the Status of Women will email copy of job posting to
Oversight Panel members.
Committees Presentation
A. Data Collection Committee
Ms. Oli Sadler, Chair of the Data Collection Committee, presented an update to the Panel. Ms. Sadler stated the Data Collection Committee had met twice and that a key objective of the Committee is to understand how agencies within the justice community communicates with one another and how information flows from one department to another. This will be demonstrated through the use of flow charts. Ms. Sadler indicated that a goal of the Committee is to identify gaps within the systems and to propose short-term, mid-term and long-term solutions. Additionally, the Committee will monitor the progress of JUSTIS and will make recommendations as needed. Each department represented is assigned to create a flow chart and/or narrative of how domestic violence is handled by its department and how information is transferred to other departments. Ms. Sadler reported the Committee is investigating 1) where data goes and in what manner and, 2) the data flow related to both the victim and suspect. Ms. Sadler stated that a pictorial view chart and other flow charts are being created to track the entry and flow of how a victim, family or citizen interfaces in the criminal justice system. Ms. Sadler also stated that DOSW will participate in the (JUSTIS users group.)
Ms. Sadler defined the JUSTIS users group. She stated that representatives from the law enforcement departments work with the Department of Telecommunications & Information Systems (DTIS) and develop a work plan in order to set-up the JUSTIS data collection system. Ms. Sadler gave the example of data elements in the old Court Management System (CMS) and how the JUSTIS group meets to discuss the data elements, including what type of security should be in place. Ms. Sadler indicated that currently security is tied to a data system, but in the future, security could be linked to an individual. Furthermore, she stated that both the data held today and data collected in the future must be deposited into a warehouse. Ms. Sadler concluded that the JUSTIS group must decide who will have access to this data.
Co-Chair Keehn asked whether the JUSTIS users group was a subcommittee of the JUSTIS government group.
Ms. Sadler stated it’s a working committee focusing on technical needs in order to have JUSTIS running. In fact, Ms. Sadler stated it is one and the same.
Co-Chair Leal asked for public comment.
B. Protocol Committee
Rachel Kilshaw, Co-Chair of the Protocol Committee, stated that the Protocol Committee had met once and discussed its goals and the best way to codify protocols. The Committee is waiting to receive the Data Collection Committee’s flow charts in order to see an overview of the domestic response systems that are currently in place. Sergeant Kilshaw stated the Protocol Committee would meet regularly, on the second Tuesday of every month from 10:30 a.m.-12:00 noon. At the next meeting, department participants will bring responses sent to the Mayor along with their departments’ protocols. Sergeant Kilshaw indicated the Committee would begin their protocol review process with the Emergency Communications Department. The next meeting will be held, 10:30 a.m. -12:00 noon, 50 Fell Street, San Francisco. The meeting is open to the public.
Co-Chair Keehn reminded Panel members that their packets included information with the date, time and location of the February Committee meetings. A list of the Chairs and approved committee minutes was also provided.
Ms. Upton commented that she is interested in the implications of policies that are put into place. She stated that protocols currently in place have been in place for many years, but are not always put into practice. She inquired if the Protocol Committee will be charged with implementing the protocols.
Sergeant Kilshaw stated that the Committee is working to assess its goals along with defining what the Committee is charged with, and to what extent they can implement other departments’ protocols.
Ms. Upton inquired if there are enough people represented on the Committee.
Sergeant Kilshaw stated it would be helpful to have the courts involvement, which was
one of the key topics during the first meeting.
Mr. Theisen indicated it would be useful to have more community agencies on the Protocol Committee. He stated that a number of gaps were uncovered in the initial meeting.
Sergeant Kilshaw reported that the Committee is working on the best way to codify information in order to know what other departments are doing and what information is expected of each department in relation to the other.
Co-Chair Keehn stated a lot of protocols are in existence and the process should include on evaluation.
Co-Chair Leal welcomed Mr. Vasquez at 10:20 a.m.
Ms. Taylor-McGhee stated that we must be sure department heads are following protocols and an evaluation needs to be included in final outcomes.
Co-Chair Leal asked for public comment. There was no public comment.
C. Interdepartmental Communications and Coordination Committee
Quita Keller, of UCSF Center for Gender Equity, serves as the Co-Chair with Leah Koss of the SF Sheriff’s Department, for the Interdepartmental Communications and Coordination Committee. Ms. Keller reported the Committee held its first meeting last week and will also use the Data Collection Committee’s data and flow charts. Ms. Keller stated the Committee discussed whether or not the Interdepartmental Committee is redundant to the Protocol Committee in its goals and objectives. The Committee recognizes there are interdepartmental issues along with intradepartmental challenges and this may be something to focus on. Ms. Keller explained how changes in staff affect Departmental work and what is being dropped. Also discussed is the current trend by departments of broadening the definition of domestic violence to encompass family violence. She noted how this may affect departments.
Ms. Keller also suggested more readily available information would be useful, such as a list serve or information online about the Justice and Courage Project Committee work.
Ms. Keller indicated this would help committees not duplicate work and provide information to the Interdepartmental Committee on collaborations where work is
needed.
Ms. Taylor-McGhee stated that she and Ms. Sadler recently had a meeting and discussed having all the chairs meet in the interim so there is not a duplication of work efforts through dissemination of electronic information.
Co-Chair Leal stated information sharing is critical and sharing it electronically seems to be the best approach.
D. Resource Committee
Caroline Donnola from the Department on the Status of Women presented on behalf of Sharon Woo, Co-Chair of the Resource Committee. Ms. Woo could not attend the meeting. Ms. Donnola reported the Resource Committee met for the first time on January 14, 2003. The purpose of the Resource Committee is to evaluate current staffing and training needs for departments. Ms. Donnola indicated the Committee is looking at the need for resources by departments and at what resources domestic violence survivors need. Ms. Donnola acknowledged the budget cuts will affect resources. Ms. Donnola also stated it would be helpful to have someone from the courts participate. Finally, Ms. Donnola reported the Resource Committee is meeting monthly on the second Tuesday from 1:30 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. The next meeting is scheduled for February 11, 2003.
Co-Chair Leal stated she appreciated the committees’ work and their looking at this work from the client’s point of view.
Mr. Theisen inquired about the parameters of the Resource Committee and asked if the Committee was looking at any community based organizations as resources.
Ms. Donnola responded that the Resource Committee needed to look at this issue as well.
Mr. Vasquez inquired about cuts to training.
Ms. Donnola replied that training was an issue, and cuts which have already taken place, have had serious impacts on all city departments.
Mr. Vasquez asked the Resource Committee to bring some specific examples to the next meeting.
Co-Chair Keehn indicated her belief that the Resource Committee should look for resources and make recommendations to the Panel. The Panel would advocate on behalf of issues and recommendations made by the Resource Committee.
Ms. Green-Simmons stated that often local government looks to State and Federal agencies for resources. Ms. Green-Simmons noted that due to the economic climate during this time, these resources might be limited however she’d like know more about foundations focusing on governmental agencies. She stated this may be useful for limited projects with measurable outcomes such as training.
Co-Chair Leal asked for public comment. No public comment received.
Actions:
1. Resource Committee to bring examples of training cuts.
2. Collect information on foundations or funding sources for government in the
near future.
Update from JUSTIS Governance Counsel
Co-Chair Leal welcomed Gregg Lowder, from the Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice
Mr. Lowder presented an update on JUSTIS. Mr. Lowder reported that in the past this project had been managed by an informal working group consisting of mainly criminal justice departments. In the spring, they implemented the JUSTIS Governmental Council (Council), which met for the first time in April of 2002. This Council was created by an Ordinance passed by the Board of Supervisors, whose purpose is to have leaders meet for more effective management. The Council has met monthly for the past eight months. This Council consists of the Adult Probation Department (APD), Department of Telecommunications and Information Services (DTIS), District Attorney’s Office (DA), Public Defender and the Sheriff’s Department. Mr. Lowder reported the latest development is a new structure for the governance of the project to be voted upon and implemented in late February. He stated this would result in three things. 1.) Identification of an Executive Sponsor, which the Council has not had previously. This Executive Sponsor would be through the Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice and the Mayor’s Office. 2) Formation of a Technical Steering Committee. 3) Hiring of a project manager to work in conjunction with DTIS to manage this project. This person would also run the Sheriff’s tracking system and record management system.
Co-Chair Leal thanked Mr. Lowder for his report and stated she was glad there would be an Executive Sponsor of the JUSTIS project.
Mr. Lowder stated there has been involvement from the Mayor’s Office consisting of two Co-Chairs on the JUSTIS Council.
Mr. Theisen inquired if there was a projected date for the JUSTIS system to be completely in operation.
Mr. Lowder stated there was not a projected date, however, some progress has been made, shuch as developing the data warehouse in order for information to be transported into it during the late summer of 2003. Case management systems are in the process of being implemented in the DA’s Office and APD. Once the project manager is hired, they will be conducting another assessment of the JUSTIS project with DTIS, due to changing technology since the project started in 1999/2000. He hoped this would help with cost cutting and efficiency, allowing all parts of JUSTIS to be implemented sooner.
Co-Chair Leal called for questions from the Panel.
Ms. Upton wondered if the funding for JUSTIS is in place. She also inquired where the funding was from and if it is sustainable.
Gregg Lowder replied that funding is coming from the general fund and long-term plans are to make it sustainable. Furthermore, grant funds have been received for the project and Mr. Lowder believes that in the long run funding would have to come from the general fund. Ms. Upton asked if Mr. Lowder felt confident that the resources were sustainable and stable in the budget to continue this process. Mr. Lowder responded he could not answer this question with certainty since the budget is in flux.
Co-Chair Keehn inquired if Mr. Lowder believes the funding received in 2002/2003 is adequate. Mr. Lowder stated that the project had received two and half million dollars of which most has been spent. Co-Chair Keehn asked if there was funding in place or if additional funding was needed for each department. Mr. Lowder indicated they are on the front end of JUSTIS and still developing its uses, such as establishing its structure and foundation. Currently they are forming a Users Committee. Ms. Sadler is heading the committee that determines what needs to be designed into the system. Co-Chair Keehn inquired if FY 2003/2004 budget for JUSTIS had been sent to the Mayor’s office. Mr. Lowder stated it would be developed over time. The next meeting of JUSTIS will be held in February.
Mr. Vasquez inquired as to how case management is being defined and what type of information will be shared between divisions.
Ms. Sadler responded that data within each department would be entered within each department’s case management system. The DA and APD are developing their own systems. Some of this data will get sent to JUSTIS to be shared with the larger criminal justice community.
Mr. Vasquez asked if there is something currently being created to share information between the DA and AP departments.
Ms. Sadler responded affirmatively and said that the current replication system is an old cable system with Legacy hardware which is difficult to maintain and repair. The JUSTIS warehouse is being created as a web-based system. Each department of the JUSTIS community must first have their own case management system in place. The DA’s Office and APD are in the process of implementing such systems. Ms. Sadler stated there are still departments lacking this system and JUSTIS cannot be fully operational without all departments being on board. Meanwhile, they will take information from the old warehouse and import it to the new one until those departments develop their case management systems. Ms. Sadler stated she believes this is the case with the Sheriff and Police Department.
Co-Chair Leal asked Mr. Lowder if he knew when and who is assigned to submit the 2003/2004 budget.
Mr. Lowder responded that he will be working with Ben Rosenfield and didn’t know when, nor was he sure which department would propose next year’s budget.
Co-Chair Leal asked Mr. Lowder to report to the Panel when he is submitting the JUSTIS budget in order to help the panel lobby for funding
Co-Chair Leal asked for public comment. No public comment.
Meeting with Judge Hitchens
Co-Chair Keehn reported on the meeting between Co-Chair Leal, Ms. Taylor-McGhee and Judge Hitchens. Judge Hitchens discussed her plans for the Family Court, including civil/criminal matters (criminal matters would involve both felony and misdemeanor cases.) With the Police Department’s assistance, the courts are working on getting a California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) terminal. Also discussed was the courts’ involvement with the Justice and Courage Project Committees. Co-Chair Keehn stated that Judge Hitchens will determine whether a representative from the courts can participate in the committees since the committees do not make policy. (The committees make recommendations to the Panel which sets policy.) Co-Chair Keehn stated she hoped to have court representation on the Data Collection and Protocol Committees, and indicated that Sally Pina would probably be available to review materials from the committees. Co-Chair Keehn added they had also discussed integrating the courts’ database system with the JUSTIS system. The courts will look at their technology and assess what would be needed to create a potential budget to consider integrating the two systems.
Mr. Theisen stated he would like a court representative’s participation to help explain the court’s system of storing and processing information.
Co-Chair Keehn stated she would inform Judge Hitchens of the upcoming committee meetings.
Co-Chair Leal called for questions or comments from the Panel.
Ms. Taylor-McGhee stated that it would be useful if the committees developed a list of questions regarding data to be given to Judge Hitchens in order for someone from the courts to respond to these questions.
Mr. Theisen indicated there are many questions that can be posed but the committees cannot anticipate follow up questions unless the court representative is present. Mr. Theisen suggested perhaps the court representative could present a brief report to the committees on how things are done currently.
Co-Chair Leal asked if Ms. Taylor-McGhee could get back to the court and ask them this question. Ms. Taylor-McGhee stated she would follow up with the courts and that a list of prepared questions doesn’t preclude their participation but would be a good introduction.
Co-Chair Leal asked for next steps and public comment. No public comment.
Action: Provide Judge Hitchens with upcoming committee meeting schedule and
inquire if they could make a brief report to the Committees.
Co-Chair Keehn stated she believes that as each recommendation from the Justice and Courage Report is being addressed in the committees, there needs to be an ongoing evaluation component. While the protocol may be excellent, the practice may be different. She would like to have the Panel consider an outside entity to do an overall evaluation. There needs to be an evaluation procedure for every recommendation not just annually but ongoing as the committees review and address issues.
Ms. Upton commented that protocols should be made as public as possible; it is essential to share information with the public and community groups. She stated this will create more accountability interdepartmentally and ensure the protocols are followed.
Co-Chair Leal inquired if it is possible to post information on the City’s website.
Ms. Sadler stated she is able to put information on an internet site. She can create an internal one available to city employees and/or can create one for the public. Using public cable television is an option to get information out. It is also possible to make a power point vignette helping a survivor walk through the process. She stated she would be happy to assist in this process.
Co-Chair Leal noted providing more information is necessary based on the Sunshine Law, and putting it on a website would be helpful. She also stated that the Panel would need to rethink how training is offered with limited resources. Co-Chair Leal felt protocols need to be accessible by the public in order to obtain opinions on their usefulness or if improvements need to be made.
Ms. Green-Simmons stated that television access versus just internet is a good idea because many people do not have computers or have limited computer skills. Ms. Green-Simmons suggested stopgaps built in the system in order to inform the community.
Co-Chair Leal agreed and stated there are several groups of people who need this system: those who experience domestic violence and domestic violence providers, organizations and agencies.
Co-Chair Keehn added that we must create a mechanism so that trainings are followed over the years. She noted that in the Charan Report the training that was recommended was implemented but stopped over the years.
Co-Chair Leal asked for public comment. No public comment.
Mr. Theisen stated that any evaluation system used must include a client survivor component which would allow clients to give their feedback.
Co-Chair Leal stated that her department receives over 500 consumer or customer surveys a year which are useful in helping to redefine how services are provided.
Co-Chair Leal asked for next steps.
Co-Chair Keehn inquired if Panel members should set up meetings with Department heads, to sure domestic violence is a priority in their department, given the expected budget cuts. It was agreed to set up meetings.
Co-Chair Leal would like Belle Taylor Mc-Ghee and the Panel Co-Chairs to meet and discuss these issues with the Mayor. Co-Chair Leal stated during this budget crisis it will be difficult to move forward on JUSTIS. She noted that the Panel should advise the City against making short-term decisions based on the current financial situation that will have long-term negative financial implications.
Co-Chair Keehn gave the example of “trainings” as a place for budget cuts.
She recommends advocating directly to department heads. Mr. Theisen stated that both the Mayor and department heads should be made aware of keeping domestic violence a priority in departments. He added that during the Charan investigation, the Task Force met with several Police Chiefs, and, in the process, the departments came to realize domestic violence was a community issue.
Ms. Upton stated that she is already hearing about potential cuts in domestic violence services in at least two or three city departments. She agrees with Co-Chair Keehn on the need to meet with department heads.
Co-Chair Keehn stated that included in the handout is notification of the Commission on the Status of Women’s annual retreat on Saturday, February 1, 2003, where the 2003/2004 goals will be set, including a series of goals for the Justice and Courage Project. Co-Chair Keehn asked the Panel to review the document and inform her of any comments by the upcoming Saturday. Ms. Taylor-McGhee stated the document is a draft.
Co-Chair Keehn reminded the public and community that comments can go through the Department on the Status of Women. Panel members should email or call Co-Chair Keehn directly.
Co-Chair Keehn asked when the Panel should hold the next meeting and whether they should be bi-monthly as discussed. Beverly Upton stated that she agrees with holding them bi-monthly. Ms. Taylor-McGhee stated that, given the budget crisis, she believes they should meet monthly in order maintain momentum.
Co-Chair Leal asked if all the committees would have met before then.
Rosario Navarrette stated the Interdepartmental Communications and Coordination Committee would not have met by that date.
Schedule of Future Meetings
The next Oversight Panel meeting was scheduled for February 18, 2003, 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.
Public Comment
No public comment.
Closing Remarks
None
Announcements
None
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m.
