Supervisors Try to Mend Rift With Children’s Shelter

Hoping to improve relations with Casa Pacifica, Ventura County supervisors Tuesday appointed two of their members to a committee aimed at resolving strife between the county and the troubled shelter for abused and neglected children.

Supervisors Judy Mikels and Susan Lacey will work with representatives of the nonprofit shelter and the Foster Parent Assn. to develop a clear understanding of each other’s role and responsibilities in the fractious child-welfare system.

“We need to get together as a group and sit down and really talk about the difficulties, issues and options to improve the system--simply that and no more,” Mikels said.

There is tension involving those who care for the county’s most troubled children “that we need to deal with head-on,” she said.

Casa Pacifica officials, who have been critical of a perceived lack of support from the supervisors, did not attend Tuesday’s meeting.

In a scathing letter submitted to the board Thursday, the shelter’s directors accused the county of “allowing us to serve as a high-profile scapegoat for the ills of the county’s entire child welfare system.”

The directors also criticized county officials for failing to come to the facility’s defense when a Ventura County Grand Jury report was critical of shelter services and a state agency recommended revocation of the facility’s license.

The state cited unqualified staff members, inappropriate disciplinary measures and inadequate staff supervision.

Critics, including foster parents and Supervisor Frank Schillo, have suggested the children would be better off in foster care than in the shelter near Camarillo.

Nevertheless, Schillo was the first to voice support for the proposed committee.

“I hope the committee can come back with facts,” Schillo said, adding that he and the public are confused over recent developments at Casa Pacifica, including the state’s recent actions.

Concerned over 63 incidents in the shelter’s first two years, the state Department of Social Services recommended the license revocation but stopped short of closing the facility. Instead, the department’s community care licensing division informed Casa Pacifica on May 29 that the shelter will have an opportunity to develop a corrective plan.

The one-two punch of the grand jury and the state recommendation has invited further criticism of the shelter.

Foster parents have accused Casa Pacifica of over-medicating children and keeping them for extended periods of time.

Mikels and Schillo have criticized the facility for failing to correct supervision and management problems.

About 328 Ventura County children were placed in the emergency shelter last year after being removed from their homes under court order because of neglect and abuse. Also, 39 youngsters were placed in a longer-term residential program for those who have exhausted the foster-care program.

The emergency shelter receives 15% of its funding, or $700,000, from the county and has room for as many as 50 children.

Casa Pacifica officials did not attend the meeting since they had already stated in last week’s letter their view that “these children are, in fact, the responsibility of the public sector,” said Steve Elson, executive director of Casa Pacifica.

“Supervisor Flynn’s proposal clearly puts the board in a policy oversight role around child welfare issues that include Casa Pacifica, and we take that as an indication of the board’s support,” Elson said. “We didn’t think our presence would be helpful to establish this ad hoc committee.”

Supervisor John K. Flynn informed the board Tuesday that his recommendation to form the committee did not come in response to Casa Pacifica’s letter.

“But for some time I’ve wanted to recommend an ad hoc committee and have been very interested in solving this problem,” he said.

Acknowledging there is room for improvement, Supervisor Kathy Long said there are many successful aspects of Casa Pacifica.

“I’ve asked the work group to look at community care licensing,” Long said, adding that problems may exist within the state agency because its regulations do not specifically address the unique system of care found at Casa Pacifica.

An earlier work group, set up in April with county and Casa Pacifica staff members, will develop a report and submit it to the new committee.