County Downplays Rehab Home Problems : Treatment: Reports says there is no need for more monitoring despite violations at a third of ‘sober-living’ centers.

Los Angeles County officials found health and safety hazards in one of every three “sober-living” homes inspected since October, according to a report released Thursday.

Despite deficiencies, officials concluded that there is no need for additional monitoring and inspections of the unlicensed, privately run houses that provide drug-free shelter to recovering addicts and alcoholics.

The report was prepared in response to stories in The Times that described overcrowding and exploitation of addicts as well as inadequate oversight by county drug treatment officials.

Drug officials have promoted sober-living homes as a low-cost way of helping addicts stay sober after they graduate from publicly funded treatment programs. The county has funded 53 sober-living homes during the last decade.

Alton Wright, the county’s top alcohol treatment official and an advocate of sober-living homes, played a major role in drafting and editing the report.

Wright said inspectors found generally positive conditions in the homes during a three-month sweep. “We don’t see what all the fuss is about,” he said.

The report said there were mostly minor violations at 31 homes, ranging from broken glass to vermin infestation, but did not itemize them.

In October, The Times reported that the Winona House in Los Feliz was jammed with up to 55 recovering addicts and alcoholics--some packed 10 to a room and others squeezed beneath the rafters of attic crawl spaces or into unfinished closets.

Visiting the house two months later, county inspectors found 30 occupants, unspecified health code violations and no health license.

County health inspectors did not visit several other homes where The Times had reported abuses--including the Natural High sober-living home in South-Central Los Angeles where addicts slept on plywood pallets in bare cubicles with exposed wiring and gaping holes in the ceiling.

At another sober-living home on the Eastside, The Times found that people were living in a metal shed and plywood huts in the back yard while the main house was littered with beer bottles. But the building was empty by the time health inspectors arrived--four months after the disclosures.

Wright said inspectors visited “all the places we had addresses for” and evaluated all major allegations of abuses.

The report does not address allegations of assaults in some sober-living homes, sexual harassment and, in one case, rape.

In evaluating health and safety code violations, the report stated that sober-living homes with five or fewer bedrooms are “not subject to state or county licensure or oversight.” Based on that position, the report concluded that dozens of homes--some with up to 18 residents--were exempt from licensing requirements.

However, some county attorneys and housing officials believe that most sober-living homes require licensing as rooming houses. A county ordinance states that a permit is required for “rooming houses which provide sleeping and living accommodations to five or more persons unrelated to the operation.”

Manny Schweid, housing and institutions program director for the county Health Services Department, said: “The problem is that there’s no licensing category that fits sober-living homes. We’re working on developing a new category just for these places.”

In response to reports of overcrowding, substandard conditions and profiteering in sober-living homes, top state drug officials called for a crackdown. Since The Times’ disclosures, state drug and alcohol program investigators have conducted surprise inspections of several sober-living homes that county officials said they could not locate.

Andrew Mecca, director of state drug and alcohol programs, has urged the county to assume accountability for the safety and welfare of the men and women who rely on sober-living homes to help them stay off drugs and off the streets.

Since The Times’ disclosures, judges have been asked to stop referring defendants to sober-living homes and have been provided with a list of 183 licensed drug treatment facilities, probation officials said.