CEDAW TASK FORCE
GENDER ANALYSES REPORT:

AN OVERVIEW OF CEDAW IMPLEMENTATION IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF

SAN FRANCISCO
December, 2001

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND ON CEDAW IMPLEMENTATION & PROCESS

FIRST TWO GENDER ANALYSES

FOUR MORE DEPARTMENTS' GENDER ANALYSES

FINDINGS OF THE DEPARTMENT GENDER ANALYSES

FUTURE

APPENDIX:

· THE SAN FRANCISCO RENT BOARD

· THE SAN FRANCISCO ARTS COMMISSION

· THE SAN FRANCISCO DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

· THE SAN FRANCISCO ADULT PROBATION DEPARTMENT

· THE SAN FRANCISCO JUVENILE PROBATION DEPARTMENT

· THE SAN FRANCISCO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

· GENDER ANALYSES LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

---

CEDAW TASK FORCE
GENDER ANALYSIS REPORT

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO TASK FORCE FOR THE LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN

TO: THE MAYOR, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, & COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN

FROM: COMMISSIONER EMILY MOTO MURASE, CHAIR, CEDAW TASK FORCE

RE: OVERVIEW OF CEDAW IMPLEMENTATION: TASK FORCE SIXTH PROGRESS REPORT:

DATE: DECEMBER 2001

INTRODUCTION

In April 1998, Mayor Willie Brown and the San Francisco Board of Supervisors unanimously enacted a local ordinance (No. 128-98) modeled on the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). The ordinance¹ requires the City to ensure the protection of human rights, including the elimination of discrimination against women and girls, and establishes a CEDAW Task Force to assist in its implementation in San Francisco. Since 1998, the Department on the Status of Women has facilitated the CEDAW Task Force whose 11 members balance City officials and community activists. After developing and refining a set of innovative guidelines for City departments to use to perform their own gender analysis, the CEDAW Task Force chose two City departments for the first analysis, the Department of Public Works (DPW) and the Juvenile Probation Department (JPD). Some of the issues raised by the first two analyses appeared to be citywide problems (or solutions) that one department could not solve on its own. To further verify this trend and continue the gender analysis process the Task Force chose four other City departments, Adult Probation Department, Arts Commission, Department of the Environment, and the Rent Stabilization Board. What follows is a summary of the findings of the six department gender analyses, with an emphasis on the most recent four. The appendix contains a summary of each individual department's recommendations and CEDAW Task Force response.

BACKGROUND ON CEDAW IMPLEMENTATION & PROCESS

CEDAW is an international treaty that was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1979 and signed by then-President Jimmy Carter over twenty years ago. Congress has not yet ratified it and the United States is thus not subject to its obligations. One hundred and sixty-six (166) other countries have ratified CEDAW, including all other industrialized member states of the United Nations and most so-called "third-world" countries. San Francisco's ordinance makes us the first-and still only-city in the United States to implement the underlying principles of CEDAW on a local level.

The ordinance works to promote gender equity and equal access in (1) economic development and employment, (2) violence against women and girls, and (3) health care. The passage of this historic ordinance resulted from a unique public/private partnership between the San Francisco Commission on the Status of Women (COSW) and a consortium of community organizations spearheaded by the Women's Institute for Leadership Development for Human Rights (WILD). San Francisco is leading the way, but others are working on following in our footsteps. Organizers from Seattle, Santa Cruz, Los Angeles, Palo Alto, Santa Clara, Chicago, and Boston are working toward similar initiatives and have sought our advice and assistance. The ordinance and its implementation progress have received international recognition. It was included in the United Nations Development Fund for Women's collection of best practices worldwide for implementing CEDAW and has been studied in Sweden as a model as well as presented to the American Association of University Women in California.

The ordinance is designed to eliminate discrimination, including violence, against women through implementing CEDAW principles within San Francisco. CEDAW broadens the definition of discrimination to protect women and girls' "human rights or fundamental freedom[s] in the political, economic, social and cultural, civil, legal or any other field." CEDAW expands the definition of human rights, giving formal recognition to the influence of culture and tradition. It recognizes that differences in life experiences often result in the social, economic, and political inequities for women and girls that permeate our society and determine how decisions are made. The CEDAW Ordinance broadly defines discrimination against women and girls as any, "Distinction, exclusion, or restriction made on the basis of sex that has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural civil or any other field." The definition of discrimination includes gender-based violence that is directed against a woman because she is a woman or that affects women disproportionately.

The ordinance requires City departments to undergo gender analysis to determine whether the departments are implementing the principles of CEDAW or discriminating against women and girls in their service delivery, employment practices, and budget allocation. The purpose in analyzing the operations of departments is to identify discrimination and, if identified, to remedy that discrimination. The aim is to integrate gender into daily operations so that women and men, as well as girls and boys are ensured adequate access to services and fairness in the workplace. The Task Force selected two departments to undergo the first gender analysis in 1999. The CEDAW framework recognizes that all departments are interconnected and part of a unified whole. Thus, the actions of the selected departments impact other departments and private entities. Equally important, the CEDAW framework also recognizes that citywide policies, unions and/or the public set many practices, and that external factors can influence the creation of an efficient or just environment within any single department. The Department of Public Works was selected for its large size, nontraditional employment opportunities for women, and provision of indirect services (services not provided directly to an individual person), such as street construction and building design. The Juvenile Probation Department provided an opportunity to examine service provision to an increasing population of diverse young women, and to delve into its community services.

The two departments underwent gender analysis in the summer of 1999. The analysis was conducted with the help of department staff, unions, and community representatives. The departments used the guidelines to conduct a self-analysis, based on the view that critical self-examination is essential for any long-term change. The guidelines provide a framework to document and address the differential impact of services, employment policies, and budget allocations on women and men in a three-step process: (1) gathering information, (2) assessing the situation, and (3) recommending what, if any, city practices and policies should change to promote gender equity. The ultimate aim was not to produce yet another departmental report but to put a process in motion that would encourage and institutionalize new ways of thinking about gender. The full guidelines are available at < www.ci.sf.ca.us/cosw/cedaw.htm>.

FIRST TWO GENDER ANALYSES: DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS & JUVENILE PROBATION

First and foremost, it was found that the very process of conducting a CEDAW gender analysis created an awareness of and sensitivity to gender-related issues at both departments. Most departmental personnel not only were receptive to the analysis as a proactive approach to eliminating discrimination, but some staff, on their own initiative, began to change the way they evaluate their policies and programs to serve all persons more effectively. Top management at the Juvenile Probation Department expressed that the gender analysis had a decisive impact on their operations helping them to promote gender specific services. Staff at the Department of Public Works acknowledged that service delivery might impact women and men differently, and recognized the need to recruit women into nontraditional employment positions. Many staff members of both departments appreciated the vision of incorporating an awareness of human rights with a gender lens into their work, recognizing that they serve a diverse population with many needs. The full report is available at <www.ci.sf.ca.us/cosw/cedaw/analysis.htm>.

The analysis found that several themes were present in both departments:

1) There was a general need for education on human rights with a gender perspective.

2) There was an absence of comprehensive data relevant to evaluating the gender equity of department's budgets, services, and employment practices.

3) There is a need to create a more fair and equitable workplace by:

• Increasing effective recruitment efforts for a diverse workforce
• Providing meaningful work-life policies to retain employees
• Increasing professional development and training opportunities for all employees

FOUR MORE DEPARTMENTS' GENDER ANALYSIS

Upon completing the first two gender analyses, the CEDAW Task Force spent considerable efforts revising the guidelines, making them both user friendly and comprehensive. Additionally, it was evident that the budget analysis lacked an overall review of the budget process. This area was expanded to focus on the budget planning protocols, including how objectives and goals are set and review how a department develops its strategic plan. In addition, a much greater time period (a year versus three weeks) was given to complete the analysis with greater emphasis placed on self-analysis.

The CEDAW Task Force reviewed carefully which four new departments would follow best on the work of the previous two and also represent policy concerns that affect women and girls in the City and County of San Francisco. With this in mind, the four new departments chosen were:

1) Adult Probation Department (chosen in part to follow up on the work already done at Juvenile Probation)

2) Arts Commission (chosen in part due to its educational programs for youth in San Francisco)

3) Department on the Environment (chosen in part because it is a new department without a history)

4) Rent Stabilization Board (chosen in part for the significant impacts housing has in San Francisco)

FINDINGS OF THE DEPARTMENTS' GENDER ANALYSES

1) First, the analyses continued to find that the very process of conducting a gender analysis does create an awareness of and sensitivity to gender-related issues at each department. Human rights education is key. Departmental staff appreciated the human rights "pro-active" application as being more effective than a reactive discriminatory complaint driven approach. Recognizing why or how a practice or policy is or is not effective helps promote equity. Correcting inequities before they caused problems or complaints also held a lot of appeal.

Department heads, their liaisons and staff became mindful of gender-related issues and concerns. For instance, the Chief Adult Probation officer, on his own initiative, incorporated gender analysis into staff meetings on the issue of safety and having more probation officers in community probation. While community policing is a goal of the Adult Probation Department, female officers indicated a concern for safety when alone in the community. The Chief brainstormed with staff around the issue of the use of cell phones or pairing officers to meet the concerns of his employees and the department. At the Arts Commission, staff mentioned that while many programs are designed to reach a diverse audience, no one has collected information on gender participation or looked at gender differences. At the Rent Board, where class issues predominate, it was noted that many individuals who utilize the service are elderly women with no other options for assistance. The newest department, the Department on the Environment, recognized that most of their technical staff are male.

There is still a general need for education on human rights with a gender perspective, however, we found that this effort needs to be adapted to each individual department. The understanding of human rights and gender issues differed from department to department. While many appreciated a better understanding of what these issues mean and the history of where they come from, most people could not understand how it related to their work. It was news to most that gender is a social constraint and not a biological one. This concept was best understood when explained with examples, such as how gender, not biology has kept us from having a female president.

2) Second, the absence of comprehensive data relevant to evaluating the gender equity of departments' budgets, services, and employment practices was the biggest barrier in doing a thorough analysis. It became evident that even in departments that collected data, the task of gathering information disaggregated by gender, race, and other attributes was difficult and rarely done effectively. This was particularly true when analyzing services. Most departments could not tell with very much detail whom they serve. While many could give numbers --gender, race or other attributes, such as age, sexual orientation, marital status were impossible to determine. The lack of detailed and comprehensive data made it impossible to determine if there is bias or even trends in usage that accompany gender differences. While we understand the sensitivity and legal issues involved in asking for confidential information (including the fear that this information can be misused to discriminate against employees and clients), it is necessary to collect this data for a meaningful analysis.

A human rights analysis understands the important links between gender and other social identities such as race, immigration status, parental status, language, sexual orientation, disability, age, and other status. Where possible, data should be collected so that it is disaggregated by these and other criteria. Disaggregating solely on the basis of gender or race is often insufficient to reveal all forms of discrimination. For example, without knowing if one is a parent, it is difficult to determine trends in promotions of women or men with children. If parental status or sexual orientation is hidden from the analysis, biases can also remain undetected. At the Rent Board, the only information collected on services was one's status as a landlord or tenant. While the department on its own recognized the need for providing services in a diversity of languages, there was no verifiable data on which languages were most in demand. The Arts Commission generally did not collect data on its customers by gender or race, nor did the Department of the Environment. The Adult Probation Department had the most information on its clients (individuals on probation).

The analysis recognizes the limitations of available data. First, the City and County of San Francisco only requires that certain data be collected and maintained. The required data, mostly on employees, has not changed in many years nor have the current categories been reviewed. There are some in the public arena that are currently attempting to restrict data collection along the lines of the restrictions on affirmative action in Proposition 209. The suppression of information makes it much easier for discrimination to flourish. Data and statistical data are the strongest evidence of any discriminatory patterns; without it the patterns cannot be exposed.

To ensure meaningful human rights analysis and non-discriminatory services for all women and men data collection is essential. The analysis urged departments to collect data from clients, community groups, and employees in as many categories as possible, on a voluntary and confidential basis.

3) Third, fair and equitable workplace environments are necessary. The new analyses demonstrated that most departments need assistance in recruiting, sustaining and developing a diverse workforce. This new analysis also demonstrated that departments with strong work-life balance environments help retain and sustain a professional staff and atmosphere.

Recruitment: Each of the six departmental gender analyses exposed the fact that the City and County of San Francisco lacks an energetic recruitment process. In the past, many city jobs were secured by word of mouth. Who knew whom and who helped who get a job resulted in the current civil services rules that are meant to eliminate discrimination and promote fairness. What the analysis found, repeatedly, was that the current recruitment and practices are dated, and that many individuals who are the intended beneficiaries of these rules and practices are still left out of the opportunity to participate in the process. Hiring is a slow and often-tedious process that ultimately discourages creativity and openness on behalf of departments and does not always result in a wide or diverse applicant pool.

Each of the new departments that underwent analysis was small and did a varying degree of outreach to women and girls of diverse backgrounds. Time and again the standard recruitment mechanisms consisted of posting a job description and mailing to a somewhat dated list of agencies or newspapers. Even the use of distribution by email and career websites was rare. Calls to key individuals and person-to-person recruitment efforts were minimal. Long-term strategies to influence the labor pool were not addressed at all. Small departments in particular did not have resources for effective recruitment. The newest department, the Department on the Environment, which turned out to also have the most nontraditional working staff (many technical and science related positions), had a difficult time filling these positions with women or people of diverse backgrounds. While most departmental staff had the best of intentions, a lack of knowledge and resources on modern recruitment practices was evident. A long tradition of assuming applicants will somehow find the appropriate job announcement on her or his own has been an obstacle to innovative outreach efforts.

On a positive note, the Adult Probation Department, which has received negative publicity in the past year in other areas, was one of the best at attracting a diverse work force and in particular had a high percentage of women in the nontraditional field of probation officer. They even went so far to analyze why one particular recruitment class was not attracting enough diverse women and realized that the qualifications needed to be adjusted to be more in line with San Francisco/Bay Area standards. However, this department also has a difficult time with retention (except in the unit that permitted telecommuting), and stereotypically had its lowest paying jobs filled by women.

Work-life polices and practices: Here the data demonstrated that when work-life policies are in place, they are very effective in the retention of valuable employees, boosting morale, and offering flexibility in both staffing and customer service and cost savings. Many of the departments we reviewed had positive or varied work-life programs, the most common being a flexible work environment. Consistently in focus groups and management, we found these policies to have a very positive impact. At the Arts Commission the staff and management expressed an appreciation for the trust and flexibility that exists. As a result, there is very little turnover in a highly professional and dedicated staff. At the Rent Board, some individuals work part time, others telecommute, and despite the extreme pressures of working within San Francisco's housing crisis, the staff expressed satisfaction with the professional and flexible work environment. At the Adult Probation Department, where telecommuting was instituted in the investigators office (with a formal procedure drafted ten years ago with assistance from the City Attorney's office), the practice not only saves considerable resources but has made the unit the Department's most popular--no one wants to leave and some have retired rather than been transferred out.

In January 2001, the Department on the Status of Women surveyed departments of the City and County of San Francisco to assess the type, extent, benefits and concerns of current work-life programs and policies within City and County of San Francisco departments. The survey found that departments with flexible work-life policies cited this as a strength that also helped with moral (92%), customer service (65%), job retention (59%) and recruitment (50%), reduced sick leave (47%), and improved performance (45%). Most departments viewed the benefits of these practices as far outweighing the concerns. Although the study found a variety of programs and practices most had very low utilization rates. See the full report <www.ci.sf.ca.us/cosw/worklife/index.htm>.

4) Gender Analysis Guidelines and Process. Departments found the gender analysis process to be very comprehensive but also overwhelming to staff already stretched thin with other responsibilities. The lack of dissaggregated data made it difficult to do an effective analysis; the information gathering alone is very labor intensive, and does not always leave the energy or resources necessary for a successful examination. Part of the problem was that the study was a new process necessitating much work but with no additional resources for department staff.

To ensure each department will implement the principals of CEDAW and take a proactive approach to eradicating discrimination in the City and County of San Francisco this process needs to be simplified. The City and County of San Francisco has recently begun to move in the direction of requiring City Departments to do more strategic planning, and setting performance objectives and measurable outcomes along with improved customer service plans. Each of these fits naturally into the guidelines outlined for doing a gender analysis with a human rights approach. It may make sense to combine these to ensure a equitable work and service environment.

FUTURE

The CEDAW Task Force is preparing a five-year action plan that will make specific recommendations for incorporating the findings herein. Included will be an exploration of combining the gender analysis with current requirements for completing the City and County of San Francisco budgeting protocols. The action plan will be presented at a public hearing in the Fall of 2002.

APPENDIX

Each department did extensive data collection and wrote a full gender analysis report with its own recommendations. The collected data is stored at each department and at the Department of the Status of Women (DOSW). Each department's final report is available on our website http://www.ci.sf.ca.us/cosw/cedaw/analysisrpts.htm. What follows are the highlights of each department's recommendations and any made by the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) Task Force. Also included is a list of participants.

· THE SAN FRANCISCO RENT BOARD

· THE SAN FRANCISCO ARTS COMMISSION

· THE SAN FRANCISCO DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

· THE SAN FRANCISCO ADULT PROBATION DEPARTMENT

· THE SAN FRANCISCO JUVENILE PROBATION DEPARTMENT

· THE SAN FRANCISCO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

· GENDER ANALYSIS LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

SUMMARY OF THECEDAW GENDER ANALYSES OF SIX CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO DEPARTMENTS' RECOMMENDATIONS

THE SAN FRANCISCO RENT BOARD

The Rent Board is a relatively small City and County of San Francisco department quasi-judicial organization, created by ordinance in 1979 to alleviate the city's housing crisis. Charged with enforcement of the City of San Francisco's Rent Control Ordinance, its current focus is limited to implementing the ordinance, which in turn emphasizes providing information and referral services about rent control, and holding binding adjudications to resolve disputes. Currently, the Rent Board does not play a significant role in shaping housing policy within the City and County of San Francisco. It views its duties as designated by legal mandate-most notably the Rent Control Ordinance. While the Rent Board's powers are not explicitly limited by statute, its funding is only provided for its designated duties. The Rent Board directly interacts with a large number of San Francisco's renters and landlords, and as such, is in a unique position to provide learned input on how housing policy changes could impact San Francisco's residents. There is a great need for citywide collaboration to alleviate our current housing crisis-in particular, to provide more affordable housing.

RENT BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS:

Budget

The Fee Ordinance should be amended so that payment of the rental unit fee is allocated between landlords and tenants in amounts that are reflective of their demands for services. Appropriate allocation, hopefully, would make the yearly process of obtaining necessary budgetary increases more fair and less politicized, the current Proposition H² issue notwithstanding.

Service

Employment

CEDAW TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS:

Budget

Service

Employment

Additional

THE SAN FRANCISCO ARTS COMMISSION

The San Francisco Arts Commission champions the arts in San Francisco. The charter of the City and County of San Francisco established the department in 1932 to ensure that the arts would be incorporated into civic infrastructure for the City's residents. The Arts Commission continues to emphasize that a creative cultural environment is essential to the City's well being. Programs integrate the arts into all aspects of city life. The Arts Commission's extensive set of programs and special projects include the: Art Gallery; Civic Art Collection; Civic Design Review; Community Arts and Education including four neighborhood cultural centers: Cultural Equity Grants, Public Art, Street Artists, and the annual Summer in the City Pops Concert.

ARTS COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS:

CEDAW TASK FORCE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

THE SAN FRANCISCO DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

The San Francisco Department of Environment (SF Environment) is one of the newest of the City's departments - it was founded by a voter approved Charter amendment in 1995, and began operations in early 1996. It is still one of the smallest departments in the City - for 2000-2001; SF Environment had 13.29 FTE staff and an annual budget of $1,578,034. Virtually all the staff is new. SF Environment's overall mission is to improve, enhance, and preserve the environment and promote San Francisco's long-term environmental sustainability. SF Environment is responsible for regularly producing an assessment of San Francisco's environmental condition. It must also produce and regularly update plans for the long-term environmental sustainability of San Francisco. SF Environment has three program areas that were developed in support of ordinances passed by the Board of Supervisors. These are the Clean Air Program, the Resource Efficient Building Program, and the Integrated Pest Management Program. In addition to the three programs mandated by ordinance, SF Environment conducts extensive public outreach and works on a variety of issues that come before the Commission on the Environment, including issues of toxics reduction (such as dioxin, mercury, and pentachlorophenol), recycling, habitat conservation, energy conservation, renewable energy, and urban forestry. One of the largest new initiatives that SF Environment is responsible for is administering a new $13 million dollar grant program for the Bayview/Hunter's Point and Potrero Hill neighborhoods.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:

·As resources become available, create more paid internships and entry-level program positions to recruit women and people of color who may not have the requisite level of experience in this field.

·Reviews needs to be conducted on a timely basis, and time should be allocated for regular meetings and feedback sessions with staff.

·The department needs to review flexible work schedules, health and safety issues, and family care issues on a regular basis. The department needs to also research childcare referral options and supply this information to employees.

CEDAW TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS:

THE SAN FRANCISCO ADULT PROBATION DEPARTMENT

The Adult Probation Department's (APD) mission is to serve and protect the community through the investigation and supervision of adult criminal offenders. The state Superior Court for the County of San Francisco is the judicial entity of the City that sentences adult offenders to probation, specifying the length of each sentence and the conditions to which the probationer must adhere. The Department serves the courts by providing thorough, timely, and accurate reports to assist judges in making appropriate sentencing decisions. It monitors the behavior of persons placed on probation and holds them accountable for any criminal activity and returns them to court when they fail to comply with conditions of their release. The Department also furnishes offenders with counseling referrals for rehabilitation services enabling probationers the opportunity for self-improvement and subsequently reducing criminal behavior. It provides information, resources, and assistance to the victims of crimes. The department collects restitution on behalf of victims and collects fines and fees for the benefit of the City.

Probation is changing with the new Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000 (Proposition 36) that went into effect on July 1, 2001. Proposition 36 is a post conviction statue that focuses on treatment in which eligibility commences upon conviction. This Act will increase the number of people supervised by the Adult Probation Department. The Adult Probation Department in turn has proposed a Treatment Network-Proposition 36 Unit. The Network program has been a part of the department since 1995. It's an 18-month voluntary or Court mandated program for women who have been sentenced to probation for drug and alcohol related offenses. The focus for Network since its inception has been for women drug offenders.

ADULT PROBATION DEPARTMENT RECOMMEDATIONS:

APD is proud of the success of their network and telecommuting programs. Given additional resources, however, these programs would allow the department to serve the community at an even higher level than what is currently being done. APD envisions moving out into the community more and both programs fit well into the vision.

Customer service: Customer service is central to any agency that serves the public. Excellent customer service is a goal of the APD. In May of 1999 The Office of Contract Education, City College of San Francisco submitted a survey and proposal to improve customer service to the department. Although the department agrees with the content of the reports, the proposed training is not within the current budget the department has to work with.

CEDAW Task Force Response:

At the time this report was written the Task Force was finalizing its response. Comments that were made at the time of the final report's presentation included:

The Task Force was impressed with the Adult Probation's incorporation of many previous concerns, namely:

1. the information reviewed in data collection about Adult Probation "services,"
2. the adjustment to qualifications of probation officers to ensure an equitable recruitment effort,
3. information on use of interpretative services, and
4. an effort to answer the Task Force's domestic violence questions.

Also noted were some of the best practices such as the Power and Network programs for women probationers who have drug and alcohol problems, telecommuting programs, and a diverse workforce, especially the high number of women probation officers, a nontraditional employment occupation for women. Significant concerns about the Department's CEDAW implementation remain.

Some of the Department's most innovative and successful programs, such as the Network and Power programs for women probationers are reliant on grant funds. Language access is still an issue as language capacity, even on phone messages, is primarily limited to English and Spanish. Gender is not considered during preparation of the department's budget, and it appears that women are over represented in lower paid administrative positions. Specific Task Force concerns about the Adult Probation Department's policies and practices regarding domestic violence cases included:

1. Overload in assignment of cases to Probation Officers (PO), the ideal caseload is 50. Currently DV Unit POs are carrying 94 cases each.
2. Shortage of Staff for specialized units relative to the number of cases in that area of specialization and lack of attention to an assessment of the seriousness of the past and potential re-offense.
3. Concerns about DV Probation Officers training. Much of the training appears to be voluntary and based on availability of funds.
4. The tracking of DV cases and re-offenses.
5. The inability to know if a probationer re-offends, and once they are aware of a new offense, protocols for responding.
6. Contact with victims/survivors. In particular, what kind of communication do they have, how are victim/survivors referred to intervention and other services, how does the PO preserve the safety of the victim/survivors?

---

The following two reports were completed in 1999.

---

THE SAN FRANCISCO JUVENILE PROBATION DEPARTMENT

The Juvenile Probation Department of the City and County of San Francisco (JPD) "provides for the welfare of youthful offenders and children at-risk, and enhances public safety under the direction of Juvenile Court and state law" and "locates and develops or administers programs for the assessment, education, treatment, appropriate rehabilitation, and effective supervision of youth under its jurisdiction."³ Its mission is, "[t]o be a primary and effective resource for positive change in the lives of youth and their families, accountability to victims and the protection of the public."⁴

The Department has five divisions: Administration and Finance, Probation Services, Juvenile Hall, Log Cabin Ranch, and Community Programs. Each division's operations are detailed and analyzed herein. In Fiscal Year 1998-1999, the Department's total budget was $25,987,747, and it employed 321 staff. A significant portion of the Department's budget goes to both Juvenile Hall (a short-term youth detention facility) and Probation Services.

CEDAW TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS:

CEDAW Task Force presents the following recommendations for action, some recommendations build on those proposed by departments themselves.

It is important to remember that the juvenile justice system's impact on girls does not start with the Juvenile Probation Department. The actions of police, prosecutors, defense attorneys and judges, and even the laws decide who comes under the purview of the Juvenile Probation department. These recommendations are solely limited to the Juvenile Probation Department, but much more needs to be done by the entire juvenile justice system to ensure justice for girls and young women.

Conduct Comprehensive Human Rights Training for All Staff

· Train employees on human rights issues with a gender perspective. Incorporate the definition of discrimination contained in the CEDAW Ordinance into the Department's training. This will enable employees to recognize gender differences among everyone involved in the juvenile justice system, from coworkers to clients.

Collect and Analyze Disaggregated Data

· Expand data collection on workforce composition, employment practices, and client demographics. Data should be disaggregated by sex, race, ethnicity, verbal language fluency, sexual orientation, age, disability, parental status, and other criteria when possible. Collection of certain data (e.g., sexual orientation, parental status, age) must be obtained legally and voluntarily. The confidentiality of respondents must be maintained.

· Collect current San Francisco Labor Market availability data for all occupational categories represented in the Department's current or anticipated workforce.

Expand Recruitment Programs

· Implement the proposed recruitment program through an action plan including staffing and training.

· Expand focus groups to all divisions to gather the concerns of employees, respecting employee confidentiality. Facilitate discussions of recruitment practices, professional development, and the grievance process.

Create a More Family-Friendly Work Environment

· Expand flexible work options in light of expressed employee concerns. Include discussions with families of youth served, unions, and staff.

· Expand focus groups to all divisions to gather concerns of employees, respecting employee confidentiality. Facilitate discussions of family leave, childcare and elder care needs, work options, and health and safety needs.

Study the Viability of Establishing an On-Site Girls' Unit

· Examine the viability of establishing an on-site girls' unit staffed by a small group of intake officers, probation officers, counselors and other staff who would be trained to work exclusively with young women. In particular, identify the benefits of this gender specific model to girls. This examination should solicit community and client input.

Provide Gender Specific Mental Health Assessment and Services

· Expand mental health services for detained girls by including counseling with a focus on improving life skills, additional case management, expanded referrals to appropriate agencies, and providing female mentors as role models. Provide specialized gender training for all peer mentors, counselors, and other service providers - male or female - so that they may provide effective gender specific services.

· Train Probation Officers and Counselors on gender specific programming so that they may address the different needs of girls and boys in the initial assessment process and when recommending services.

Provide Additional Gender Specific Services for Young Women and Girls

· Expand and/or redesign gender specific services for mental health, sexual assault, domestic violence, parenting and pregnancy prevention, delinquency prevention for at-risk girls, substance abuse prevention, education, and transition planning. Involve young women in the design of these services.

· Provide gender specific counseling for young women and girls about aftercare and transitional services including housing, counseling, life skills and self esteem development, health care (including reproductive health), education, job skills training, and job placement assistance. At minimum, young women need viable, safe options for housing and paid employment.

Conduct Annual Gender Analysis of Budget

· Conduct an annual gender analysis of the Department's budget. Assess the Department's annual budget for general services, gender specific services for girls, and gender specific services for boys. Develop an action plan that includes the department's detailed budget for that fiscal year, and its budgetary commitment to improving equity for girls for that fiscal year.

---

THE SAN FRANCISCO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

The San Francisco Department of Pubic Works (DPW) is the department responsible for maintaining city streets and public areas, restoring public monuments, and providing architectural and engineering services to other city departments. More specifically, the Department is responsible for the following: street cleaning, repairs and maintenance; restoration of public monuments (e.g., City Hall, Opera House); building and maintaining plazas, stairways, and other public areas; coordinating street excavation work with other entities; caring for the city's urban forest; enforcing litter laws; removing graffiti and illegal signs; regulating street and sidewalk use; conducting utility undergrounding; and providing architectural and engineering services to other city departments. The Department has a budget of approximately $115 million and a staff of 1549, making it one of the larger city departments in San Francisco.

The Department is organized into three primary Divisions: Finance and Administration, Engineering, and Operations. The three Divisions are run separately, but senior management in the Divisions work closely together, especially in the collaboration of services and when handling customer service issues. The Engineering and Operations Divisions are each organized into Bureaus.

CEDAW TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS:

CEDAW Task Force presents the following recommendations for action, some recommendations build on those proposed by departments themselves.

Conduct Human Rights Training With A Gender Perspective

· Train employees on human rights issues with a gender perspective. Incorporate the definition of discrimination contained in the CEDAW Ordinance into the department's training. This will enable employees to recognize gender differences among all, from coworkers to clients.

Collect and Analyze Disaggregated Data

· Expand data collection on workforce composition, employment practices, and client demographics. These data should be disaggregated by sex, race, ethnicity, verbal language fluency, sexual orientation, age, disability, parental status, and other criteria when possible. Collection of certain data (e.g., sexual orientation, parental status, age, etc.) must be obtained legally and voluntarily, and the confidentiality of respondents must be maintained. Collect data about the sex, ethnicity, income level, etc. of who uses services. Workforce composition data should include data on family leave, childcare, flexible work options, and employee health and safety.

· Collect current San Francisco Bay Area Labor Market availability data for all occupational categories represented in the Department's current or anticipated workforce.

· Maintain gender and other disaggregated data to track participants' careers with the department to ensure that internship and apprenticeship programs provide equal opportunities for women and candidates from other historically underrepresented groups.

Enhance Recruitment and Professional Development

· Conduct focus groups across all bureaus to gather need and concerns of employees on employment practices such as recruitment practices, professional development opportunities, and the evaluation and promotion processes.

· Implement the Department's five-year recruitment plan. Plan to hire and train women for professional and management positions. Form a Process Improvement Team among existing employees, and visit high schools, colleges, and job fairs.

· Expand training and recruitment for underrepresented groups, with particular attention to recruiting tradeswomen, in concert with unions and community groups.

· Expand the current internship and apprenticeship programs, such as "Project Pull," with human and financial resources.

· Expand employees' professional development by creating more formalized training and mentoring opportunities, such as a training program on leadership skills for women managers and their mentees, as well as other professional and technical training programs for women and men in all occupational categories, particularly those in the operations Division.

· Implement the performance review process on career advancement, including access to work assignments that enhance the potential for promotion for all persons.

· Expand the "Women Engineers' Caucus" by publicizing it to all employees and by creating similar programs throughout the Department.

Create A More Family-friendly Work Environment

· Conduct focus groups across all bureaus to gather need and concerns of employees on employment practices such as: family leave, family care needs, flexible work options, and health and safety needs. Respond to the above needs with expanded family friendly practices, such as creating and promoting flexible work options, initiating a childcare and elder care information and referral program, and improving safety.

Ensure Equal Opportunity For All

· Continue mandatory gender and diversity training, including sexual harassment training, for all employees.

Integrate Gender Into the Customer Service Approach

· Integrate gender into the Department's customer service approach.

· Conduct focus groups with women and men to assess service needs and impact.

Train Staff In Each Bureau on How to Integrate Gender Into Daily Operations

· Train staff to institutionalize gender analysis into the project review process, integrating the needs of and impact upon both men and women as they relate to the specific services provided by each bureau.

Conduct Annual Gender Analysis of Budget

· Conduct an annual gender analysis of the Department's budget. Assess the Department's annual budget for general services, gender specific services for women, and gender specific services for men. Develop an action plan that includes the department's detailed budget for that fiscal year, and its budgetary commitment to improving equity for women for that fiscal year.

---

GENDER ANALYSIS LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

1999-2001

(This is a partial list, many individuals have assisted in implementing CEDAW. We apologize if we have inadvertently left anyone out. * Department Liaison ** Task Force *** Staff)

Assmann, David Department on the Environment*

Ackerman, Amy Office of the City Attorney***

Bedford, Roger Department of Public Works

Bushe, Carmen Adult Probation Department

Cabezas, Raymond Rent Stabilization Board

Calvillo, Angela Board of Supervisors**

Carlson, Robert J. Department of Public Works

Cervantes, Armando Adult Probation Department

Chang, Patti Women's Foundation**

Chlala, Youmna Women's Institute for Leadership (WILD)**

Dharmaraj, Krishanti Women's Institute for Leadership (WILD)**

Ellender, E. Roy Adult Probation Department

Godfrey, Anne Department of Public Works

Gonchar, Nancy Arts Commission*

Grubb, Joe Rent Stabilization Board

Guillen, Maria Elena Department on Aging/Local 790**

Kipness, Marina Department on the Environment

Hill, Candace Adult Probation Department

Herrera, Carmen Human Rights Commission**

Horan, James P. Department of Public Works

How, Kathy Department of Public Works*

Kelly, Harlan Jr. Department of Public Works

Lee, Ed Department of Public Works

Lehman, Ann Department on the Status of Women***

Lopez, Myrna Mayor's Budget Office**

Malkani, Latika Department on the Status of Women***

Marsh, Cheryl Adult Probation Department

Melara, Sonia Arriba Juntos**

Murase, Emily Moto Commission on the Status of Women**

Navarrette, Rosario Department on the Status of Women

Newirth, Rich Arts Commission

Primeau, Mark A. Department of Public Works

Richardson, Sandra Brown Juvenile Probation Department

Rolfe, Rebecca Department on the Status of Women***

Samson, Lee Adult Probation Department

Summers, Kathy Breast Cancer Support Group**

Tamura, Patti Local 790**

Theisen, Ken Bay Area Legal**

Thomson, Cosette Amnesty International**

Tucker, Gwendolyn B. Juvenile Probation Department*

Vietor, Francesca Department on the Environment

Varah, Adine Office of the City Attorney

Waller, Pansy Human Rights Commission**

William, Jesse Juvenile Probation Department

Williams, Dee Adult Probation Department*

Wolf, Delene Rent Stabilization Board*

Yee, Dorothy Department of Human Resources**

¹ San Francisco Administrative Code, Chapter 12 K, also known as the CEDAW Ordinance or Ordinance. The full text of the Ordinance is available at the Commission's website, {C}{C}www.ci.sf.ca.us/cosw/cedaw.htm

² Limits capital improvement passthroughs to either (a) seismic work or (b) non-seismic work necessary to obtain

a fair return; changes amortization period to 20 years, limits annual increase to 5% of tenant's rent, and requires one who did seismic work to file petition. Requires bond passthroughs to tenants to be disclosed and approved by the voters and limits rent increases for increased operating and maintenance expenses to 7%. Prop. H was stayed by the Court in Quigg v CCSF, et al., on 12/20/00.

³ Written Response of the Juvenile Probation Department to the Gender Analysis (JPD Response), page 1.

⁴ Juvenile Probation Department Mission Statement, dated 8/19/98.