SCOTLAND COUNTY — The former Monroe County public administrator
accused of stealing from elderly and disabled residents accepted a plea
deal Wednesday.
Online court records say Jessica A. Chase pleaded
guilty to one count each of filing false documents, stealing $750 or
more and financial exploitation of an elder or disabled person.
Chase was sentenced to serve a total of 10 years in the Missouri
Department of Corrections and to pay $12,000 in restitution to the
Monroe County Prosecutor’s Office. The case was moved from Monroe County
on a change of venue to Scotland County.
Charlie McGrory, left, who has Down syndrome, and his brother Andy, who is also his job coach, bag groceries at Hy-Vee in Winona, Minn. in 2018. Charlie McGrory previously worked at a sheltered workshop, but transitioned to integrated employment as a result of a 2014 federal law that prioritizes helping people with disabilities find jobs in the community. (David Joles/Star Tribune/TNS)
More than a dozen states have moved in
recent years to stop employers from paying workers with disabilities
less than minimum wage. Now, it’s starting to become clear how that
decision is playing out on the ground.
A first-of-its-kind analysis finds that
eliminating what’s known as subminimum wage employment does not lead to a
significant drop in the number of people with disabilities who are
employed, the hours they work or their wages.
Within two years, subminimum wage employment fell by about 2,000 workers per state, according to findings
published in the June issue of the journal Labour Economics. At the
same time, income from government welfare programs declined by more than
12%.
“The biggest takeaway from our study is
that the employment fears that have kept section 14(c) in place at the
federal level are not supported by the national data,” said Michelle
Yin, an economist at Northwestern University who led the study. “The
policy does exactly what it is designed to do, that is sheltered
workshop employment falls, … but workers do not disappear from the labor
force. They remain employed, and by different measures, they become
more economically self-sufficient.”
The study offers a new look at a practice
that has persisted for nearly a century. Under a federal law dating back
to 1938, employers can obtain special 14(c) certificates from the U.S.
Department of Labor allowing them to pay workers with disabilities less
than the federal minimum of $7.25 per hour.
Since 2015, however, 17 states have
enacted legislation eliminating 14(c) certificates, according to the
Association of People Supporting Employment First. The Biden
administration sought to take things a step further by ending the
program nationally. In 2024, the Labor Department proposed plans to stop issuing new certificates and phase out 14(c) over three years.
Now, the winds appear to be shifting. The Trump administration withdrew the Labor Department plan last year and the House Committee on Education and Workforce advanced a bill in May designed to make it easier for young adults with disabilities to enter 14(c) employment.
For the study, Yin and her colleagues
looked at administrative data from the Department of Labor and the
Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey from 2009 to 2024 on 15 states
that eliminated subminimum wage employment. Each state ended subminimum
wage on a different timetable, but notably, the patterns the
researchers observed were remarkably similar across states no matter
their size or political leanings.
However, Yin admits that the outcomes aren’t entirely rosy for everyone.
“The aggregate results likely reflect two
groups moving in different directions,” she said. “Workers with higher
productivity and more labor market experience appear to find competitive
employment. Workers with the most significant disabilities and the
least experience outside sheltered settings may exit employment rather
than transition. The averages look encouraging, but averages can mask
who gets left behind.”
That’s where the approach a particular
state took matters, Yin said. In states that prioritized supported
employment, job coaching and vocational rehabilitation alongside
eliminating subminimum wage, individuals were more like to transition to
new employment, while states that neglected to build such
infrastructure left some workers without appropriate options.
Still, Yin says the findings broadly support moving away from subminimum wage.
“The feared employment collapse has not
materialized in any of the 15 states we studied,” she said. “The
transition from subminimum wage to competitive employment pays for
itself when the investment is in place.”
But Hugo Dwyer, executive director of VOR,
which supports the availability of subminimum wage employment, said the
numbers don’t tell the whole story.
“We need to somehow look at the human
side, and measure satisfaction and the opportunity for personal growth,”
he said, adding that it’s important for individuals with disabilities
to have choices.
“No one has to work in a sheltered
workshop if they don’t want to,” Dwyer noted. “But they are right for a
certain cohort of individuals who have a combination of skills that
exceed those exercised in day programs and challenges that make it
difficult for even the most patient employer to accommodate them.”
While
courts make efforts to ensure that guardians are trustworthy, some
guardians have taken advantage of people in their care. The mistreatment
could be financial, physical, emotional/psychological or any other type
of abuse of an older person or person with a disability. Guardians also
may neglect the people for whom they have a responsibility to provide
care. These perpetrators of abuse can be anyone serving as a guardian (family members, trusted others, non-profits, professional guardians, agencies).
There is currently limited information on the number of guardianship cases involving abuse. The U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging and the U.S. Government Accountability Office have highlighted the problem and cited anecdotal information. The National Center for State Courts has
found that most reports on the problem of exploitation by guardians
lack empirical data. Reports of fraud or other malfeasance by guardians
have most often involved financial exploitation, but other types of
mistreatment are also reported. Abusive acts by guardians may meet the
definitions for various state and federal crimes, depending on the facts
of the case. Guardians might be charged with such crimes as elder
abuse, embezzlement, larceny, money laundering, theft, and neglect.
How can the courts with jurisdiction over guardianship cases respond to abuse?
A
court with jurisdiction over a guardianship case might uncover evidence
of abuse through monitoring, or a person or government agency might
need to file a complaint or petition the court to respond to the
mistreatment. These courts can take the following types of actions:
Freeze assets and/or restrict accounts –
Courts may take these actions to limit a guardian’s access to money and
property while investigating a case or preparing to take another
protective step.
Investigate allegations of malfeasance–
Once allegations of abuse have been made, courts can appoint a guardian
ad litem, investigator or visitor to investigate. A court can also
audit an individual’s assets or order an accounting by an external
entity such as a certified public accountant.
Order repayment for lost assets or property –
Such orders might restore lost assets but, in many cases, the only way
to recover funds is through a bond that the guardian obtained upon
appointment. Sometimes courts do not require bonding when the guardian
is appointed, making it more difficult to obtain repayment for losses at
the hands of the guardian.
Enforce statutory rights to communication and visitation – When
abusive guardians use isolation tactics, family members and others may
be able to seek orders enforcing state laws that define the rights of
people subject to guardianship to interact with others of their
choosing.
Appoint a co-guardian or limit the powers of the guardian – This strategy may help deter or stop mistreatment by a guardian.
Remove the guardian – Removal may be the best way to stop guardian malfeasance, and petitioners might suggest a willing and suitable replacement.
Terminate the guardianship – Less restrictive options or changed circumstances might lead a court to terminate the guardianship entirely.
Besides courts with guardianship jurisdiction, who can address abuse by guardians?
Numerous
federal, state, and local government entities and non-profit agencies
can respond and provide services when someone suspects that a guardian
is mistreating an individual. Although the court has the sole power to
impose certain orders such as removing the guardian or surcharging
bonds, other entities can get involved and assist victims. These
include:
Adult protective services –
Anyone suspecting mistreatment by a guardian should report to adult
protective services. Find your state or local adult protective services
agency through the Eldercare Locator. Most states have laws making certain categories of people mandatory reporters of elder or vulnerable adult abuse.
Protection and advocacy systems –
Protection and Advocacy Systems are federally-mandated state-based
organizations that work to protect the rights of people with
disabilities, including guarding against abuse. Find your protection and
advocacy agency here.
Long-term care ombudsmen –
If the individual resides in a nursing home (or, in some states,
receives home- and community-based services), the long-term care
ombudsman can investigate and resolve complaints about abuse, neglect,
and exploitation, including complaints about guardians. Anyone can file a
complaint, but the resident (or an appropriate representative) must
consent in order for the ombudsman to investigate and share information.
Learn about the ombudsman program here and find your local ombudsman.
Law enforcement –
A guardian’s breach of duty may violate criminal laws and warrant
investigation and prosecution. In addition to reporting to Adult
Protective Services, individuals suspecting guardian abuse should report
it to law enforcement. Contact your local law enforcement agency, your
state attorney general, or call 911. Some recent examples of
guardianship fraud cases pursued by the United States Department of
Justice include cases in Pennsylvania and Florida.
Attorneys –
Separate from the guardianship system, there are various civil actions
that may apply to abuse by guardians. Depending on state law, civil
attorneys might bring cases alleging breach of fiduciary duty, breach of
contract, fraud, undue influence or a private right of action for elder
abuse. Remedies might include restitution (repaying money lost),
voiding documents including deeds, or other monetary awards of damages.
Federal agencies –
If the guardian also serves as a Social Security representative payee
or VA fiduciary and is misusing public benefits, individuals may report
to the Social Security Administration Office of the Inspector General or the VA Office of the Inspector General.
Professional licensing boards –
In some states, professional guardians may be certified, licensed or
registered. State boards can investigate and may revoke a license or
certification. If the guardian is a lawyer, the state has a committee
that takes disciplinary action when a lawyer violates professional
responsibilities.
What is power of attorney abuse?
Powers
of attorney give a trusted person (the agent) a great deal of authority
and access to money and property, without regular oversight. Power of
attorney abuse can take many forms. The agent might spend the
individual’s money on items for his or her own use rather than for the
individual’s needs. The agent might do things that the document doesn’t
allow, such as making gifts when that power hasn’t been granted. The
power of attorney document itself might be forged or fraudulent in some
other way.
State laws may help to prevent or limit power of attorney abuse. For example, the Uniform Power of Attorney Act,
adopted in over half the states, permits a third party such as a bank
to refuse to honor a POA when the abuse is suspected, and the third
party reports it to an adult protective services agency.
What are the remedies to address power of attorney abuse after it occurs?
Lawyers
may help people to stop power of attorney abuse and to get money back
that has been improperly taken by the agent. For example, a lawyer
could:
Draft a document to revoke (cancel) the POA
Ask a court to require the agent to file an accounting to see how the agent has spent the money
File a civil action to cancel contracts or deeds that the agent should not have made
File a civil action to recoup money
Petition a court to appoint a guardian who can manage the finances if the individual is unable to manage money independently
In
addition, agents under a POA may be prosecuted for abusing a power of
attorney. Depending on state criminal law, power of attorney abuse might
be theft, fraud, embezzlement, money laundering, exploitation or
another financial crime. Through the criminal court process, a
prosecutor could ask the court to freeze the individual assets to
prevent further abuse and could also seek restitution (repayment of
money taken).
What do we know about abuse by government fiduciaries?
Reports from the Social Security Advisory Board,
the Office of the Inspector General for the Social Security
Administration, the Government Accountability Office, the National
Academy of Sciences and other government and quasi-governmental entities
over the past fifteen years have documented abuse by both individual
and organizational representative payees. These incidents have prompted
removal of payees from the program and, in some cases, criminal
prosecution. The Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Veterans Affairs also has investigated and substantiated allegations of abuse by VA fiduciaries.
Amanda Bynes took to social media to air her grievances about the costs of her medical treatment and said she wants to speak to a judge about the terms of her conservatorship. The former child star said she's "been going to a treatment center that charges $5,200 a month" and there's "no reason why I shouldn't go to a therapist who takes my insurance for $5,000 less a month." Amanda then apologized to fans for talking about her case on social media "but this is what life has come to."
Note: Termination: A California judge officially terminated the 9-year conservatorship in March 2022. This video is a reminder of her situation and reaction to it.
OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced the arrest and filing of felony charges against a certified nursing assistant for the alleged sexual abuse of an 86-year-old resident with diminished capacity at Concord Post Acute, a skilled nursing facility in Concord.
Note – suspect identified as Arian Mojaddidi according to the filing
“Caregivers are entrusted with attending to and caring for people in a vulnerable, and often, incapacitated state,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Sexual abuse
is absolutely intolerable and sexually abusing a compromised individual
while in a position of power over them is all the more deplorable. At
the California Department of Justice, we will continue to fight against
any form of sexual misconduct and elder abuse.”
The Division of Medi-Cal Fraud & Elder Abuse (DMFEA) received a
referral from the California Department of Public Health regarding the
inappropriate contact at Concord Post Acute. A felony complaint has been
filed in Contra Costa County Superior Court, charging the nursing
assistant with a lewd act by a caretaker upon a dependent adult. DMFEA
is a division within the California Department of Justice whose mission
is to protect the public and the state’s Medi-Cal program from those who
defraud taxpayers and divert state health care resources. The
investigation was made possible through the collaboration of government
agencies and those who reported incidences of Medi-Cal fraud or elder
abuse. If you suspect Medi-Cal fraud or elder abuse, please report it
at https://oag.ca.gov/dmfea/reporting.
DMFEA receives 75 percent of its funding from the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services under a grant award totaling $77,652,892 for
Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2026. The remaining 25 percent, totaling
$25,884,297 for FFY 2026, is funded by the California Attorney General’s
Office. FFY 2026 is from October 1, 2025 through September 30, 2026.
It is important to note that criminal charges must be proven in a
court of law. Every defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Administrator was arrested after an incident at a Minnesota care facility
By Clark Kauffman
An Iowa nursing home administrator has been fined by state regulators
for failing to report a 2019 criminal conviction to licensing
authorities.
The Iowa Board of Nursing Home Administrators recently charged
administrator Brian Douglas Reindl with failure to notify the board
within 30 days of a criminal conviction. According to the board, Reindl
was working in both Iowa and Minnesota care facilities when the offense
occurred seven years ago.
The board has not disclosed the nature of the criminal offense, other
than to say that on Oct. 11, 2019, it resulted in a conviction for an
unspecified misdemeanor offense in Minnesota.
Minnesota state records indicate that on July 2, 2019, sheriff’s
deputies responded to a complaint at Pioneer Memorial Care Center in
Erskine, Minnesota. Reindl, the facility’s administrator at the time,
had allegedly entered the office of the director of nursing while she
was on break and refused to leave after being asked to do so.
The director of nursing alleged that when she attempted to leave the
office, Reindl used his body to hold the door shut and only allowed her
to leave after she indicated she was going to call the police. She
alleged that she then entered the office of a third employee, locked the
door, and called board members for the facility.
Reindl was charged with one count of misdemeanor harassment and one
count of misdemeanor assault in the fifth degree, and a no-contact order
was issued in the case.
According to the Minnesota Board of Nursing Home Administrators,
Reindl’s employment at the home ended the next day, and he later pleaded
guilty to a charge of assault causing fear and was placed on probation
for one year. Several months later, in 2020, the Minnesota board issued
an order of corrective action against Reindl, requiring him to complete
six hours of educational training on professional conduct.
The Iowa Board of Nursing Home Administrators recently agreed to
settle its case against Reindl with a $500 civil penalty and a
requirement that he complete three hours of educational training on
ethics.
The Iowa Capital Dispatch was not able to reach Reindl for comment.
Detectives say William Ly of Simi Valley stole the money from the victim in a series of more than 80 transactions.
A Ventura County man is
facing elder abuse, grand theft, and identity theft charges after
detectives say he stole nearly $100,000 from an 89-year-old man.
Investigators
say in June 2024, William Ly of Simi Valley was introduced to the
victim through a senior citizen breakfast club. They say Ly helped the
victim with his smartphone, and in the process Ly reset the password on
the victim's cryptocurrency account.
Last September, the victim
noticed he was missing a substantial amount of money. He reported it to
the Ventura County Sheriff’s Office. Detectives working with a county
fraud team and the FBI say they discovered nearly $100,000 had been
stolen in a string of more than 80 transactions. They say they traced
the money to Ly’s accounts.
Investigators say they are now looking for more potential victims.
The Lagos State High Court has ordered the Lagos State
Administrator-General to take over the interim administration of the
estate of late billionaire industrialist, Chief Labode Akindele, amid a
legal dispute over his Will.
Justice Tanimola Ajorin-Ajose made the order following an application by
the deceased’s first son, Mr. Oladipo Akindele, who is challenging the
validity of the Will and seeking to prevent the dissipation of his late
father’s assets pending the determination of the substantive suit.
Akindele, who was the Parakoyi of Ibadan, died on June 29, 2020, at the age of 88 at his residence in Lagos.
The claimant had sued 16 defendants, comprising the deceased’s
widows, children, relatives, associates and officials of the Lagos State
High Court Probate Registry, over the disputed Will.
Among those joined as defendants are Rev. Michael Stephen, Prof.
Wale Tomori, Rev. Canon Kolawole Jaiyeoba, Mrs. Oluwatoyin Isemede, Mrs.
Abiola Aderibige, Mrs. Abiodun Duduyemi, Mrs. Ajoke Braithwaite, Mrs.
Oluyemisi Oladapo, Mrs. Titilola Madedor, Mrs. Afolake Coker, Miss
Ayodele Akindele, Mr. Mobolaji Akindele, Mrs. Mojisola Shonibare, Mrs.
Roseline Akindele, Miss Samantha Stevenson, the Registrar of the Probate
Registry and the Administrator-General of Lagos State.
In the substantive suit, the claimant is asking the court to
declare the entire Will invalid, arguing that it failed to comply with
the provisions of the applicable Wills Law and therefore could not
constitute the legal basis for administering the deceased’s estate.
The claimant had also raised concerns over the management of the
estate, which includes properties generating rental income, alleging
that some rents had remained unpaid and that income from some of the
properties had not been properly accounted for.
He argued that the absence of an effective executor or
administrator placed the estate at risk of waste, dissipation or
mismanagement while the dispute over the Will remained pending.
Ruling on the application, Justice Ajorin-Ajose appointed the
Lagos State Administrator-General as interim administrator of the estate
pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.
The judge ordered the interim administrator to operate under the
immediate control and direction of the court and to file quarterly
reports on the administration of the estate.
The court further directed all parties to cooperate with the Administrator-General to ensure the preservation of the estate.
The application had been opposed by some of the defendants, who
challenged the claimant’s case and questioned the jurisdiction of the
Lagos State High Court.
The defendants argued, among other things, that the properties
allegedly forming part of the estate had not been sufficiently
identified and that the claimant’s affidavit contained vague and
speculative allegations.
They also questioned the territorial jurisdiction of the Lagos
State High Court, particularly in relation to assets said to be located
outside Lagos State and Nigeria.
However, the court rejected the objections, holding that the
immediate issue before it was the preservation of the estate and
prevention of waste pending the determination of the substantive
dispute.
Justice Ajorin-Ajose held that it was not necessary, at the
interim stage, to determine the precise properties constituting the
estate before taking steps to protect the assets.
The judge also noted that the deceased’s Will was under challenge
and that, at the time of the application, there was no executor or
administrator effectively in place to manage the estate.
The court consequently held that the application for the
appointment of an interim administrator was meritorious and ordered the
Administrator-General to assume responsibility for the interim
administration of the estate.
The order will remain in force pending the hearing and final
determination of the substantive suit challenging the validity of the
Will.
Colorado’s guardianship program, long
criticized for mismanagement and high staff attrition, is undergoing a
“cultural reset,” as its new director works to repair partnerships and
prepare for a major expansion under recent legislation.
Created by lawmakers in 2017, the Office
of Public Guardianship serves as a ward of last resort for indigent or
incapacitated people who lack family, friends or a private guardian to
care for them.
The public guardians are responsible for
protecting their clients’ rights and supporting their independence to
the greatest extent possible.
Staff turnover crippled early operations
The office struggled from the outset.
Lawmakers did not seek state funding for
it in 2017, instead expecting the program to run on gifts, grants and
donations — with hopes of raising $1.7 million. In its first two years,
it collected only about $2,000.
In 2019, lawmakers stepped in to fund the
office through probate fees that generated about $800,000 per year. The
first guardians began taking referrals in Denver’s 2nd Judicial
District, with planned expansion into the districts serving Delta and
Trinidad.
Legislation passed in 2023 broadened the office’s authority, directing it to operate in all 23 judicial districts by 2030.
Later in 2019, the five-member board hired Sophia Alvarez as executive director.
The guardianship office began accepting referrals in 2020 but quickly encountered a major obstacle — severe staff turnover.
The agency
struggled to even get enough guardians to cover the three districts it
was authorized to operate in. Most guardians, frustrated with an alleged
toxic work environment they attributed to Alvarez and the agency’s
deputy director, Janelle Cantu, lasted less than a year.
Some employees left after only a few months.
In its 2024 end-of-year report, the office had listed 11 guardians. By Jan. 19, 2025, seven of the 11 were gone.
In 2024, seven of the division’s former guardians
asked Gov. Jared Polis for an audit. Another former guardian filed a
complaint with the state’s Civil Rights Commission, although the status
of that complaint is unknown due to the privacy laws.
At the same time, several partner agencies
— including Denver Health, its largest — stopped sending referrals,
saying the office was mismanaged. In a 2022 state hearing, Denver Health
reported that one guardian had physically confronted a client at the
hospital and that another client, who died there, had been effectively
abandoned by the agency.
As staffing problems persisted, the
agency’s mortality rate came under scrutiny. Of the first 80 clients,
more than two dozen died during the office’s first three years. Most
were elderly and medically fragile, though some were in their 20s or
30s. The agency declined to release even basic public information beyond
a client’s age or limited details.
The governor’s office showed little
interest in the unfolding problems, even after seven former guardians
sent the 2024 letter pleading for stronger oversight. One former
guardian told Colorado Politics the office replied with a form letter
and never followed up.
The agency’s board meetings showed the agenda was swamped with personnel issues.
New leadership takes charge
Following Alvarez’s resignation in 2025, officials said the agency finally began moving toward the mission it was created to fulfill.
In November, the board hired Amelia Milton
McKeon, a veteran with more than two decades of experience working with
people with disabilities. In Florida, she helped launch the state’s
first statewide public guardianship program and later led three agencies
serving people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
Amelia McKeon, executive director of Colorado’s Office of Public Guardianship. (Photo courtesy of Amelia McKeon)
She arrived in Colorado fully aware of the
office’s troubled past. Before accepting the job, she said she read
every Colorado Politics story detailing the agency’s dysfunction. She
wasn’t deterred, she said, adding she has weathered “tough press”
before.
McKeon’s background is steeped in human
services. Her mother was a health and human services lobbyist who helped
build Florida’s intellectual and developmental disabilities agency. Her
father, a longtime Florida State University professor, taught
educational leadership. Together, they published research in the field
and became guardianship experts.
McKeon jokes she had “no choice” but to follow the same path.
“I love it,” she said.
She started early, at 17, working in a
high school pilot program supporting special‑education students who were
pressured to meet state testing requirements despite qualifying for
exemptions. She mentored those students and met two attorneys, Twyla
Sketchley and Karen Campbell, who specialized in guardianship and
independence. She later worked as Sketchley’s paralegal.
Those experiences shaped her philosophy,
she said, nothing that systems are built for the masses and the
challenge is to tailor services to each person’s needs. She carried that
into her role as a clients’ rights advocate at Florida’s Agency for
Persons with Disabilities, where the state was facing multiple lawsuits
over how it applied waiver services.
“They needed someone to be a thorn in their behind,” she said. “I was that thorn.”
Her approach to guardianship centers on preserving independence, she said.
“Even in a guardianship, it is my
statutory obligation that anything they can exercise, anything they can
choose, I’m going to support them in doing that,” she said.
Guardianship, she added, is not about taking over someone’s life —
ethically or legally. “It is not to substitute our opinions for theirs.”
Florida’s experience closely mirrored
Colorado’s — beginning with guardians in three judicial districts before
expanding statewide, with the same number of districts and similarly
rural regions.
The Colorado office had long struggled to
retain guardians in its two rural districts. McKeon made stabilizing
those areas an early priority. There was also the issue of ensuring that
people in rural areas knew these services were available.
“We need to be available, especially in
the most rural areas that have no other resources,” McKeon said. She
said she wants to avoid a system where people must travel to metro
Denver to get help. “We want them to stay where they are, in their
homes, in their communities.”
It points to another challenge for rural
Colorado: ensuring the services clients need are available and the
barriers to access removed. McKeon said that, too, has been part of her
focus.
Mending bridges
Among McKeon’s major challenges is to repair the relationships with Denver Health and other partner agencies.
Those efforts have been noticed.
Brad Torch, guardianship director for the
Guardianship Alliance, said his organization had been absorbing
referrals when the state office became an unreliable option. Last year,
he told Colorado Politics the alliance was effectively filling the gap
left by the agency’s instability.
The last nine months have been a different story, he said.
“It’s much better,” Torch said, adding the work environment has become collaborative.
He meets weekly with McKeon to work
through the issues, and she’s helping the alliance on some of its state
funding challenges, he said.
The state office recently hired a
Guardianship Alliance staffer, he noted. That guardian is now in the
16th Judicial District, based in Pueblo, a sign of slow but steady
expansion.
Competency mandate reshapes role
The Office of Public Guardianship’s “cultural shift” is not the only big change in the agency in the last nine months.
During the 2026 session, it became part of
state’s efforts to address the competency issue, as enacted through
Senate Bill 26-149.
“We should be involved in this space and have a seat at the table,” McKeon said.
She argued that the state office offers
not only the most cost-effective option, but also long-term stability
and support for people — helping them live better lives, improving
community safety and reducing the likelihood they will cycle back into
the criminal justice system.
Under the new law, if a person is
adjudicated not restorable to competency, it will be up to OPG, working
alongside other state agencies, to stand as an emergency guardian,
responsible for providing long-term care.
McKeon also added staff to ensure the bill
works as intended on their side. She recently hired Brad Turner to
serve as in-house counsel.
Office
of Public Guardianship Executive Director Amelia McKeon and Brad
Turner, its in-house counsel. (Marianne Goodland, Colorado Politics)
Turner wrote the 2026 bill in his role
with the Colorado District Attorney’s Council and in collaboration with
the Colorado State Public Defender.
He explained that the bill requires that,
when a criminal defendant is deemed incompetent, any interested person
can petition the criminal court for the appointment of an emergency
guardian.
That excludes the City and County of Denver, which constitutionally has jurisdiction over appointing a guardian in some cases.
“We wanted to make that process
transparent and easy,” and it’s identical to the process of appointing
an emergency guardian in a civil case, Turner said.
Prior to SB 149, there was a significant
gap in moving someone into the civil or voluntary treatment system. The
new law allows courts to direct district or county attorneys to file
civil petitions for involuntary treatment.
If the guardian agrees, that guardian can take over those petitions instead of the county attorney.
Turner said the major shift under SB 149
is that, once the criminal case or short-term treatment ends, the
guardian remains involved.
The in-house counsel said that distinction
matters: Incompetence determines whether someone can be prosecuted,
while incapacity means they need another person to make decisions for
them.
To meet its new responsibilities, the
office also hired a “flex” guardian — someone who can take cases
anywhere in the state, help people access the civil treatment system and
provide services in districts that don’t yet have an assigned guardian.
McKeon said her office’s role is to
provide guardianship services to those who are incompetent and
incapacitated, and she believes there is more overlap than people might
expect.
When guardianship first came into being,
it was mostly age-based, she explained. That’s shifting now to handling
intellectual or developmental disabilities and mental health, and she
believes individuals in substance abuse will be the next population that
could require guardianship.
“If you have a high-involvement case,
someone committing significant felonies and they have been deemed
incompetent and continue to reoffend, it begs the question if there is a
legal incapacity issue,” she said.
While it hasn’t happened in the past, there’s nothing to prevent the civil and criminal sides from working together, she said.
Navigating ethical dilemmas
Colorado Politics recently visited the
office’s Greenwood Village office, where staff gather weekly to work
through some of the most complicated situations guardians face.
One recent training scenario involved two
residents of the same apartment complex. The woman, 30, is
developmentally disabled but able to live independently. The man, 38, is
a registered sex offender whose offense occurred when he was a teenager
and has not reoffended. The pair are in love, want to marry and may
want children, though the woman cannot care for a child and shows little
interest in doing so.
Guardians — each client has their own —
were asked how they would support the couple’s plans. Then McKeon added a
twist: the woman is now pregnant.
The staff split into two groups, one for
each guardian, to discuss privacy rights and how to approach the
situation. McKeon emphasized that these exercises aren’t meant to
produce clear-cut answers.
In this case, they didn’t. The group
advising the woman’s guardian suggested seeking court guidance but
acknowledged numerous unresolved issues and no simple path forward.
The state office has also created an
on-call guardian role, one of the agency’s biggest operational lifts.
That guardian can respond to emergencies anywhere in the state —
including the death of a client, threats to safety, suspected criminal
activity involving a client, attempted suicide, mistreatment or
disappearance.
The staff of the Office of Public Guardianship as seen on July 2026. (Photo courtesy of the Office Public Guardianship)
Critics question the office’s purpose
Maureen Welch of Navigating Disability
remains a vocal critic of the state office, though she acknowledged the
new director is an improvement over what she called “awful” past
leadership.
Welch argues the agency shouldn’t exist at
all, describing it as “a state office that sanctions civil death by
court appointments of public employees who make life-impacting
decisions.” She contends that many guardian clients have friends or
family who were wrongly excluded from consideration by courts or by the
guardianship office.
Her primary interactions with the agency
have been through board meetings, where she said she was cut off while
attempting to give public comment on July 22. Welch said the board
should be more open to public participation, hold meetings in person so
the public can see “the expensive office space” and improve a website
she finds difficult to navigate. She also noted the director’s monthly
report no longer lists when clients die.
Welch pointed to the office’s $3 million
budget, funded through what she described as a drafting error in the
original bill — one that allows the office to collect fees on every
probate filing statewide, not just guardianship filings or filings in
counties where the office operates. She believes the original intent was
far narrower. To her, the current structure amounts to “empire
building.”
McKeon said she has been in conversation with Welch and welcomes scrutiny of guardianship itself.
“It is the most restrictive option available; it should be questioned and used sparingly and appropriately,” she said.
“I welcome her feedback and criticism.”
The road ahead
McKeon acknowledged the agency still has
significant ground to make up, especially in rebuilding trust and
repairing its reputation, but that signs of progress are emerging.
Among the new hires is a senior guardian
who has followed the agency since its inception and only recently felt
confident enough to join. The office now has nine guardians and plans to
hire at least 12 more over the next year, in part to handle the
caseload expected under the competency bill.
Another recent addition is a guardian
assigned to the 18th Judicial District in Arapahoe County — the site of
one of last year’s most high-profile competency cases, which helped
drive the 2026 legislation.
Since McKeon arrived last November, not a single staff member has left.
Arizona infomercial star Sam Meranto, 94, is currently amid a legal battle with wife Cynthia Meranto, 65, over the couple’s $2.6 million estate after she petitioned for guardianship over him.
By Olivia Evans
An Arizona couple is amid a tense, expensive legal battle.
Sam Meranto, a local Phoenix celebrity who rose to prominence for his self-help infomercials, and his wife of nearly 45 years Cynthia Meranto are currently fighting for control over their $2.6 million estate.
According to Maricopa County Probate Court records obtained by The Arizona Republic, Sam, 94, as well as his three living children Jeffrey “Rico” Meranto, April Meranto and Jason Meranto—he welcomed six kids with his first wife Maria Meranto—have
alleged that he is “terrified” of Cynthia’s effort to place him in a
guardianship and conservatorship that will “deprive him of money,
friendships and family.” They further expressed fear he will be “sent to
a facility to die.”
Cynthia, for her part, has stated in court documents obtained by The Arizona Republic
that her husband is “unable to make meaningful decisions regarding his
care and finance,” and that Rico and Jason had him removed from a care
facility earlier this year without her knowledge and against her
wishes.
The
65-year-old’s court filings also claim she is “afraid” of Sam’s
children, especially Rico, who she alleged in the documents had
previously accused her of stealing Sam’s valuables (she has made similar
allegations toward him).
Meanwhile, Cynthia—who tied the knot
with Sam in 1983—alleged that Rico manipulated her husband into signing a
document that replaced her with him as Sam’s power of attorney.
However, Sam and Rico argue that he had signed over the papers after the
94-year-old called his son multiple times begging for help to get out
of the facility where Cynthia had placed him following a hospitalization
in July 2025 after a bad fall. (According to court documents, Sam’s
sons removed him from the care facility in February, and he’s currently
residing in a “family home.”)
Sam Meranto/Instagram
Cynthia’s attorney Carol Soderquist acknowledged
elsewhere in court documents that the couple’s estate is estimated to
be worth around $2.6 million, but noted that as of July the pair have
lost around $100,000 due to their ongoing legal battle, which began in
March.
Sam was an established television
star at the time the pair tied the knot in 1983, but Cynthia’s petition
alleges that due to their nearly 50-year marriage, “there are very few
assets that are not community property.”
In a statement to The Arizona Republic in June, Cynthia said she loves her husband and the entire ordeal “has been very difficult for everyone involved.”
E! News has attempted to retrieve court documents and reach out to attorneys for Sam and Cynthia but has not yet heard back.
Inspectors cite care facility for failing to report the allegations
By Clark Kauffman
A former Iowa nursing home administrator is accused of elder abuse in
civil court filings alleging she improperly took more than $32,000 from
a relative who resides at the home.
No criminal charges have been filed in the case, but a judge has
issued a temporary protective order against elder abuse. The order
limits the administrator’s contact with the resident.
State inspection records indicate that in July 2026, the niece of a
76-year-old male resident at the Accura Healthcare of LeMars care
facility filed a complaint with the Iowa Department of Inspections,
Appeals and Licensing. According to state records, the niece, Janelle
Scoville, reported that on March 5, 2026, she was notified by her
uncle’s bank of potentially fraudulent charges to his personal account.
Inspectors allege the bank reported the charges involved checks
written by the resident’s stepdaughter, identified in court records as
Katrina Bruner, who was the administrator at the care facility at that
time and had power of attorney over some of the resident’s affairs.
Scoville also reported concerns regarding medical decisions and care
that was being provided at the facility, inspectors allege.
According to the inspectors, an Adult Protective Services worker
reported that while at the care facility, she informed the home’s
executive director of operations of the allegations of financial
exploitation by Bruner, as well as concerns that were expressed about
the resident having to sleep on a couch.
The inspection report indicates Bruner stopped working at the care
facility on March 30, 2026, the same day the courts issued a protective
order preventing her from contacting the resident in question.
The home’s former director of nursing allegedly told state inspectors
Scoville had expressed concerns regarding financial and medical
decisions made by Bruner but could not recall when those conversations
took place. When asked whether the concerns should have been reported
by the facility to DIAL as potential resident abuse, the former director
of nursing allegedly responded, “Until something is proven, there is
nothing we can do.”
In July, the home’s new administrator confirmed that the facility was
required to have notified DIAL as soon as the abuse allegations were
reported to the staff, inspectors allege.
Court records show that Scoville, of Dakota City, Nebraska, filed
with the Plymouth County courts a petition for relief from elder abuse
on March 30, 2026.
In her petition, Scoville alleged under oath that Bruner “has written
$32,000 worth of checks to her children from (the resident’s) account
that he didn’t authorize. She paid for her own home remodel with his
money and paid for her own credit cards. She was supposed to take over
payments of his new car but took the car and paid it off with his money.
Is trying to sell his house. Has all his vehicles and keys. I have
video of him saying he didn’t approve it.”
On March 30, Chief District Court Judge Patrick Tott approved a
Temporary Protective Order Against Elder Abuse, barring Bruner from
having any contact with the resident or exercising control over his
finances.
On May 11, Scoville and Bruner filed a joint agreement with the court
indicating Bruner, while admitting no liability in the matter, had
agreed to relinquish power of attorney and any control she had over the
resident’s finances and property.
“The issue of alleged financial exploitation and any claim for
restitution shall be reserved and deferred for determination by the
court at a later hearing,” the agreement stipulated.
The Iowa Capital Dispatch was not able to reach Bruner for comment on
the case. Her attorney, Robert Brock, declined to comment on the
matter.
Scoville said Friday she is still waiting for a copy of an
investigative report from Adult Protective Services, adding that a
criminal investigation is still ongoing.
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer recently signed Public Act 69 of 2026, formerly
Senate Bill 586, which creates new requirements for guardians seeking
to change a ward’s permanent residence and may affect hospital discharge
planning for patients who require placement in a long-term care
setting.
Under the new law, guardians must obtain court approval before
changing a ward’s permanent residence except in limited circumstances. While
temporary placements, including short-term rehabilitation stays, appear
to be permitted, hospitals should review the legislation and consult
legal counsel to understand how the new requirements may affect
discharge planning for incapacitated patients who require a permanent
change in residence.
The MHA was not involved in the development of this legislation and
understands that the additional probate court steps may create barriers
to timely care transitions, prolong hospital stays and increase
administrative burdens for patients, families, guardians and providers.
The association believes the law is a step backward in addressing
guardianship issues and reducing discharge delays.
The MHA is evaluating options to address these concerns and
will continue advocating for solutions that support safe, timely
transitions of care while maintaining appropriate protections for
individuals under guardianship. Hospitals are encouraged to
familiarize themselves with the new law, assess potential operational
impacts and share any challenges or examples with the MHA as the law
takes effect.
Members experiencing guardianship-related discharge challenges are encouraged to share examples with the MHA.
A Montgomery County man is facing criminal charges after investigators discovered he was operating two unlicensed personal care homes out of residential houses where bedridden and disabled seniors were living without required fire safety equipment or state licensing.
I-Team investigator Adam Walser appears as a panelist for the screening of Lifetime film based on real guardianship abuse cases
Concerns about guardianship abuse took center
stage at the Whistleblower Summit and Film Festival on Capitol Hill,
where the Lifetime film "The Bad Guardian" was screened for lawmakers
and advocates.
By:
Adam Walser
WASHINGTON, D.C. —
Concerns about guardianship abuse took center stage at the Whistleblower
Summit and Film Festival on Capitol Hill, where the Lifetime film "The
Bad Guardian" was screened for an audience that included lawmakers,
advocates, and filmmakers.
The film, inspired by real stories, was selected for its accurate portrayal of guardianship abuse.
"It means that our film really hit a nerve," executive producer Elizabeth Stephen said.
From Lifetime to Netflix's top 10
The film first aired on Lifetime before reaching a wider audience on Netflix.
"It
got a new life on Netflix, and in the 1st 3 weeks that it aired, it was
in the top 10 movies in the country, which was incredible," Stephen
said.
Stephen said viewers across the country have reached out to share their own experiences.
"I get emails from people all over the country, and it's always the
same thing. This was my story. That was my father, my mother, my sister.
That was the Guardian, and it's always heartbreaking," Stephen said.
A system meant to protect — but one that can harm
Guardianship is a legal process that allows someone else to make
decisions about a person's finances, healthcare, and even where they
live.
The system is intended to protect vulnerable people who cannot care for themselves.
But
over more than a decade of reporting, our I-Team has uncovered cases
where families say guardianship led to isolation, exploitation, and
abuse.
Panel discussion puts accountability in focus
Following the screening, I joined a panel that included filmmaker
Claudia Myers, National Center on Elder Abuse Director Julie Schoen, and
guardianship reform advocate Rey Contreras.
"This was very real. It's very guttural. They got a lot of things right," I said during the panel discussion.
"People
say this can't be true, and even attorneys who I speak to who end up by
chance in probate court, they feel like they've gone off into Alice in
Wonderland because the rules of a normal court system just don't seem to
apply there," I said.
Contreras said his own family became entangled in the guardianship system despite years of estate planning.
His
stepfather, Pete Beaty, created trust documents naming who should
manage his affairs if he became incapacitated — wishes that were later
disregarded in court.
WFTS
"Trust documents to me are an admission ticket to a circus, a circus,
because the lawyers make all the money on the back end," Contreras
said.
Panelists repeatedly focused on accountability during the discussion.
"The next sequel should be called The Bad Judge because at the end of the day, everything these Guardians do is being rubber-stamped by the judge," Contreras said.
Schoen acknowledged that not all guardianship cases involve abuse.
"There are successful guardianship cases out there, but that's not what we're here to talk about today," Schoen said.
"The best kind of guardianship is to not have one at all. These are supposed to be last-resort measures," I said.
'It could happen to you'
Myers said she hopes the film leads to meaningful change.
"I
can just hope that it helps in some small way lead to change," Myers
said. "I hope so. Eventually, I think they will. I think the question is
how quickly and how efficiently can we tackle this very complex
problem."
Myers offered a stark warning for viewers.
"The takeaway for me is very clearly that it could happen to you," Myers said.
Panel meets with Senator Rick Scott
After the event, members of the panel met with Senator Rick Scott,
who chairs the Senate Special Committee on Aging, to discuss concerns
surrounding guardianship and possible solutions at the federal level.
Stephen said raising public awareness remains a priority.
Rey Contreras
"We have to raise public awareness because if there's any way to
prevent this from happening to people, we need to do that," Stephen
said.
