Audit finds Florida’s guardianship program not doing enough to protect seniors from ‘malfeasance’

By ActionNewsJax.com News Staff

Retirees move to Florida to live out their golden years in the Sunshine State, but for those who become vulnerable in their old age, there are serious concerns.

An Action News Jax investigation uncovered that the Department of Elder Affairs’ guardianship program has come under serious criticism for a lack of oversight, leaving the people they are supposed to protect unguarded.

Guardianship is a legal process where a judge takes away a person’s rights and appoints someone to manage their finances and other aspects of their lives. That person is often a family member, but sometimes it’s a professional, and a scathing state audit found the office created to make sure guardians are doing their job is failing those it’s supposed to protect.

That is exactly what Rey Contreras said happened to his family.

“My stepfather’s wishes were denied and revoked,” he told Action News Jax’s Emily Turner.

Contreras’ stepdad was a huge part of his life, but once the court placed him in the care of a professional guardian, neither Contreras, who lives in Ponte Vedra, nor his mother was able to be there when his stepdad needed them most.

A judge in Polk County threw out the family trust documents, power of attorney, and everything else, instead appointing a professional guardian to the case.

“My mother and I could never speak or see my stepfather again,” he says. “We were even barred from going to his funeral … and today, it’ll be close to five years and he’s still in an unmarked grave in Plant City because the people that took over this estate have failed to even build a tombstone for him.”

Guardianship nightmares like Contreras’ have made headlines across the state: in Miami, elected officials received probate houses for pennies on the dollar, $150 million disappeared from a special needs trust, and a Central Florida guardian was in charge of 700 people when one of them died in her care.

When it comes to how rampant that kind of malfeasance is, Ken Burke, who chaired the state’s task force that looked into issues with guardianship, said, “We have no idea. That’s the problem. “

The Department of Elder Affairs doesn’t do enough to monitor the program or the people in it.

“There’s not enough rules to keep people honest,” Burke said. “It’s just too wild, wild west out there in guardianship, and it makes the availability of malfeasance way too easy.”

An audit of the Office of Public and Professional Guardians backs that up. It says OPPG received 174 complaints in two years against the state’s 566 professional guardians, but rarely took action.

It also said the OPPG hasn’t “developed and implemented an effective monitoring tool” to make sure guardians complied with state law, making sure “wards receive appropriate care and treatment, are safe, and their assets are protected.”

In his presentation to a state senate committee the Deputy Auditor Matt Tracy said things aren’t getting better.

“This is actually a follow-up audit we did,” he said. “And to be honest, in some respects, it was worse the second time around.”

That’s why Contreras is working with State Representative Clay Yarborough to tighten up laws regulating the industry and Burke helped created a state registry of guardians so judges will know how many wards they have and where. But until sweeping change and tougher oversight are in place, they say Florida’s most vulnerable are at risk.

Full Article & Source:
Audit finds Florida’s guardianship program not doing enough to protect seniors from ‘malfeasance’

Audit finds lax management, scattered conflicts at Miami-Dade’s Guardianship Program

By Douglas Hanks

BEFORE: Express Homes bought this Kendale Lakes home on Southwest 138th Place from the Guardianship Program for $430,000 in January 2022. The Multiple Listing Service shows the house was not listed. Once Express Homes rehabbed the four-bedroom house, a listing did show up in May ahead of the property’s $695,000 sale that summer. Google Street View

A county-funded charity failed to pursue the best deals in selling homes of incapacitated people under its supervision, relying on a small circle of investors, appraisers and real estate agents to handle sales that often weren’t offered on the open market, according to an audit released Wednesday. Two of the three charity employees assigned to help manage property sales left their jobs after investigators pointed out deals that seemed to benefit them personally. 

The Inspector General report on the Guardianship Program of Dade County (GPDC) described poor recording keeping, indifference to internal rules and inconsistent practices in the relatively infrequent instances when a person under the charity’s care also had a home to sell. The non-profit, funded by Florida and Miami-Dade county, was responsible for 2,800 incapacitated people during the nearly six years covered by the audit, a time period when 60 homes were sold, according to the report.

With a budget of about $6 million a year, the Guardianship Program steps in to manage a person’s financial affairs and healthcare after a judge deems them incapacitated but can’t find a family member or friend to serve as a guardian for them. Investigators found that when an incapacitated person — known as a ward — required a home sale, the Guardianship Program’s tiny real estate staff often didn’t follow internal procedures that would help get as high a price as possible, such as circulating it widely to would-be investors or listing it as for sale on Realtor websites. 

The audit “revealed questionable transactions and it exposed deficiencies in GPDC’s internal controls, particularly in its failure to follow its existing policies and procedures, which would have prevented, or detected and corrected many of the issues identified in this audit,” the report said.

The report also recommends minor changes to fix the Guardianship Program’s real estate problems, such as sticking to a checklist of best practices and listing properties for sale, and urged the charity to continue to taking on cases where incapacitated people have homes to sell. 

Investigators began looking into the Guardianship Program after a 2023 investigation by WLRN raised questions about whether the charity was getting fair-market value on property sales because multiple properties went to a small pool of buyers. One of those buyers was a real estate investor who is also married to Victoria Méndez, then the city attorney for Miami. Méndez and her family denied any impropriety and those transactions were not cited in the Inspector General report. 

The media coverage prompted Miami-Dade to suspend funding for the Guardianship Program until the charity agreed to stop taking cases of incapacitated people who had homes to sale.

At the time, administrators of the charity emphasized the property sales were a tiny portion of the court-supervised work it did for wards. They also said that by the time someone is incapacitated enough to need a court-appointed guardian, their home often is in deplorable condition, limiting the pool of willing buyers. 

In a July 11 letter to Felix Jimenez, Miami-Dade’s inspector general, the Guardianship Program expanded on that point, noting that a quick sale can be vital after a ward has let home insurance lapse and a distressed property can be at risk of code violations and liens that would create even more of a financial mess. 

“If a hurricane or fire were to happen while waiting for additional offers on the MLS, the Ward would bear the entirety of that loss,” the letter read.

“GPDC is under extreme pressure to manage the Wards’ properties, many of which are in very poor condition.” 

The audit found the Guardianship Program relied on an email list to offer properties up for real estate agents and appraisers interested in doing work for the charity. Paperwork was spotty showing how often the charity utilized the email list, but records revealed a small circle of professionals tapped for the work. Three appraisers performed 84% of the appraisals reviewed by investigators, and three real estate agents handled half of the sales when properties weren’t sold directly to investors. 

Along with a poorly supervised sales operation, investigators identified two questionable deals that led to the departure of Guardianship Program employees.

One sale from 2015 involved a home that wasn’t placed on the Multiple Listing Service, a database of homes for sale that real estate agents can access and which populates real estate websites, such as realtor.com and Redfin. Investigators found an investment company purchased the home for $125,000, then sold it weeks later for $149,000 to the girlfriend of the Guardianship Program property coordinator who helped manage the sale. The couple ended up living there. The original buyer, MAIA Investments, was owned by the father of a real estate appraiser who frequently got hired by the Guardianship Program employee on other deals, according to the report. 

Investigators described the sale to the employee’s girlfriend as a “clear” violation of state rules governing financial conflicts with court-appointed guardians. Guardianship Program administrators said they weren’t aware of the unnamed employee’s connection to the property and said the employee resigned after investigators revealed their findings. In a rebuttal, the Guardianship Program said records show it was a charity lawyer who reviewed the three bids for the property and authorized the sale to a buyer who later sold it to the employee’s girlfriend. 

Another unnamed property coordinator in the three-person real estate staff also left after investigators pointed out a partner in a property-management company he ran on the side had purchased an unlisted Guardianship Program home in 2019, submitting the highest of three bids.

While investigators fault the Guardianship Program for failing to follow its own best-practices for selling real estate, the report also described the charity as performing “an essential function” and having “a dedicated staff who work hard to ensure the wards are well taken care of, are visited by case managers, and receive benefits they are entitled to.”

Full Article & Source:
Audit finds lax management, scattered conflicts at Miami-Dade’s Guardianship Program

Miami city attorney faces Florida Bar probe, report says

by Sommer Brugal

Miami City Attorney Victoria Méndez speaks at a commission meeting last year. Photo: Jose A. Iglesias, Miami Herald

Miami City Attorney Victoria Méndez is under investigation for her connection to companies that purchased below-market value homes and sold them for a large profit, according to the Miami Herald.

• The Florida Bar has been investigating since at least April, but the probe has just recently come to light, according to the newspaper, which broke the news yesterday.

Why it matters: The investigation is yet another problem for Méndez, who was removed from her position last month by commissioners but will remain city attorney until June.

• Méndez was hit with a lawsuit last year over allegations that she and her husband enriched themselves by flipping a home owned by a man who claimed he was convinced to sell below market value.

Catch up quick: Last year, a WLRN investigation detailed how Méndez's family profited from the Guardianship Program, which cares for incapacitated people who can't afford a private guardian or who have no one willing to serve in that capacity.

The latest: Local film director Billy Corben filed another complaint Friday, according to the Herald.

• Corben claims Méndez acted unprofessionally and violated Bar rules during a recent commission meeting.

The other side: Méndez has described the WLRN investigation as a "hit piece" and cautioned Herald reporters against writing about the review and "trying to damage" her reputation.

Full Article & Source:
Miami city attorney faces Florida Bar probe, report says

WLRN investigation featured in national conversation about guardianship reform

By WLRN NEWS STAFF

WLRN Investigation: Unguarded

When elderly people or those with disabilities or mental illnesses are placed under guardianship, their rights are removed. A legal guardian is appointed to make life decisions for them, including decisions about their personal finances. Without greater transparency and scrutiny on these legal arrangements, vulnerable people can become victims of fraud and abuse.

U.S. senators, attorneys, advocates and people who have been placed under guardianships, as well as their families, are calling for more transparency and scrutiny nationwide. They also recommend the embrace of less restrictive options than guardianships such as supportive decision making, in which people who are considered “incapacitated” or incapable of making decisions independently can do so with the guidance of people they trust.

“Unguarded,” a project from the WLRN News investigations team, along with a recent series from Bloomberg Law, in part prompted the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging to hold a March 30 hearing on guardianship programs, with an eye toward reforms.

Journalists from both news organizations shared their insights Tuesday morning during an hour-long episode of the national radio show 1A, produced by WAMU in Washington, D.C., as well as NPR.

WLRN’s Danny Rivero, who co-reported the project with reporter Joshua Ceballos, appeared on the program. Rivero advised people who might be considering placing a family member under guardianship to think ahead about how the arrangement might affect any real estate holdings the person might have.

If an elderly father comes under guardianship, for example, “all the decision making is removed from father, but also daughter, son, uncle, wife, everyone,” Rivero said on the show. “It's really incumbent on everyone, especially if you're proactively looking to put someone in guardianship, to get your affairs in order before you do so.”

During the show, listeners heard an excerpt from part two of WLRN’s investigation, in which Emma Ladson describes her astonishment when she learned that the Guardianship Program of Dade County sold her then-incapacitated mother’s Liberty City home for $31,000 in 2015.

The sale was to Gallego Homes, one of two real estate companies WLRN has identified as frequent buyers from the Guardianship Program. The other company was Express Homes. Both companies have family ties to City of Miami’s top attorney Victoria Méndez.

When the Guardianship Program took control of the Ladson home, Emma, who was living there with her mother, was evicted.

“Because she did not have her name on that deed, the court could just quickly move to get her out of there, even though the family had owned that home outright for years,” Rivero said. “That was the family home. … Four generations had been through that home. And then, from one day to the next, she was put out on the street. She ended up in a homeless shelter.”

One of the obstacles to reforming guardianship programs nationwide is a lack of transparency about how they operate. According to Bloomberg Law’s reporting, there are an estimated 1.5 million active adult guardianships in the U.S.

In Florida, guardianships have not been tracked statewide — until now. A new law passed last year requires a statewide registry and is slated to be available early next year.

On 1A, Rivero said the lack of a registry has alarmed the advocacy group AARP for years.

“Part of the complaint that they've had for a long time is they just don't know. They don't know how many cases are open in Florida,” Rivero said. “You'd have to go into the guts of local government, to go to each clerk's office. And then each one has its own system. It's just incredibly cluttered and hard to track.

“So, I mean, there is hope that the database will be step one toward enabling people to put more scrutiny on this,” Rivero said.

Full Article & Source:
WLRN investigation featured in national conversation about guardianship reform

Commentary: New York state must invest more in guardianship program

By investing in a guardianship system, New York can ensure that older residents in need of protective arrangements have access to the appropriate services.

by Kevin Thomas and Kimberly George

Credit: Getty Images. SolStock/Getty Images

New York strives to be a progressive beacon that cares about every resident. Yet when it comes to one of our fastest-growing populations, New York has a lot to prove.

Our state is home to 3.2 million older adults — a figure expected to nearly double by 2030. Over the past decade, the poverty rate among older New Yorkers increased, with Black, Hispanic, Asian, and immigrant residents most likely to experience poverty in their older years.

Today, nearly a third of older New Yorkers are aging alone. Gov. Kathy Hochul has pointed to investments in aging services and long-term care as the pathway to greater equity in aging. But when it comes to caring for older adults who are poor and alone, we have yet to deliver on our promises.

Conservative estimates suggest that more than half of older New Yorkers will require some form of long-term care. One way to facilitate long-term care is Article 81 Guardianship — a legal tool that assigns a surrogate decision-maker for those who can no longer manage their affairs and are at risk of harm. When applied properly, guardianship can improve health, safety and quality-of-life outcomes.

Unfortunately, guardianship services are not equally accessible to all. Our law states that those in need of a guardian shall be appointed one yet offers no funding or infrastructure to adequately deliver on that promise. In this broken system, thousands are left without the services they need and wind up in nursing homes, hospitals are overcrowded, and community guardianship programs are stretched to capacity.

It doesn’t have to be this way. By investing in a guardianship system, we can ensure that older New Yorkers in need of protective arrangements have access to the appropriate services. We can address glaring inequities in our current system and prevent unnecessary guardianships by connecting community members with a range of resources. We can also save taxpayers millions of dollars long-term by keeping people out of hospitals and nursing homes.

We were thrilled to see a preliminary $5 million investment in the Senate one-house budget, and we will continue to work toward further investment, which would advance equity in aging, reverse an over-reliance on our guardianship system, and restore our commitment to older adults.

We are all aging, and we all deserve a system of care that aligns with our New York values. It’s time to act. It’s time to fund good guardianship. 

State Sen. Kevin Thomas of Nassau County represents the 6th Senate District. Kimberly George is president & CEO of Project Guardianship. Becky Preve, executive director of the Association on Aging in New York, also contributed.

Full Article & Source:
Commentary: New York state must invest more in guardianship program

'Beyond horrible': Sisters frustrated with state’s guardianship program that’s kept them separated from older father

PALM BEACH COUNTY, Fla. —

Benito Navarro is 92 years old. His daughters, Zoraida and Maritza Navarro, say for 63 years, their dad was married to their mom until she died. Soon after his wife’s death, Navarro started talking about marrying a woman from Peru whom he had spent time with on the phone.

His daughters worried their dad was about to enter into a fraudulent marriage. Maritza Navarro recently told WPBF 25 News. "We said, dad, you can’t do this. You don’t know this woman. This is illegal. She’s coming here for citizenship fraudulently. You cannot do this."

The sisters turned to the Palm Beach County Guardianship program hoping to protect their dad from an illegal marriage. The court placed him under an emergency temporary guardianship that is supposed to last 180 days. Nearly two years later, their father is still under a guardianship. "It's been horrible. Beyond horrible. I wouldn’t recommend anyone going through it," said Maritza Navarro.

While under the court-ordered guardianship, Benito Navarro has been moved from his home and placed in three different facilities. His long-time home was about to be sold, but the sisters went to court and managed to stop the sale. And according to his daughters, most of his belongings have moved out of his home.

Anthony Palmieri is the Deputy Inspector General & Chief Guardianship Investigator for the Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller's Office in Palm Beach County. He told WPBF 25 news that guardianship is a last resort when all other alternatives have been exhausted. Palmieri also said families need to put a plan together before considering guardianship.

"Best practices are all your advanced directives, durable powers of attorney, joint bank accounts and putting assets into a trust. The best thing that elders can do is to communicate their wishes to their family members," Palmieri said.

The sisters must now get court approval to visit their dad. Last month, a judge granted them permission to visit him. It was the first time they were allowed to see him since May. But they said he wants to come back and live with them. But they must now wait until the court decides his future.

"I feel sad that we had wasted time. It’s just been a nightmare," Zoraida Navarro said.

Full Article & Source:
'Beyond horrible': Sisters frustrated with state’s guardianship program that’s kept them separated from older father

Orange County commissioner wants closer look into guardianship program

by Greg Fox

 

Click to watch Video

ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. —

In March, WESH 2 Investigates detailed the findings in an audit into how the Orange County Clerk of Courts oversees guardianship, the program that appoints people to take care of the medical and financial affairs of the incapacitated, mostly senior individuals, called wards.

Many of the findings highlighted the handling of wards by former professional guardian Rebecca Fierle, who is now facing trial for aggravated abuse and neglect.

"It was very troubling to see the things we found in our investigations," Phil Diamond said.

Comptroller Phil Diamond found a lack of training for deputy clerks in handling guardian cases, missing or inaccurate information in case files, and courts not being consistently notified when guardians fail to follow the law.

Clerk Tiffany Moore Russell defended her office's procedures.

"The recommendations from the audit really tells me that there's a lack of understanding of the comptroller's office of the guardianship law and the roles and responsibilities of the clerk's office," Russell said.

That's not good enough for Orange County commissioner Mayra Uribe.

In this memo, she wrote the audit "highlights a number of problematic procedures, administrative concerns, and shocking outcomes due in part to these issues."

"I was very disturbed at the findings," Uribe said.

She's asking the mayor to schedule an open discussion so all of the commissioners can weigh in with concerns and solutions.

"What are we going to do to improve it? What are we going to do to make sure that that next person is not taken advantage of?" Uribe asked.

Mayor Jerry Demings believes the commission has no say in clerk and comptroller business, but he's scheduling an informational meeting.

Besides the inquiry from Uribe, the Secretary of Florida's Department of Elder Affairs reviewed the comptroller's report, but does not appear willing to act on it.

Secretary Richard Prudom wrote: "While the findings in the recent audit on The Orange County Clerk of Courts Guardianship Program are deeply concerning… the Department of Elder Affairs'… reach does not extend into the operational processes and procedures of county courts."

Fierle is scheduled to be tried this year.

Full Article & Source:

Orange County commissioner wants closer look into guardianship program 

 

See Also: 

Audit finds missteps in Orange County Clerk of Courts handling of guardianship cases 

 

Orlando guardian accused of filing unauthorized ‘do not resuscitate’ orders resigns from Seminole cases

Audit finds missteps in Orange County Clerk of Courts handling of guardianship cases

County comptroller investigation was already underway when former guardian Rebecca Fierle was arrested

Click to View Video

ORLANDO, Fla. – The Orange County Comptroller released its findings into the Clerk of Court’s role in Florida’s guardianship program following the arrest last year of Orlando-based guardian Rebecca Fierle, who is accused of placing do not resuscitate orders on elderly clients against their wishes.

Following a Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigation, Fierle was arrested in February 2020 and is facing one count of abuse of an elderly person and one count of neglect of an elderly person in regards to the case of 74-year-old Steven Stryker.

Prior to the allegations against Fierle, Orange County Comptroller Phil Diamond ordered an audit into the Orange County Clerk of Court’s administration of the state public and professional guardianship program, which provides guardianship services to help elderly and incapacitated adults. The Department of Elder Affairs oversees the program and includes more than 550 professional guardians statewide.

Our office just released the Audit of the Orange County Clerk of Court’s Administration of the Guardianship Program report.

For more information, please follow the link below.https://t.co/7N9uOsT6tc

— OC Comptroller - FL (@occompt) March 1, 2021

Under Florida law, a judge appoints guardians for minors and adults with mental or physical disabilities, allowing them to make financial and medical decisions.

Diamond said his team was already well into the audit when the allegations against Fierle came to light. The period audited was from January 2015 to December 2017 with additional information collected through July 2017.

“During the course of this audit, we became aware of acts committed by a professional guardian in Orange County that were not in the best interest of the wards and potential violations of Florida law,” Comptroller investigators wrote in the report. “We brought our concerns to the Court and law enforcement. As a result, we worked concurrently with multiple law enforcement agencies during this audit.”

An Orange County judge revoked “do not resuscitate” orders in 98 cases in which Fierle, was found to have “abused her powers” by filing DNR orders on behalf of clients without permission from their families.

An 86-page audit of the clerk of court’s role in the program recommends changes to the guardianship program to prevent more harm to Florida’s most vulnerable residents. Investigators listed a series of missteps in the court’s handling of guardianship cases.

Investigators found that clerks did not notify judges of unauthorized attorney and guardian fees. The audit includes that a professional guardian was paid directly by a hospital group in 117 of their 204 cases totaling payments of $2.5 million. The hourly rate the guardian was paid was more than twice the approved Orange County rate.

Click to View Video

“At the request of the Court, we conducted two separate investigations of professional guardian, Rebecca Fierle,” according to auditors. “These investigations found that the guardian had received approximately $4 million in fees without Court approval.”

Auditors reported missing documentation from guardians, errors in documents filed and the lack of consistent reporting between clerks.

The court was not consistently notified when guardians were not in compliance with the state requirements. The audit listed several examples.

“One professional guardian still had five active cases when they were suspended and a replacement was not timely appointed. In one case, a replacement was not assigned for 16 months after the guardian was suspended,” investigators wrote. “In another case, we notified the Clerk that the ward had died 33 months prior. The Clerk was unaware the ward had died almost three years earlier.”

The court was aware of conflicts of interest between guardians appointed and other parties involved in cases. Guardians make financial decisions for their wards and auditors found judges may not have been aware when clerk staff did not document those conflicts.

“The investigations also found that the guardian maintained business relationships that were not approved (or even disclosed) to the Court,” according to the report. “This created conflicts of interest in the performance of the guardian’s fiduciary duties.”

The Clerk of Courts advised investigators that it has made numerous changes to guardianship administration procedures.

As for the audit, Orange County Clerk Tiffany Moore Russell said she disagrees with four of the findings and recommendations, partially concurs with seven and concurs with two.

“While some findings and recommendations included in the document are well-intentioned, we strongly disagree with a number of them, primarily because they are outside the scope of the audit and reflect a misunderstanding of our office’s responsibilities under the law,” Russell said in a news release. “But, let us be clear: When it comes to guardianship, all of us involved in the process are working toward a common goal – to protect the most vulnerable in our community. We want the system to work effectively and efficiently on their behalf.”

Russell’s news release also provided additional context into the timing of the audit.

“The timing of the audit spanned two different operations managers in the Clerk’s office, three Guardianship Judges in the Ninth Circuit, several changes in Statutes by the Legislature, and many process improvements made voluntarily by the Clerk to increase efficiency and effectiveness. These changes in leadership and process render several of the recommendations null and void given the office’s present-day process,” it reads.

Russell said initially, her office would review cases that auditors were examining and some cases came to the conclusion that the findings were inaccurate but because conducting reviews was such a timely process, her office stopped about three years into the audit.

“Although we’re bound by statutory responsibilities, the Clerk of Court’s office is committed to a culture of best practices and continuous process improvement,” Russell said. “We welcome feedback and oversight – and we will work with all offices of government to help improve the guardianship system so that, together, we can better serve those in our care.”

The Office of Statewide Prosecution is prosecuting the case against Fierle, according to FDLE.

She is accused of placing do not resuscitate orders on clients who did not want them.

A state investigation revealed one of her clients may have died as a result. According to a statement from the FDLE, the investigation began after a complaint to the Office of Public and Professional Guardians about Stryker’s death, he was under the guardianship of Fierle.

News 6 is reviewing the audit. Check back for updates on this developing story.

Full Article & Source:

Audit finds missteps in Orange County Clerk of Courts handling of guardianship cases

Guardianship program protects vulnerable citizens

Every county in Ohio has its own probate court, and each court is responsible for more than 200 separate duties.

The duties include handling wills, administration of estates and trusts, adoptions, marriage licenses, name changes and appointment of guardians for minors and incompetent adults.

Locally, the probate and juvenile courts are divisions of the Common Pleas Court of Guernsey County, and are led by Judge David Bennett.

The probate court is the superior guardian of those placed in guardianships and is responsible for monitoring guardians to make sure that they fulfill their duties.

Guardianship is one of the more restrictive protective services available under Ohio law and is only necessary when individuals are unable to care for their basic needs, finances, or medical issues and when a less-restrictive alternative is not feasible.

People placed in guardianship are especially vulnerable, and there is a great need for willing volunteers, family members, and attorneys to act on their behalf. In many cases, every decision affecting those individuals is in another person’s hands.

That is why it is so important for guardians to carry out their duties responsibly.

A guardian holds a unique role with respect to the minor or incompetent adult, and the guardian has an obligation to obtain an understanding of the fundamentals of that relationship. Formalized training is one means to gain that competency.

In June of 2015, the Ohio Supreme Court enacted new rules of superintendence that required the local court to establish new rules on guardianship. The most radical change was the requirement that all guardians attend a guardianship training course.

The Guernsey County Probate Court worked throughout 2015 to establish a Family Guardianship course, and in 2016 it was implemented.

As a result, the probate court adopted Local Rule 66, which requires family guardians to attend a shortened local version of the Supreme Court of Ohio’s Guardianship Fundamentals Training Program.

This program was developed in conjunction with the Guernsey County Board of Developmental Disabilities, Mental Health and Recovery Board and Area Agency on Aging Region 9.

The training sessions are offered four times per year at various times with all of the sessions at the Guernsey County Board of Developmental Disabilities building on Southgate Road in Byesville. All family guardians must attend this program once during the year.

The initial basic course titled “Responsibilities and Duties of Guardians” will be offered for new guardians of family members and those who have not yet completed the mandatory training. This training will be offered twice during the year on the designated dates listed below.

In addition, courses will be held with topics of interest to guardians, which were created from suggestions and questionnaires that were completed at the trainings over the past three years. Those who have already completed the initial course may choose to attend one of the alternate topic sessions to satisfy their annual training requirements.

This year’s training topics and scheduled dates and times are as follows:

‒ March 20 — Responsibilities and Duties of Guardians at 1 p.m.; Medicaid Eligibility and Information at 2 p.m.

‒ June 12 — Stress Management for Caregivers at 6 p.m.

‒ Aug. 12 — Stable Account/Payee Information and Estate Planning at 1 p.m.

‒ Oct. 17 — Responsibilities and Duties of Guardians at 10 a.m.; Dementia/Alzheimer’s Disease Information at 11 a.m.

This program assists the guardians in complying with the law, as well as helping them learn about the different resources that may be available to them for the benefit of their ward.

For more information about the Guardianship Program, or the rights and responsibilities of becoming a guardian, please contact the Guernsey County Probate Court at 740-432-9262. The Probate Court is located on the second floor of the Guernsey County Courthouse, 801 E. Wheeling Ave. in Cambridge.

Full Article & Source:
Guardianship program protects vulnerable citizens

Republican Senators put forth package of legislation focused on prioritizing mental health in Washington

On Wednesday morning, Senators Steve O’Ban, John Braun, and Randi Becker announced a series of proposals aimed at improving mental health care and addiction recovery in Washington State. After several years focused on fully funding education, the legislators say it is now time to make mental health care reform the legislature’s top priority.

The proposals put forth by the legislators include reforms to expand Washington’s mental health workforce, new guardianship laws for family members of those with severe mental illness or drug addiction, efforts to improve mental health services in schools, and bills to enable patients to receive treatment closer to home.

Specifically, the legislators proposed five separate bills that they will pursue during the 2019 session. They include:

1. A bill creating a guardianship program in the state to provide supervision and individualized treatment for those that are “gravely disabled.” The proposed bill would authorize guardians to require treatment for incapacitated persons and require a treatment plan to be made within ten days of establishing a guardianship.
2. A bill increasing the behavioral health workforce. The bill would require the Department of Health (DOH) to create a reciprocity program to make it easier for certified, out-of-state behavioral health professionals to practice in Washington. The DOH would also be required to explore options for an “interstate compact” for licensing counselors.
3. A bill expanding the Offender Re-entry Community Safety Program (ORCSP). The ORCSP provides enhanced treatment, services, and case management for released prisoners with serious mental illness. The new bill would rename the program the Re-entry Community Safety Program and would expand to include state hospital patients who are committed as incompetent to stand trial after committing a violent felony or are committed based on criminal insanity.
4. A bill expanding mental health services in schools by creating a tele-health care delivery model available for students. The goal of the tele-health services will be to identify students in need of these services in order to help prevent school violence, adolescent suicide, and substance abuse.
5. A bill expanding the availability of community-based behavioral health facilities. As outlined in Governor Inslee’s recently announced mental health system reform plan, the bill seeks to move long-term civil commitments out of Western and Eastern State Hospitals and allow them to receive treatment closer to their communities. The bill asks voters to approve $500 million in bonds over ten years for construction of community mental health treatment facilities throughout the state.

Other proposed bills relate to increasing behavioral health peer support services, increasing coordination between the Department of Social and Health Services and the Veterans Administration, and developing long-term involuntary treatment capacity in communities.

“I am committed to working with my friends across the aisle to put the care of our mentally ill first. This is the session to make improving our mental health care system the top priority of our state,” said Sen. O’Ban, R-University Place.

“Our state faces a crisis in providing adequate, safe and effective treatment for people with mental illnesses,” added Sen. Braun, R-Centralia. “We know that treating people with mental illness in their community keeps them closer to their support network and improves long-term outcomes… An investment in helping people with mental illness goes beyond those being treated; it’s good for their loved ones, keeps our communities safer and recognizes the humanity of all people in our state.”

Full Article & Source:
Republican Senators put forth package of legislation focused on prioritizing mental health in Washington

Some Concerned With Deficient Guardianship Programs Hope Volunteers Can Fill The Void

Wilma Simmons, a retired nurse from Indianapolis, is a volunteer guardian for two people. In addition to her regular guardianship duties, she meets with Kenneth every week to play his favorite game – spades. (Photo by Drew Daudelin)

When an adult loses the ability to make important legal and medical decisions, courts can appoint a guardian to help manage their life. But in many places around the country, there aren’t enough. And for someone in need, not having a guardian can increase the risk of abuse, neglect, and financial exploitation.

Among the estimated 1.3 million adult guardianship cases across the country, guardians are family members, friends, social workers, and even for-profit businesses.

Wilma Simmons falls into another category – she's a volunteer.

Simmons is a retired nurse from Indianapolis. She takes a weekly trip to a nursing home to check on two people. One of them is Kenneth Simmons (no relation), who suffered a brain injury at an early age and later became partially paralyzed.

He rarely speaks, and spends much of his time sitting in a recliner by the window.

When she pulls a deck of cards out of her purse, he lights up. His favorite game is spades. With the TV blaring nearby, they play on a table by his bed.

Simmons is, in a practical sense, his guardian. She accompanies him to the doctor, keeps track of his medications, and she is his main advocate to the nursing home every day of the week.

“You don’t want other people making the decisions. If there’s a room move, if there’s a bed change, if there’s a wheelchair change,” Simmons says.

She’s one of a few dozen volunteers at a small nonprofit called the Center for At-Risk Elders. The group is the legal guardian for about 150 people. Its staff recruits, trains and manages volunteers to take care of people who have no one else, or the money to afford a professional.

A volunteer guardian costs clients on Medicaid – which account for the majority of those who need one – $35 a month from their social security income.

Tom Gryzbek says the idea started at St. Margaret Mercy hospital in Lake County, Indiana, where he was president about 15 years ago.

“I was finding more and more instances where people were in the hospital, had no one to be able to consent for their placement in a nursing home,” Gryzbek says.

Most states fund a system that offers public guardians to people in need, but Indiana doesn’t. So a lot of the people Gryzbek saw ended up with private guardians, who are paid for the service.

Lake County Judge Diane Kavadias Schneider says there are private guardians who do good work. But she says with few alternatives on the market, exploitation was increasingly common.

“We had one woman in particular, who was a registered nurse, who took over 300 guardianships and then fell off the radar. We didn’t know what happened to her, what happened to her wards," Schneider says. "And that was a problem.”

So Gryzbek and Schneider teamed up, assembled a statewide task force, and a pilot program launched in their county using volunteers to fill gaps in the market. It was considered enough of a success that state lawmakers passed a law allowing other counties to start their own.

The result is called VASIA – Volunteer Advocates for Seniors or Incapacitated Adults. VASIA works to get grants from the Indiana Supreme Court, which helps fund new county-based volunteer guardian programs. There are now about 18 around the state.

But the state grants are small, especially for groups that serve a large urban area. The Center for At-Risk Elders, for example, says state grants account for just 14 percent of their funding. The rest comes from area hospitals.

The program can only spread to a new county if there’s significant local buy-in to the idea.

“And that seems to be where we have issues," Schneider says. "I think we’re gonna have to look to some non-profits, and other agencies locally, to come up with the money.”

Catherine Seal, an attorney in Colorado who’s worked for years on guardianship issues, says the need for more guardians is a "huge problem" across the country.

Seal says many states, even those that fund public guardian programs, don’t support guardianship enough.

“I don’t think the urgency is recognized," Seal says. "We not only don’t have the fiduciaries in place, we don’t have a system in place that’s gonna work.”

Fueling that urgency is what Seal calls an underappreciated fact, that the country is getting older. Baby boomers started turning 65 in 2011. Researchers at Pew Research Center estimate that by 2050, one-in-five Americans will be over that age – that’s higher than the current share in Florida.

Some critics of Indiana’s volunteer program say the job is too complex, and grants too much power, to give to unpaid strangers. While there is some training, mandatory nationwide standards on guardianship don’t exist, and some argue it’s risky to use volunteers in such an unregulated system.

Supporters of the volunteer model, like Tom Gryzbek, say volunteers are especially committed to caring for their clients. Like visiting someone once a week to play their favorite card game, he says small, human touches make a big difference.

“Sometimes they’re the only person at the bedside when the patient dies, holding the patient’s hand. I know on many occasions they’re the only person that is present in a funeral home for the wake service, or the burial at the gravesite," Gryzbek says. "If it wasn’t for them, no one would be there.”

The statistic at the start of this story – 1.3 million guardianship cases – is a rough estimate from researchers. And that’s part of the problem. For decades, court record-keeping on guardianship cases has been dismal in many states.

That's slowly changing in Indiana, thanks to a registry pushed by the same people who started the volunteer program, which has been adopted by about half the counties in the state. But nationally, no one seems to know how big the need for guardians is, just that it’s growing every day.

Full Article & Source:
Some Concerned With Deficient Guardianship Programs Hope Volunteers Can Fill The Void

Bexar commissioners OK guardianship funding with plans to include program in 2019 budget

Bexar County commissioners this week approved about $116,000 to fund five months of the probate courts’ guardianship program for people with incapacitating mental or physical conditions, carrying the initiative through the end of the fiscal year.

Judge Kelly Cross, who runs one of the county’s two probate courts, said that while the program still lacks adequate staffing to meet the county’s guardianship needs, she was pleased commissioners approved the funding.

“Any kind of help is good help, so you know what they say, beggars can’t be choosers. I’m OK with it,” she said. “We’re powerless.”

About 96 percent of the funding goes toward the salaries of four guardianship employees: the program manager, an office assistant and two guardians. David Marquez, executive director of the Bexar County Economic & Community Development Department, recommended adding a third guardian in the fiscal 2019 budget.

“That funding could be requested from the (county budget’s) general fund, or we may approach the probate court to see if they would be willing to fund some, or part, or all of the additional guardian capacity that we would add,” Marquez told the commissioners Tuesday.

The money approved Tuesday brings the guardianship’s total funding to about $255,000 for the final 11 months of the fiscal year. In October, the court approved $139,000 for six months of the program, from November through April, after initially omitting the program from its annual budget.

The fund that the probate judges administer had covered costs in October, the first month of the fiscal year. Marquez acknowledged in an interview Monday that the funding exclusion was a “funding miscue” and “misunderstanding on my part,” as he was new to overseeing the program.

Marquez added that the program would be funded through the county’s fiscal 2019 budget next year, conditional on the commissioners’ approval. Commissioners Court makes the county’s budgetary decisions, and they set a $1.76 billion budget for the 2018 fiscal year.

Cross and the county’s other probate judge, Tom Rickhoff, have complained of poor communication with the commissioners, even claiming that they weren’t made aware the commissioners planned to consider the funding until Monday.

Otherwise, Cross appeared to see two aspects differently than Marquez and the commissioners: the appropriate caseload per guardian, and whether the program should be designated as one of “last resort.”

The 2014 “memorandum of understanding” establishing the guardianship “pilot program,” signed by Bexar County Judge Nelson Wolff, several other county officials and both probate judges — Rickhoff and then-Probate No. 1 Judge Polly Jackson Spencer — signifies the program “will be a Guardianship Program of Last Resort.” It also allotted about $291,000 for the 2015 fiscal year.

But Cross said Monday the program is not a “guardian of last resort.”

“That’s very important. What it means is, the court can give you anybody, it can give you an illegal alien, head-injured person, no benefits, no housing, no Medicaid. That’s the guardian of last resort,” she said.

She further added the guardianship program could not feasibly be one of last resort because “we have no ability, except through charitable sources, for someone who is not a citizen of the U.S. and would not qualify for benefits.”

The Texas Judicial Council unsuccessfully recommended in 2014 that the Legislature establish a statewide public guardianship office, which currently does not exist.

“A public guardianship office serves as the guardian of last resort when no other appropriate guardian can be located. Texas currently does not have a guardian of last resort, and judges are oftentimes faced with the difficult task of locating an appropriate guardian for an individual,” the council’s 2016 Elders Committee Report & Recommendations reads.

Some court members, including Wolff and Precinct 2 Commissioner Paul Elizondo, have urged state involvement because the county lacks the resources to adequately provide guardianships for enough people.

In his presentation, Marquez said the program was designed for each guardian to handle 25 wards, and for the program manager to handle 15, for a maximum of 65. But Cross said each guardian should be assigned 20 wards, noting that some cases are particularly “hard and time-consuming.” She also said five guardians would be an ideal amount, not two. The program currently handles 45 wards.

On Tuesday, Wolff pointed to the services the court already contributes funding to, saying the county already is “very much involved” in helping people with mental and physical issues.

“There is an array of services — Meals of Wheels is one of them — that we fund, and I think those wraparound services are important,” Wolff said. “And I think it's important to also understand that that is the key point of helping these people. And we fund a number of those that do that.”

During his presentation, Marquez outlined the duties a guardian performs, including many tasks the guardians are precluded from doing. He said guardians cannot “prevent a ward from making a bad decision,” “use force to make a ward take medication” or “place a ward in a mental health facility.”

Guardians also do not “supervise a ward around the clock” and are not responsible for a ward’s illegal acts or for funding the ward’s expenses, he said.

“I think there needs to be greater clarity about what kinds of cases we can and can’t take,” Marquez said. “These are social workers, they’re not mental health professionals. So they have limitations on the types of cases they can take.”

Full Article & Source:
Bexar commissioners OK guardianship funding with plans to include program in 2019 budget

State Auditor Wayne Johnson To Look For Audit Solutions For New Mexico’s Guardianship Program

SANTA FE – State Auditor Wayne Johnson today says he’s honored to join a task force with the New Mexico Supreme Court and representatives from throughout state government to bring sunshine and accountability to New Mexico’s adult guardianship system.

The task force Johnson has joined is charged with implementing newly passed legislation for improving the adult guardianship system.

Family members and advocates have complained for years about a process shrouded in secrecy that can take advantage of incapacitated adults, including the possibility of fraud and the systematic siphoning away of an individual’s life-savings.

“Implementing some type of audit system in the guardianship program just makes sense for people who are relying on strangers to manage their life-savings and expend it responsibly on their behalf,” Johnson said. “I strongly believe in openness and transparency in government spending. I think a similar standard applies when a judge orders a guardianship for someone who doesn’t have the ability to manage their own affairs. I’m committed to working with New Mexico families, judges, legislators, and anyone else with a stake in our guardianship program, to safeguard our seniors and other vulnerable adults.”

The full announcement of the guardianship committees can be found here.

Full Article & Source:
State Auditor Wayne Johnson To Look For Audit Solutions For New Mexico’s Guardianship Program

Journal series sparks town hall on guardianship program

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — “Who Guards the Guardians?” – an Albuquerque Journal series by reporter Diane Dimond – has triggered an exceptional response, so much so that the Journal, KANW-FM and the Albuquerque Department of Senior Affairs are sponsoring a town hall-style discussion on the issue of the state’s court-monitored guardianship program for senior citizens.

The event will be held in the Journal auditorium from 7 to 9 p.m. March 22 and will be broadcast live on KANW, 89.1-FM.

A panel of family members, advocates, judges, lawmakers, industry representatives and others will join Dimond in making presentations. Sen. Gerald Ortiz y Pino, former Rep. Conrad James and Mayor Richard Berry will be among members of the panel. There also will be an opportunity for audience participation.

Journal senior editor Kent Walz and Tom Trowbridge of KANW will serve as moderators. Reprints of the series will be available to those in attendance.

“This series touched a nerve in the community,” Walz said. “We hope that this forum can lead to better understanding and positive changes in a system that critics say is in dire need of repair.”

“If honoring a family elder is the purpose of this guardianship system, something is terribly wrong,” said Jorja Armijo-Brasher, director of Albuquerque Senior Affairs. “We definitely need to hold ourselves to a higher standard.”

The venue can accommodate about 50 members of the public, so advance sign-ups are required. If you are interested in attending, please let us know by sending an email to newsroom@abqjournal.com.

If you have questions you would like to ask the panel, please send them to the same email address. Because it will not be possible to ask all questions submitted, they will be selected in an effort to cover various points of interest.

If you go
What: Town hall meeting on New Mexico’s guardianship program
When: 7-9 p.m. March 22
Tune in: Broadcast live on KANW 89.1-FMSponsors: Albuquerque Department of Senior Affairs, KANW, Albuquerque Journal

Source:
Journal series sparks town hall on guardianship program

Nevada AG wants nontaxpayer funds for fraud unit, help in guardianship program

By WESLEY JUHL
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL

Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt wants the blessing of the Legislature’s Interim Finance Committee to jump-start his new project to fight financial fraud.

With $1.3 million from the state’s National Mortgage Settlement fund, Laxalt wants to create an unit within the attorney general’s office and to boost the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada to take on more guardianship cases.

About $900,000 would go toward positions in Laxalt’s new unit: four criminal investigators, including one assigned to the joint terrorism task force, two supervisors, an analyst, a legal secretary and two prosecutors.

“Unfortunately, there’s a lot more predators out there taking advantage of everyday Nevadans,” Laxalt said. “The reality is we need more support.”

 

Laxalt told the Las Vegas Review-Journal the complaints his office has received about financial fraud have risen significantly in recent years, and it’s part of a national trend.

The state attorney general’s office received approximately 600 fraud-related complaints in fiscal year 2014, 952 in 2015, and 870 in the first three quarters of fiscal year 2016. The Federal Trade Commission received 18,539 Nevada complaints in 2013, 19,334 in 2014 and 20,016 in 2015.

Nationally, the FTC received 3.1 million consumer fraud complaints in 2015, a 19.4 percent increase from 2014.

Laxalt said he doesn’t anticipate serious obstacles to implementing the plan because the fact the unit won’t use general fund money — i.e., taxes — makes it a win-win.

And the plan also provides for a mechanism to help with cases of exploitation in adult guardianship, which Laxalt called a serious problem in Southern Nevada.

About $400,000 would go to the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada to pay for two lawyers, a paralegal and a legal assistant, all devoted to the issue.

The nonprofit center’s executive director, Barbara Buckley, said the problem is widespread. The center devoted an attorney to the issue in January, and that lawyer already has 45 cases.

There are about 60 new guardianship cases filed each month, and about 3,500 on file with the court.

Many of the high-priority cases the legal aid center takes on were referred by law enforcement because a senior citizen or other vulnerable person was being exploited by a guardian.

 

“We just don’t have the funding or attorneys to take them,” Buckley said. “If you don’t have criminal prosecution and civil representation, exploiters will continue to harm the most vulnerable among us.”

Full Article & Source:
Nevada AG wants nontaxpayer funds for fraud unit, help in guardianship program

EDITORIAL: Clark County adult guardianship program must better protect wards

Las Vegas Review-Journal

If there were any doubts that the Clark County adult guardianship system needs a major overhaul, they were cast aside last week in the first meeting of a 26-member panel commissioned by the Nevada Supreme Court.

As reported by the Review-Journal'€™s Colton Lochhead, the panel is aiming to fix what three of the state'€™s top justices view as a troubled process that has seen some guardians drain hundreds of thousands of dollars from the accounts of elderly and mentally incompetent Nevadans. Yet during the meeting, Jared Shafer, who worked for more than 20 years as the Clark County public administrator and public guardian before starting his private professional guardianship business in 2003, stated that the system "isn'€™t that bad."

Certainly not for Mr. Shafer, whom Mr. Lochhead wrote about earlier this year in an extensive series on the seriously flawed guardianship system. Mr. Shafer took over as the court-approved guardian for World War II veteran Guadalupe Olvera in 2009. Over the next 3½ years, Mr. Olvera'€™s estate was drained of at least $420,000 -- including $240,000 in legal costs as his daughter, Rebecca Schultz, who lives in Aptos, Calif., fought to gain guardianship.

Mr. Lochhead noted that after Mr. Shafer'€™s assessment, one woman at the public meeting shouted, "€œYou used the money to pay lawyers!"€ Many others who attended the meeting, held in a Regional Justice Center courtroom, stood in front of the panel and explained that their family members who had been made wards of the county had been exploited by their guardians.

Indeed, there have been miserable oversight failures of the system that'€™s supposed to protect the estates of thousands of elderly and mentally incapacitated residents. The District Court operation has allowed people to be stripped of hundreds of thousands of dollars while not enforcing guardian reporting requirements and ignoring wards and their families. There is no accountability in the current system, even though the Clark County Commission had at least some knowledge of how bad things were. After Mr. Lochhead'€™s initial reports in April, county commissioners expressed outrage over abuses carried out by court-appointed guardians. But Commissioner Tom Collins also admitted he knew the system was troubled after personally intervening on behalf of a friend whose grandmother couldn'€™t be freed from a guardianship.

That squares with the difficulties of Ms. Schultz, who felt the only solution was to help her father gather a few belongings and flee the state. That led to accusations of kidnapping from Mr. Shafer (no charges were filed) and a bench warrant from Guardianship Commissioner Jon Norheim for Ms. Schultz's arrest, after she and her father ignored Mr. Norheim's order to return for a court appearance.

With 8,500 adult guardianship cases in Clark County each year, this long-neglected problem requires much more action, and soon. Removing Mr. Norheim from adult guardianship hearings in May was a good first step, and creating the panel —€” chaired by Nevada Supreme Court Chief Justice James Hardesty —€” is also laudable. But there must be more oversight, guardians must be more accountable and wards must receive better protection against financial exploitation.

Full Article & Source:
EDITORIAL: Clark County adult guardianship program must better protect wards