A new push to fight homelessness is underway, with county departments banding together to get the job done.

Acknowledging that solving the multifaceted problems of the nation’s largest homeless population calls for bigger and more concerted action, supervisors on Tuesday created Los Angeles County’s first interdepartmental council on homelessness.

The council will bring together county departments serving children, families and veterans along with those specializing in everything from mental health and housing to criminal justice and social services.

Board chairman Zev Yaroslavsky, who proposed the council along with Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, said its creation will allow the county to take its efforts against homelessness “to a whole new level.”

“Getting this kind of centralized communication among departments, not just within departments, gives us a real opportunity to do something special,” said Yaroslavsky, who will serve as chair of the new council, with Chief Executive Officer William T Fujioka acting as vice-chair.

Los Angeles County, already a focus of national attention because of the size and complexity of its homelessness problem, will use the new interdepartmental team to “scale up” successful programs that have been so far tried on relatively small scales, according to the motion by Yaroslavsky and Ridley-Thomas.

The motion was unanimously approved, along with amendments offered by Supervisor Don Knabe. Those amendments require an evaluation of the council at the two-year mark; mandate that the council develop its plan using existing resources; and instruct the CEO to inventory and review “outcomes, findings and best practices that resulted from the board’s investment of $100 million to prevent and end homelessness” since 2006.

That earlier push, called the Los Angeles County Homeless Prevention Initiative, has led to pilot projects such as Project 50, which has taken a “housing first” approach to assisting some of Skid Row’s most vulnerable chronically homeless people. Another program, called Access to Housing for Health, has moved frequently hospitalized homeless people into housing where health care services are available.

Although the 2011 Greater Los Angeles Homeless Count report estimates a 3% drop in the county’s homeless population since 2009, it nevertheless depicts a large and troubled population of 51,340, including growing numbers of veterans and the aging.

Against that backdrop, national homeless advocates said interdepartmental and interagency councils can offer important advantages in getting things done.

“Homelessness is a cross-cutting issue,” said Steve Berg of the National Alliance to End Homelessness. If agencies and departments aren’t working together, he said, “you don’t get the kind of results you should get.”

And because there’s rarely enough money to adequately meet all the needs of the homeless population, bringing together diverse service-providers can “create efficiencies while serving people better,” said Laura Green Zeilinger of the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, a model for the new county council.

Such collaborations, she said, can also make it easier to pursue funding opportunities, set priorities and create a better dynamic for solving problems.

As the council begins its work, it’s clear that people far beyond L.A. County will be watching.

“I definitely think that what Los Angeles does can influence other counties,” said Nan Roman, president and CEO of the National Alliance to End Homelessness. “I think it’s very promising.”

More than 50,000 homeless people live in L.A. County, from the beaches to the desert.

Posted 1/31/12

“This is a sweet victory,” Reiner elatedly proclaimed after a final tally of absentee ballots had given his Proposition 10 the edge. “It means so much for the young children of this state…”

But this week in Los Angeles, the mood was far more somber as the Board of Supervisors received a highly critical audit of how hundreds of millions of dollars of that money has been administered locally by an independent public agency called First 5 LA.

Although no malfeasance was uncovered, the board was so concerned about the findings that, by a 4-1 vote, it set in motion a plan to strip First 5 LA of its independence and turn it into a county agency, like the majority of its companion organizations across the state.

The audit, requested by Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich, who’s currently serving as chairman of the First 5 LA commission, was performed by Harvey M. Rose Associates and bluntly details a series of risks that the firm says may be undermining the performance and integrity of First 5 LA.  Among the findings:

• First 5 LA has been significantly under-spending its revenues, placing the organization “at risk of not fulfilling its mission and goals to the extent possible and consistent with the Board of Commissioners policy and program objectives.” With a fund balance of more than $800 million, the organization has spent comparatively less on its programs than California’s other First 5 groups.

• The First 5 commission receives such insufficient information from the organization’s staff that its ability to oversee spending, program activity and outcomes is compromised. “Most grant and contract awards, representing hundreds of millions of dollars of annual agency expenditures, are not submitted for approval or review.”

• In the last fiscal year, the agency awarded more than $200 million in contracts, but failed to report them all to the First 5 commissioners, which “raises the risk of agreements being in place for inappropriate purposes or with unqualified vendors or grantees.” In fact, the commission approved only 28% of First 5 LA contract awards. In many cases, contracts were awarded without competitive bidding—and without notifying the commission. Auditors could not determine how some contracts were awarded because documentation was not properly retained.

• The staffing of First 5 LA is high compared to other First 5 agencies and is “not configured to best enable development and administration of new programs and initiatives,” thus contributing to the under-spending problem and delays in launching health, safety and educational programs for the county’s children.

• During the past four fiscal years, First 5 LA has had an annual staff turnover rate ranging from 8 to 19 percent a year, generally higher than other First 5 organizations surveyed by the auditors. This, along with the absence of a commission-approved compensation policy, “raises the risk of First 5 LA not being able to attract and retrain qualified, high-performing employees.”

After the audit findings were presented during Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting, Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky offered a particularly blunt assessment.

“The lack of transparency, the lack of accountability, the lack of competition in proposals, the lack of information sharing between the staff and the commission itself, any one of these things would be a bell and whistle. And all of them together is a siren,” said Yaroslavsky, who praised Antonovich for initiating the audit process.

No representatives from First 5 LA testified during Tuesday’s session. But the organization’s chief executive officer, Evelyn V. Martinez, later released a statement noting that, since 1998, First 5 LA has undergone annual independent audits of its financial statements and controls “and at no time have these audits resulted in any material findings.”

First 5 LA, she said, “takes its fiduciary responsibilities seriously and has been a responsible caretaker of the public funds entrusted to it.” While acknowledging the Board of Supervisors’ authority to exert greater control over the organization, Martinez said that “I hope we can continue to maintain our focus on improving the lives of our youngest children in Los Angeles County.”

Among chief executives of First 5 commissions in California’s 58 counties, Martinez’ annual compensation of nearly $250,000 in 2009-2010 topped the list. That included a $10,000 performance bonus.

Supervisor Gloria Molina cast the sole vote against the motion authored by Antonovich and Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, which directs the county counsel and chief executive officer to prepare a proposed ordinance establishing First 5 LA as a county agency and report back within 30 days.

“I don’t see where one dollar was stolen, one dollar was misappropriated, one dollar was mishandled,” said Molina, who was chair of the First 5 LA commission during some of the audited period. (That position is held by the sitting chairman of the Board of Supervisors, a position that rotates annually. Each supervisor also appoints a member to the commission.)

Molina added: “I think it’s a shame that we are moving so drastically to take over this agency.”

The audit process began earlier this year when the governor proposed diverting half of the current and future Proposition 10 tobacco-tax money from the county commissions established to administer it. For First 5 LA, according to the Antonovich/Ridley-Thomas motion, this would divert about $450 million from its current reserves and $50 million annually in the future.

The audit, conducted in two phases, initially was intended to identify First 5 LA’s reserves and ensure the most efficient use of future allocations. But, in the end, serious issues were uncovered that led to Tuesday’s vote.

The First 5 commissions have sued the state to block diversion of funds. The case is pending.

Posted 10/26/11

The cashier’s check, dated May 2 and drawn on a bank in Bellingham, Wash., was mailed directly to the county Auditor-Controller’s Office with a handwritten note that said: “In this time of economic difficulties, governments need all the help they can get. Please put this anonymous check to good use. God Bless.”

But the donor didn’t name a specific department for the gift, meaning that the money was headed for the county’s multi-billion dollar general fund, a fate that somehow seemed too unceremonious for the grandness of the gesture.

So Supervisors Zev Yaroslavsky and Michael D. Antonovich introduced a motion directing that the money be deposited with the Children’s Trust Fund, a non-profit organization that provides direct aid to foster children. The motion was unanimously adopted.

Operating under the auspices of the county’s Department of Children and Family Services, the organization was founded in 1968 by a group of social workers to take up the slack for services not funded by the government. According to its website, the Children’s Trust Fund last year served 5,000 foster youth by paying for, among other things, clothing, educational field trips, sports equipment, replacement glasses and dental work not covered by insurance or Medi-Cal benefits.

“This donation is going to have a positive impact on so many lives,” said DCFS’ public affairs chief, Nishith Bhatt, who added that, because Children’s Trust Fund has no administrative overhead, 100 percent of its donations go directly to services for foster children. “It’s really a unique thing.”

Meanwhile, during Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting, one member of the public offered his personal appreciation for the donor’s contribution. And that led to an intriguing exchange with Supervisor Antonovich.

“I just want to say, whoever that donor is, well, thank you on behalf of all of us residents in L.A. County,” the speaker said during a period for public comment.

“He’s a very charitable person who one time served as a public official in this county,” Antonovich responded.

Surprised, the speaker asked: “So we do know who he is?”

“Yes, I know who he is,” the supervisor said. “But if he wanted you to know who he was, he would have told you.”

And with that, the board moved on to its next order of business.

Posted 7/6/11

Turning life around for L.A.’s homeless youth is a tall order. Now there’s an NBA star in the arena.

Game on.

Kobe Bryant and his wife, Vanessa, announced this week that they are throwing the resources of their family foundation into making a difference in the lives of homeless kids.

“We’re going to attack this,” Bryant said during a news conference at My Friend’s Place, a drop-in center for homeless youth in Hollywood. “We’re going to go after it and we’re going to solve it.”

The Lakers guard said he was moved by the life stories of kids he met there. “It’s heart-wrenching stuff,” he said.

Getting involved means more than just financial support, he said; it also means forging a personal connection with homeless young people.

“Basically we want to help them kick butt,” he said. “What I do in the game of basketball is easy compared to what they have to go through. What they have to go through, that’s real determination.”

Bryant said some of the specifics of what the Kobe and Vanessa Bryant Family Foundation will undertake are still being worked out. “We’re still educating ourselves on the issue because we’re kind of brand new to it. But we sunk our teeth into it, man, and we’re going to go after it.”

Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who represents the area and is one of Los Angeles’ leading advocates for homeless issues, praised the Bryants for getting involved—not just for their foundation’s support but for their star quality, which helps draw greater public attention to the problem.

“Homelessness is one of the great stains on American society to this day,” Yaroslavsky said. “The richest society on earth still has hundreds of thousands of people across the country who live on the streets. Here in Los Angeles County, 48,000 homeless persons live on the streets. Almost 20% of them are veterans of the United States military; 7,000 of them are youth.”

He said the county, along with a network of nonprofit service providers, is committed to working with the Bryants to help turn those statistics around.

“This is the center of youth homelessness in Los Angeles County. And if we can solve youth homelessness in Hollywood, we’ll be a long way to solving it for the county as a whole,” Yaroslavsky said.

Bryant said it is possible to drive past homeless people on the streets of Los Angeles and not have their plight register.

“After a game, driving home, you see the issue around you but you don’t see it. It’s kind of one of those things you glance over… It’s all around us. And it’s not fair. And it’s something that we can solve, so let’s do it.”

Posted 6/8/11

The motion by Supervisor Don Knabe, which sought a 45-day delay in adopting the new structure, was seconded by Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas but failed to win approval by the board majority.

Supervisors Michael D. Antonovich, Gloria Molina and Zev Yaroslavsky approved the ordinance permitting the board to retake authority for managing the departments. The ordinance was tentatively approved on its first reading last week.

With the two departments no longer under supervision of the county’s Chief Executive Office, supervisors believe they will be able to obtain more timely and direct information from the departments, both of which have been plagued with embarrassing and sometimes tragic miscues.

In the case of DCFS, a series of children’s deaths has raised widespread concerns about the department’s operations and management. The agency’s director, Trish Ploehn, was reassigned to the Chief Executive Office last December and an interim replacement, Antonia Jimenez, resigned last month and returned to her former CEO post. Under the new governance structure, selecting someone to head the department now becomes a top priority for the Board of Supervisors.

As for probation, a new team led by former Alameda County probation chief Donald Blevins is working to fix problems ranging from employees’ sexual misconduct to lax management practices to poor educational outcomes for young people under its supervision. Going forward, supervisors will need to make sure those efforts stay on track and will also be at the forefront of ensuring that the department complies with a series of Department of Justice-mandated reforms.

The move to reassert control over both departments comes as supervisors consider making changes to the county’s overall governance structure. A report by Chief Executive Officer William T Fujioka and the supervisors’ chief deputies is expected to come before the board next week.

Posted 5/17/11

Voting 3-2, the board majority on Tuesday took the first step in removing the Department of Children and Family Services and the Probation Department from the CEO’s portfolio. In the process, the supervisors erased any doubt about their willingness to modify a governance structure they created in 2007 to reduce their day-to-day management of the county’s vast bureaucracy of departments.

Voting in favor of the new structure were Supervisors Zev Yaroslavsky, Michael D. Antonovich and Gloria Molina. Opposing it were Supervisors Mark Ridley-Thomas and Don Knabe.

Because the board’s action requires a change to a county ordinance, a second vote is required next week to add children’s services and probation to several other departments that were exempted from CEO oversight and report directly to the supervisors.

For months, board members had been growing increasingly concerned and vocal about worsening problems within DCFS and probation.

The tragic deaths of a number of youngsters had ignited an uproar over issues of competency and oversight of DCFS at all levels. Last December, the agency’s embattled director, Trish Ploehn, was removed and reassigned by the CEO’s office, headed by William T Fujioka.

The Probation Department, meanwhile, was grappling with everything from sexual misconduct of employees to an inability to track nearly $80 million allocated by the supervisors to hire personnel. An internal review revealed, among other things, that management was so loose that too many employees had been hired for the department’s youth camps—a problem now being corrected by a new management team led by former Alameda County probation chief Donald Blevins.

In the case of both departments, some board members came to believe they were not being provided information necessary to understand the serious and recurring lapses for which they—as the county’s top executives—were being held accountable.

The turning point came last month when DCFS’s interim director, Antonia Jimenez, openly defied a motion by the supervisors to sign a “memorandum of understanding” with the board’s special counsel for investigating child deaths and offering possible policy reforms.

The document, signed by the top officials of eight other county departments, established protocols to ensure that the Children’s Special Investigations Unit was able to independently and efficiently review child deaths and serious cases of abuse and neglect of children under the care and/or supervision of the county.

The document also stated that the unit’s reports, prepared solely for the board, were deemed attorney/client privilege to maintain their confidentiality and thus could not be given to the departments—a provision Jimenez found unacceptable, even though she’d be allowed to read them and be given copies of any recommendations. (While earlier overseeing DCFS in the CEO’s office, Jimenez had argued that she needed copies of the reports there, too.)

Jimenez’ intransigence led to an April appearance before the supervisors that left several of them clearly exasperated.

“The other departments didn’t have a problem signing the [memorandum of understanding]. You should sign the darn thing,” Yaroslavsky told Jimenez. “Why this had to get to this point and raised to this level is beyond me. It’s really a mountain out of a molehill.”

Molina agreed, saying: “It’s shameful that we have to go through this kind of a process for something that this board has found very, very helpful.”

The board concluded by passing a motion directing Jimenez to sign the document by 5 p.m. Instead, she resigned, returning to the CEO’s team to oversee children’s services from there—a move that Antonovich later called “a blatant act of insubordination.”

Three weeks later, Yaroslavsky, Molina and Antonovich would form the three-vote majority needed to reassume authority over DCFS and probation.

“These are the two most troubled departments in the county today, and the board majority wants a more direct role in overseeing them,” Yaroslavsky said after the meeting. “The CEO will continue to partner with us, but the board will be primarily responsible.”

Ridley-Thomas, who joined with Knabe in voting against the measure, was visibly angry when his effort to have the vote delayed was rebuffed. When asked how he wanted to vote, he shouted “No!” and then added just as loudly: “Ridiculous.”

Ridley-Thomas argued that he needed more time to study a Yaroslavsky amendment to the ordinance aimed at ensuring that the new management structure would not impede the internal sharing of confidential information among departments.

Ridley-Thomas called the reluctance of the board majority to reschedule the vote “a rush to judgment” and urged his colleagues to side with him as “a point of courtesy to allow everybody to come up to speed.”

But Yaroslavsky and County Counsel Andrea Ordin both noted that the amendment had been suggested by Ordin as one of two options in a memo she sent to the supervisors last week.

Antonovich, meanwhile, noted that Tuesday’s vote was just the first of two, suggesting to Ridley-Thomas that if his concerns weren’t addressed this week’s meeting, then he’d have a chance to address them before next week’s vote.

Posted 5/10/11

“That corner,” she says, “has been an eyesore for as long as I’ve lived here. And I’ve lived here for 37 years.”

Although the $10.9 million complex has been open for two months at Veteran Avenue and Pico Boulevard, this week marked its official grand opening. Restricted to tenants 62 and over with a maximum income of $29,000 for one-person households and $33,150 for couples, it brings 45 units of desperately needed low-income senior housing to one of the city’s priciest neighborhoods.

“We received 1,134 applications,” says foundation president Anne Friedrich, whose organization—a non-profit, non-sectarian offshoot of the Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles—operates 17 apartment buildings for low-income seniors throughout the county. “We held a public lottery.”

During the 1970s and 1980s, the building housed the Department of Public Social Services West Los Angeles Regional Office—a drab, beige, 37,597-square-foot welfare facility in an area of homes and apartments. All day, Tippit says, needy people would line up outside, waiting for caseworkers. Periodically, the office would reach capacity and close its doors, and the crowds would mill around the neighborhood, waiting for the building to reopen.

“It was all right at first, when it was mostly women and children,” says Tippit, who chairs the Westside Neighborhood Council and serves as president of the West of Westwood Homeowners Association. “But then it switched to more of a general relief, homeless population. There was a liquor store directly across the street—with a signal, yet—and, well, I won’t go into the gory details, but there were a lot of problems with the clients. They weren’t respectful of the community.”

Sympathetic though she was, she says, she and others pushed hard for the welfare offices to be moved to a more commercial sector. But when the move finally occurred, the now-vacant building presented new problems. Unoccupied for years, it became a magnet for weeds, graffiti and vagrants. “It wasn’t kept up,” she says. “You can’t have people sleeping in doorways.”

Finally, in 2009—and with city, county and federal assistance—Menorah Housing Foundation bought the property from Los Angeles County, razed the old offices and started construction on the new apartments. It wasn’t easy, says Lance Bocarsly, who chairs the foundation’s board. Because property values in Los Angeles are so high, low-income housing projects can be prohibitively expensive.

“Supervisor Yaroslavsky was absolutely instrumental in letting us pull this together,” says Bocarsly. “This would not have happened without him. He was the engine.” Which is why, he added, the new complex has been named the Zev Yaroslavsky Apartments.

Tippit says the neighbors are so happy that they’ve decided to be patient—for now—with an unexpected parking issue caused by the number of cars at the complex.

“Now that there’s a new building,” she says, “it’s a whole new environment.” 

For the residents, the place is nothing less than a godsend. Clean and secure, with a bus stop out front, a diner next door and a shopping center a half-block walk away on a level sidewalk, the apartments rent on a sliding scale that averages about $240 a month. Friedrich says the average tenant is 71 and the average income is far below the eligibility requirement.

“I moved in here on my birthday, February 15, and it was the best present I’ve ever had in my life,” says 63-year-old Nancy Evers, a disabled ex-waitress who had been paying $785 a month for a room over a garage in Montrose when she heard she had won the right to lease her third-floor unit.

Evers said she had been trying for years to get into subsidized housing, only to be confronted with years-long waiting lists. 

“I’m disabled and only get Social Security,” Evers says. “My rent only left me $50 a month to live on. I was living on bread. French toast, bread and butter, bread and bread. My doctor kept saying, ‘Nancy, what are you eating?’ But my daughter heard about Menorah Housing and said, ‘I think if you call, God is telling me it’ll be all right for you this time.’”

Evers was reluctant to get her hopes up.

“I’ve been working since the age of 13, when I got my first job peeling potatoes at a greasy spoon at Sixth and Bixel,” she says. “I never win anything. But I called and I got it. Now I have a one-bedroom apartment, and it’s so bright and sunny—full-sized fridge and stove, beautiful butter-yellow bedroom carpet. You could probably get four people in my shower. I’m just so blessed, and I think everyone in here feels the same way.”

Posted 4/14/11