MOMS Report Card: Premier Christy Clark’s solution to the CLBC crisis
Here is an overview of Premier Christy Clark's solution to the crisis in community living, as outlined at a Jan 19 press conference:
1. Funding:
Of the $40 million in "new" funding announced:
- Only $18 million is directed to CLBC operations, of which $9 million was the emergency funding announced last September – leaving $9 million in new money, but an $18 million yearly increase moving forward;
- $12 million is “tagged” by the government from the contingency budget to spend in case of caseload increases;
- $10 million is earmarked from the Ministry of Social Development for day and employment programs and transitioning youth;
Compare this to an estimated $70 million that CLBC needs just to address current waitlists, with at least 3,000 documented unmet requests for support from CLBC-eligible clients on hold. Waitlists grew during a two-year funding freeze in 2010 and 2011 when the number of clients grew by 5% annually. Besides millions needed to resolve the backlog, CLBC needs further budget increases of $35 million in April 2012 and again in April 2013, just to address projected 5% caseload growth for each of the next two years.
Conclusion: Better than zero but this is a Band-aid, not a solution. Stay tuned for more gut-wrenching crises and more outside noise.
2. Independent Advocate:
The Children's Advocate, Mary Ellen Turpel Lafond, will be given a limited mandate to advocate on behalf of youth turning 19 as they transition into adult services. This is very good news for young adults, but it completely fails CLBC's most vulnerable clients -- the hundreds of older clients who have no families to advocate for them, who can't go to the media when they have a problem, and who are unable to access the support of appeal mechanisms like the Advocate for Service Quality or the Client Support Team.
Conclusion: A+ for extending the mandate of the Children's Adocate, and a resounding F for the disgraceful and cynical failure to provide equal support for the more vulnerable older adult population who can't cause Premier Clark the same kind of political pain by describing their abuse/neglect at the hands of CLBC in front of the TV cameras.
3. Deputies' report
This report by senior provincial bureaucrats relied primarily on the internal audit and the CLBC Board's new vision report, released before Christmas. It proposes better coordination of CLBC services with other agencies and during adult transitions, plus more reliance on non-CLBC services (same old, same old).
In short, the Deputies' advice is that families and adults expect too much and that CLBC and its clients should stop complaining and get used to less support from govt.
Conclusion: F
4. CLBC Audit report
Key issues are summarized below:
1) Omissions: The auditors did not acknowledge, investigate or report on most of the troubling allegations around CLBC practices, as raised by families and the media:
- Firing of Vancouver coastal director Paul Sibley, which allegations have linked to contracting practices.
- Serious contracting and practice irregularities noted in the Lister consultants report, as reported by Global News and the Victoria Times Colonist.
- Complaints (Vancouver Sun) that CLBC staff improperly changed needs assessments using the GSA tool to justify contract cuts, or misled home share contractors by failing to be transparent about known risks like violence history, in efforts to reduce contract costs.
- Complaints about abusive/unprofessional contracting practices: alleged threats, intimidation, or blackballing of contractors who raise health and safety concerns, allegations re preferential awards & of wildly divergent contract values for similar needs. Allegations that moonlighting CLBC staff paid themselves higher rates while cutting other contractors.
- Complaints about oversight failures: that clients were left in home shares with expired contracts, clients whose placement, status and care was rarely or never inspected by CLBC and or agency supervisors.
Conclusion: F. These are serious omissions that seriously undermine the report's credibility. Sweeping problems under the rug will do nothing to restore confidence in CLBC or help the agency get on track! Expect more outside noise.
2. Projections: The audit admits CLBC has a good handle on projected caseload increases but claims that's meaningless for planning and budget purposes without detailed assessments of exactly what services each future client will need.
It's a ludicrous assertion: In no other arm of this or any other government can bureaucrats predict exactly what will be needed by a consumer who walks in the door a year or two in the future.
3. Waitlists: After months of denying it had any waitlists, CLBC released data in September 2011 showing that 2,126 clients were receiving some services but were waiting for additional or enhanced services; while another 832 eligible adults were waiting and had not yet received any CLBC services.
While imperfect, CLBC's client file management system and waitlist data is better than most other arms of govt. The Children's Ministry, for example, can only guess how many kids most of their programs serve, and claims to have no ability to even estimate unmet service requests.
Yet the government auditors, after reviewing a sample of files from CLBC's Request for Service List (RFSL) and allegedly finding it riddled with errors, concluded that CLBC's waitlist numbers were unreliable and overstated. They concluded therefore that the data did not support the $65 million CLBC has requested from the province to eliminate the backlog, or the new funding required to meet projected caseload increases in 2012 and 2013.
The conclusion is at odds with the results of CLBC's December 2010 customer satisfaction survey, which also addresses the question of unmet needs.
One Mom’s letter to the Minister
We continue to receive the most amazing, heartbreaking and disturbing letters from families, caregivers and concerned citizens around the province sharing their experiences about BC's community living crisis. I wish we could share them all, but most people are simply too afraid of retaliation if they speak out, or are quite understandably reluctant to sacrifice their family's privacy.
We thank all of you who have entrusted us with your stories, your hopes, your frustration and your fears. We are doing our best to bring these issues to public attention, with the help of our BC Community Living Action Group partners and with strong interest and support from the provincial media, in the hope of finally pressuring government to take real action.
Below, with permission, is an example of one of the dozens of letters in our inbox yesterday.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 1:57 PM
Subject: CLBC
Honorable Stephanie Cadieux:
This morning I had the opportunity to listen to you regarding CLBC on CKNW. It seems that despite the huge crisis in CLBC you still strongly believe (or keep telling yourself and want others to believe) that CLBC is meeting the needs of most families. That the huge media blitz is overrated and that there are just a few families being affected and are in actual crisis.
I can tell you that you are very wrong. There are countless families who are needlessly suffering emotional and financial stress due to CLBC's lack of concern, acknowledgement of problems and lack of financial support. Have you had a good chat with any of your front line facilatators or social workers lately? How's the morale?
To pay the CEO bonuses for not adequately supporting families in crisis is morally wrong and unethical. For you and the government to continually support a board that refuses to assist families in crisis is sickening.
Why do I feel this way? Because we are one of those families, we are just one of many. Thank God we have finally received some home share funding for our son but only after a significant long term crisis!
We begged for help. Care Plan after Care Plan was submitted and revised by me as I sought help and made revisions just so our family could survive. Finally we were forced to have our son removed from our home. Still CLBC refused funding, instead they preferred to use up significant police, ambulance and local hospital resources and expected the hospital to provide his housing. Then CLBC staff suggested and threatened that he be moved to the local homeless shelter. I won't go into the details as I have already done that in numerous emails to Premier Christy Clark and the former Minister for CLBC in May 2011.
Already I suspect the funding for our homeshare is not enough; as I am already getting hints from him (only four short months into the contract) that he feels he is not getting enough and was "railroaded" in the contract.
I have friends who are aging, unwell and tired, yet their facilitator told them they will likely not get funding for their son till they die. That's encouraging!
Apparently the funding contract for our son's home share provider is top secret. CLBC and contract provider can't tell; won't tell; confidential. Yet some staff at CLBC are getting multiple funding contracts for multiple homeshare clients. They know funding contracts and are negotiating their own contracts while working full time for CLBC! Interesting. How can this be? Don't home share clients require significant care? How are providers able to work full time or even part time if they are home share providers for needy clients? How do CLBC staff negotiate their own contracts if $ amounts are top secret? Who takes responsibility if our current home share provider feels his funding contract is too low? He's getting wind that others are paid more. What is the funding formula and why is it not consistent? Who negotitiates and advocates on behalf of a potential home share provider who is not familiar with a system full of conflicts of interest? Where's the accountability of home share providers? What safeguards, controls and oversight is there to these home shares? Who's watching that homeshare providers are actually doing what they are supposed to be doing, such as life skills training?
For 18 years I've been a stay at home parent due to my son's significant needs. How does one get one or multiple homeshare clients and still manage to hold down a full time job?
Lots of questions, lots of irregularities, lots of mismanagement and I suspect some are getting rich on the backs of needy, vulnerable individuals and families who are suffering needlessly.
Economy wise; families in crisis don't help the economy much either as it causes unnecessary mental health issues to ALL family members. Hard for a husband to work when his family life is in crisis. Might explain why divorce rates among families with special needs kids is so high. Has the Finance Minister ever considered that? Would Premier Christy Clark be Premier if her son was Autistic, Deaf and had Cerebral Palsy?
My whole family has paid a price!
Also, one more key question...... Can you tell me why there is an endless pot of money in the medical/hospital setting (ex.Children's hospital) where babies of all gestational ages and ailments are saved yet the pot dries out once these vulnerable, needy, disabled children are lovingly placed into the arms of their parents and sent home? Why is it that at that point almost all parents left out in the cold? The "AT Home Program" is not adequately funded, parents receive little supports or respite, if any, and then after 19 long years there is again no funding at the CLBC end. Any answers to that question?
Sincerely
(Name withheld to protect family confidentiality)
MOMS challenges minister’s efforts to downplay community living complaints
The Minister responsible for Community Living, Stephanie Cadieux, suggested in media reports today that families and other community living advocates have been exaggerating the crisis in BC's community living sector because only 63 complaints have been filed to date with a new client support team.
- Read the Minister's comments in today's Victoria Times Colonist and Vancouver Sun
The minister said her client support team has ordered CLBC to provide more services after validating more than 60% of the complaints reviewed to date.
- Find out more about the Minister's community living client support team and how you can file a complaint.
MOMS has written to the Minister to raise a number of concerns relating to her client support team and her comments in the media. Minister Cadieux and Premier Christy Clark are still trying to manage the community living crisis as a public relations exercise when what is needed is a commitment to working in good faith with families and other community partners to effect real change.
Read a copy of our letter below:
Dear Minister Cadieux
According to reports in today's media, you have stated that the crisis in community living crisis "is not maybe as large as some would like us to believe it is" because your new client support team has only received 63 complaints.
We wish to express our disappointment at the disrespect your statement shows for the many hundreds of caring families, caregivers and community partners who have contributed enormous volunteer time and effort, in good faith, to help to identify key challenges in community living and offer positive solutions.
Social worker: CLBC doomed from start
Here's a very interesting retrospective from a Burnaby social worker on the problems and flaws that have dogged CLBC from its inception. (She is incorrect about exemption from the Freedom if Information Act - CLBC does have to comply.)
A history of Community Living
By Tracey Young, Burnaby Now
November 11, 2011
Dear Editor:
Community Living B.C. was doomed from the very beginning. It was never about greater individual and family control and improved service delivery. People have a short memory about how it was that Community Living B.C. was created. Read more
She argues that the flawed CLBC model was doomed from Day 1 and notes that the current crisis is just the latest, coming on the heels of the decision to return children's services to MCFD due to widespread concerns about serious gaps in how children under 19 and their families were being supported by CLBC. She also points out that scandal and alleged contracting irregularities dogged CLBC even before it was officially created in 2005.
Many argued that despite the grand vision, hopes and promises, CLBC was always intended by government to serve primarily as a mechanism to deflect political flack while doing the dirty work of cutting/controlling community living spending.
Media continue to expose disturbing CLBC reports as Premier resists calls for enquiry
Media reports continues to expose disturbing complaints about how the BC government and Community Living BC have been managing the $700 million community living program that is supposed to provide residential and other supports to adults with developmental disabilities in BC.
New reports in the past week have revealed more disturbing practices by CLBC and gut-wrenching stories told by families of adults victimized by a brutal agenda to cut costs regardless of the human impacts.
Here are some of the latest stories on the ongoing crisis, with sincere appreciation for the tremendous work being done by BC journalists to expose the reality within community living, as BC Premier Christy Clark continues to resist growing calls for a full public enquiry:
Victoria Times Colonist reporter Lindsay Kines got hold of a secret CLBC report that warned CLBC-funded "home share" placements had gone badly awry due to a lack of standards and oversight, resulting in allegations of serious sexual and physicial abuse. After receiving the report, CLBC's response was to award more home share contracts to the agency responsible. Read the Times Colonist story
Vancouver Sun reporter Jonathan Fowlie investigates allegations that CLBC downgraded the needs assessment rating for one young woman to justify cuts to her supports. Read the Vancouver Sun story
- Here is Global BC on the same story
Vancouver Sun reporter Denise Ryan has been behind a compelling in-depth series highlighting the plight of families dealing with CLBC:
- Woman battling cancer must also fight for autistic son
- Mom's attempt to beat poverty on hold
- Navigating the maze of Community Living BC
- Struggle for care: mother fights to get special needs son back home
More disturbing reports from the front lines of the continuing crisis in community living:
- CTV Vancouver Island: Family turns to CTV for help for disabled son
- Global TV BC: Life in turmoil
- Langley Times: Move still on for Langley group home residents
- Kamloops Daily News: Parents, advocates rally against CLBC cuts
Meanwhile, newspaper editorial boards, columnists and Op Eds have joined the growing chorus calling on Premier Christy Clark to launch an independent review of CLBC:
- Victoria Times Colonist editorial
- Nanaimo Daily News editorial
- Provincial columnist Paul Willcocks
- UVic Prof. Michael Prince's Op Ed for the BC CLAG
How many more families need to sacrifice their privacy and tell their life stories in front of TV cameras before the BC government will "come to its senses," as one frustrated dad told Global News last night, and stop the betrayal of our most vulnerable citizens?
Dawn & Cyndi, MOMS
CLBC ‘home’ share abuses exposed
CLBC has been defending the closure of group homes and forced moves of residents into "home share" contractors with claims that it's about providing more personalized models of care. And for some aduls with developmental disabilities, finding a home with a caring family is exactly that - a happy new beginning.
But CLBC and the ministers who have promoted this shift don't like to talk about the fact that a major driver of these changes is simply a desire to decrease the per person costs of providing residential care.
And in a series of disturbing revelations this week, we are learning more about an even darker, ugly side to this shift.
First it was revealed that CLBC executives were moonlighting as home share contractors, earning as much as $10,000 a month on the side (on top of their $130,000 executive salaries and bonuses) for providing room and care in their homes to adults with developmental disabilities. These reports indicate that senior managers who ordered cuts to programs, group homes and other contractors may have themselves been awarded contracts valued at double or tripe the rates paid to typical home share providers.
MOMS is receiving reports that this practice may be far more widespread than CLBC's management admits and that it has led to conflicts and unresolved complaints. In one case, the parent of a young man alleges that her son was mistreated in the home of a CLBC executive moonlighting as a home share contractor to two clients (CLBC policy requires that home share contractors take in only a single client unless there are exceptional circumstances). In one community, caregivers say this "double dipping" is common practice among CLBC staff, with contractors allegedly reporting to the same office in which they work to manage contracts and supervise themselves and fellow caregivers.
These contracts are not reported in CLBC's public list of contractors , because they are arranged as subcontracts through community agencies that deliver services for CLBC or through microboard societies created especially to handle the home share arrangements as subcontracts.
These contracts appear to directly violate several provisions in CLBC's conflict of interest policy . That policy is not posted on CLBC's Policy Website but MOMS was able to obtain a copy. Other government departments and agencies do not permit staff to "double dip" as contractors to their own employer for obvious conflict of interest reasons.
Now Global BC News has been revealed that in at least one case, a home share contractor was providing care to five individuals in the same home, and was the subject of serious complaints and a police investigation into alleged sexual and physical abuse.
No charges have been laid. Neither CLBC nor the agency responsible for supervising this home share subcontractor will speak publicly about the incident. The public would never have learned of these troubling reports but for whistle blowers throughout the sector who are now risking their own contracts, careers and funding to expose what many see as a deeply flawed culture and serious systemic problems within BC's troubled community living system.
It is not clear how a CLBC home share contractor could ever have won approval for 5 contracts to care for 5 individuals in the same home, since this is expressly prohibited under CLBC's policies . The incident also highlights serious gaps in monitoring policies and their enforcement -- the serious oversight gaps that families, self-advocates, caregivers, agencies and concerned CLBC staff have been trying to highlight in recent months.
It is not clear how anyone could imagine such an arrangement as consistent with the personalized, individualized "family care" concept that CLBC claims to be promoting when it forces adults out of their homes and into "home share" arrangements.
In another disturbing allegation this week, one care provider says CLBC has obstructed efforts by home share contractors to form their own association to support training, sharing of best practices, standards and advocacy on behalf of the adults whom they support. Home share providers tell us they have been forced to accept budget cuts of 50% and higher imposed by CLBC, with no recourse if they believe it is unreasonable or unfair. Those who complain may get their contracts cancelled and the adult whom they care for reallocated to someone else willing to take them for less money.
MOMS is also learning that some agencies have encouraged their own group home staff to moonlight as home share providers. Colleagues question the practice, pointing out that the care of adults with severe challenges can be emotionally stressful and that such moonlighting, while lucrative, can negatively impact the ability to maintain patience and quality care both at home and at work. One of BC's largest agencies, the Developmental Disabilties Association, says it does not permit such moonlighting amongst its own staff as a policy, and that it encourages individual care and support plans for its clients that involve multiple providers as a way of providing additional checks and balances.
BC has excellent, caring people dedicating their lives to supporting people with developmental disabilities. But CLBC's twisted culture and mandate appears to have fostered all the same conditions that led to horrible abuses and neglect in the old days of institutions like Woodlands and Tranquille: isolation, inadequate oversight, a gross failure of standards, accountability and transparency and a culture that places more emphasis on the dollar value of a care contract than on the human beings that it is supposed to be all about.
What will it take for the BC government to confront this crisis and order a full independent enquiry?
In 2004, when the media revealed that the BC government was considering leaving children exposed to moderate sexual abuse to save money, Premier Gordon Campbell finally relented and commissioned the Hughes enquiry, which led to far-reaching changes and the appointment of an independent child and youth advocate.
Today, the media have again revealed that the BC government not only left vulnerable adults exposed to abuse to save money, but that it has sought to cover it up. It's time for Premier Christy Clark to face the obvious and call in someone of Judge Hughes' stature to investigate and report publicly on what is happening in community living.
Dawn and Cyndi, MOMS
Disturbing CLBC reports continue to emerge as Premier dodges external review
The following summarizes some of the serious issues/concerns shared with MOMS regarding CLBC’s management and oversight, particularly regarding efforts to reduce the costs of supports and residential care contracts. These issues are being brought forward by concerned CLBC insiders and service providers as well as families and they illustrate the need for a full independent review of the government’s and CLBC’s management of the $700 million community living sector.
Questionable assessments
Many service providers are being forced to accept reductions as high as 50% to 80% to the value of their contracts, while continuing to deliver the same or higher service levels as their clients age. There are vast discrepancies between the amounts paid to different providers. While these may be justified in some cases, given the range of different needs, it remains very unclear why some providers are targeted for cuts while others are not, and/or to what extent such cuts are reasonable.
Since 2010, when CLBC quietly launched its "service redesign" initiative, the agency has been relying on a controversial new assessment tool called the Guide to Support Allocation (GSA) to try to create a standard measure of need. The GSA remains in draft form – it has never been officially approved as a policy tool and when MOMS first asked about it last year, CLBC insisted it was an internal document that could not be shared publicly!
The GSA has since been widely criticized as flawed and inadequate in assessing real needs. The application of this tool has also been widely criticized. Clients’ needs levels have been dramatically downgraded without any consultation in many cases. Adults, families or care providers who disagree with the results of the assessment have no transparent checks and balances or independent appeal mechanisms to verify that the reductions are reasonable. Budget reductions based on the GSA have been unilaterally enforced by CLBC on contracts for family respite, group homes, day programs and other services. However, contractors tell us that they are warned that if they complain or object, their contracts could be cancelled entirely and given to another contractor who is willing to deliver lower standards of care.
Threats, intimidation: a climate of fear
The mandate to significantly cut costs, coupled with the lack of a fair process for determining funding levels, has led to widespread complaints of both overt and implied threats, intimidation and a general climate of fear within community living. Families, staff and service providers have repeatedly told MOMS that they cannot complain publicly because they have either been told or believe that there will be reprisals, such as further cuts or cancellation of their existing services or contracts, if they go public with complain about CLBC. Agencies and staff are coming to MOMS with complaints because they have nowhere else to go. As a volunteer family support network, we are not equipped to handle such concerns and have been pleading with the minister responsible for over a year now to establish effective mechanisms to address these issues.
Agency objectives, incentives put dollars before people
Bonuses for senior CLBC executives and mid-level managers have been tied to CLBC service plan objectives that promote moving as many adults as possible from group homes into less costly models of care such as home shares. This provided a financial incentive to overlook the appropriateness of a recommended care model and/or the quality of care, as long as the placement produces savings for CLBC. This incentive bonus structure existed at all levels of the organization, not just among senior executives. On Friday, the Minister announced an end to this incentive pay system, although it appears that managers will still receive the same money as part of their regular pay. Moreover, CLBC’s service plan objectives have not changed, so these will continue to guide the kinds of decisions that put savings ahead of the interests of individual clients.
Conflicts of interest
Several sources have told MOMS that some CLBC staff, including senior managers responsible for budget cuts to other programs, are allegedly moonlighting to provide home share themselves. The home share contracts are allegedly subcontracted through agencies and microboards, so they don’t show up in CLBC’s published contract list. If these reports are accurate, it presents a serious conflict of interest, as senior staff would have a financial incentive to protect and promote a model of service from which they are able to derive significant additional financial benefit. If these arrangements are subcontracted as reported, the contracting agency would find it hard to take action against a negligent home share subcontractor who also happens to be a CLBC employee or manager with the power to make budgetary decisions that affect the agency’s or microboard’s viability. In the child welfare system, social workers are not allowed to accept foster contracts because of similar conflicts. CLBC apparently has no such policy with regard to its own staff. This is another symptom of a very disturbing and endemic culture and of the systemic nature of CLBC’s challenges.
Oversight gaps
Most of the adults served by CLBC have limited verbal skills and no family/friends in their lives to speak up on their behalf if something bad happens to them, and so they are particularly vulnerable to all forms of abuse. Checks and balances to address these risks should include licensing, inspections and public reporting by an independent oversight authority, promotion of care models and or individual care plans in which multiple staff or providers can keep a check on each other. CLBC has none of these safeguards in place. The oversight gaps are most serious with the informal models of care like home share, which CLBC has been promoting to save money (Group homes are subject to licensing requirements but not home shares). There is no independent investigation of systemic complaints (the advocate for service quality has an extremely limited mandate and reports to the minister). There is no independent monitoring of caregivers and no public reporting.
Family role discouraged
One agency told MOMS they encourage families to establish Representation Agreements (which give them a legal voice in life decisions on behalf of their adult relative) as a safety check, especially to address the potential for financial abuse and to provide external support and advocacy. But CLBC has actively discouraged this practice among clients, who are penalized under CLBC’s needs assessment tool if their families have a Representation Agreement in place. CLBC was created with the goal of giving families and adults more control at all levels, from policy development to individual care decisions. But former Minister Rich Coleman ended the strong role of families and self advocates on CLBC's board. There was no consultation with families or the public in developing the service redesign process launched in 2010. And families have increasingly been excluded from individual care and support decisions.
Need for independent advocacy
Families sharing their concerns in the past year through MOMS have stressed the urgent need to establish an independent advocate with a broad mandate to ensure that CLBC is able to offer an appropriate choice of support options, with checks and balances to ensure the delivery of support in ways that respect the rights, safety and wellbeing of adults with developmental disabilities and their families. On Friday, the Minister cited the existing Advocate for Service Quality, and suggested that independent advocacy and oversight already exists. The existing office is not independent (it reports to the minister) and the limited mandate prevents the office from providing proactive advocacy, effective oversight and/or addressing systemic issues. The disturbing complaints surfacing via the media are evidence that the current model is ineffective and has allowed bad decisions, abuse and neglect.
On Friday, the Minister also announced the creation of a client response team, with a number to call for complaints. However, that number simply directs callers back to CLBC – the very organization responsible for the problems. Self-policing is not an effective remedy. A further concern is that many adults served by CLBC, especially those with limited or no verbal skills and/or no family in their lives – i.e. those most vulnerable to abuse – will be unable to initiate contact and access support from this client support team on their own, just as they are unable to access the support of the existing Advocate for Service Quality. This is another ill-conceived remedy that fails to understand or address the real systemic issues. This again highlights the need for an independent advocate, especially to look out for the many older adults who may not have families to support them.
Public reporting
CLBC compiles (or used to compile) regular internal reports to its board on reported deaths and critical incidents among residential clients. CLBC may also launch its own investigations when there are allegations of severe abuse. However none of this information is ever made public. It is not known to what extent abuse and neglect go undetected. And where problems are detected, CLBC, its staff and its contracted care providers are allowed to bury the damaging evidence and are not held publicly accountable.
Subcontractor issues
CLBC has been pursuing a major shift from models like group homes run by contracted community agencies to home shares, which are increasingly provided by independent, unlicensed and unacredited subcontractors. This raises a number of concerns, since the agency’s management and accountability system is focussed on contractors. Subcontracted caregivers are not listed in the agency’s public list of contractors and may rarely if ever come into contact with CLBC managers. If something goes wrong with a subcontractor, there is incentive for the contracted “middleman” agency to keep it quiet to avoid jeopardising their own broader contract. CLBC is basically asking its contractors to police their subcontractors. The shift underway therefore raises serious questions issues that warrant consideration by independent experts to ensure that appropriate accountability mechanisms are in place.
Final thoughts
Last week, the last block of Woodlands was torn down, symbolizing the end of an ugly chapter in our province’s history. But the fear is that we have not learned from the past and that indeed the reforms underway in community living may be recreating all the key factors – isolation, lack of transparency, independent oversight and public accountability – that allowed abuse and neglect to thrive in the old institutions.
We know there are many good, committed people throughout the system, who deserve credit and respect for the great work they do and for their unquestionable commitment to helping people with developmental disabilities live lives that respect their enormous potential as fellow human beings as well as their challenges. The Premier needs to stop trying to cover up the problems and take decisive action to restore confidence in community living and to ensure that the positive work being done can be fully recognized and supported.
Dawn & Cyndi, MOMS
MOMS, BC CLAG partners reject Minister’s stop-gap measures: full review needed
Minister Cadieux announced another series of stop-gap measures today, as her government continues to try to deflect widespread calls for a full independent enquiry of CLBC and a stop to service cuts and group home closures.
The BC Community Living Action Group, of which MOMS is a partner, has issued a media release in response, rejecting the minister's actions as another stop-gap that won't address the serious, systemic community living issues.
MOMS continues to receive new and increasingly disturbing reports via our network, including allegations of serious practice issues.
MOMS fully supports the points noted in the BC CLAG statement and again urges Premier Christy Clark to immediately commission a full independent enquiry of CLBC, as an essential first step towards providing real accountability and restoring confidence in the BC government's management of community living
Dawn & Cyndi, MOMS
More reasons CLBC needs external review
More developments in the nightmare CLBC saga!
1. Families form new Facebook group:
Please join and invite all your other Facebook friends to join to show support for adults with developmental disabilities and their families.
2. CLBC Execs maxed out bonuses while cutting services, turning away adults & families in crisis
Thanks to the sharp-eyed reader who pointed us to this CLBC doc ument showing that top executives at the troubled agency all received their maximum bonuses while cutting services, closing group homes and forcing residents into cheaper accommodations and denying supports to individuals and families in crisis. It seems that CLBC's policy structure actually rewards senior management for doing exactly what has caused the growing crisis in BC's community living sector.
- CLBC Executive Compensation Reporting
3. New CLBC CEO downplays concerns, says CLBC only failed to consult adequately in 15 - 20 cases
CLBC's new Interim CEO Doug Woollard didn't waste any time trying to curry favour with his boss, Premier Christy Clark, travelling to Victoria on Wednesday to try to deflect attacks from Opposition MLAs and members of the Premier's own caucus over her handling of the problems in community living.
Woollard took the unusual step of staging a CLBC press conference at the BC Legislature in which he stated that there were only 15 or 20 cases where CLBC did not adequately consult with families before changing their relative's living arrangements.
- Read a report by BC Local News on what Woollard had to say
- Read quotes from some of the hundreds of emails that MOMS has received in the past 15 months outlining serious complaints that CLBC has refused to address .
MOMS doesn't get paid a cent to support and advocate for families in our network while the CLBC CEO has a $230,000 paycheque at stake. Who are you gonna believe?
4. UPDATE: OK, here's yet one more reason:
CKNW: CLBC has spent thousands to try and polish its media image
"A government agency that needs millions of dollars just to help all of its clients is spending thousands on a media relations contractor.
"Community Living BC interim CEO Doug Woolard laid out the agency's financial needs today.
"Woolard says in order to meet the requests for services for everyone applying to CLBC would cost out between 51.5 million and and 65 million dollars.
"But CLBC has hired a media relations company for a maximum of $25,000, to help get its message out...." Read more
MOMS rejects Premier’s internal probe of CLBC as attempted cover-up
MEDIA RELEASE: October 19, 2011 - For immediate release
VANCOUVER: In the BC Legislature today, Premier Christy Clark acknowledged "big" problems in the managment of Community Living BC (CLBC)and said an internal audit is under way. Minister Stephanie Cadieux described this as a "rigorous," serious investigation.
But at a meeting with Minister Cadieux just last week, MOMS asked the Minister when we could expect to see the results of this internal review. The Minister stated that this is the annual budget planning report that the Ministry produces for the Treasury Board, and, as a Treasury Board document, that report or its contents could never be made public.
MOMS stressed to the Minister that an internal audit undertaken by the same officials responsible for CLBC's serious failures would NOT restore public confidence in the troubled agency.
A secret internal report that will never see the light of day will not shed light on the very serious abuses and failures that are reported to have taken place, it will not hold those responsible for CLBC's failures accountable and it will not provide solid footing to move forward with positive solutions.
Many families will view the Premier's internal investigation as simply an attempt to cover up her government's failures. For 15 months, MOMS has been urging the Premier, the Minister and their numerous predecessors to take urgent action to address the troubling complaints that families have been bringing forward through our provincial family support network. For months, the Premier and the minister responsible for CLBC sought to dismiss many of these disturbing complaints. They refused to acknowledge the growing crisis or to take action to prevent or to stop the appalling treatment of people with developmental disabilities and their families.
MOMS again calls on Premier Christy Clark and Minister Stephanie Cadieux to start listening to families, to start listening to community leaders, to start listening to members of the BC Legislature from across the political spectrum, and to immediately appoint a credible, independent reviewer to conduct a complete "top to bottom" review of CLBC, with the results of that review to be made fully public.
We believe this is the only way to start the process of restoring confidence in CLBC and moving forward on developing positive solutions in partnership with families and community leaders.
Families are the major partners in community living and provide the great majority of the lifetime care and support for adults with developmental disabilities in British Columbia. Community living is supposed to be a partnership with families but BC families have been shut out, ignored, abused and/or disrespected by CLBC and its political masters.
Dawn Steele and Cyndi Gerlach
MOMS on the Move
Media contact: Dawn Steele: [email protected] 604 874-1416
-30-