.
Feedback

Handprint License Plate Money for Child Abuse Mismanaged

About 40 percent of the funds went to administrative costs, in violation of California law.

The money from state license plates with hearts, hands and star symbols has been misspent, according to a report released Tuesday by the California State Auditor.

State departments broke the law by hiring private contractors to manage the program, according to the audit. Between fiscal years 2006-2007 and 2009-2010, about 40 percent of the money paid administrative costs to private contractors, the audit says. That's nearly $2.1 million.

The Kids Plates program was approved in 1992. For a fee, drivers could order a custom license plate with a hand, cross, heart or star symbol. Half of the money was to be spent on prevention of child abuse and unintentional childhood injury.

The money from the plates was administered through the Department of Public Health. But when the department hired the private San Diego State University Research Foundation to manage the program between 2004 and 2010, it broke the law, according to the state auditor.

Public Health "paid the research foundation to administer the program from the funds that the Legislature had intended it to use directly for childhood injury prevention programs," the audit found.

The SDSU Research Foundation was also operating without a valid contract, meaning it could not disburse state funds intended for childhood injury prevention, according to the audit.

Here are key points from the audit:

  • The Department of Health Services and the Department of Public Health violated state law by hiring a private contractor to manage the Kids' Plates Program, rather than having state employees perform the work.
  • The contractor performed services without an approved contract, and was unable to award any funds that could have been used to help prevent unintentional childhood injuries.
  • Health Services and Public Health spent roughly 40 percent of total appropriations received during four fiscal years, or nearly $2.1 million on the contractor's administrative costs for the Kids' Plates Program.
  • Public Health did not comply with its own contracting procedures when it awarded 115 grants to community agencies.
  • The Department of Social Services did not fulfill certain monitoring requirements for trust fund expenditures. As a result, one grantee overcharged Social Services by $10,189, and Social Services' Office of Child Abuse Prevention may have used trust fund money to pay for expenditures that did not meet the trust fund's requirements.
  • Social Services failed to fully publish certain information about the trust fund on its website as state law requires.
Rebecca Goddard November 27, 2012 at 08:27 pm
The government is so inept, and lemmings keep voting to give them more power. Way to go!
Peter Schelden (Editor) November 28, 2012 at 04:53 pm
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Rebecca. If you like the story, please share it with friends!
Kathi November 28, 2012 at 05:04 pm
Wow & they just passed a new program to have a state version of SS or private pension administered by the state. I'll give them credit for good intent--to help provide more retirement security for those who do not have pensions but what people need is education on how to invest their own $ appropriately in their own Roth or Traditional IRAs.
You would think that people would wake up eventually that govt doesn't do a very good job of managing a things.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Mission Viejo Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Greg Raths announced for Congress
Shripathi Kamath June 19, 2013 at 10:51 am
"As a Republican, he will go head to head with our current incumbant [sic]" Wait, areRead More there no other contenders? John Webb on the Republican side might run, and then there was that Irvine mayor Sukhee Kang fella, who finished second. The more the merrier. The more diversity in the views, even better. I would like to hear from contenders how they would vote differently on some of the votes the incumbents have cast. Because all too often we have "an independent minded Republican" or a "progressive reformer" or "Heck, I am BATMAN himself" only to have disappointing regurgitation of ideology of what should not be done ("low taxes", "freedom", "family values", "apple pie, motherhood"). Not what will be done. And until we have that, corporate monies shall determine our representative. I mean I can imagine Mr. Raths voting for the 45th time to repeal Obamacare, but seriously, which vote that John Campbell cast would be different if Mr. Raths were in office? If 90% of the positions are the same, it looks like a remarkable coincidence that an independent thinker is so like the incumbent, does it not? Mr. Raths did offer an 'independent' idea endorsing civil unions but not gay marriage. Cool. Is he going to sponsor a bill for civil unions? Or simply insist on enforcing DOMA because "sanctity of marriage", "religious liberty". How about H.R. 1797? How about the Gang of 8 bill on immigration if it passes the Senate and comes to the House? Will his vote be different than that of Mr. Campbell's? That is the key question. But again, I welcome Mr. Raths entry in the field, we need more variety, and if we cannot get that, we at least need more people willing to run. Good luck to you, sir.
Gregory Raths June 19, 2013 at 05:30 pm
I've talked with both John Webb & Sukhee Kang and they have indicated they will not be runningRead More in 2014. I do welcome all entries into the 2014 race. GREG RATHS
Human Options' Cristi Dugger
Peter Schelden (Editor) June 19, 2013 at 09:29 am
Uncanny timing—this is especially poignant in light of this announcement:Read More http://alisoviejo.patch.com/groups/police-and-fire/p/elder-sexual-abuse-caregiver-suspect-arrested
M June 19, 2013 at 07:32 am
Anymore info on this place? When I looked online the only location is vista, ca
Dan Avery June 16, 2013 at 10:09 am
Tom Thumb you didn't read section 1021(b)(2) closely enough. It wouldn't apply to those arming theRead More rebels because of the word "suspicion." We know they are arming the rebels. See the difference. 1021(b)(2) only applies to those we "suspect" like you. Notice how the word "reasonable" doesn't appear anywhere near "suspicion"? Hmmmm wonder why that would be. Section 1021(b)(2) seems to be the modern day "suspicion of lurking with intent."
Tom Thumb June 16, 2013 at 02:31 pm
Shoot, I don't know about that. What we are hearing now is Obama/McCain are pushing to arm theRead More rebels who are supporting and are part of Al Qaeda: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22095099
Shripathi Kamath June 16, 2013 at 03:02 pm
Hey Avery, I am totally stealing the "suspicion of lurking with intent" phrase. It mightRead More even flourish on reddit.