To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body

Meeting Information



Audit_Oversight

2009 2008 

Audit Implementation Committee

Friday, February 13, 2009

10 a.m.-11:30 a.m.

Bay Area Legal Aid

50 Fell Street, San Francisco, CA  94102

 

MINUTES

 

Members Present: 

Kathy Black, La Casa de las Madres

Susan Fahey, Sheriff’s Department

Martha Jimenez, Elder Abuse Prevention Program (Institute on Aging)

Jim Rowland, Office of the District Attorney

Carol Sacco, DOSW

Cecilia Terrazas, DOSW

Ken Theisen, Bay Area Legal Aid

Andre Wood, Adult Probation Department

 

 

I.          CALL TO ORDER/AGENDA CHANGES                                                                 

The meeting was called to order at 10:06. The agenda was changed and “IV.B. Criminal Justice Flow Chart for Victims” was removed from the agenda to be saved for the next meeting. The modified agenda was then approved. 

 

II.       APPROVAL OF MINUTES

The minutes from the January 9, 2009 meeting were approved.

 

III.    ANNOUNCMENTS

Ken Theisen announced that a representative from the court still needs to be found to attend the Audit Implementation Committee meetings.  Mr. Theisen will continue to follow up with the previous representative, Sally Pina, to find a court staff person with an appropriate job position to fill this role.  

 

The Family and Criminal Courts are continuing to meet to address the Administrative Office of the Courts’ “Recommended Guidelines and Practices for Improving the Administration of Justice in Domestic Violence Cases.”  The next meeting will be February 27, 2009, Hall of Justice Department 15, at 12:15 pm.     

 

IV.    OLD BUSINESS           

 

A.     Safety Audit Recommendations Review                      

      Materials:  Matrix of Recommendations from Safety for All: San Francisco Domestic Violence Safety and Accountability Audit.

 

The Committee reviewed the progress and departmental responsibilities for implementation of Audit recommendations in light of changes made to the matrix at the January 2009 meeting (i.e. adding a “Resources” column, and taking into account budget cutbacks).  Committee members agreed to review the comments section in the matrix to ensure that they reflect the current situation.  The following is a summary of the discussion. 

 

GAP 1: THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IS NOT ORGANIZED TO HELP PRACTITIONERS IDENTIFY KEY FACTORS OF SAFETY AND DANGER IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES ON A CONSISTENT BASIS, AND THEREFORE INFORMATION IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR PRACTITIONERS TO ASSESS DANGEROUSNESS IN CASES THROUGHOUT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.

 

1.I.4. Cease using the “victim declination form” within the DVRU (i.e., a form that victims sign indicating that they do not intend to participate in or “cooperate with” prosecuting the suspect in the case).

 

Although the comment section states that this has been completed, currently the SFPD still uses the victim declination form. As a result, this comment should be eliminated.

 

1.I.5. Include a domestic violence risk/danger assessment tool in the Adult Probation Department’s Probation Supplemental Reports, and institute risk assessment protocol for all criminal justice agencies, including training to cover the usage of such assessments.

 

All the comments for this recommendation are currently correct.  The DA’s Office has not looked at its lethality assessment protocols yet, but has agreed to do so.  La Casa and the SFPD are working together to develop lethality assessment protocols. The final protocols will likely be applicable to other departments, and Adult Probation and others would be able to adapt them to their needs.  Kathy Black offered La Casa’s training in the lethality assessment tool to all departments free of charge.

 

1.I.6 Develop a written protocol to include the Police Department and the Courts for the issuance of Emergency Protection Orders (EPOs).

 

No police or court staff members were present at the meeting to validate the status of this recommendation, and it was tabled until a future meeting for confirmation.

 

1.I.8. More information is needed on the number and nature of Gone on Arrival (GOA) cases, (e.g., where the suspect is not present when the police officers respond to the scene), such as the number of such cases, dispatch priority level, and follow-up by subsequent interveners, such as DVRU inspectors or the prosecutor’s office.

 

 The DA’s Office should not be checked for this recommendation, as this is not a DA function.    

 

1.II.1. Identify and allocate more money for quality domestic violence training across all criminal justice system agencies, including dedicated funding for ongoing, regular domestic violence training.

 

La Casa recently received a 2-year training grant from the federal government for the training of 500 SFPD officers (as well as APD, possibly) about domestic violence in late-life (age 50-65).  The will be targeted but will likely cross over into other subject matter as well.  La Casa carries out numerous trainings of law enforcement, generally including information about all types of victims.

 

Comments related to the DA are not accurate. The words "significantly invested" should be removed, as the DA has limited training funds, and is only able to offer staff periodic speakers at no charge.

 

1.II.3. Ensure that all criminal justice system agencies participate fully in the San Francisco Department on the Status of Women (DOSW) Cross-Training Institute, including providing trainers and sending workers to participate as trainees.

 

[Laura Marshall will update the matrix with the final participation levels of each department at the Institute, and future plans for this training.]

 

1.II.4. Create a permanent community-based Training Network between the criminal justice system and community-based organizations (CBOs) serving domestic violence survivors, with a training coordinator that includes cross-training between CBO personnel and criminal justice personnel.

 

The members present would like to participate in a training network, but none have the staff to create it.  The group discussed having the Justice and Courage Oversight Panel officially convene such a body, and Ken Theisen will raise the idea with the Panel.  Interdepartmental coordination would allow departments to advertise training spots that may be available to staff from other departments.   

 

1.II.6. Document annually all domestic violence-related training within each criminal justice system department, including training topics, hours allocated, and whether they were roll-call, in-house, or individual trainings.

 

Matrix comments should include that the Sheriff's Department has a record of all trainings.

 

1.II.8. Provide intra-net and web-based domestic violence training to criminal justice system agencies.

 

Matrix comments should be removed. None of the agencies have capacity to create an online training, and they look to Justice and Courage to take the lead on implementing it, likely as a facet of the proposed Training Network (Rec.1.II.4).

 

1.II.9. Within the District Attorney’s Office, create domestic violence training DVDs to be distributed to each police station and the Department of Emergency Management with updates on domestic violence legislation, guidelines for taking photographs and collecting other forms of evidence, etc.

 

The SFPD and DEM should be included in this recommendation, and the committee will consult with department staff about creating a subcommittee to create a DVD appropriate to the SFPD and DEM audiences.   

 

1.III.1. Provide confidential, secure interview rooms for DVRU Inspectors, DVRU advocates from La Casa de las Madres, and staff from the District Attorney’s Victim Services Division.

 

No changes to the current comments are needed.

 

1.III.2. Explore options to provide adequate space and staffing to the DVRU and La Casa VAs, to include administrative support, safe and ample waiting area, and a place for children while parents are waiting or being interviewed.

 

This recommendation is still in process.  A check in the “other” category for DV Service Providers should be added, as La Casa supplies community advocates to the DVRU, and they need appropriate space to carry out their functions, as well. 

 

1.III.3. Ensure safe access and waiting areas for victims and their children at the Hall of Justice, particularly in regards to the DVRU and Department 15.

 

The Court should be added to this recommendation.  Jim Rowland suggested that victims need a separate entrance to the courtroom, and this issue needs to be raised with the courts and the Police Chief. 

 

1.IV.1.a. Enhance communication between criminal justice system agencies by developing written protocols on communication between criminal court and family court, including updated technological communication, such as access to all court-related computer networks.

 

The DA’s Office and Sheriff’s Department have no role in carrying out this recommendation, and should not be checked in the matrix.

 

1.IV.1.b. Enhance communication between criminal justice system agencies by providing voice mail to patrol officers and email accounts to all criminal justice system personnel, with internet access at work to email.

 

No SFPD representatives were present to comment on this recommendation’s status, though group members were aware that each inspector and sergeant in the DVRU have email and voicemail, as do each of the Assistant District Attorneys.  Susan Fahey commented that there is no way to provide voicemail and email to all of the Sheriff’s Deputies, but all of the supervisors who deal with domestic violence have these tools.

 

IV.       NEW BUSINESS

 

Andre Wood passed out Interpreter Services policies and procedures provided by Tina Gilbert.

 

V.        PUBLIC COMMENT

 

No public comment

 

VI.              ADJOURNMENT      

 

The meeting was adjourned at 11:25 am.  The next meeting is March 13, 2009.