SB 345 has passed another hurdle. Vote on Senate floor 26 in favor 9 opposed. Yahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!

Now on to the Assembly.

So grateful for your support of this bill.

Sylvia

I want to let you know that SB 345, for which the Committee for an Independents State Office (CISO) is the sponsor, is scheduled for hearing January 10th at 1:30 PM before the Senate Committee for Health and Human Services.

I have attached the fact sheet for your review. Factsheet (24)

I have also attached CISO’s support letter of the bill.Support Letter (19)

As the CA Dept of Aging will be auditing our local ombudsman program next week, I am unable to attend the hearing, but two members of our CISO committee will be speaking on behalf of the bill.

SB 345 has gone through many revisions since we started back in February of 2009, and there have been many rewrites, but the most significant revision which was the cornerstone of the bill involves the outsourcing of the state ombudsman office to a private entity. We were forced to eliminate that section as the CA constitution prohibits the elimination of civil servant positions as a result of outsourcing to a private entity, and the bill, in its original form, would have eliminated about 8 civil servant positions.

The bill is not where we started, but the revised bill, SB 345, when enacted, will be a good first step toward strengthening the state ombudsman office in that it will mandate stronger advocacy and accountability from that office.

I wanted to share this with all of you as many of you have been on this long journey with us for the past three years, and we very much appreciate all your encouragement and support.

I also want to wish each of you a very Happy and Healthy New Year, and thank you for being such an integral part of our community and our team.

Warmest regards,

Sylvia

Sylvia Taylor Stein

Team Leader

Committee for and Independent State Office (CISO)

The state is one of only a handful in the U.S. that does not regulate in-home care agencies, which provide help with activities of daily living such as bathing, dressing, hygiene and eating. The oversight office discovered that a 2008 law intended to help seniors and their families do their own background checks has never been implemented. As a result, very few people who hire caregivers from on-line services such as Craigslist take advantage of their legal right to order a statewide criminal background check through the Department of Justice.

In its report, “Caregiver Roulette: California Fails to Screen those who Care for the Elderly at Home,” the oversight office examined Craigslist ads placed by people offering to care for elderly clients in their homes. The oversight office found caregivers with criminal backgrounds, including convictions for commercial burglary, methamphetamine trafficking, and prostitution in a home where a young child was present. One would-be caregiver, caught stealing $2,400 worth of merchandise from a garden supply store, described herself to a sheriff’s investigator as a “kleptomaniac” with “uncontrollable urges.”

 The report is available here.

 A review by the oversight office of 64 recent criminal cases involving caregivers found that 27 percent had previously been convicted of crimes, underscoring the potential value of requiring criminal background checks. In one case cited in the report, a woman convicted of stealing $43,000 from the church where she worked as a bookkeeper and $18,675 from her bed-ridden mother got a job as a caregiver through a newspaper classified ad. She moved into the master bedroom and started charging the client rent, bought cars on her client’s bank accounts and put the elderly woman’s house up for sale before she was caught.

 “Maybe there need to be some regulations that say you don’t get to just walk in off the street and live in someone’s home,” said Kellie Ikenberry, whose parents unknowingly hired a caregiver with a criminal background who stole from them. “Government has to protect these elderly people.”

 The report points out that, in the absence of regulation, many in-home care agencies claim to do criminal background checks voluntarily. But the quality of these checks varies widely, from instant Internet screening to thorough searches of county courthouse records or Department of Justice and FBI databases. Clients victimized by caregivers have sued in-home care agencies for shoddy background checks. Prosecutors have taken agencies to court for ignoring criminal backgrounds they discovered and placing felonious caregivers in private homes anyway.

 In a survey of states that include 83 percent of the U.S. population, the oversight office found that 24 regulate in-home care agencies, including requiring criminal background checks. Six, including California, do not. The report makes several recommendations, including some that would address the perils faced by consumers who hire caregivers without the help of an agency.

 Among the options are a registry that would allow clients to find independent caregivers who have voluntarily been screened and avoid those guilty of earlier transgressions; a public education campaign to let consumers know how to get and interpret a statewide Department of Justice background check; and a state law to allow consumer reporting agencies to disclose caregiver convictions older than seven years.

 The non-partisan Senate Office of Oversight and Outcomes was created in 2008 by Senate President pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) to bolster the Senate’s ability to gauge government performance.

John Hill

Principal Consultant

California Senate Office of Oversight & Outcomes

(916) 651-1657

Fax: (916) 324-5927

I have attached Senator Lois Wolk’s bill which was just put in final form yesterday. Amendments to Senate Bill No. 345

Federal law expressly prohibits the state long-term care ombudsman office from being operated by any state agency that is responsible for licensing or certifying long-term care facilities. This conflict exists in California.  It has precluded local programs from having a strong, advocacy driven state ombudsman. If you recall, during the past two years when our Ombudsman Funding Workgroup worked countless hours on funding legislation, the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman (OSLTCO) was silent. They could not participate in hearings, they could not offer us any support. This is minor compared to the thirty years we have experienced without an office of long-term care advocacy for the residents in our facilities! There has not been one press conference or press release from the OSLTCO, when systems failed, when deplorable conditions were uncovered, when systemic issues needed to be addressed. Silence has prevailed.

We are asking you for your support. We need letters by Friday afternoon to members of the Senate Human Services Committee

Support Letter for SB 34 (DOWNLOAD AND PRINT)

and participation at the hearing, scheduled for Tuesday, April 26th at 1:30 PM in Room 3191.

I have attached a Fact Sheet, Senate Bill 345 and a sample support letter. We realize this is very short notice and appreciate anything you can do to help with this much needed legislation.

Please send letters of support to the offices of the following members on the Human Services Committee.

Human Services Committee Fax Numbers

Senator Liu (Chair): (916) 324-7543

Senator Emmerson (Vice Chair): (916) 327-2187

Senator Berryhill: (916) 327-3523

Senator Hancock: (916) 327-1997

Senator Strickland: (916) 324-7544

Senator Wright: (916) 445-3712

Senator Yee: (916) 327-2186

Thank you for all your support.

Sylvia Taylor-Stein (Team Leader CISO)

Read more here…