Severe Growing Pains

As the sun rises over the Santa Monica Mountains, the children awake each morning at 6:30, take turns showering, clean their rooms and eat breakfast. The school-age children report later to their classrooms and the younger ones to the preschool center.

This is the morning routine at Casa Pacifica, Ventura County’s only emergency shelter and residential treatment program for abused and neglected children through the age of 17. The Santa Monica Mountains provide a serene backdrop for the 22-acre facility. But there has been little tranquillity at Casa Pacifica since October, when the state Department of Social Services launched an investigation into a report that a 9-year-old molested a toddler while other youngsters were forced to witness the incident.

Though public attention has focused on that incident, state records show there have been more than 40 other violations at Casa Pacifica since its opening 2 1/2 years ago. At least 14 have occurred since the state’s investigation began.

As the state continues its probe, which could lead to actions as tough as closure of Casa Pacifica, caseworkers for the department’s Community Care Licensing division have documented problems that include:

* Inappropriate disciplinary measures such as use of excessive force during restraint procedures that have resulted in injuries, including an incident June 24 when a child’s jaw was broken during a scuffle with staff members trying to stop him from throwing apples and oranges at other children.

* Lack of staff supervision that has generated many incident reports, including that of a drug overdose April 16 after a child learned she could hide medications in her mouth and then take them all at once. Reports indicate this child also needed hospital attention.

* Consensual oral sex between two children under a couch in a residential cottage April 1 during an evening movie; an admission by one child that he had participated in oral sex with several children in the past; and other incidents of consensual sex behind the facility’s gymnasium and in children’s rooms.

* An inappropriate decision by a staff member Jan. 18, 1996, to bring his pit bulldog to the facility and unleash it. “Children were left alone with the dog. Children may be scared of the dog,” a report said.

* A disparaging remark to a child Jan. 16 by a staff member who called a girl a “loser” and referred to her as a “51/50,” a term for someone suffering from mental illness.

* Failure by staff to report numerous incidents, including a suicide attempt by one child who tried to hang herself using bed sheets tied around her neck Aug. 25. The caseworker report dated Jan. 15 stated that “attempts to locate report in client’s files did not turn up an incident report.”

The problems have continued in recent weeks, according to state investigators. During the last month, they said, Casa Pacifica staff members denied children the right to call Community Care Licensing with complaints and neglected to provide intensive therapy for two children as required by court order.

On Jan. 23, one report states, Casa Pacifica staff also allowed children to “run wild” in a residential cottage, getting so out of control that “at one point, a client picked up a chair and threatened staff.”

Community Care Licensing attorneys are compiling all the allegations into a final report. After Casa Pacifica responds to the allegations, the licensing agency will determine its course of action--a decision expected by the middle of next month.

“When a facility is in gross noncompliance, meaning that it is posing an immediate health and safety risk, Community Care has three options available to it,” said Myron Taylor, the licensing program supervisor.

The agency could put Casa Pacifica on probation and hammer out an agreement on how the facility plans to remedy its violations; it could temporarily suspend Casa Pacifica’s license and close the facility; or it could decide to let a judge determine to either revoke the facility’s license or put it on probation.

“The initial step is to look at the facility,” Taylor said. “Then there are intervening points when they are given a chance to let us know how they will change the program to come back into compliance. If problems still exist, then we take administrative action--it’s a progressive intervention.”

Casa Pacifica has very difficult children to deal with, Taylor said, but what is at issue is how staff members respond to the children’s behavior and how they intervene when problems occur.

“Violation of personal rights and injuries are not appropriate responses,” Taylor said, adding that the main focus should be on child safety and supervision of direct care staff. Each time Casa Pacifica is found to be in noncompliance with state regulations, Community Care files an incident report that lists the violation and the steps the facility must take to correct the situation.

“Casa Pacifica has been very responsible with showing plans of correction,” Taylor said. “So far, every deficiency cited has a plan of action. There have been a lot of changes there since our agency began intervening. But they need to look at what kind of changes work with what kind of kids.”

There are two programs at Casa Pacifica with two distinct groups of children: the emergency shelter program, a partnership between Casa Pacifica and the county; and the residential treatment program, a private nonprofit. All the children live in what are called cottages and are segregated by age.

In the shelter program, children from birth to 17 who are removed under court order from their homes due to physical or sexual abuse, neglect, abandonment or parent imprisonment, arrive at all hours of the day and night. Last year, 325 children were placed in the shelter, 99 of them on more than one occasion. The program has room for up to 50 children at any one time and the average stay is 28 days.

Casa Pacifica’s other program, a 28-bed residential treatment program, serves children from 9 to 18 who have exhausted the resources of Ventura County foster care and group home settings and require a more restrictive environment.

Many of these children have histories of physical or sexual abuse or substance abuse. Most have been diagnosed with psychological problems, including depression, post-traumatic stress disorder or borderline personality disorder. Last year, 39 were placed in the residential program. These children usually stay at the facility longer than the shelter care children--about 7 1/2 months.

It is impossible for Casa Pacifica not to have incident reports, given the nature and needs of these children, said Steve Elson, the facility’s executive director.

Casa Pacifica was originally designed for children who were new to the system, Elson said. However, almost half the children admitted to the shelter have been removed from foster care or group homes because of disruptive behavior.

Casa Pacifica staff frequently finds itself revamping program protocols because they were designed with other types of children in mind, Elson said. More staff has also been added to increase supervision in the cottages, and incident reports have been modified to require more detailed information and serve as a learning tool for staff.

But as facility administrators try to figure out which protocols are effective, violations reportedly continue. Elson says Casa Pacifica’s policy is to openly admit when something is done incorrectly.

Take, for instance, the molestation incident in October. Older children do not usually reside with younger ones. However when staff found out the 12-year-old was planning a group runaway at his cottage, they moved him to the cottage that houses younger children.

“It was an unusual step and the only time we’ve done it,” Elson said. “It obviously was not a good idea.”

It was also not a decision made solely by Casa Pacifica, Elson said. Casa Pacifica works with county staff from the departments of social services, mental health, and education who are located at the facility and deal with the emergency shelter program. So the decision to relocate the 12-year-old in the younger children’s cottage was a joint decision between Casa Pacifica and county staff, Elson said.

But this doesn’t change the way one parent feels about the molestation incident one of his children was forced to witness.

“When I stop and sit down and look at all my children have been through, I just don’t believe it,” Jerome Hunter said about his two boys, ages 2 and 4. “I just can’t walk away. I think my children were jeopardized and traumatized by this.”

Hunter says his 4-year-old hasn’t been the same since the incident, prompting Hunter to believe that his son was also molested. However, Elson says evidence indicates no witnesses of the incident were sexually assaulted.

Hunter said his two boys were placed in Casa Pacifica while he was recovering from an alcohol problem. He said he has been trying to find a place to live and a job so that he can regain custody. The first thing he plans to do after he gets his children back is sue Casa Pacifica for allegedly endangering them.

Another parent, who chose to remain anonymous, thinks inadequate supervision is a problem as well, but says the facility also has many positive points.

She says she placed her child, who has been diagnosed as severely emotionally disturbed because of sexual abuse by his father, in the residential treatment program in October because of his dangerous behavior.

Since her son has been there, she said, his individualized program has been changed three times in attempts to meet his needs.

“They try to figure out what his stressers are so they can work on it before he goes off,” she said, explaining that her child’s behavior has necessitated staff to restrain him with a procedure that involves several staff members each assigned to hold a limb.

The restraint procedure is used when children pose imminent danger to themselves or others, Elson said, adding that staff members must attend a 16-hour training course before they are allowed to apply the procedure, which is used nationally by police and service providers.

“The restraint is designed to keep people safe and not create injuries,” Elson said, admitting that there have been times when staff inappropriately restrained children and caused injury. Staff members have gone through additional training and have been instructed to use the restraint only as a last resort.

The procedure has also been applied during runaway attempts, which will always occur at Casa Pacifica because state law does not allow it to be a locked facility, Elson said, adding that many psychotic or suicidal children need locked facilities.

In fact, the lack of specialized facilities in Ventura County has significantly contributed to problems at Casa Pacifica because these children’s more frequent and longer stays drain disproportionate amounts of resources, Elson said.

Community Care Licensing has said that runaway attempts at Casa Pacifica are excessive. However, a state study shows the average runaway rate to be at 29%; Casa Pacifica’s is 9%.

The problems that occur at Casa Pacifica are not unlike incidents at similar facilities, Elson said.

Although the Orangewood shelter in Orange County is a county-run program, it is similar to Casa Pacifica because of the types of children who stay in the facilities, said Bob Theemling, who was executive director at Orangewood for 10 years.

“Every program that deals with adolescents deals with runaway and out-of-control behavior,” Theemling said.

A major difference between Casa Pacifica and Orangewood is that county-run facilities do not have to be licensed by Community Care Licensing, but rather are held accountable to a juvenile commission and a presiding judge, Theemling said.

“All other shelters in the state, with the exception of a Fresno facility, are county-run because of licensing problems,” he said. “You can have the same kinds of problems at a county-run facility, but because of the additional scrutiny and standards of Community Care Licensing it makes it more difficult to recognize the successes and easier to point out what seems to be a failure.”

The Orangewood shelter gave Ventura County Supervisor Susan Lacey the idea for Casa Pacifica about a decade ago when private citizens and local government first joined together to raise $10 million to build the facility.

Prior to Casa Pacifica, children who were in crisis situations were placed in foster care because there was no shelter. However, when foster care homes filled up, the county realized it needed a facility such as Casa Pacifica.

But Lacey and others initially envisioned the facility as a place for children who had not yet been through the system.

“Unfortunately, a lot of foster care placements haven’t worked, and Casa is getting children who are difficult to deal with,” Lacey said. “If we ever get to the point of just getting kids in on the first time, it would be a different story.

“I do think we will probably have to build another cottage and accommodate some of these more difficult cases a little differently,” Lacey said.

It took the county a year to decide whether it would operate Casa Pacifica alone or through a partnership with a private nonprofit group, Lacey said.

“We wanted the people of the county to own it so it would never have bars,” she said. “The children need a place to go that’s safe and that’s Casa Pacifica.”

Other county supervisors aren’t as optimistic as Lacey. Supervisors Frank Schillo and Judy Mikels are considering revoking funding to Casa Pacifica in June, when its contract comes up for renewal, if problems are not quickly remedied.

Despite concern over facility violations, the county recently approved payment of $95,000 for emergency shelter services and $106,954 for psychological and medical support services because it owed the facility the money for services already rendered, Schillo said.

“In the past, it hasn’t been the county driving this thing at all,” he said. “We give them money and they do whatever they’re going to do. I say no more of that. We will give them the money we owe them, but there will be no more money after July 1 unless we have some control over the children we’re sending there.”

Agreeing with a report from the Juvenile Justice Commission, Schillo is also calling for the separation of emergency shelter care children and longer-term residential treatment children. The report also suggested that shelter care residents be segregated into two groups: those who have been placed in the program because of short-term parental problems and those who come from foster homes, because the second group is more hardened.

“Between now and June, they have to ensure us that they’re not mixing residential and shelter program children together,” Schillo said. “And if they can’t assure us, I’m not willing to sign a contract with them.”

The Casa Pacifica board has been seriously considering modifying buildings and perhaps adding a cottage or two to assist with the segregation, Elson said.

However, Supervisor Mikels said her staff is preparing a contingency plan in case Casa Pacifica’s license is revoked.

“It is less than good oversight to know there are problems happening and to continue to place the children out there without us having direct oversight and control,” Mikels said. “I don’t want children I’m responsible for put in any more danger than in what they’ve already been.”

Elson says he would welcome the county becoming more involved.

“I’m glad to hear the supervisors say they want more responsibility,” Elson said. “What we want is shared decision making about the kids who come here.”

The county Public Social Services Agency also welcomes the supervisors’ involvement, said Deputy Director Jerry Blesener.

“Casa Pacifica started out as a dream and sometimes dreams and reality don’t always come out the way the dream intends,” Blesener said. “I think our effort now should be to hold onto that dream and try to work with it because it is so good.”

Elson suggested the county join Casa Pacifica in pursuing accreditation through a national council because the council would have more specific standards that address shelter care than does Community Care Licensing.

“Casa Pacifica as a program has not peaked--it’s only 2 1/2 years old,” Elson said. “We will continue to use feedback to enhance and strengthen our programs. It is a never-ending process and an important part of our task here.”