thursday, june 2, 2016

Minutes of Budget Meeting Thursday, June 2, 2016 of 7

For Recording Stamp Only

Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960

(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org

MINUTES OF BUDGET MEETING

DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

Thursday, June 2, 2016

Allen Room, Deschutes Services Building

Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone, Alan Unger, and Tammy Baney. Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Mike Maier, Jimm Burton and Bruce Barrett, citizen members of the Budget Committee; Wayne Lowry and Loni Burk, Finance; John Hummel, Mary Anderson, Ashley Beatty, Kara Palacio, and Josh Kilander, District Attorney’s Office; and Dr. Jana VanAmburg, Medical Examiner’s Office. Those observing were Shaunda Haines and Nancy Davis, Medical Examiner’s Office; David Givens, and Phil Henderson.

Meeting minutes were taken by Elyse West, Risk Management

The topic of discussion was District Attorney’s Office Budget

Chair Bruce Barrett opened the meeting at 9:00 a.m.

John Hummel, Deschutes County District Attorney, presented a PowerPoint that would give an overview of the past year and also address new requests. (Exhibit 1). The District Attorney’s Office has fifty staff whose goal is to keep community safe by holding offenders accountable and to prevent crime by being a community leader. DeschutesSafe is a program of the District Attorney’s Office whose inception came

http://www.deschutes.org/


from community ideas for reducing crime. It has a community advisory board comprised of law enforcement, the courts, community leaders, business owners, health agency representatives, and citizens. DeschutesSafe looks at the five most common crimes in Deschutes County and works to reduce recidivism rates within each. The PowerPoint presentation exhibits the data findings. The next steps in DeschutesSafe are to complete this preliminary data analysis in the next two months, and then hold public meetings. The public will be asked for their input on the data, and the community advisory board will decide on one or two crime priority areas. The board will assess what this and other communities are currently doing to address the crime and what programs could be put into place. A draft strategy will then be created to propose a plan of action to the public and to the Board of Commissioners. Implementation and monitoring will then occur—tracking data daily and adjusting according to the results. Once recidivism is reduced, the strategy will continue but work will also begin on the next crime priority area. Mike Maier asked if the community advisory board included a criminal representative and a victim representative. Mr. Hummel stated there currently was not, but it was an idea worth investigating. At this stage in DeschutesSafe, Kathleen Coop, Management Analyst for the District Attorney’s Office, is committed at 0.25 (ten hours) per week to the project. Additionally, Mr. Hummel commits two to three hours per week. The results are good but the process has taken one and a half years. The goal is to finish the data faster so as to improve safety and decrease the cost to the system. The budget proposal from the District Attorney’s Office includes the following requests:

-move Ms. Coop from committing 0.25 of her job time to DeschutesSafe to committing 0.5.

-recruit a Hatfield Fellow from the Hatfield Field of Government’s fellows program to assist with data analysis, developing intervention, and monitoring results of DeschutesSafe. This would cost $40,000 dollars for each Hatfield Fellow contractor for a nine-month fellowship.

-one new additional Deputy District Attorney. This position completes a myriad of duties, exhibited in the PowerPoint.

The District Attorney’s Office’s hiring process has been changed. Most new hires were hired above the first step, due to extensive lateral experience in candidates. Due to high levels of mid-level and high-level staffing, the District Attorney’s Office is at a point now to hire new staff at entry level and promote upwards. Recruitments now clearly state that positions start at step one, and the last four hires have accepted the job at step one. Also implemented was the action to not automatically give a new trial assistant to


every new Deputy District Attorney, as was done in the past. Now implemented is a team model, with Deputy District Attorneys assigned to specific pools of Trial Assistants. A handout was distributed (Exhibit 2) to exemplify the Deputy District Attorney caseload size—based on historical staffing, population, and neighboring counties’ caseloads. Deputy District Attorneys caseloads in Deschutes County are currently manageable but too large. Projected numbers show the caseloads will become unmanageably large for current staffing. One added Deputy District Attorney would follow historical ratios and patterns associated with hiring this position. The impact of this caseload size on operations is turnover, delayed justice, and stress. Four Deputy District Attorneys have left in the last thirteen-month period, which is a historical record. One cited stress and excessive time away from family as being their reason for leaving. Staff are working hard at the risk of declining health and work. Resolving felony cases has remained consistent by staff, but misdemeanor crime resolution time has increased as a result. Regarding the Victims’ Assistance Program budget, there is no request for general fund increase. Mr. Maier said he noticed that the impact crimes statistics shown compared to the rate of resolution, it appears staff is currently doing a good job. He voiced concern that statistics can be reported differently by sources, and relying on them can be risky. Mr. Hummel agreed that staff is doing a good job, however the impact crime statistics focus on felony cases at the expense of lower quality of crimes. He agreed statistics are not perfect, but believes information is better to rely on that simply a gut feeling. Mr. Maier stated in reference to the state grant on line 001-1100-334-12-00, asked that since the state grant actual is $110,000, adjusted 39,000, and budgeted is $5,000—where the remainder of the money is. Kara Palacio and Mary Anderson stated that this state grant is a title 5 grant for the Juvenile Department and does not go directly to the criminal fund. It is an hourly reimbursement for the District Attorney’s Office juvenile prosecutors to cover for the Department of Justice in court; and it is reduced this year. The workload does not change because the juvenile deputies still have to appear in court according to statute. Bruce Barrett asked how the IT system transition has gone, particularly with the County IT systems. Mr. Hummel replied positively, saying their systems analyst, Josh Kilander has been meeting and working with County IT for two years. They are currently recruiting for Josh’s replacement, and County IT staff can now cover for District Attorney’s Office IT


staff when needed. The District Attorney’s Office is going to switch to an electronic discovery system in the cloud. It will be a small start-up expense of approximately $10,000, as much of it will be paid for by defense attorneys’ copy fees. Staff time, office equipment, and money will be saved. Mr. Maier asked how Mr. Hummel would prioritize his budget requests. Mr. Hummel responded that the new Deputy District Attorney is the number one need. The Hatfield fellow would be the second need, to work with data and implement DeschutesSafe programs. The third need would be increasing Ms. Coop’s time commitment to DeschutesSafe from 0.25 to 0.5. DeschutesSafe is already in progress, but added help would help it develop quicker. Commissioner DeBone asked if there is a parallel between the DeschutesSafe community advisory board and the Public Safety Coordinating Council. Mr. Hummel stated that the Public Safety Coordinating Council does not have staff to drive a program like DeschutesSafe. The Council has applied for a grant for a staff position however, at which point Ms. Cook could be moved back to her current time commitment to the program. He stated that at some point, the DeschutesSafe programs could be transferred to the Public Safety Coordinating Council. Commissioner DeBone asked if there is other agency support recognizing a need for better resolution time from the District Attorney’s Office. Mr. Hummel responded that law enforcement agencies do not normally give feedback after providing a case to the District Attorney’s Office, but victims do struggle with delays. Commissioner DeBone asked Ms. Anderson how a criminal representative would be brought in to be part of DeschutesSafe, as was mentioned earlier. Ms. Anderson stated that certain participants in repeat offender programs are open about their crime and its impact. Many have successfully completed Family Drug Court and are clean and sober. Mr. Maier asked if the 1.4 million dollar increase in this budget could be sustained. Mr. Hummel answered that the majority of the increase is grants. The effect on the general fund is flat-lined. The increase in the last two years’ budget went to hiring a new Deputy District Attorney, shifting IT from County to the District Attorney’s Office, adding a new Victims Advocate, and the union contracts’ dictated pay and benefit raises. He pointed out that the State has decreased its money flow to County District Attorney’s Offices.


Commissioner Baney asked if there is an opportunity with the recruitment for systems analyst to consider moving some IT support to the County and free up funds to support other areas. The position could possibly be categorized a different way. Mr. Hummel said he is willing to look at it, however he recommended there would be a need for two full-time IT staff—to equal eighty hours per week. Ms. Anderson stated from a user perspective, that there is a significant benefit to having internal IT integration. It meets the District Attorney’s Office’s user needs, which are different than County IT needs. Computer forensics, criminal justice systems, and digital evidence are all needs that are only supported by their internal IT. Josh Kilander stated that as internal IT support, his role is critical to investigations and court efficiency; and at this point, County IT is not available to provide that specialized support to systems and staff. There has been focus on integrating County IT and District Attorney’s Office IT so temporary coverage can be maintained if needed. This concluded Mr. Hummel’s presentation. Dr. Jana VanAmburg, Deschutes County Medical Examiner presented the Medical Examiner’s portion of the PowerPoint presentation. She introduced herself and her staff that were present: Shaunda Haines, registered Forensic Nurse and Nancy Davis, Office Manager. Dr. VanAmburg gave a review of her background and experience and described her staff positions. Six Deputy Medical Examiners perform investigations, coordinate with funeral homes, follow-up with medical personnel, and communicate with families of the deceased. Dr. VanAmburg noted that there has been an increase in natural deaths over the last two years. The current and proposed pay given to Dr. VanAmburg and her staff for specific tasks is referenced on the PowerPoint (Exhibit 1). The requests for the 2016/2017 budget are as follows and are detailed in the PowerPoint:

-increase the Continuing Education by $300.00 annually; -increase the on-call stipend to $50.00 per day for death investigators; -increase Deputy Medical Examiner on-call stipend to $50.00 per day. These are

on-call positions and is done in addition to a regular job. -increase the Medical Examiner’s stipend to $5,000 per month—based on hard

work by staff, and to match the average compensation for the position in other agencies, which Dr. VanAmburg stated as $89,500 annually. Currently she receives no stipend.


Mr. Maier asked for clarification on the actual costs of $31,659 for 2015 and the requested increase to $135,705. What does the increase $69,155 buy? Mr. Anderson clarified that the amount is different in the proposed budget. Discussion was had with Mr. Hummel and District Attorney’s Office’s staff in initial budget discussion. It was decided to acknowledge that the Medical Examiner’s office is underfunded, but there was not enough specialized expertise to make a qualified recommendation to the budget committee. They recommend that next fiscal year an analysis with the District Attorney’s Office and the Medical Examiner is done to research other medical examiner offices. Then a thorough recommendation will be made to the budget committee. Also, it should be determined where the Medical Examiner ought to be placed within the budget. Based on preliminary research by David Givens, it is inconsistent throughout the surrounding counties. Mr. Maier expressed concern about the amount of increase requested, if it has not been an issue in the past. He acknowledged professional recognition, and recommended staff investigate the need. Dr. VanAmburg pointed out that the Medical Examiner has never been reimbursed and the current Administrative Stipend is divided among an increased number of death investigators. Nancy Davis stated that she discovered that funeral homes were overcharging their office and now there are contracts and timelines set in place. This saved money and improved processing. Dr. VanAmburg stated that the State Medical Examiner would like to regionalize services. It is possible that Central Oregon counties could have a forensic pathologist be located in Deschutes County to perform autopsies for the region. State funding did not support this idea a couple years ago, but it is still a possibility. Mr. Barret summarized that the deficiency in the Medical Examiner’s office budget has been brought to the budget committee’s attention and there is much work to be done ahead.

Being no further discussion, the session ended at 10:30 a.m.

DATED this ;?-';)dDaYOf ~ 2016fortbe Deschutes County Board of Commission~

t1L-Lk-~ Alan Unger, Chair

ATTEST SIGNATURES: Anthony DeBone, Commissioner

~~ Recording Secretary

Minutes of Budget Meeting Thursday, June 2, 2016 of7

“Community Safety and Justice”

District Attorney FY 2016-17 Budget

WHO ARE WE?

• 19 Deputy district attorneys • 1 Administrative Supervisor • 1 Executive Assistant • 1 receptionist • 17 Trial assistants • 1 half-time file clerk

• 2 IT professionals • 1 investigator • 1 quarter-time management

analyst • 5 victim advocates • 1 Director of Victims’ Assistance

50 Dedicated Individuals

WHY DO WE SHOW UP?

TO KEEP OUR COMMUNITY SAFE

HOW DO WE DO IT?

WE HOLD OFFENDERS ACCOUNTABLE

AND WE WORK TO PREVENT CRIME

1. PREVENTING CRIME

DeschutesSafe

Ken Hales Director Deschutes Community Justice Marney Smith

Director Les Schwab Amphitheater

Jamie Aguirre Owner Ginger’s Kitchen

Charla DeHate Chief Executive Officer La Pine Community Health Clinic

Naomi Mozelle Mortgage Loan Officer Home Street Mortgage

Gwenn Wysling Executive Director The Bethlehem Inn

Bob Gomes CEO St. Charles Hospital

Terry Schroeder Mobile Crisis Assessment Team Deschutes County Behavioral Health

Austin Purcell Youth Representative

Sally Pfeifer Owner Pfeifer & Associates Treatment Services

John Hummel District Attorney Deschutes County

Shane Nelson Sheriff Deschutes County

Honorable Alta Brady Presiding Judge Deschutes County Circuit Court

Jim Porter Police Chief City of Bend

Dave Tarbet Police Chief City of Redmond

Ken Mulenex Mayor City of La Pine

George Endicott Mayor City of Redmond

Cyndy Cook Retired Affordable Housing Professional

Teryl Young COCC Student

Chris Gardner Juvenile Rights Attorney

Andrew Doyle Criminal Law Defense Attorney

Tonya Karlowicz Attendance Secretary La Pine High School

Bruce Abernethy Grant Writer Bend-La Pine Schools

Cindy Tisher Managing Member Litigation Support Services LLC

Debbie Baker Chairperson Sunriver Service District Board

Deevy Holcomb Management Analyst Juvenile Community Justice

Janet Huerta Executive Director Saving Grace

Jessica Jacks Prevention Programs Supervisor Deschutes County Health Services

Julianne Repman Director of Communication & Safety Bend-La Pine Schools

Scott Patterson Oregon Department of Corrections

Sophie Nathenson Assistant Professor Oregon Institute of Technology

DeschutesSafe

TOTAL CRIMES (2009-2015)

Crime Type 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total

Assault 94 114 108 97 120 131 103 767

DUII 1,297 1,011 887 956 965 814 792 6,722

Drug 417 424 493 542 686 802 897 4,261

SA 75 82 47 51 59 71 62 447

Theft 769 687 762 795 964 894 833 5,704

Total 2,652 2,318 2,297 2,441 2,794 2,712 2,687 17,901

TOTAL CRIMES (2009-2015)

The “average” number of unique charges for each crime over the 7 year period. A visual representation of the previous table.

020

040

060

080

0m

ean

of to

tal

Assault DUII Drug SA Theft

Frequency of Recidivism (2009-2015)

Recidivism Rate

Recidivism Frequency

Recidivism Percentage

Recidivism Cumulative

0 10,077 55.95 55.95 1 3,182 17.67 73.62 2 1,579 8.77 82.38 3 1,020 5.66 88.05 4 636 3.53 91.58 5 468 2.6 94.18 6 368 2.04 96.22 7 176 0.98 97.2 8 163 0.91 98.1 9 120 0.67 98.77

10 99 0.55 99.32 11 60 0.33 99.65 14 15 0.08 99.73 15 48 0.27 100

Total 18,011 100

Will Any Crime be Committed in the Future? (2009-2015)

Recidivism Count Assault DUII Drug SA Theft Total

0 383 5,367 1,533 313 2,481 10,077 1 186 923 885 80 1,108 3,182 2 78 258 593 30 620 1,579 3 50 102 395 17 456 1,020 4 20 50 289 1 276 636 5 17 26 210 0 215 468 6 18 20 144 1 185 368 7 4 4 70 4 94 176 8 5 8 63 0 87 163 9 2 6 63 0 49 120

10 1 3 39 1 55 99 11 2 2 21 0 35 60 14 0 0 6 0 9 15 15 1 0 13 0 34 48

Total

Will the Same Crime be Committed in the Future? (2009-2015)

# of Subsequent

Crimes

Frequency

Assault DUII SA Drug Theft 0 699 5,954 396 2,344 3,387 1 56 734 47 885 976 2 12 61 0 493 527 3 20 4 289 342 4 162 153 5 74 122 6 35 77 7 24 40 8 18 36 9 20

10 0 11 24

Total 767 6769 447 4324 5704

D-SAFE NEXT STEPS • Complete preliminary data analysis • Public meetings • Analyze public input • Decide on one or two crime priorities • Assess what our community is currently doing to address these priority crimes

D-SAFE NEXT STEPS (cont.)

• Research what other communities are doing to address these priority crimes. • Decide if our community needs to improve what we’re doing, implement a new intervention(s), or a combination of both. • Develop a strategy/plan to address our crime priorities


• Introduce our draft strategy/plan to the public. • Modify it based on public input. • Implement the intervention strategy. • Monitor the implementation to see if it works.


• Adjust the intervention based on monitoring results.

• Once priority crime(s) is successfully reduced, consider addressing our next priority crime.

D-SAFE BUDGET

+ = + = +

2. HOLDING OFFENDERS ACCOUNTABLE

• DDA’s are on the frontline • What do they do?

Phone Messages

Emails

Court Notifications

Notice of Declines

Intake Follow up Continuing Legal

Education

Docket Review

Victim Meetings Grand Jury

Post Conviction

Post-Sentencing Packets

Judgment Amendments

Restitution

Witness Prep Plea Offers

Witness Travel

Recruit Expert Witnesses

KIDS Center

Computer Forensics

Phone Dumps

Read Police Reports

Defense Position on Motions

Interns/Externs

Team Meetings

On Call Review Psycho-Sexual

Evaluations Review Defense

Evidence Safe Screen

Return of Evidence Form

Parole & Probation Detainer List Review (Daily)

Multidisciplinary Team Child Abuse Elder Abuse

Mental Health Court

Domestic Violence Deferred Sentencing

Program Trial

Detective Meetings Bend PD

Redmond PD Deschutes County Sheriff

DDA Brandi Shroyer’s Week May 2-6, 2016

• Monday: • 8-3:00: Last day of a three-week sex abuse

trial • 3:00-5:00: Reviewed intake for new jail

inmates/Prep for civil commitment hearing /Completed evaluation for intern.


• Tuesday: • 8:00-12:45: Civil commitment hearing • 1:00-5:00: Meeting with Kids

Center/return phone calls and emails from Monday

• After hours catch-up


• Wednesday • 9-10:00: Prepare for trial on Friday • 10:00-11:00: Meeting with witnesses • 11:00-12:00: Research and draft bench memo for Friday

trial • 1:00-2:00: Phone calls with doctor preparing for motion • 2:00-3:30: Draft motion • 3:00-5:00: Sentencing hearing from trial


• Thursday: • 8:00-10:00: Review new jail inmate cases • 10:00-11:00: Meeting with victim in rape case • 11:00-12:00: Return emails and phone calls • 1:00-2:00: Prepare for Friday’s trial • 2:00-3:00: Prepare for hearing in one hour • 3:00-5:00: Motion to elect in injured baby case


• Friday: • 8:00-5:00: Trial

WHAT’S THIS MEAN FOR THE BUDGET?

EFFICIENCIES

• Revamped DDA hiring process • No new TA for each new DDA

EFFICIENCIES (CONT.)

• DDA/TA team model rolled out:

– Violence – Drugs – Felony property/non-violent weapon crimes – Misdemeanor property/quality of life – Traffic – Juvenile

EFFICIENCIES (CONT.)

• VAP budget: • Aggressively wrote grants = no

general fund increase

BUT……….

WE NEED A NEW DDA

CASELOADS ARE TOO LARGE Cases Per DDA’s in Other Counties (2015) County # of Cases Per DDA

Jackson County 444

Clatsop County Deschutes County

Linn County Lincoln County Lane County Marion County Yamhill County Harney County

356 357 388

330

276 259 250 250

CASELOADS ARE TOO LARGE (CONT.)

Historical Cases per DDA FTE Deschutes

# of DDAs

Cases Reviewed

Cases Per DDA

2013

18

7,185

400

2014

18

7,320

407

2015

19

7,384

388

2016

19

2017 Status Quo

2017 Requested

19 20

7,452 7,676 7,676

392 404 384

# of DDAs

Cases Reviewed

Cases Per DDA

CASELOADS ARE TOO LARGE (CONT.)

County Population

2013

162,525 11.1

2014 166,400

10.8

2015 170,740 11.1

2016 175,862

2017 Status Quo

2017 Requested

181,138 181,138

10.8 10.5 11.0

Historical Staffing Based on Population

County Population

2008 2012 2011 2010 2009 160,140 158,875 157,733 170,705 167,015

11.2 11.3 11.4 10.5 10.8 DDA’s Per 100,000

DDA’s Per 100,000

People Per DDA 9,279 8,896 9,484 8,826 8,763

9,029 9,057 9,533 9,256 8,986 9,244 People Per DDA

SO WHAT? • Turn-Over • Delayed Justice • Stress

1. TURN-OVER

• Lost 4 DDA’s in last 13 months • 22 percent of our team • Historical record

2. DELAYED JUSTICE

Felony Misdemeanor All Case Types

2013 362 213 271

2014 256 176 212

2015 208 179 205

2016 210 238 225

Average Days to Complete Cases

CHARGING UNCHANGED

• Felonies as a percentage of all cases charged: • 2013 – 36% • 2014 – 38% • 2015 – 39% • 2016 – 39%

3. WORK RELATED STRESS

WRAP UP

• We’re working on keeping our community safe with prosecution and prevention.

• The prevention side needs modest assistance via the proposed investment in DeschutesSafe

• We’re wringing every possible efficiency out of the system.

• But with this, we still have a need for a DDA.

QUESTIONS?

• Stay tuned for the Medical Examiner……

MEDICAL EXAMINER Dr. Jana VanAmburg

ABOUT THE MEDICAL EXAMINER The Deschutes County Medical Examiner, Dr Jana VanAmburg, is an Oregon licensed physician with a private practice who was appointed by the State of Oregon in October 2014, to investigate and sign the death certificates for all unexpected, accidental or suspicious deaths as well as all natural deaths of individuals not currently under the care of a physician. Dr VanAmburg has a staff of 6 Deputy Medical Examiners, all Oregon licensed Registered Nurses who perform investigations, fluid collection and follow up with appropriate State/County personnel. Deschutes County covers 3055 square miles Population is 170,388 (2014 Census)

2016 – 2017 BUDGET REQUEST 2015 – 2016 Budget Amounts Investigation/completion of Death Certificates - $150.00 Administrative Stipend - $1000.00 per month ($32/day on-call pay for investigators) Continuing Education - $2200.00 total annual amount Mileage Reimbursement - $.540 per mile 2016 – 2017 Budget Requests: Investigation/completion of Death Certificates - $150.00 Administrative Stipend - $1000.00 per month Continuing Education - $2500.00 (increase of $300.00 annually) Mileage Reimbursement - $.540 per mile On-Call Stipend - $50.00 per day/24 hour shift/$18,250 annually (New) Medical Examiner Stipend - $5000.00 per month/$60,000 annually (New)

EXPLANATION OF BUDGET INCREASES Medical Examiner Stipend - $5000.00 The Medical Examiner is an Oregon licenses physician appointed to oversee the investigations of all unexpected deaths in Deschutes County. Following a complete investigation, she fills out and signs the Death Certificate in accordance with ORS 146.00. In addition, Dr VanAmburg provides education and guidance to primary care physicians who are not well versed in ORS 146.00. Currently, Dr VanAmburg provides office space with dedicated phone and secure fax lines, a computer work station for the Deputy Medical Examiners as well as administrative office support. There has not been reimbursement for the office space in the past and this budget request has been made to more adequately compensate Dr VanAmburg for her time and the cost of providing office space, equipment and supplies for herself and the Deputy Medical Examiners. Job Description provided.

BUDGET INCREASES CONTINUED…

Deputy Medical Examiner (On-Call position) - $50.00 daily stipend The average monthly ORS 146.00 case load is approximately 20 deaths. In addition to these cases there are a 4:1 ratio of Non-ME cases to ME cases. Non-ME cases are investigated as completely as ME cases in the event the investigation results in the case classified as ME under ORS 146.00 guidelines. Currently, the investigators receive an on-call daily stipend of $32.00 per day which is derived from the $1000.00 Administrative stipend provided to the Medical Examiner. The call shifts are 24 hour shifts which equates to $1.33 per hour to have them “at the ready”. A similar on-call position in Multnomah County pays their investigative staff $24.04 - $29.56 per hour which equates to $576.96 - $709.44 per 24 hour shift. The request for 2016-2017 is to increase the stipend to $50.00 per day or $2.08 per hour. Job description provided

ADDITIONAL BUDGET INCREASES… Office Manager - $1000.00 Administrative Stipend The Deschutes County Medical Examiner’s Office Manager provides professional and technical assistance to the Medical Examiner, Deputy Medical Examiners, Funeral Home personnel in obtaining the necessary information to complete the death certificates in accordance with ORS 146.00. The Office Manager is expected to accomplish job duties including interview and hiring of new investigators, administrative tasks, budget preparation, payroll, purchasing, contracts and statistical analysis. In addition, this position is responsible for the development of the contractual agreements with funeral home personnel. The Office Manager is the liaison between the Medical Examiner staff, law enforcement, medical office/hospital personnel, families of the deceased and funeral home personnel. This position requires approximately 25 – 30 hours per week and is currently not funded. This request is to use the current Administrative stipend for this position. Job description provided.

TYPICAL MEDICAL INVESTIGATION CALL

• Dispatch Calls Investigator • Investigator calls law enforcement on scene and determination is made

whether a scene or funeral home investigation is warranted. • Head to toe body examination is performed and fluids obtained. If

autopsy is needed calls are made to DA and State ME for authorization • Process fluids for transport to State Lab in Clackamas, OR • Obtain deceased medical records to research for contributing cause of

death • Complete Notice of Death report for Medical Examiner – used to track

police reports and toxicology/autopsy results • Release deceased remains to funeral home for final disposition • Prepare State Medical Examiner Record in computerized format

(SMER) • Medical Examiner reviews SMER, Notice of Death forms and police

report and medical records to complete and sign death certificate.

thursday, june 2, 2016

Documents