Shelter files suit against county

Operation SafeHouse says officials didn’t warn staff about violent teens

Riverside County staff failed to disclose important information about at-risk youths dropped off at a shelter, including a girl’s violent tendencies before she assaulted a shelter director, a lawsuit alleges.

Operation SafeHouse’s lawsuit, which seeks unspecified damages, accuses the county of fraud and breach of contract regarding drop-offs of youths at the nonprofit group’s Riverside facility. The Board of Supervisors was set to discuss the lawsuit in closed session Tuesday, but the topic was postponed because the trial date has been delayed, county spokeswoman Brooke Federico said via email.

She declined to comment further. Lawyers for the county de

nied the lawsuit’s accusations in court filings.

A trial is tentatively scheduled for summer.

Founded in 1988, Operation SafeHouse provides temporary housing for 11to 17-year-olds.

The lawsuit, filed in Riverside County Superior Court in January 2020, came about seven months after a girl referred by the county Department of Public Social Services allegedly assaulted a manager, identified in court papers as Jackie Moot, and was removed by police.

The incident led Operation SafeHouse to put a temporary moratorium on county referrals. The county, according to the lawsuit, responded by terminating its contract for temporary shelter services with the nonprofit group.

That contract paid Operation SafeHouse up to $112,000 per fiscal year to set aside at least 12 beds, the lawsuit read, adding an amendment that was to take effect July 1, 2019, would have upped the nonprofit group’s compensation to as much as $328,500 per fiscal year.

Under the contract, the county was supposed to provide detailed intake information on the youths it dropped off and “ensure that medical, psychological, psychiatric, and therapy services (were) made available and provided to each child,” the lawsuit states.

The suit alleges that the county repeatedly failed to provide information on the youths’ histories, including those with “violent or aggressive tendencies,” and failed to ensure youths were getting the medical and mental health treatment they needed or had the proper medication with them when they were dropped off, the lawsuit read.

A county social worker didn’t disclose the violent history of the youth accused of assaulting Moot, so the shelter was “unable to take necessary measures and precautions,” such as declining to take the youth in, the lawsuit read.

Moot suffered “severe physical and psychological injuries” and the youth destroyed shelter property “in a violent rage,” the lawsuit alleged.

The incident damaged Operation SafeHouse’s “reputation as a safe respite for at-risk youth” and led to higher workers’ compensation premiums and other costs, the lawsuit read.

“Moreover, the incident has made it difficult for Plaintiff to obtain insurance that is required for the running of its shelter.”