WELCOME TO THE NEW YORK STATEWIDE CENTRAL REGISTER OF CHILDABUSE AND MALTREATMENT CLASS ACTION WEBSITE

This website has been established to explain the status of two separate class action lawsuits against the New York State Office of Children and Family Services (“OCFS”) which operates the New York Statewide Abuse and Maltreatment Register (“SCR” or the “Register”). The court has certified two classes. One class is referred to as the Finch Class and the other is referred to as Sub Class B. This website will advise you of a settlement for Finch Class A and for Sub Class B and the rights that members of the class have.

SUB CLASS B MEMBERS
CLICK HERE

IF YOU ARE NOT SURE IF YOU ARE LISTED ON THE REGISTER
CLICK HERE

You will find below information regarding the following:

1. What is the New York Statewide Abuse and Maltreatment Register and why was the Finch Litigation Filed.

2. Are you a Class A Member?

3. What rights do you receive as a Class A Member?

4. What is the Class A Settlement Agreement about?

5. Has the proposed settlement been approved?

6. How will class counsel monitor the State’s compliance with the settlement?

7. Who are the Class Representatives and who is the Class Counsel?

8. Who is paying the attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses of class counsel.

1 WHAT IS THE NEW YORK STATEWIDE ABUSE AND MALTREATMENT REGISTER
AND WHY WAS THE FINCH LITIGATION FILED

New York, similarly to virtually every State in the union, maintains a Registry that lists the names of people who have supposedly abused or maltreated a child. Inclusion on the Registry is virtually automatic requiring only that the allegations satisfy a minimal “any credible evidence” standard. Although adding a name to the Registry is easily done the consequence of such inclusion can be economically devastating.
Before an employer who is engaged in child care may hire, the law requires that an inquiry be made to ascertain if the job applicant is listed on the Registry. Licensing or foster care agencies must also consult the Registry. If the person is not listed, the employer receives a “no hit” letter. If listed, a “hit letter” is sent to the employer which will for all practical purposes foreclose the opportunity to be gainfully employed in the child care industry. Once on the Registry, your name remains listed for up to 28 years.
In 1994, a federal Appeal court held that the legal requirement that employers must consult the Registry is an unconstitutional impediment to employment.

Finch v. State, filed in February of 2004, challenged the substantial delays in
scheduling these hearings. Since hearings took years to complete, many people who were awaiting a clearance lost job opportunities. These delays were particularly troubling since 60%-70% of people who eventually received their hearings were exonerated.
The Honorable Shira Scheindlin of the Southern District of New York (04 CIV 1668), was assigned to the Finch case. The Judge certified a class. After denying the State’s motions to dismiss and for summary judgment the trial was scheduled to begin in March of 2010.
Three weeks before the trial was to start the case took a dramatic turn. A staff worker at the Central Registry advised counsel that shortly after the Finch litigation was filed the State Agency that operates the Registry undertook various projects that wrongfully terminated hearing requests. To eliminate the hearing backlogs of up to seven years the State implemented a project that contacted the inquiring employer to ascertain if they were still interested in the applicant. As these calls took place years after the clearance request had been made all of the contacted employers were no longer interested in the applicant. The request for a hearing was then closed out and the State records were marked that the hearing had been “waived”. Some hearing requests were shredded and similarly noted as “waived.” As the State records recorded that the requested hearing was waived, the person who was listed was permanently foreclosed from receiving a hearing ever again when a later clearance inquiry was made. These projects violated the statute that created the Registry which afforded the right to the hearing to the job applicant and not to the inquiring employer. After discovery confirmed the “whistle blowers” allegations, the State agreed to settle the “project” claims. Beginning in August 2010, and staggered over fifteen months, notices would be sent to 20,000 people whose hearings were terminated by these projects. People who receive these Notice Letters are all members of Sub Class B. The notice advises the class members of their right to reopen their “waived” hearings. Because of this settlement over a thousand New Yorkers have requested that their hearings be reopened.

Finch Class A

As the partial settlement only related to the hearing termination projects, the question as to how long it should take to complete hearings remained outstanding. The timeliness trial was then scheduled to start in September 2010. On the eve of trial a final settlement of the litigation was reached. Beginning in November, 2011, for those whose opportunity to work is impeded, hearings will be completed in four months. For those whose jobs are not immediately at risk, hearings will be completed in eight months. Compliance with these time limits will be monitored by appointed class counsel for up to three years.
For thousands of people hearings will now be held in a timely way allowing many to return to work sooner. Those projects that wrongfully deprived people of their rights to a hearing are now a thing of the past.

2. ARE YOU A CLASS A MEMBER?

On December 18, 2008, Judge Scheindlin did so and defined the members of the Finch Class as:
“All persons who are working or desire to work or to be licensed in child-related employment who, now and in the future, are listed on the Statewide Central Register of Child Abuse and Maltreatment as the subjects of indicated reports that were investigated and indicated by a designated investigative agency, and who have timely requested amendment of the indicated report and whose requests for amendment have not been disposed of.”

(See 12/18/2008 Decision link)

Thus, if you are currently listed on the Statewide Register and have requested a hearing and have yet to receive the hearing, you are a member of this Finch Class A. 

3. WHAT RIGHTS DO YOU RECEIVE AS A CLASS A MEMBER?

A. What are the Rights you will Receive?

Beginning November 1, 2011, if you have applied for a job or a license to work with children and are awaiting a clearance from the Register, your review will be completed in 130 (4 months) days from the day you make your request. If you have been terminated or suspended form a job because of the indicated report, your review will also be completed in 130 days from the date of request. Those whose jobs, or license or job application are not immediately affected will have reviews completed within 310 days (8 months).

4. CLASS A WHAT IS THE CLASS A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ABOUT?

In the past people who have requested hearings have had to await months and often years before the hearings were completed. While awaiting completion of the hearing people were unable to work in child-related employment or to receive a license to operate a day care center or to become a foster parent. The settlement will require these hearings be completed more quickly.

5. HAS THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT BEEN APPROVED?

On February 7, 2011 Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin, Federal Judge in the Southern District of New York, has approved the final settlement. No one has objected to the terms of the settlement. CLICK HERE to view class settlement.

6. HOW WILL CLASS COUNSEL MONITOR THE STATE’S COMPLIANCE WITH THE SETTLEMENT?

A. Under the agreement, because of fiscal considerations, the State will not have to comply with time limits until November 2011.
B. After November 2011, Class counsel will randomly review records to make sure that 85% of requests will be completed within the agreed to time limits.
C. The Court will continue to have jurisdiction to make sure that the State is complying with the terms of the Settlement Agreement.
D. Oversight by Class Counsel will be for up to three years after the settlement is approved by the Judge. If the State can show that it has completed reviews in a timely fashion for 85% of requests for six consecutive quarters, then the oversight may end after two years.

7. WHO ARE THE CLASS REPRESENTATIVES AND WHO IS THE CLASS COUNSEL

A. Who are the Class Representatives?
The plaintiffs Barbara Finch, Carol Jordan and Barbara Ortiz will be acting as the class representatives.
B. Who are the Attorneys Representing the Class?
The attorney designated by the court as counsel for the Class is:

Thomas Hoffman, Esq. of Law Offices of Thomas Hoffman, P.C.
250 West 57 Street, Suite 1020, New York, NY 10107
Tel. No. 212 974 1170

8. WHO IS PAYING THE ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND LITIGATION EXPENSES OF CLASS COUNSEL

You will not pay any of the attorneys’ fees and expenses of the attorneys Representing the class. Class counsel will request that the State pay the costs and legal fees. 
8. WHERE AND HOW DO YOU GET MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE SETTLEMENT?

CLICK HERE

We hope you have found the website helpful. We will continue to update the website and advise you of current developments. Please contact us with any comments you may have.

Thank you for visiting us.


Thomas Hoffman
Class Counsel

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

SUNY's broken foundation

What does the Office for Children and Family Services (OCFS) and Child Welfare in New York State have to do with State University of New York (SUNY) Research Foundation Fraud?  According to OCFS - they are partners.

SUNY's broken foundation

Despite its lofty sounding name, the State University of New York Research Foundation is really just another example of New York's shadow government -- a secretive behemoth that considers itself above public scrutiny, even as it handles nearly $1 billion a year in grants for the public higher education system and pays the checks for some 17,000 public workers and students.

The arrogance of this foundation is gratingly outlined in a consultant's report for SUNY Chancellor Nancy Zimpher and SUNY's board of trustees. It describes an entity that was designed to serve SUNY but often keeps its presumed partner as much at arm's length as it does the public and the press, leading to poor communication and distrust.

I would normally publish the report but it is a secret.

It also leads to a failure of SUNY's research to live up to its potential, the report finds. SUNY lags in things like patents, licenses and royalty income, costing it prestige and money.

None of what's in the report should be a surprise to SUNY. After all, the foundation's board includes Ms. Zimpher as the chair, four SUNY presidents and a dean. Yet the board is -- according to some of its own members -- "a joke" that receives little information, is not asked for its views and is kept in the dark by the foundation's management. The board's control seems to have long ago been either appropriated by or ceded to the foundation's president, John O'Connor, a SUNY vice chancellor who is resigning under the cloud of an ethics investigation.

If this was the gist of the entire report, it would be easy to suggest that the state simply dismantle this travesty. But the consultant, Clifford Stromberg of the Washington, D.C. law firm of Hogan Lovells, stressed that the foundation plays a crucial role in handling SUNY's outside grants. Without a flexible entity that's not subject to many of the state's cumbersome contracting rules and delays, he said, SUNY's research efforts would fall behind those of other major universities.

Clearly, though, this research foundation has to be put back on the track of its original mission, which is, in short, to serve SUNY.

That means, above all else, ending what appears to be almost a legalistic game in which the foundation is forever trying to keep itself from being considered a public entity, to the point of hiding information from SUNY itself.

It should not take a nearly $300,000 consultant's study and, now, a forensics audit by the state comptroller, to find out what's going on at this foundation.

Here's a research project for the great minds at SUNY and in state government: Come up with a framework that preserves the foundation's flexibility while ensuring that it is transparent and accountable.

Be prepared to justify your solution.

THE ISSUE:

A report paints the SUNY Research Foundation as secretive and even hostile to the university it serves.

THE STAKES:

A foundation created for public benefit needs to return to its original purpose.

New York OCFS and SUNY Caught In Lustful, Multi-Billion Dollar False Claims Tryst

What does the New York Office of Children and Family Services have to do with the State University of New York Research Foundation Fraud?  According to OCFS - they are partners: 

http://www.ocfs.state.ny.us/ohrd/partner.asp

http://www.bsc-cdhs.org/TrainingPrograms/SpecialProjects.aspx

http://www.timesunion.com/default/article/Public-school-private-dealings-1403960.php

What this partnership means is there are conflict of interests which allow for the continuing practice of filing false claims and nothing is being done about it.  The sting from a slap on the wrist quickly fades when dealing with a lustful, multi-billion dollar false claims tryst.
HHS OIG Review of Training Contract Practices at the New York Department of Social Services A-02-93-02006

I am a child snatching piece of crap...

Brought to you by the makers of Legally Kidnapped...

I am a child snatching piece of crap...

 0digg

... who is making Child Abuse Propaganda video's for New York's ACS, that nobody is watching, in a desperate attempt to repair their public image after a few recent high profile failure to protect cases, by making themselves look like the Champions of Children...


And embedding is disabled by request. Therefore, you will have to watch these NY ACS Child Abuse Propaganda Video's on YouTube. I assume they are going to be played on a screen at some child abuse propaganda month event, although I could be wrong.


Hold on to your lunch!!!

I Am A Child Protective Specialist #1 

I Am A Child Protective Specialist #2 

And here's their YouTube channel.http://www.youtube.com/user/childservices

What a joke.



Could not have said it better myself!

Wanna See A Classic Medicaid Fraud Scheme In Child Welfare?

Anyone want to see a classic Medicaid fraud scheme in child welfare?  Well, here it is.

Now, who, besides me is going to do something about drugging these kids??

It's not going to be the GAO.  How do I know?  I called.  Not so long ago, the GAO put out a call for information on the psychotropic drugging of foster kids.  Unfortunately, the contact information was corrupt.

When I got a hold of the Director of the engagement, he told me that, due to confidentiality laws, the GAO could not take public information.

Naturally, I asked how they were going to conduct the investigation.  I was informed that they were going to use information and data provided by the states.

Ok, after I got up from the floor from laughing my ass off, (proverbially speaking), I inquired as to whom they were going to verify the information and data, relevant to being suspect.

I really did not get a cogent response.

So, without further adieu, I present to the public, another drugging foster kids, Medicaid fraud racket:

New York State Administration for Chiidren's Services Suit Against New York to Revise Foster Treatment

NYS OCFS Forces "Off-the-Books" Litigation in Darryl Thompson Civil Action

NYS OCFS Forces "Off-the-Books" Litigation in Darryl Thompson Civil Action

iReport —

     Defendants and NYS OCFS seek

    to hide their misconduct from the public.

Defendants and NYS OCFS are seeking to hide their misconduct from the public by forcing Plaintiff, Anntwanisha Thompson, to file documents "off-the-books" in the matter of Thompson v. Johnson, et al, a civil action filed by Elmer Robert Keach III, who represents the family of Darryl Thompson.

Darryl Thompson, a 15 year old from the Bronx, died in November 2006 after being restrained by two aides at the state-run Tryon Residential Center in Johnstown. An autopsy conducted by Medical Examiner, Dr. Michael Sikirica, ruled Thompson's death a homicide, yet a Fulton County grand jury declined to indict the two aides involved (John P. Johnson and Robert Murphy).

A letter motion, pursuant to the Court's direction, was filed earlier this month by Keach to The Honorable Andrew T. Baker, federal judge for the US District Court for the Northern District of New York to request the unsealing of all documents submitted to the Court. It states, in part, "...the Plaintiff's efforts to learn the truth about her son's death were used against her, in that in order to gain information about how Darryl died, the Plaintiff was forced to agree to a restrictive protective order that required court sealing. The Plaintiff specifically requested that she be provided with an opportunity to revisit the sealing provisions of the order at the appropriate time, and she does so by this letter motion."

Thompson suggests that all documents submitted to the US District Court for the Northern District of New York are judicial documents. To that end, NYS OCFS forcing "off-the-books" litigation not only does not serve the interests of justice, it also precludes the public from being able to access documents upon which the US District Court for the Northern District of New York will make its decisions.

Thompson is also requesting to take the depositions of Jeffrey Delorme and Robert Hoefs due to the uncertainty amongst the Defendants as to who was present during Thompson's restraint and death. While not Defendants in this action, the depositions of Delorme and Hoefs are said to be "...highly relevant to this litigation..." They are represented by the New York State Attorney General's office, who has refused to allow them to be deposed.

Source: Keach Letter To The Honorable Andrew T. Baxter, federal judge, US District Court for the Northern District of New York

Note: In the latest development, the Court has decided on the letter motion, keeping the documents sealed without prejudice.

(Case 608-cv-01241-DNH-ATB Document 147 filed Nov. 19, 2010)

Hypocrisy Rampant in New York State

Hypocrisy Rampant in New York State

iReport —


By Rhonda Mangus

Our story is given mention in this Legally Kidnapped: Baby LKReport For Halloween 2010.

It should be noted well that my son, Michael, was never truant or unlawfully detained from school. Michael was under the care of, not one but two, medical professionals who never released their demand for home-instruction.

In New York State it is a Class A Misdemeanor to file a false report with CPS. Principal James V. Fisher and City of North Tonawanda School District Child Associate Rosemary Fox were well-aware of the circumstances surrounding Michael's absence from school, yet they made the false reports to CPS. In effect, they circulated information known to be false and misused a state agency.

In light of all of the facts, several state agencies, including NYS OCFS, refused to let me file charges against North Tonawanda High School Principal James V. Fisher for filing a false report. In fact, NYS OCFS found 'no wrong-doing' by Principal Fisher. Given this, I did not attempt to bring any charges against Rosemary Fox. Ms. Fox filed the second false report the following school year (2006-2007).

Last month NYS OCFS released a 'Policy Brief' prepared by the Vera Institute of Justice.

"What their brief does not begin to explore is false filings of educational neglect charges, and why there are no investigations into this aspect. "

To that end, Chief Judge Honorable Jonathan Lippman, who denied my Motion for Permission for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeals at a session of the Court, held at Court of Appeals Hall in the City of Albany on the second day of September, 2010, has recently received "kudos" for his crackdown on  foreclosure practices. It's unfortunate that Judge Lippman does not follow the same procedures in his own Court.

The hypocrisy:  "We can't have the process being a fraud," New York State Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman said in announcing the new procedure. "It has to be real and based on credible information."

Be Disgusted With The System, Not The Victims

Here is a video of a father having his daughter tell her story of what happened while in foster care.

There are many who will find this disturbing, faulting the father for having his daughter relive the experience and averring that she has destroyed her credibility as a witness to sue.

Here is the reality.

The incidents took place 3 years ago after Child Protective Services removed his daughter and placed her in foster care.  From the statement posted on the video, the father notes that no one has been prosecuted to this day.  Here is the reason why:

In foster care, sexual abuse of children at the hands of other foster children is a daily event, yet goes unreported.

It is acceptable to report the physical abuse of children in foster care as seen with the sensational articles of foster parents being the abusers, but never other children.

Children in foster care who commit acts of violence or sexual abuse are never prosecuted, and rightfully should not be as they are under the "parenting" of the state.  To prosecute a youth who has committed such acts as described by this little girl in foster care would be a public admission of culpability and liability.  This is why it is a secret.

This father was reunited with his daughter successfully.  From my take, the father has tried to bring to justice those who were in authority, allowing this to happen, but to no avail.

This is a father, who may not be sophisticated in his public approach for justice, but he wants the world to know of what happens in foster care.  This is an act of desperation.  This is an act of free speech.  The father was a victim, too.

A parent will come to his or her breaking point to get someone to listen and to get help for the child, but in situations such as this, nothing happens unless they stand up and speak out on their own so other parents do not have to relive the horror stories their children tell them in screaming fits of night terrors.

Everything in foster care is a secret and society is conditioned to keep it a secret to be taken to the grave.

It is acceptable for children to speak out about 'bullying', for what I consider assault and battery, but it is not acceptable for children to discuss being sexually stimulated by other children in foster care.  It happens more often than one can conceive and it is never reported.

Shhhhh.....it's a secret.

No one reports to the prosecutors or attorney general.  No one is willing, as professional attorneys, to risk losing their law license to bring forth these actions against the state.  There are no national statistics.

This little girl and her father are not victims; they are survivors, heros.  They had the courage to break the social taboos on telling the dirty little secrets behind the iron curtain.

The true victims are the perpetrators, the youth who commit these acts.  Yanking a child out of a home and grinding them through a corrupt and dysfunctional system creates a disturbed child, but what is worse is there will never be any intervention.  The cycle will continue as these perpetrators were probably victims of other foster children sexually abusing them.

Residential institutions are breeding grounds for such behavior yet the only cure is to pump the kids with more psychotropic medication that only exasperates and perpetuates disturbing behavior.  The more a foster youth acts out, the higher the psychotic medication doses.

At least he got his kid back.



Youths in the custody of the State have a constitutional right to be free from physical abuse by staff and assaults inflected by other youth.

U.S. DOJ New York Investigation of Child Abuse in Residential Institutions

The child welfare industry is so desperate to keep their dirty secrets of what happens to children in the system, it is not just willing to keep the public thinking it is an horrific act to force a child to relive the event, but it has no qualms of getting on its knees, begging and groveling to the court to keep even the details of a child murder under lock and key, just so the industry can stay in operation.

Just as a parent who allows a child to needlessly suffer torture and harm under his or her care be held accountable for these actions and inactions, so should a state.

Keach Letter To  Federal Judge Requesting Unsealing Of New York Office Of Children And Family Services Reco...
Be disgusted with the system, not the victims. What would you do if this happened to your child?