The Grand Jury has released two reports for the year: one about turmoil in the Mendocino County human resources department, and the other about dire conditions at the county’s Family and Children’s Services division. The family and children’s services report warns that understaffing, specifically the lack of personnel with proper experience and education, is a leading factor in the county’s low performance metrics, compared to state averages. While the report notes that “Understaffing does not appear to be related to funding issues,” it does appear to hamper timely investigations, leading to a work environment that former staff have described as “hostile” and “toxic.”
This year’s report notes that the situation has been the subject of two previous Grand Jury reports: one in May of 2015, and another in June of 2017. Eight years ago, the Grand Jury announced its investigation with this grim summary: “The Mendocino County Family and Children’s Services Agency is one of the lowest scoring child protective services agencies in the State of California (State). In spite of a dedicated, caring, hardworking staff, the agency appears to be falling further behind. Every performance indicator points to understaffing as the main culprit.”
The problem appears to go back to 2011, when base salaries were cut by 10% and, “There was an exodus of experienced staff…Testimony termed the level of morale as ‘almost malignant.’” At that time, the Grand Jury reported documented instances of retaliation and “Lack of respectful communication,” concluding that, “Fear is always a morale problem.” Oddly, in the report that followed two years later, the Grand Jury itself took some responsibility for low morale at the agency, reporting without evidence that, “The critical content of the 2014-15 Report, intended for the BOS (Board of Supervisors), inadvertently devastated staff and resulted in loss of morale in the Department.”
Employees still report a toxic work environment due in large part to overwork caused by understaffing, which in turn is caused by difficulties in recruitment and retention. This year’s report notes that there are no state waivers available to ease the educational requirements for staff. Half of the social workers providing emergency response and family maintenance services and all of their supervisors are supposed to have a Masters degree in Social Work (MSW). These requirements are not being met. In 2017, there was a state waiver, and lack of staff was cited dozens of times in the analysis of the department’s shortcomings. The first finding of that report was that the 2011 exodus and lackluster recruitment “has resulted in the hiring of inexperienced workers with a higher than normal turnover rate and a need for on-the-job training.”
The 2017 report cites “The County’s pervasive drug culture,” a number of other social ills, and the lack of a competitive salary scale as contributing factors to problems at the agency.This year’s conclusion that, “Understaffing does not appear to be related to funding issues,” is explained by the fact that ninety-five percent of the department’s funding comes from federal grants and sales tax revenue. Turnover is up to one-third of the staff every year, with employees reporting that it takes two years on the job to become competent.
The other report, which focuses on Human Resources, finds that many of the issues in Family and Children’s Services are pervasive throughout county departments, due to poorly organized management of personnel.
The Grand Jury also dismissed perennial claims that staffing issues stem from low compensation and housing availability, writing that workplace culture at the county and the hiring process are major culprits. Top talent is unlikely to be available at the end of the county’s 3-6 months’- long hiring process, when 4-8 weeks is realistic.
The report notes that over the past 25 years, the county has had 19 people leading the HR department, with an average tenure of 1.2 years. The position is currently unfunded, with a deputy CEO overseeing four other people who divide the work among themselves, in addition to their other duties.
The Grand Jury found a lack of professional experience in this department, too. Only one HR director since 2010 had HR experience, and high attrition throughout the department ensures a lack of institutional knowledge.
And the consequences are real. The Grand Jury wrote that, “Without a full-time, long-term Director for the HR department, the department has been unable to engage in strategic long-term planning or make organizational improvements.” This includes basic metrics of performance, as well as the somewhat more subjective experience employees have of workplace culture at the county. The report notes that, “When the GJ requested HR policies, procedures, training, or guidelines regarding performance management, the GJ was informed that the department had no relevant written policies.”
Performance reviews reportedly consist of a video that does not appear to be relevant and a numerical 1-5 assessment that is the same across all departments in the county except the sheriff’s. The report suggests several basic well-known HR practices, like ensuring that the assessments include expectations and goals, the employees’ job descriptions and responsibilities, and a clear summary of employees’ performance over the last year, so they will know what they have done well or poorly, and how to improve.
When it comes to workplace culture, the Grand Jury cited an employee engagement survey from last year that found that only 49% of county employees would stay at their jobs if a similar one were available elsewhere. Fewer than a third felt their leadership communicates well with them, and just under a quarter reported that there are clear incentives for doing a good job. Not even half would recommend the county as a great place to work. Harassment, discrimination, nepotism, bullying, and favoritism are common complaints, though formal guidelines on how to report problems that are not outright crimes appear to be sparse.
The Grand Jury recommends creating a position for a person who would conduct training on handling reports and tracking problems, including the results of any investigations. Another suggestion is hiring someone who can act as a guide for new employees to help them integrate into their new community. And the Grand Jury strongly recommends recruiting for a fully qualified HR director.
As the Family and Children’s Services report noted of the conditions in that department, “The situation is not sustainable.”