a Better Bubble™

ProPublica

Help Us Report on Assisted Living Facilities in Maine

1 year 8 months ago

In Maine, the number of nursing home beds is declining even as the state’s population grows older and medical needs continue to rise. Assisted living facilities have expanded their presence across the state, attempting to meet the demand. The Maine Monitor and ProPublica would like your help in reporting on how well these facilities are run, especially in looking after people who need a high level of medical care, and whether the state is doing enough to ensure that residents’ needs are being adequately met. If you have firsthand experience of living, working or caring for someone in one of these facilities, we would appreciate your help and perspective.

We are focusing on large residential facilities, classified as Level 4, that have seven or more beds in private or semiprivate rooms, as well as common living and dining areas.

We want to hear from residents or their family members about the medical care provided by Maine’s Level 4 assisted living facilities. We’d also like to hear from Mainers who are struggling to find an assisted living facility that they can afford or that provides adequate care.

We also are hoping to hear from workers in the Level 4 assisted living facilities, as you understand the challenges that accompany the rising demand for care.

We take your privacy seriously. We are gathering these stories for the purposes of our reporting and will contact you if we wish to publish any part of your story. We are the only ones reading what you submit.

We may not be able to respond to everyone, but we read each submission, and they all help inform our work.

by Rose Lundy, The Maine Monitor

A Christian Health Nonprofit Saddled Thousands With Debt as It Built a Family Empire Including a Pot Farm, a Bank and an Airline

1 year 8 months ago

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

Bonnie Martin kept the bleeding secret for as long as she could. Her sisters, boyfriend and sons knew nothing of her illness until suddenly, during a family gathering in October 2018 at a diner in Annapolis, Maryland, she began hemorrhaging.

A tumor had burst through the wall of her uterus. Doctors performed an emergency hysterectomy and removed what cancer they could reach. She needed multiple rounds of chemotherapy and radiation, expensive stuff. As her family grew fearful, Martin walked that fine line between resilience and denial — she’d beat this, she said. She focused instead on fun things ahead, a trip to Ireland with her boyfriend and sisters, for instance, and a Rolling Stones concert.

Luckily, or so Martin thought, she had placed her trust — and her money — in Liberty HealthShare. Liberty is what’s known as a health care sharing ministry, a nonprofit alternative to medical insurance rooted in Christian principles. Hundreds of thousands of people rely on such organizations for basic health coverage. They promise no red tape, lower costs and compassion for the sick. Although Martin wasn’t religious, she found comfort in Liberty’s pledge to “carry one another’s burdens.”

Martin received treatment that pushed her cancer into remission. But 18 months later, it returned, this time in her lungs. She was dying.

Liberty covered her bills at first, but then, without warning or explanation, the payments stopped. Suddenly, she faced $10,000 in unpaid charges. Her whole life, she’d had pristine credit. Now creditors called constantly and sent harassing letters.

Martin refused to accept that her cancer was terminal. She was going to survive, and when she was rid of it, she needed those bills paid. She spent hours pleading over the phone with Liberty, straining to focus as the toxic drugs she was taking sapped her energy. Martin’s long, auburn curls fell out, and her memory was slipping.

Martin forwarded the overdue notices to Liberty, writing on one in pen, “WHY HAS THIS NOT BEEN PAID?” In emails Martin’s family shared with ProPublica, she pleaded, “I am asking for your help and compassion. Help me, I don’t know what else to do. … I CANNOT deal with this stress and fight cancer. You say you are a ministry and want to help people. THEN HELP!!!”

Bonnie Martin, a Liberty HealthShare member who was left with unpaid bills for her cancer treatment, was remembered in photographs at her memorial service. (Rich-Joseph Facun, special to ProPublica)

Martin died in July 2022 at age 63. Liberty never settled the bills that she had begged them to pay.

What Martin didn’t know when she joined Liberty was that she was sending her money to members of a family with a long and well-documented history of fraud.

For generations, members of the Beers family of Canton, Ohio, have used Christian faith to sell health coverage to more than a hundred thousand people like Martin. Instead they delivered pain, debt and financial ruin, according to an investigation by ProPublica based on leaked internal documents, land records, court files and interviews. They have done this not once but twice and have faced few consequences.

Patriarch Daniel J. Beers, 60, lies at the center of the family network. He was a leading figure in a scheme in the 1990s involving a health care sharing ministry that fraudulently siphoned tens of millions of dollars from members, court records show. Two decades later, he played a key role in building Liberty into one of the nation’s largest sharing ministries, several of the nonprofit’s current and former employees told ProPublica.

Four years after its launch in 2014, the ministry enrolled members in almost every state and collected $300 million in annual revenue. Liberty used the money to pay at least $140 million to businesses owned and operated by Beers family members and friends over a seven-year period, the investigation found. The family then funneled the money through a network of shell companies to buy a private airline in Ohio, more than $20 million in real estate holdings and scores of other businesses, including a winery in Oregon that they turned into a marijuana farm. The family calls this collection of enterprises “the conglomerate.”

Beers has disguised his involvement in Liberty. He has never been listed as a Liberty executive or board member, and none of the family’s 50-plus companies or assets are in his name, records show.

From the family’s 700-acre ranch north of Canton, however, Beers acts as the shadow lord of a financial empire. It was built from money that people paid to Liberty, Beers’ top lieutenant confirmed to ProPublica. He plays in high-stakes poker tournaments around the country, travels to the Caribbean and leads big-game hunts at a vast hunting property in Canada, which the family partly owns. He is a man, said one former Liberty executive, with all the “trappings of large money coming his way.”

Despite abundant evidence of fraud, much of it detailed in court records and law enforcement files obtained by ProPublica, members of the Beers family have flourished in the health care industry and have never been prevented from running a nonprofit. Instead, the family’s long and lucrative history illustrates how health care sharing ministries thrive in a regulatory no man’s land where state insurance commissioners are barred from investigating, federal agencies turn a blind eye and law enforcement settles for paltry civil settlements.

The Ohio attorney general has twice investigated Beers for activities that financial crimes investigators said were probable felonies. Instead, the office settled for civil fines, most recently in 2021. It also required Liberty to sever its ties to some Beers family members.

The IRS has pursued individual family members for underreporting their income and failing to pay million-dollar tax bills. But there’s no indication that the IRS has investigated how several members of one family amassed such substantial wealth in just seven years by running a Christian nonprofit.

The agencies’ failure to move decisively against the Beers family has left Liberty members struggling with millions of dollars in medical debt. Many have joined a class-action lawsuit accusing the nonprofit of fraud.

After years of complaints, health care sharing ministries are now attracting more scrutiny. Sharity Ministries, once among the largest organizations in the industry, filed for bankruptcy and then dissolved in 2021 as regulators in multiple states investigated its failure to pay members’ bills. In January, the Justice Department seized the assets of a small Missouri-based ministry, Medical Cost Sharing Inc., and those of its founders, accusing them of fraud and self-enrichment. The founders have denied the government’s allegations.

Those leading the Beers family enterprise have already moved on to its next health care venture. This time, it involves a bank in the Ozarks that family members hope will generate millions of dollars each year. Business filings lay out plans that would further shield sharing ministries from oversight.

Two weeks after Martin’s death, ProPublica reporters traveled to Canton to sit down with Brandon Fabris, chief operating officer of one of the family’s companies that has received tens of millions of dollars from Liberty. Dan Beers had declined the meeting.

Ten minutes into the interview, though, Beers parked his Ford F-150 Platinum edition in front of the building, blocking the driveway. He marched into the vast foyer with its cathedral windows, turned right past the receptionist and barged into the conference room as if, well, he owned the place.

Wearing worn jeans, Beers delivered a beefy handshake, sank into a chair, pushed his silver hair back and grinned. For the next two hours, he waved away suggestions that he was the mastermind behind everything.

“I’m just not smart enough to do it,” he said, brushing his goatee with his hand. “I’m not the kingpin here.”

Beers and Fabris acknowledged that Liberty failed to pay medical bills for its members but said it was because the ministry’s fees weren’t high enough. The pair confirmed many of the details ProPublica had uncovered about how the family got rich from Liberty members, but they denied any legal wrongdoing.

“There’s profit,” Beers said. “Absolutely there’s profit.”

“Nobody’s here to not make money,” Fabris said.

Attorneys representing Beers, his sons Danny and Ronnie, Fabris and his father, Tom, disputed ProPublica’s finding that they controlled or influenced the sharing ministry. Liberty’s contracts with the family-run businesses were legal, “arm’s-length” transactions, they said, and they performed work for the nonprofit at market rates or better. ProPublica sent dozens of detailed questions to members of the Beers and Fabris families and their lawyers but did not receive answers.

ProPublica repeatedly asked Liberty and members of the Beers family to provide the ministry’s contracts with the businesses, but all declined. The family members’ attorneys cited the confidentiality of the contracts, while Liberty officials said they could not release the documents because of the ongoing litigation.

During the interview in Canton, Beers joked that regulators and creditors and law enforcement have been chasing him for alleged misdeeds “since birth.” One after another, Fabris added, they’ve all come up short.

“Nobody can catch Dan Beers,” he said.

Tens of thousands of people paid Liberty HealthShare monthly fees for medical coverage. Controlled by members of the Beers family of Ohio, the sharing ministry was marketed as a Christian alternative to health insurance.

Watch video ➜

The nonprofit promised to use the money to pay for members’ medical bills.

Watch video ➜

But Liberty started directing tens of millions of dollars a year to two for-profit companies that members of the Beers family also controlled: a marketing firm and a billing-management company, according to IRS filings and interviews.

Watch video ➜

The marketing and billing companies then transferred much of that money to shell companies that the family members created.

Watch video ➜

That money was used to set up or buy private businesses, such as butcher shops, an airline, a wedding venue, a marijuana farm and a bank.

Watch video ➜

When Liberty’s members needed to pay their medical bills, the ministry’s funds had been largely depleted.

Watch video ➜

The Brotherhood Blueprint

To understand the rapid rise and fall of Liberty HealthShare and the devastation it wrought for thousands of members, it helps to understand the family’s first foray into the business of health care sharing ministries.

Health care sharing ministries have existed since the early 1900s, primarily among Mennonites and the Amish. The idea was simple: Members chip in what they can to help cover a neighbor’s costs when someone breaks a leg, say, or falls ill. It was the financial equivalent of a potluck dinner, with everyone contributing something to the table and sharing the spread.

Few outside those communities knew or cared that health care sharing ministries existed. They were tiny, didn’t advertise for new members and posed no threat to corporate insurance. Most importantly, no one envisioned making money from a ministry.

This would all change with Dan Beers’ uncle and mentor, an Ohio preacher named Bruce Hawthorn.

Bruce and Phyllis Hawthorn in front of the Barberton Rescue Mission shortly after they opened the halfway house for men struggling with alcoholism in 1965. (Akron Beacon Journal/USA TODAY NETWORK)

In the mid 1960s, Hawthorn founded the Barberton Rescue Mission, serving men struggling with alcoholism, in a rundown brick hall along a dirt road just outside of Canton. As the Akron Beacon Journal would note, the townsfolk snickered at the irony. The building had previously been a nightclub called the Lazy L Ranch, which a local sheriff described as “a notorious one-stop tavern and bordello.” (As an homage, or perhaps an inside joke, the phrase “Lazy L” would surface again and again, tucked into the name of many Beers family enterprises.)

The mission was a shoestring operation, sustained by small cash donations. In the fall of 1981, though, tragedy would transform Hawthorn and lead to the creation of the modern health care sharing ministry.

Hawthorn was driving his family to Michigan when a truck broadsided the car, killing his wife and 4-year-old daughter and seriously injuring three older children. Hawthorn faced tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills. When he spread the news in the mission’s newsletter, his followers responded by mailing him handwritten prayers — and money, often in the form of cash folded into cards and letters. The outpouring continued for weeks and covered the family’s expenses.

Hawthorn had an epiphany. Could he build on this sort of generosity? Maybe he could serve as an intermediary, connecting people who’d never met but who might have nodded their heads from a pew to the edict of Galatians 6:2: “Bear ye one another’s burdens.”

The next year, Hawthorn launched the Christian Brotherhood Newsletter, which charged subscribers a fee, originally $75 a month. He called it a “share,” but it was functionally what insurance calls a premium. A subscriber with a medical bill would write to the Brotherhood, and other subscribers would receive instructions to send money directly to the person in need. More than 90% of the subscription fees went toward health care expenses, with the mission taking the rest to cover administration and publishing costs.

After a decade of slow growth, the Brotherhood decided to expand and began partnering with independent “sponsors,” paying them cash incentives for every new subscriber they brought into the organization. The more people they recruited, the more commissions they made. By the early ’90s, the Brotherhood had added tens of thousands of members, making it a nationwide purveyor of something that looked a lot like health insurance. Dan Beers began working in the nonprofit’s marketing department, helping to sell its coverage.

The Brotherhood wasn’t following the few laws that applied to sharing ministries, and state regulators started to notice. Arkansas’ attorney general warned citizens that the nonprofit had “all the earmarks of a phony con job.”

Hawthorn hired a lobbyist to fight back. Insurance companies pool customer premiums to offset costs. The Brotherhood argued that its health plan was not insurance because members had individual control of their funds. Any crackdown, they insisted, amounted to religious persecution. By 1994, 10 states had effectively exempted health care sharing ministries from oversight. Beers’ uncle had created an entire industry for an insurance-like business that was unregulated. And now the family was free to exploit it.

In the early days of the Brotherhood, the ministry handled little of the money because members sent payments to one another through the mail. But this changed in 1995, when the Brotherhood began directing many members to send their monthly fees to a bank account that Beers and Hawthorn had set up under the name of Beers’ wife, Theodora. The nonprofit wasn’t just pooling money; Beers and Hawthorn now had control of members’ fees.

The day after opening the account, Beers and a cousin started a business called Benevolent Health Systems, which the Brotherhood soon hired to negotiate with hospitals and doctors to lower bill amounts. In return, Beers claimed his business would pocket 15 cents of every dollar saved.

But Ohio financial crimes investigators later found no correlation between Benevolent Health Systems’ revenues and the services it provided to the Brotherhood. In late 1997, Beers began automatically transferring $55,000 a week from the Brotherhood to Benevolent Health Systems, according to bank records reviewed by state investigators. In three years, Beers’ firm collected at least $23 million from the charity.

Hawthorn also raided the Brotherhood’s funds to reward himself and his relatives, using money intended to cover members’ medical bills to buy an airplane, a tour bus and several Honda Gold Wing motorcycles, court records show. During the early 1990s, Hawthorn directed the nonprofit to purchase hundreds of acres of ranchland along the Tuscarawas River, north of Canton. The ranch became a family compound as Hawthorn signed over houses and wooded parcels to relatives through complex transactions. County property records show that Beers and his wife received a 5,000-square-foot house on the estate and paid nothing for it.

“A Criminal Enterprise”

A few directors on the nonprofit’s board began to question the way Hawthorn was spending the organization’s funds on gifts to friends and family, court and law enforcement records show. The board, however, was unaware that in the Brotherhood’s annual disclosures to the IRS, the ministry hid the money it was paying directly to Benevolent Health Systems.

With subscribers’ fees going elsewhere, medical bills began to go unpaid. Members complained, and many left, shrinking the flow of cash. Brotherhood officials acknowledged a backlog of $15 million in overdue bills from 1997 alone. Beers and Hawthorn blamed subscribers. “The problem we have is that the giving by the partners has not kept up with the climb in bills,” one issue of the newsletter said.

Responding to complaints from inside the Brotherhood, the Ohio attorney general’s charity division launched an investigation in March 1997. After two years, investigators had compiled a dossier, obtained by ProPublica, that detailed “acts of theft, theft by deception, money laundering and conspiracy.” The dossier reveals that state forensic accountants recommended 65 felony counts of fraud and theft against Beers — offenses that carried the threat of yearslong prison sentences. The Brotherhood organization “is a criminal enterprise,” state investigators wrote, and top executives were “engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity.”

By law, the attorney general’s office had to refer the criminal case to prosecutors in Summit County, where the Brotherhood was based. In April 2000, the Ohio attorney general sent the dossier to the county prosecutor, seeking criminal fraud charges against eight of the Brotherhood’s executives, including Beers; Theodora; Beers’ brother-in-law Randy Abel; and Hawthorn. Theodora Beers declined to answer questions, and Abel did not respond to requests for comment. 

No charges were ever filed.

Christine Croce was an assistant criminal prosecutor in Summit County and part of the team on the Brotherhood case. Multiple police agencies were investigating the charity in 2000, she said, working to flip witnesses, gather evidence and secure search warrants. But Croce’s boss lost his reelection bid that fall, and many high-level prosecutors were forced out, including Croce. “I couldn't tell you where the investigation went awry,” she said, “or why it stopped.”

(Michael Callahan, the county prosecutor who lost his office, did not respond to requests for an interview. James Pollack, a spokesperson for the Summit County Prosecutor’s office, said that no public records from the Brotherhood investigation remain in its possession, and no one there knows why the case languished.)

The attorney general’s office, however, continued to pursue a civil case against Beers, Hawthorn and their wives. When it went to trial in 2004, jurors unanimously held Beers liable for fraud and unjust enrichment. He and Benevolent Health Systems were ordered to pay $9.6 million in damages to the Barberton Rescue Mission. Hawthorn was also hit with a $4.6 million judgment. The jury did not find Theodora Beers or Hawthorn’s wife liable; the state did not name Abel as a defendant.

The Christian Brotherhood Newsletter foundered, its members saddled with millions of dollars in medical debt.

Hawthorn died in 2012 without ever paying. Beers dodged the judgment for almost 20 years but negotiated a new settlement with the charity, paying it $210,000 early last year. The verdict “doesn’t mean what we did was wrong,” he told a local newspaper the day the jury read its finding.

Over the next decade, Beers continued to find himself at the center of allegations of fraud, though on a smaller scale. He lost his family’s home to creditors and was convicted of bouncing a $50 check written to “cash” at a grocery store. He was convicted of a felony, motor vehicle theft, and sent to prison for several months. (Beers later persuaded a judge to expunge the felony conviction and seal records from the case.) While he was incarcerated, Theodora divorced him; she and their seven kids moved in with one of his brothers-in-law.

After his release, Beers returned to Canton, talking his way into small construction jobs. Beers lost several lawsuits accusing him of running an array of scams between 2007 and 2013, according to Ohio court records. A former landlord accused him of owing more than a year in back rent and, when he was evicted, of stealing window coverings, a riding lawn mower and a paddle boat.

Louis Smith, a property manager in the Akron area, hired Beers to install carpet, replace roofs and make other renovations. Beers convinced Smith to pay him upfront, then left most of the work unfinished. Smith won a $46,000 judgment against Beers but said he wasn’t paid for another five years.

“That guy,” Smith said, “he’s slicker than grease.”

Reboot

In the wake of the Christian Brotherhood Newsletter scandal, a group of health care sharing ministries formed a trade organization. By 2008, the Alliance of Health Care Sharing Ministries had convinced five additional states to pass laws shielding ministries from regulation.

An even bigger coup came in 2010 with the passage of the Affordable Care Act. The act required that all Americans carry health insurance — a provision called the individual mandate — or face a fine. But with help from Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, a conservative lobbyist working for the Alliance managed to slip in an exemption, which gave anyone who belonged to a health care sharing ministry a pass on the mandate.

The exemption — 200 words in a 900-page bill — didn’t just save the industry. It propelled it. Health care sharing ministries now offered a legal and financially attractive alternative for consumers. They drew thousands of members who were opposed to President Barack Obama’s hallmark legislation, but they also appealed to many more who wanted a better deal than what they could find on the new insurance marketplace. Before Obamacare, maybe 40,000 people belonged to health care sharing ministries. Four years later, the Alliance boasted that the number of people enrolled in ministries had jumped to a million.

Beers and his family seized on the opportunity, incorporating Liberty HealthShare as a nonprofit in 2014. (Although called “Liberty,” it was actually a combination of two nonprofits, Gospel Light Mennonite Church Medical Aid Plan and the National Coalition of Health Care Sharing Ministries.) It had all the makings of a Hollywood reboot — the old Brotherhood crew getting back together for a new but familiar caper, only this time with some kids and novel technology thrown in.

Liberty’s CEO was Dale Bellis, Dan Beers’ close friend and business partner and the former communications director for the Brotherhood. Bellis and Beers are also connected through marriage; Bellis’ sister was married to Beers’ uncle.

Beers’ sister, Drudy Abel, another Brotherhood alum, was Liberty’s vice president; she later became CEO and a member of its board of directors. Abel did not respond to requests for comment.

Then there was Beers himself, who was as involved in Liberty as he was in the Brotherhood, according to interviews and documents.

Fabris, the leader of one of the family’s companies, lives with Abel’s daughter and is a longtime friend of Beers’ sons, Danny and Ronnie. They all live on neighboring parcels of the family ranch.

Liberty resembled the Brotherhood in another way: It soon began contracting out services to companies owned and operated by family members and friends.

Liberty outsourced bill negotiations to a company called Medical Cost Solutions LLC, which was owned by Liberty CEO Bellis before he sold it to Fabris’ father. Between 2015 and 2021, the ministry paid at least $35 million to Medical Cost Solutions, but the true amount is likely higher. Liberty masked payments that were going to the company by reporting that those millions of dollars were spent on members’ medical costs, ProPublica found by comparing internal accounting records with IRS filings from 2017 to 2019.

Liberty also contracted with a firm called Cost Sharing Solutions to bring in new members. The company was owned by Brandon Fabris and Danny and Ronnie Beers. Between 2015 and 2021, Liberty paid $105 million for its marketing services, according to the nonprofit’s IRS disclosures.

Medical Cost Solutions and Cost Sharing Solutions derived all of their revenue from Liberty, Fabris told ProPublica.

In an interview last fall, Bellis said Liberty awarded exclusive contracts to Cost Sharing Solutions and Medical Cost Solutions solely because they were the best options. Bellis said the board had used an open bidding process and considered other companies, but he was unable to name them.

Both Beers and Fabris said they never worked for Liberty, but interviews, photos, emails and other records reveal the two were key figures in Liberty’s founding and growth. Former employees told ProPublica that Beers attended Liberty executive meetings and had access to the ministry’s bill processing offices, which held members’ private medical information. When an executive voiced concern about how much Liberty was paying to Cost Sharing Solutions, Beers later approached him and yelled at him for raising questions, according to a complaint filed with Ohio fraud investigators.

Fabris was an official at Liberty at the same time as he helped determine how much it paid to Cost Sharing Solutions, his own company, records show. Emails from 2014 to 2017 identified Fabris as a Liberty employee. In one 2014 message to firms selling coverage plans, Bellis, the CEO, wrote, “If you have any questions in regards to the changes to the compensation structure please contact: Brandon Fabris.” Bellis included Fabris’ Liberty HealthShare email address.

Fabris said he kept Cost Sharing Solutions “at arm’s length” from the nonprofit.

Beers and Fabris also traveled to pitch the ministry to churches, fraternal organizations like the Loyal Order of Moose and conservative groups like the Conservative Political Action Coalition, or CPAC. The men urged audiences to join Liberty and make money selling coverage to their friends and flock, according to interviews, records and photographs obtained by ProPublica. Liberty spent more than $200,000 a year between 2017 and 2021 to be a top sponsor at CPAC, vaulting the sharing ministry and its chief executive to the main stage of the high profile conservative political event. Bellis was given a prime speaking slot in 2018, following Fox News host Laura Ingraham. At the next year’s conference, then-President Donald Trump famously hugged a U.S. flag as he took the stage for his keynote address, with a large Liberty logo to his right.

Liberty’s logo appears beside President Donald Trump at the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2019. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

Craig Berens, a sales consultant in Michigan, said he worked closely with Beers and Fabris and connected them to the Christian Coalition of Michigan as part of a membership drive. “Oh yeah, he was my pipeline to Liberty,” Berens said, referring to Fabris. “Him and Dan Beers were at the top of the organization.”

When ProPublica presented its findings to Beers and Fabris, their lawyers responded. Rick Arnold, the family’s longtime attorney, and Laura Mills, who is representing the family in the class-action lawsuit, said the relationship between Liberty and the two companies did not constitute a conflict of interest under IRS standards.

“Just because you’ve got a family member on a board and you may have a vendor does not mean that’s an improper transaction, as long as those people recuse themselves, make it known as well,” Arnold said.

Beers and Fabris’ sales efforts were an extraordinary success. Liberty enrolled 50,000 members in its first two years, more than the entire industry had covered before the Affordable Care Act. Marketing flyers from that era show Liberty urging people to “join the movement” and “opt out of Obamacare.” Money came flooding in as Liberty offered cheap plans — about $160 a month for an individual and $400 a month for families.

Between 2015 and 2021, Liberty collected at least $1.9 billion in revenue, according to tax filings and internal audits. But ProPublica found that Liberty did not report more than $1 billion of those payments to state and federal tax agencies on its financial balance sheet. Instead, Liberty noted it had possession of hundreds of millions of dollars in an obscure text field tucked deep in its tax filing each year. This pot of money, the nonprofit said, was under the control of its members.

Nonprofit experts told ProPublica that the practice was dubious at best and potentially illegal. “If they have the discretion to redirect the money, then it’s revenue,” said Marcus Owens, former director of the IRS’s nonprofit division.

An attorney representing members of the Beers family did not directly respond to questions about Liberty’s accounting practices.

Echoing a strategy used by the Brotherhood, Liberty recorded its finances in two ways. One was the company’s bank account, which showed actual transactions — member fees received, medical providers paid. Only a small number of executives and staff could see those transactions, including Drudy Abel, according to interviews with former Liberty employees.

The second way was designed for Liberty members’ eyes. The company developed in-house software that purported to show members’ individual accounts and track their personal medical bills and monthly payments, according to Fabris. He called these “hypothetical accounts.” In other words, this software created a facade; it tracked accounts that didn’t exist and reflected transactions that may or may not have been completed.

The hypothetical accounts accomplished two things, according to current and former employees. They gave the appearance that Liberty was sending far more money to medical providers than it was, and they gave Liberty cover from regulations. If Liberty was pooling members’ funds into bank accounts, insurance commissioners could argue that the company was selling insurance. The software, however, made it look as if each person had an individual account. In reality, Liberty controlled every dollar.

The Conglomerate

With money from Liberty flowing into Cost Sharing Solutions and Medical Cost Solutions, corporate filings show Danny and Ronnie Beers and Fabris created a dizzying array of businesses, real estate holding companies and shell companies — entities that conduct no business but hold assets and move money.

The family reclaimed much of the Beers family compound that had been lost in the collapse of the Brotherhood. One of the newly formed shell companies, Ohio Lazy L Ranch Ltd., paid $4.2 million for 140 acres of Hawthorn’s old ranch. This included a 4,000-square-foot house that overlooks the expanse of rolling hills where Beers made his new home. The family formed additional shell companies and over the next two years spent $6 million for neighboring parcels, including a wedding venue and a commercial horse stable.

Other Lazy L businesses popped up: Lazy L Ranch Trucking, Lazy L Ranch Meats, Lazy L Ranch Cattle and Lazy L Ranch Leasing.

Danny Beers launched Dan’s Wholesale Carpet in an old brick building down the road from the ranch and then opened four more locations around Canton and Akron in two years.

After the family acquired a popular chicken restaurant, Beers explained to the local newspaper how the businesses all fed off one another. The wedding venue ordered cakes from the bakery. The butcher shops got cattle from the ranch. “My son wanted a place he could sell steaks,” Beers said, “so we bought a restaurant.”

Dan Beers, second from left, Ronnie Beers, second from right, and Brandon Fabris, far right, at Tapawingo Lodge in Alberta, Canada, one of many ventures that members of the family have invested in or purchased (Via the Alberta Adventures website)

The family acquired a one-quarter interest in Tapawingo Lodge, a hunting and fishing camp in Alberta, Canada, through Next Level Adventures LLC, which is registered to Ronnie Beers. Next Level’s mailing address, however, is Dan Beers’ home. The lodge’s promotional website shows multiple photos of Beers family members.

Through a common arrangement that kept their names out of public records, family members purchased a controlling stake of Ultimate Air Charters, a boutique airline that specializes in shuttling passengers from Canton to gambling locales such as Atlantic City. (Ultimate Air Charters recently made headlines when Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis used the company to shuttle immigrant families to Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts.)

In Oregon, Fabris and his father purchased an 80-acre vineyard outside of Medford for $1.8 million. The hillside property had produced syrahs and pinot noirs. Fabris decided to grow a different crop. He hired a local contractor to tear out the grape vines, dig lines and run electrical wiring and conduits to power an industrial marijuana farm. There are now five greenhouses and a 16,000-square-foot metal barn tucked into that valley.

Brandon Fabris and his father purchased a southern Oregon vineyard, which they converted into a marijuana farm. (Jordan Gale, special to ProPublica)

In all, the Beers family set up at least 35 companies in six states in seven years. The full extent of their holdings is likely greater, but it can’t be determined because transaction details between private businesses aren’t typically made public.

A Chorus of Complaints

In its first two years, Liberty gained a reputation for paying most bills promptly, bringing in new members and hundreds of millions of dollars in fees. Then, beginning in late 2016, that reputation began to fall apart. Liberty started rejecting claims and lowballing doctors, leading some to return checks, which Liberty staff stuffed in boxes and stacked in a storage room, according to several former employees directly involved. Internal data and records obtained by ProPublica show that at least 50 hospitals refused to work with Liberty’s bill negotiators to settle unpaid charges. A memo from June 2017 shows Utah’s Intermountain Healthcare system, one of the largest in the western United States, refused to negotiate with the ministry and its billing contractor, leaving many members to fend for themselves.

At the same time, Liberty stopped reimbursing members for charges they paid out of pocket. This led to a massive backlog in bills, with both members and health care providers waiting months and years to be paid, if they were paid at all.

ProPublica spoke at length with nearly a dozen current and former employees familiar with Liberty, Cost Sharing Solutions and Medical Cost Solutions. They confirmed that the spending binge on the conglomerate drained money from member funds.

David Chalman paid monthly fees to Liberty, but his medical bills were sent to collections. (Rachel Woolf for ProPublica)

In Colorado, David Chalman joined Liberty in 2016 because he disliked Obamacare, hadn’t had any previous health issues and ran his own small business. Two years later, he suffered a heart attack, which left him with a stent above his right ventricle. After many months of calls and letters, Liberty eventually paid for that. But then, in 2018, while driving to a job outside of Cañon City, he turned to his son and said, “I think I’m having another heart attack.”

Thinking the stent might have failed, he and his son rushed to a rural clinic, where a doctor called for a helicopter to transport him to a hospital in Pueblo. The flight, an aortic valve replacement and checkups cost more than $150,000.

As Liberty instructed all its members to do, he told the hospital he would pay out-of-pocket and then submitted the bills to Liberty. The ministry never sent him money, the bills were referred to a collection agency, and Chalman’s credit score dropped from 750 to 600. Due to the supply chain chaos wrought by the pandemic, Chalman’s windshield repair business went under. He then hoped to buy a truck and become a commercial driver, but no banks would give him a loan because of his credit rating.

Still, fear kept him paying into Liberty. Until the end of 2022, he paid his $400 a month share because he worried that, if he left, Liberty would never reimburse him. Dozens of current and former members told ProPublica they felt stuck in this predicament, as Liberty executives had said in newsletters that the organization prioritized paying new bills for current members. “I’ve thought about suing, but the lawyers don’t know what to do,” Chalman said. “They’re not an insurance company.”

Debt collection notices piled up when Liberty failed to pay bills for Chalman’s heart treatments. (Rachel Woolf for ProPublica)

ProPublica contacted nearly 300 current and former Liberty members and spoke with more than 70 who described extended periods of stress, harassment by bill collectors and financial ruin.

Heidi Dunfield of Salt Lake City said that after Obamacare costs “went sky high,” she signed her family up with Liberty. One year, she had more than $10,000 in bills sent to collections after her husband was seen for back problems and her daughter broke two limbs. Dunfield said she fought for months, calling Liberty repeatedly to get reimbursed. She is still waiting.

Like hundreds of other Liberty members, she found a Facebook group where users shared complaints and raised questions about the people behind the ministry. She sifted through court records and found the Brotherhood case and the Ohio attorney general’s allegations of theft and money laundering. How, she asked, was this ministry any different?

“It became almost like a second job,” she said. “So I started looking into it and realized that it was kind of a family that was just scamming people. It was kind of genius in a way.”

In South Dakota, Marilyn Breck needed a colonoscopy and cancer screening. The charge came to about $20,000, which Liberty never paid even after she went through months of submitting claims and paperwork. Breck said she couldn’t stop the bill from going to collections and wrecking her credit because she was in the middle of a divorce and had lost her job.

“My daughter and I — we were going to the food bank to get food, so I couldn’t deal with Liberty anymore or the collections company,” said Breck, who now lives with her mother in a mobile home in Florida. “It really made a big impact in my life.”

Citing health privacy laws, current Liberty executives declined to comment on individual members’ bills.

It is not a coincidence that many of Liberty’s members ended up in collections. It was part of a strategy by Liberty to reduce medical bills, according to interviews and social media statements by current and former billing staff.

While many hospitals and doctors stopped negotiating with Liberty, collection agencies did not. Medical Cost Solutions, Liberty’s billing contractor, found it could convince those agencies to close out cases for pennies on the dollar.

Members have complained to the Better Business Bureau, state insurance departments and their state attorneys general. Many found their way to the Ohio attorney general’s office, which has fielded hundreds of complaints from consumers living in 44 states. The complaints are unambiguous. More than 40 people told the Ohio attorney general that they’d been forced into collections. More than a dozen complaints specifically referred to Liberty as a “shell game” or a “fraud.”

“I believe this company is a total PONZI SCHEME,” reads one complaint, from Georgia. “Shameful that a company as deceitful as this portrays itself as a Christian-based company. As a Christian myself, this façade is deplorable.”

The complaints and scathing online consumer reviews contributed to a decline in members and income. By 2017 that reduction in revenue, sources said, had further strained Liberty’s ability to pay its obligations.

Another blow to revenue came later that year when Republican lawmakers in the House and Senate effectively eliminated the individual mandate. This wiped out health care sharing ministries’ primary selling point. When the change took effect in 2019, many people who had bought into the insurance alternative found they no longer had reason to stay.

There is no national data showing how much health care sharing ministries spend on members’ medical bills. However, as scrutiny of sharing ministries increased in recent years, some states have begun to require financial disclosure. Data published by the Massachusetts’ insurance board shows that Liberty spent about 56 cents of every dollar it took in from members in that state on medical expenses in 2019 and 2020, a figure that would be scandalous if it were an insurance company. The federal government requires insurance companies to spend at least 80 cents of every dollar on direct care.

“Remarkably Similar to the Brotherhood”

Dr. John Hunt became Liberty’s chief medical officer in 2017. He joined the ministry in the hope of serving a Christian alternative to a health care system he viewed as rigged against consumers. He soon learned he’d misplaced his faith. Hunt was disturbed to find that nearly all of Liberty’s top executives had worked at the Christian Brotherhood Newsletter, and he saw that Dan Beers, the person at the center of that scam, was clearly involved in running Liberty.

Hunt pressed his bosses for details about Liberty’s contracts with Cost Sharing Solutions and Medical Cost Solutions, arguing they constituted a clear conflict of interest and had to end. Bellis, Liberty’s CEO, rebuffed him, he said, and denied the arrangements were inappropriate. Bellis declined to answer ProPublica’s questions about Hunt, citing the civil lawsuit.

In late November 2017, Hunt wrote a three-page memo detailing what he knew as well as what he suspected about Liberty’s finances and sent it to the Ohio attorney general’s office.

“Large sums of money are going to the friends and family that in my opinion are excessive and should be examined,” he wrote. Liberty followed “a pattern that is remarkably similar to the Brotherhood,” he wrote, “except that I expect that Dan Beers (of Brotherhood fame) will assert that he is not currently involved.”

Hunt’s letter added urgency to the growing number of complaints the Ohio attorney general had received from Liberty members. A month after receiving Hunt’s whistleblower memo, the attorney general’s charity section opened an investigation into Liberty and its contracting companies for potential self-dealing and fraud.

Court records indicate the attorney general’s office investigated how the Beers family network had obtained funds for the 700-acre ranch, the chain of carpet stores, the airline, the marijuana farm and more. Fabris told ProPublica that the family cooperated with the state’s lawyers.

The attorney general refused to release files from its investigation into Liberty, Cost Sharing Solutions and Medical Cost Solutions, citing a state law that makes charity investigations confidential. Unlike in its earlier probe of the Brotherhood, there is no evidence the attorney general’s office asked other law enforcement agencies for help securing records or witnesses. The office refused to answer questions regarding Liberty and whether it had investigated potential crimes.

What is clear is the state’s attorneys didn’t even entertain the argument that Dan Beers wasn’t involved in running Liberty. In April 2021, the attorney general opened settlement talks with Beers, his sons Danny and Ronnie, and the Fabrises. Seven months later, a deal was struck, with that group agreeing to pay $6.4 million to the state, most of it intended to help Liberty members with their medical expenses. (The family has not yet made the $540,000 payment that was due in January. An attorney for Fabris and Beers said they are renegotiating the payment schedule.) That figure appears to have done little for members who were sent into debt by the ministry’s failure to reimburse them, and it’s far less than the fines levied against the Brotherhood nearly two decades earlier.

The attorney general wrote in the settlement that it believed the three organizations had broken state law. None of the defendants admitted wrongdoing.

As the two sides finished settlement talks, the IRS put a lien on Danny Beers’ house for $1.2 million in unpaid federal income tax. Records indicate he had $3.6 million in taxable income in 2019. Danny Beers paid the debt in full and had the lien removed three weeks later.

The extent to which the IRS has examined the family’s sudden wealth, if at all, is unknown. The IRS denied ProPublica’s request for records related to any investigations of Liberty, Cost Sharing Solutions, Medical Cost Solutions or any member of the extended Beers family.

As part of the settlement, Liberty’s new board severed any relationship with the Beers family. The nonprofit now has a new board of directors and new management.

Once again, Beers was kicked out of the health share he helped build.

Rochelle Glasgow, left, Donna Landry, center, and Joanne Gabris attended the memorial for their sister Bonnie Martin, who died after a long battle with cancer in 2022. She spent her last months begging Liberty to pay her medical bills. (Rich-Joseph Facun, special to ProPublica)

A group of Liberty members have banded together in a class-action lawsuit that names Liberty and some of the Beers family. That case is led by the sisters of Bonnie Martin, who unsuccessfully fought Liberty over her unpaid bills. The defendants have filed a motion to dismiss, which is pending.

The new Liberty CEO, Dorsey Morrow, told ProPublica that the organization is chipping away at its massive backlog of unpaid bills to make its members whole. Numerous members continue to file formal complaints to the state of Ohio and express frustration on social media about unpaid bills. Morrow said he and a new team are doing all they can to avoid the worst-case scenario: Liberty going into bankruptcy and never paying people’s bills.

Morrow confirmed that Liberty no longer works with Cost Sharing Solutions; severing those ties is a central part of the strategy to save the sharing ministry. It now performs the work in-house or uses other vendors for the services the Beers family company previously provided.

Immediately, he said, Liberty achieved “significant savings.”

The nonprofit’s contract with Medical Cost Solutions is set to end in May.

The Bank

In early 2018, as the Ohio attorney general’s office began its investigation, Danny and Ronnie Beers and Brandon Fabris and his father paid $7.3 million to buy Farmers State Bank, a small chain that served rural communities at the foot of the Missouri Ozarks. Brandon Fabris told ProPublica that the group pulled together the available cash in the conglomerate’s various accounts to cover the cost.

The bank is the linchpin of the family’s next business venture.

They renamed the chain LimeBank and applied for federal approval to take control. The filing included a letter from Liberty’s board committing to shift the nonprofit’s money to LimeBank.

Members of the Beers and Fabris families bought a small chain of banks in Missouri to launch a new health care sharing ministry business. (Bruce E. Stidham, special to ProPublica)

Red flags went up immediately. An official at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis read an article about the Brotherhood civil trial and asked the applicants if they had any connection to Dan Beers. The agency redacted most of the application records before releasing them to ProPublica; the documents do not include responses from Beers or the Frabrises.

The Federal Reserve typically approves or denies ownership changes within 60 days, according to its website. It examined the LimeBank purchase for much longer — 441 days — before signing off. The agency declined to answer ProPublica’s questions about the application.

In their filings, the Beerses and the Fabrises explained that the bank would use special software to create accounts for Liberty’s members, track their funds and make thousands of transfers every day to pay bills.

For the first time, Liberty would follow the letter of the law and not pool funds together, like an insurance company does. Instead of using “hypothetical accounts,” the health care sharing ministry would give individual members real bank accounts.

However, there was a catch: Members would have to sign power of attorney for the account over to Liberty. Again, the nonprofit would control their money.

Liberty was supposed to be only the beginning. The application details plans to sell the service to all sharing ministries, which now claim a combined 865,000 members and $1 billion a year in revenue.

The plan was simple. Liberty would open an account for each member. LimeBank would charge $16.50 for every new account and then a $6.50 monthly fee on every existing account, several former bank employees told ProPublica. Liberty’s membership alone in 2019 would have generated more than $7 million a year in bank fees.

Fabris filed for a U.S. patent on the software that was designed to manage multiple health care sharing ministries through one bank. But the Beerses’ in-house technology never functioned properly and has been scrapped, the former LimeBank employees said.

Liberty had planned to shift its money to the bank in late 2021, but the Ohio attorney general’s office blocked the move in its settlement with the nonprofit.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., the agency that insures people’s bank deposits, is currently examining LimeBank’s sharing ministry division to determine whether it follows federal rules intended to protect account holders’ money, former employees said.

Meanwhile, the bank has lost a slew of key executives. Midway through 2021, Fabris fired Thane Kifer, who’d led the bank for more than a decade, and replaced him with Lee Keith, Missouri’s former top bank official. Keith had approved the Beerses’ acquisition as state finance commissioner. Keith resigned in July 2022, just a year after he took the job. John Kopecky, LimeBank’s chief financial officer, left at the same time because he said he was uncomfortable with his new bosses’ disregard for bank regulations.

Kifer declined to comment. Keith did not respond to ProPublica’s interview requests.

Michael Elliott, LimeBank’s security officer whose job was to monitor for money laundering, also quit in 2022. Elliott said he did not witness illegal activity while working for the Fabrises and the Beerses, but he wanted out nonetheless.

“They have a very unique way of running things, a very unique business model,” Elliott said, “and I did not feel comfortable continuing in the role for which they hired me.”

How Do You Pay Your Bills, Dan?

During the interview at Cost Sharing Solutions’ headquarters in Canton last summer, Dan Beers acted like the man in charge.

As he settled into his chair, Brandon Fabris caught him up.

“They’re asking about our conglomerate — me and the boys,” Fabris said, referring to Beers’ sons, Ronnie and Danny.

Wearing a polo shirt emblazoned with the Lazy L Ranch logo, Beers nodded.

For the next two hours, Beers answered questions and provided details about numerous businesses and transactions he claims he had nothing to do with. At times, he’d slip and take credit, saying “we,” only to correct himself and attribute all the success to his children — “they.”

Multiple times, when a question was posed to Fabris, Beers interjected. Asked about a real estate deal that effectively transferred close to a million dollars from Liberty to Cost Sharing Solutions, Beers said, without offering any evidence, “The documents are wrong.” County property records show that when Cost Sharing Solutions sold the building that is now Liberty’s headquarters, the nonprofit paid nearly $1.6 million. Just two weeks before that deal, Cost Sharing Solutions had bought the building for $650,000.

Asked if he had a bank account in his name, Beers responded, “I do. Maybe. Yeah, I do have a bank account.”

Beers was more assertive when he spoke at a 2019 event sponsored by CPAC. In a video from that conference, Beers described how he’d ascended from convicted felon to a magnate overseeing “23 businesses.”

He misspoke at that conference, he now claimed.

“I was referring to our family — not me,” he said. “I don’t own a single company.”

He corrected himself to add that he owns Dan Beers Construction Company. A search of Ohio business filings revealed no business with that name.

ProPublica has it all wrong, he said. He’s just a father to some savvy and successful kids who took an old idea — the health care sharing ministry — and evolved it with software and a banking solution. With the bank they purchased in the Ozarks, they’re about to grow the conglomerate even more. They’re not hiding anything.

“I can’t even send an email, dude,” Beers said. “They’re a technology company. Try to pin that one on me, you’re going to fail miserably on that one.”

While he seemed unfazed by most of the exchange, it was the simplest of questions that agitated Beers.

How do you pay your bills, Dan?

“How do I pay my bills?” he responded. “I get paid.”

By whom?

“I get paid by a lot of people.”

By?

“Just different entities that I work for.”

Who do you work for?

“I work for myself.”

Asked about the many similarities between Liberty’s funneling of cash to family companies and the activities of the Christian Brotherhood Newsletter, which investigators had alleged two decades earlier constituted conspiracy and money laundering, Beers rejected the question.

“There’s no money laundering,” he said. “Zero. It’s not even worth discussing. There’s no money laundering.”

Do You Have a Tip for ProPublica? Help Us Do Journalism.

Andrea Suozzo contributed research. Additional design and development by Lucas Waldron.

by Ryan Gabrielson and J. David McSwane, graphics by Kolin Pope

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Fines TitleMax $15 Million for Predatory Lending

1 year 8 months ago

This article was produced for ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network in partnership with The Current. Sign up for Dispatches to get stories like this one as soon as they are published.

A federal consumer watchdog group has fined one Georgia-based company $15 million for predatory lending practices. TitleMax, which is headquartered in Savannah, offers short-term loans — at exorbitant interest rates — in exchange for a lien on the title of the borrower’s car.

In its order, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said TitleMax had intentionally evaded laws meant to protect military families from predatory lenders and, separately, charged illegal insurance fees to more than 17,000 customers.

The federal regulator found that the company used deceptive means, including falsifying information, to issue 2,670 so-called title loans over a five-year period to military members or their dependents in violation of the Military Lending Act and in contravention of the company’s own internal guidelines.

The operations of TitleMax, the nation’s largest title lender and the dominant industry player in Georgia, have been the subject of a yearlong investigation by The Current and ProPublica. The news organizations revealed for the first time the scope and scale of the industry in the state. The stories also revealed TitleMax’s questionable practices in Georgia, which has one of the most permissive local regulatory environments for the title lending industry. Due to a loophole in state law, title lenders there are allowed to charge triple-digit interest rates that would be illegal for any other financial lender.

The 53-page CFPB Consent Order repeatedly castigated the company for a lack of meaningful internal oversight in its pursuit of revenue. Federal law caps annual interest rates at 36% for financial products sold to military members and their families. TitleMax, which counts more than 293,000 customers nationwide and posted $910 million in revenue in 2019, emphasizes in its own internal training manuals that employees should not lend to service members.

But the company did anyway. Between Oct. 3, 2016, and Sept. 17, 2021, the CFPB said, the company sold 2,670 loans to military members and their families, sometimes by falsifying personal information of the borrower to conceal the fact that they were a military member or a dependent covered by the Military Lending Act. The company lacked internal controls to catch or stop such behavior, according to the consent order.

“TitleMax’s violations were caused by intentional misconduct, a lack of internal and system controls, and no meaningful monitoring or oversight,” the consent order said. “TitleMax did not conduct any periodic monitoring or audits of its origination activity to ensure compliance with the MLA, allowing intentional misconduct and problematic practices to go unchecked.”

TMX Finance, the parent company of TitleMax, denied the allegations of wrongdoing. In a statement, the company said it agreed to pay the fine to avoid costly and lengthy litigation, saying it “would be a distraction for the Company’s core business of providing best-in-class services to its customers.” It also noted that the violations documented by the CFPB have not been proved.

The CFPB ordered that $5 million of the fine be made in restitution to consumers affected by the illegal activities and $10 million be paid to the government as a civil penalty for all the violations cited in the consent order. It also voided all the 2,670 contracts identified in the consent order as having violated the Military Lending Act.

The $15 million fine is the CFPB’s second ruling against the company. In 2016, the agency fined TitleMax $9 million after documenting deceptive practices in Georgia, Tennessee and Alabama, and the company has remained under investigation ever since.

TitleMax boasts around 1,000 storefront locations across the United States, including more than 200 in Georgia. It has publicly touted its legal and compliance teams as a “stellar example” for the industry. In commercials, it boasts that its streamlined appraisal process can approve loans in 10 minutes for people who have been written off as credit risks by traditional lending institutions but need financing to pay for life’s basic needs.

Congress passed the Military Lending Act after a 2006 Department of Defense report concluded that predatory lending “undermines military readiness” and “harms the morale of troops and their families.” Over the last decade, multiple states have moved to pass similar interest rate caps for all consumers. TitleMax and other title lenders have ceased operations in states that have passed such caps, arguing that they could not be profitable in such an environment.

Georgia, which accounts for 20% of TitleMax’s current business operations, has bucked this trend. Earlier this month, however, the chairman of the state House of Representatives Committee on Defense & Veterans Affairs introduced a bill that would end the legal loophole for title lenders that has allowed them to charge triple-digit annual interest rates to consumers and evade Georgia’s usury laws.

In an interview last week, Rep. Josh Bonner, a Republican from Fayetteville, said that protections for Georgia-based service members from predatory lenders should be granted to all Georgia residents. The bill is co-sponsored by five other representatives hailing from various parts of the state, but has not yet been endorsed by the state Republican leadership.

“If protections are good enough for our military members, they are good enough for all of us,” Bonner said.

In a second set of findings, the CFPB also cited a lack of internal oversight that allowed TitleMax store managers to charge illegal or unnecessary fees to approximately 15,000 customers. These fees were associated with the filing and canceling of liens placed on the vehicles being held as collateral in exchange for TitleMax financing.

Additionally, the CFPB has ordered the company to enact new oversight protocols, including the hiring of an outside consultant and the creation of a new internal compliance committee that includes the company president and chief executive officer. It is unclear what these requirements will cost.

TitleMax financed its own national growth through private corporate bond placements. The company has around $400 million in debt coming due in April. Its current credit ratings reports cite the ongoing federal regulatory investigation as well as increasing state regulation of title lending as cause for concern for investors.

by Margaret Coker, The Current

Prosecutors and Judges Push for Conviction Reviews, Ban on Junk Science of 911 Call Analysis

1 year 8 months ago

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

Text STORY to 917-905-1223 to get the next installment in this series as soon as it publishes. Standard messaging rates apply.

Revelations that a new type of junk science known as 911 call analysis has infiltrated the justice system have triggered calls by prosecutors, judges and defense attorneys nationwide to ban the use of the technique, review past convictions in which it was used and exact sanctions against prosecutors who snuck it into court despite knowing it was inadmissible.

The actions follow a two-part ProPublica investigation published last year that many judges and other court officers said took them by surprise. “I never anticipated that prosecutors — officers of the court — would engage in systematic organized frauds,” a judge in Ohio wrote in an email to ProPublica. She said she had alerted fellow judges to be on the lookout for 911 call analysis, which ProPublica found to be pervasive throughout the justice system: “I’m sure that some will care and share my outrage that innocent people are going to prison.”

The technique’s chief architect, Tracy Harpster, developed a program to spread his methods and says police and prosecutors who take his training will learn how to identify guilt and deception from the word choice, cadence and grammar of those calling 911. So far, researchers who have tried to corroborate Harpster’s claims have failed.

Last year, ProPublica documented more than 100 cases in 26 states where law enforcement has employed his methods. Those responsible for ensuring honest police work and fair trials — including the FBI — have instead helped 911 call analysis metastasize. The investigation revealed that some prosecutors knew 911 call analysis would not be recognized as scientific evidence but still disguised it in trial against unwitting defendants anyway.

During the reporting for the two stories, Harpster at first defended his program but then did not respond to repeated interview requests or detailed lists of questions. Supporters of his work in law enforcement have said 911 call analysis is a valuable investigative tool but not decisive evidence on which to base a conviction.

On Wednesday, he and Susan Adams, who co-authored the original study the technique is based on, sent a letter to ProPublica and argued its coverage had “presented an inaccurate narrative” and listed material they claimed to be omissions and misrepresentations. They asked that their letter be published. ProPublica is also publishing a point-by-point response.

Last October, ProPublica reported on the case of Jessica Logan, a young mother convicted of killing her baby after a detective trained by Harpster testified about his analysis of Logan’s 911 call. Shortly after the story was published, the Supreme Court of Illinois agreed to take another look at Logan’s case.

In addition, attorneys from the Exoneration Project and the Center for Integrity in Forensic Sciences offered to represent her. One of her new lawyers is Josh Tepfer, who was recently profiled by BuzzFeed News for helping exonerate 288 wrongfully convicted people, “making him among the most prolific exoneration attorneys since anyone began keeping track.”

Hope Bradford, who is a mother figure to Logan, said she’s encouraged by the recent developments but is reserving optimism. “I never thought it would even get this far,” she said. “I’m just waiting for her to come home — that’s all.”

Faulty scientific disciplines, including misleading testimony, are the second most common factor in wrongful convictions, according to the Innocence Project. “The criminal legal system can add 911 call analysis to the junk pile of fake scientific theories contributing to this statistic,” said Nellie King, president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. She called the business of 911 call analysis “dangerous and insidious.”

“Most bothersome is the fact that justice agencies — police officers and prosecutors alike — are buying what he is selling,” King added. “Harpster’s impact on case outcomes is devastating to those falsely accused based on his claims.”

North Carolina’s Office of Indigent Defense Services issued a warning to attorneys across the state to be on the lookout for appearances of 911 call analysis. Fair and Just Prosecution, a network of elected prosecutors, called on its members to review past cases, as well: “Prosecutors must guard against these practices and correct the past injustices they’ve caused through post-conviction review processes.”

At a recent summit of prosecutors in Austin, Texas, Miriam Krinsky, the group’s president, presented ProPublica’s reporting to warn new district attorneys about 911 call analysis. In an email, Krinsky said her organization, in partnership with the Innocence Project, “is concerned about this issue and looking at where and how elected prosecutors can engage to guard against these and other practices that undermine the integrity of convictions.”

In recent weeks, dozens of readers, including defense attorneys and prosecutors, have reached out to ProPublica to inquire about the other jurisdictions where 911 call analysis has surfaced.

Reporters canvassed a sample of about 50 departments and training associations nationwide where records show Harpster’s methods appear to have surfaced over the past 10 years. These agencies, which range from Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension to the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, have either hosted him for seminars, sent officers to attend, used his methods in actual cases or did a combination of all three.

Eleven of the 50 agencies responded, and the rest did not answer questions about whether or not they’d continue to support Harpster’s work. Those that did reply either distanced themselves from the program or minimized its role in past cases.

“We’ve never been of the opinion that 911 call analysis should be anything more than a potential investigative lead,” Susan Medina, chief of staff with the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, said in an email, adding that the department “would never advocate for 911 call analysis to be a deciding factor of an arrest or conviction.”

Some of those agencies that responded to ProPublica’s survey didn’t know about their past involvement with the program.

For example, Melaney Arnold, a public information officer with the Illinois State Police, said that department leaders were unaware of 911 call analysis or anyone who’s been trained in it. ProPublica then sent her emails and attendance lists documenting personnel who have attended the program or consulted with Harpster.

“Let me circle back with staff,” Arnold replied in an email. “They may have only been looking at 911 call analysis and not the concept in general.”

Two notable agencies that did not respond to questions are the Westchester County, New York, and Orange County, California, district attorneys offices.

A prosecutor in Westchester once wrote to Harpster to thank him for his consultation, which, he said, “proved to be an invaluable aid in understanding the defendant’s 911 call and greatly assisted in the successful prosecution.”

In Orange County, the district attorney charged a woman with murdering her boyfriend 26 years ago. The arrest came last spring, after prosecutors and detectives consulted with Harpster. “It significantly helped our district attorney to realize the indicators of guilt in the phone calls,” the lead detective told Harpster in an email, “as well as suggestions on how to introduce the 911 calls to the jury during trial.”

Public Defenders and Defense Attorneys: Help ProPublica Report on Criminal Justice

by Brett Murphy

ProPublica Promotes Reporter Michael Grabell to Senior Editor

1 year 8 months ago

ProPublica announced Friday that Michael Grabell will be promoted from reporter to senior editor for its Local Reporting Network.

Grabell was one of ProPublica’s first staffers, joining in 2008 from The Dallas Morning News. As a reporter, he wrote stories about economic issues, labor, immigration and, more recently, the food safety system. He expanded his reporting on the 2008-09 economic stimulus into a book, “Money Well Spent?” Most recently, Grabell edited “Invisible Schools,” a collaboration with The Seattle Times co-authored by Lulu Ramadan, a distinguished fellow with the Local Reporting Network.

Grabell has won two George Polk Awards and has twice been a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize — in 2021, as part of a team covering COVID-19, and in 2019, with Ginger Thompson and Topher Sanders, for stories that helped expose the impact of family separations at the border and abuse in shelters for immigrant children. The latter work also won a Peabody Award and was a finalist for the Goldsmith Prize for Investigative Reporting.

“Michael is a world-class journalist who has done some of ProPublica’s finest reporting since our inception,” said Charles Ornstein, managing editor, local. “We’re so thrilled to welcome him in this new role and are excited for him to work with our local partners as they pursue ambitious accountability journalism.” “Since joining ProPublica, I’ve had the opportunity to travel the country and parts of the world to tell stories that spotlight critical issues and amplify voices that are too often ignored,” Grabell said. “I’m excited to use that experience to help other reporters do their best work and fill the need for more investigative journalism in our communities.”

by ProPublica

After a Decade of Tracking Politicians’ Deleted Tweets, Politwoops Is No More

1 year 8 months ago

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

Politicians haven’t stopped deleting some of their most cringeworthy tweets, but Politwoops, our project that has tracked and archived more than half a million deleted tweets from candidates and elected officials since 2012, is no longer able to track them.

Since Elon Musk took over Twitter, the platform has disabled the function we used to track deletions — and the new method that Twitter says should identify them appears to be broken. We have been unable to find anyone who can help us, and with Twitter surprising developers by announcing a move to a paid model for gathering tweet data, it’s no longer clear that Twitter is a stable platform on which to maintain this work. It seems fitting to give Politwoops a sendoff, a farewell to not exactly a friend but an odd part of our national political discourse for a decade.

Originally built by the Sunlight Foundation, Politwoops always had a tenuous existence. Born in 2012, it received its first eulogy just three years later after Twitter pulled the plug, only to come back just in time for the 2016 presidential election. (Now-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy welcomed it back, then deleted that tweet.) When Sunlight closed up shop, ProPublica took over the app, which is when I started to maintain it.

Politwoops was built on the idea that what elected officials and candidates said on Twitter mattered, at least a little. Like most users of Twitter, politicians usually tweet pretty mundane stuff: celebrations of victories mixed with jeers for opponents, some local flavor and attempts to jump into trending conversations. Most of the deletions are for mistakes any Twitter user could make: typos, forgotten or incorrect images, bad URLs. The occasional seems-like-a-toddler-grabbed-the-phone posts. Truly forgettable stuff.

But for those politicians who really embraced Twitter as a place where they could be themselves, the deletions sometimes spoke volumes. Some deleted posts are hard to forget, like one from then-President Donald Trump in the early evening of Jan. 6, 2021, not long after a mob invaded the U.S. Capitol and assaulted police officers in an attempt to stop Congress from certifying Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 presidential election:

Trump had perhaps the most-watched Twitter account during my time running Politwoops. While he was in office, Trump’s tweets got a ton of attention, but they seldom were a departure from other things he said in public. I would often get emails from reporters asking whether he had, in fact, deleted some alleged tweet they had seen, and mostly he had not; other accounts would post images of fake tweets that never appeared on his timeline. Politwoops became an integral resource for checking whether viral (and often poorly photoshopped) tweets were fake.

All the while, other politicians were posting — and deleting — interesting, newsworthy and bizarre things on the platform. Running Politwoops for the past six years has, strangely enough, made many elected officials seem more human to me. They, and not Trump, are what I’ll remember most about the site.

Sometimes deleted messages appear to be offhand remarks that politicians have instantly thought better of: When political scientist Larry Sabato wrote, “You have to admit, Biden is on fire,” referring to then-Vice President Joe Biden’s debate performance against Republican Paul Ryan in October 2012, Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn retweeted it. And then deleted it 11 seconds later.

Other examples of this genre include Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie’s deletion of this somewhat cryptic tweet about men and war a minute after posting it, while New York Democratic congressional candidate Nate McMurray did the same for this hot take about The Buffalo News in October 2020.

In other cases, it was harder to tell why a tweet was deleted. Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, famous for his use of abbreviations and sparsely worded posts, is a known booster of the University of Northern Iowa, his alma mater. In November 2021 he posted that UNI was trying to recruit a local volleyball player. Fourteen hours later, he deleted the tweet. That athlete did, in fact, sign with UNI a year later.

As Twitter grew in popularity among politicians, its use became more professional, with staffers posting news and pictures. That led to some interesting conversations as staffers who had access to multiple accounts, including their own personal ones, sometimes clicked the wrong button. I’ve gotten more than one email or phone call asking if a tweet posted by mistake to the wrong account and then deleted could be removed entirely from Politiwoops. (Answer: We don’t do that.)

In December 2020, I got an email from someone who worked on the campaign of then-Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney, D-N.Y. The congressman had posted and deleted a tweet that showed up on Politwoops, and would we consider removing it? It’s very rare that we would do that — that’s the whole point of the site — but when I brought up the deleted tweet I saw why he was asking: Maloney had mistakenly sent a public tweet that should have been a direct message, because it included his personal cell phone number. After some conversation, we decided to redact the number.

After the 2016 election, when Twitter became an important part of fundraising for political campaigns, I started to notice a very strange pattern: some accounts, especially long-shot candidates running against high-profile incumbents, dramatically increased the number of their deletions. A good example of this was Kim Mangone, a California Democrat then running against McCarthy for a House seat. Mangone’s deletions consist mostly of her own retweets, which seems like a weird thing to do until you discover that Twitter prevents users from reposting identical tweets or retweets over and over in a short time span. The only way around that restriction is to delete the earlier post and then repost it.

Perhaps the most interesting political deleter is Sen. Brian Schatz, a Hawaii Democrat active on the platform. Like many of his colleagues, Schatz deleted typos and some retweets of others’ posts. But he often posted an informal message — almost always without a link or mentioning other accounts — that gave you a glimpse into his actual thinking. Here’s an example where Schatz could have tagged some of the pundits he was criticizing, but didn’t. And another one in that vein. Or this one with early COVID advice on mask-wearing. Sometimes he’d even acknowledge the deletions, or provide an explanation for doing it. Most politicians do not do this.

Other senators are famous for their folksier tweets — Grassley excels at this — and there are some lawmakers who can be equally blunt on the platform. But I’d like to believe that I learned something about how Schatz thinks that would be hard for me to know otherwise, given that we’ve never met.

That’s one of the things I’ll miss most about running Politwoops: getting a glimpse behind the carefully crafted images that politicians present to the public. ProPublica would be happy to continue running this service, so if anyone at Twitter wants to help out, please get in touch. That includes you, Elon. politwoops@propublica.org

Correction

March 1, 2023: This story originally misidentified who sent a profane tweet, later deleted, from Rep. Chuy Garcia’s account. After publication, a Garcia spokesperson said the tweet was sent by a staffer who was dismissed the next day, not by the representative himself. The text referring to that tweet has been removed.

by Derek Willis

Tennessee Lobbyists Oppose New Lifesaving Exceptions in Abortion Ban

1 year 8 months ago

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

Join us for an upcoming live virtual event, “Post-Roe: Today’s Abortion Landscape.”

In Tennessee, Republican lawmakers are considering whether patients should be forced to continue dangerous pregnancies, even while miscarrying, under the state’s abortion ban — and how close to risking death such patients need to be before a doctor can legally intervene.

At a legislative hearing last week, a lobbyist who played a dominant role in crafting the state’s abortion legislation made his preference clear: A pregnant patient should be in the process of an urgent emergency, such as bleeding out, before they can receive abortion care.

Some pregnancy complications “work themselves out,” Will Brewer, who represents the local affiliate of the anti-abortion organization National Right to Life, told a majority-male panel of lawmakers Feb. 14. When faced with a patient’s high-risk condition, doctors should be required to “pause and wait this out and see how it goes.”

Top Republicans like Gov. Bill Lee have defended the state’s abortion law, one of the strictest in the country, as providing “maximum protection possible for both mother and child.” But currently, the ban has no explicit exceptions, not even for the pregnant patient’s health.

It only includes an “affirmative defense” for emergencies, a rare legal mechanism that means the burden is on the doctor to prove abortion care was necessary because the patient risked death or irreversible impairment to a major bodily function.

The penalties for getting it wrong are three to 10 years in prison and up to $15,000 in fines. Doctors could expect to lose their medical license just for being charged. Concern over how the unprecedented law will be interpreted by prosecutors and the courts has already resulted in patients with high-risk conditions having to rush across state lines for care.

Some Republicans are proposing a modest change. An amendment to the law introduced in the House Population Health Subcommittee last week would remove the affirmative defense and clarify that it is not a crime to terminate a pregnancy to prevent an emergency that threatens the pregnant patient’s life or health, among other provisions.

“No one wants to tell their spouse, child or loved one that their life is not important in a medical emergency as you watch them die when they could have been saved,” said Republican Rep. Esther Helton-Haynes, a nurse and the bill’s sponsor.

But the word “prevent” is a sticking point for the anti-abortion groups who wrote the law.

“That would mean that the emergency hasn’t even occurred yet,” Brewer told the committee. He made a distinction between immediate, urgent emergencies — “A patient comes into the ER bleeding out” — and what he calls “quasi-elective” abortions.

Brewer, who has no medical experience, defined those as “abortions that aren’t necessary to be done in the moment but are still performed in an effort to prevent a future medical emergency.” He called for an “objective” standard.

When reached for comment, Brewer said his statements as summarized by ProPublica had been mischaracterized but did not provide additional details. “Ending the life of the baby should not be used as treatment for non-life-threatening conditions or to prevent some unknown possibility in the future,” he said. He did not respond to follow-up questions seeking clarification.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists said laws that try to limit or define medical exceptions are dangerous because they interfere with a doctor’s ability to assess fast-moving health indicators in unpredictable situations and don’t account for people’s different thresholds for risk.

Kim Fortner, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist practicing in Tennessee for more than 20 years, testified to the committee and pushed back on Brewer’s characterizations. She described a patient she saw recently whose water broke too early — the fetus still had a heartbeat, but there was virtually no chance it would survive and a very high risk the patient would get an infection.

But because of the law, the woman was sent home without the option of abortion care. She came back with emergency bleeding and sepsis, a life-threatening infection.

“It is not always so clear, and things don’t always just work themselves out,” Fortner said. “It is a significant, in my mind, misuse of resources, if she did not need to have six units of blood that could have gone to the trauma victim or the gunshot wound. Blood is a limited resource. Just because she can wait and come back in and she still lives to talk about it today — one, that won’t always happen, and two, it also is a significant misuse of an ICU bed. It is a preventable occurrence.”

Andy Farmer, a Republican state representative, agreed with her.

“These things need to be addressed early on,” he said, adding that he didn’t want doctors to feel they needed to consult a lawyer before offering care that could stop a condition from progressing into an emergency.

Brewer, however, said he believed giving doctors that kind of power would be too subjective. “Once one doctor is let off the hook in a criminal trial, it would be open season for other doctors who wanted to perform bad faith terminations,” he said.

Brewer’s position appears to be out of step with public opinion on abortion, even in a deeply red state. A recent poll found about 75% of Tennesseans support abortion exceptions, including for pregnancies caused by rape and incest.

Yet his organization exerts outsize influence on Republican state politics. Tennessee Right to Life issues an annual scorecard rating lawmakers on their fealty to “pro-life” positions and plows money into primary campaigns to unseat candidates viewed as insufficiently loyal. Already, they retracted the endorsement of one Republican lawmaker who publicly advocated for clear medical exceptions.

Signs of frustration emerged over the course of the hearing as lawmakers grilled Brewer on how his preferred positions may harm pregnant patients and accused him of trying to intimidate legislators.

“You’ve made a statement that you are fine with the current trigger law as it is, and nothing more needs to be done,” said Republican state Rep. Sabi Kumar, a retired surgeon, referring to the state’s abortion ban. “Did you believe that?”

Brewer responded: “That is our most preferential position, although we would accept an objective standard.”

Kumar said he was surprised Brewer did not appear to be taking into account other changes the bill addresses that are not in the current law, such as exceptions for cases of fatal fetal anomalies, where a baby is not expected to survive, and ectopic pregnancies, which implant outside the uterine cavity, are non-viable and can lead to rupture and death.

“Those things need to be corrected,” he said. “In the face of that, it is difficult for you to say that that is your preferential thing.”

Kumar also asked Brewer to consider the plight of doctors. Physicians carry malpractice insurance, but Kumar noted it doesn’t cover costs associated with criminal charges, which can be financially ruinous. Kumar didn’t think they should be threatened with prison time for acting to avoid an emergency.

“I would have liked to see you, as a friend, be as concerned about a physician who was under that degree of emotional stress and pressure, trying to save the life of a baby and worried about being prosecuted,” he said. “I would have liked you to be gushing with sympathy for that.”

He and others pointed out that the bill’s changes would not affect the vast majority of pregnancies, where abortion would continue to be outlawed. The bill explicitly states abortions are prohibited for mental health reasons, such as a patient threatening suicide, and it has no provisions allowing abortion for pregnancies due to rape or incest.

But Brewer suggested that lawmakers who vote in support of the bill might stand to lose the endorsement of Tennessee Right to Life.

“I would not consider this a pro-life law,” Brewer said. “And in discussions with our [political action committee], they have informed me that they would score this negatively for those members that wish to vote for it.”

Brewer’s invocation of the anti-abortion group’s scorecard provoked a strong response. As the hearing wrapped up, Tennessee’s House speaker, Cameron Sexton, appeared in the chamber.

“Something happened that I’ve never experienced in my time down here, which was somebody on a committee testifying tried to intimidate our members by telling them they’re gonna score them a vote,” he said. “You can have those conversations in your room, you can have those conversations in email. But to do it in the committee — to try to intimidate this committee to go a certain direction — is uncalled for.”

The rare public rebuke of an anti-abortion activist by a top Republican lawmaker may be a sign of growing GOP support for the modest amendments to the law. However, the bill’s path is not guaranteed. It will need to pass in three more committees before reaching final votes in the state’s House and Senate.

Republican state Rep. Bryan Terry’s reaction provided a preview of potential challenges ahead. He was the only member of the committee to vote against the amendment, and he leads the House Health Subcommittee, where the bill is headed next week.

In an email to ProPublica, Terry said that he does want to see changes to the law, but that the word “prevent” would need to be removed or redefined in the measure before he could consider voting for it.

“There are a multitude of medical emergencies that can occur during a pregnancy, but they usually never materialize,” Terry, who is an anesthesiologist, said. “A concern with the current amendment language is that an abortion could be performed in an instance when it wasn’t ‘medically necessary treatment.’”

ProPublica followed up to ask if he would consider conditions such as premature rupture of membranes, preeclampsia, cancer or heart conditions “medically necessary” reasons for abortions. He did not respond.

Three days after the hearing, Tennessee Right to Life sent a “legislative alert” obtained by ProPublica to its members, calling on them to oppose the bill at the next hearing.

The email described changes in the bill as “loopholes” making the current law “unenforceable.”

“Tragically, some pro-life legislators are currently supporting this bill,” the email read. Below, it listed the nine lawmakers who voted in favor of it.

Are You in a State That Banned Abortion? Tell Us How Changes in Medical Care Impact You.

by Kavitha Surana

How Unemployment Benefits Are Taxed in 2023

1 year 8 months ago

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

While unemployment benefits can be a huge help when you’ve lost your job, at tax time, they can leave you with more questions than answers. Here’s what you should know about your unemployment benefits when it comes to filing your taxes.

Are Unemployment Insurance Benefits Taxed by States and the Federal Government?

Generally, yes. The federal government will tax your unemployment benefits, and most states will as well. Unemployment benefits count toward your income and are taxed by the federal government at rates according to the IRS’ tax brackets.

It’s a bit more complicated when it comes to state taxes. Most states fully tax unemployment benefits just like they would for regular income. Some states don’t tax unemployment income at all, while others only partially tax the benefits. See how your state taxes unemployment benefits here.

Can I Have Taxes Withheld From Unemployment Payments?

Yes. State unemployment agencies allow you to have federal and state taxes taken out of your unemployment checks. The IRS recommends you do this to avoid surprise tax bills. You can set this up when you first apply for unemployment, or at any point while you are receiving it, by filing Form W-4V and sending it to your state’s unemployment agency. You will also have to fill out your state’s withholding form to have state taxes withheld from your benefit. Most states also allow you to do federal and state withholding online via their unemployment websites.

Never miss the most important reporting from ProPublica’s newsroom. Subscribe to the Big Story newsletter.

When you sign up for voluntary withholding, your benefits will be withheld at a federal flat rate of 10%, no matter your income bracket. If you choose to not sign up for voluntary withholding, you can also make quarterly estimated tax payments to avoid surprise tax bills.

Important: If you are receiving unemployment benefits, setting up a withholding now may save you from a surprise tax bill next year.

If I Collected Unemployment, What Paperwork Do I Need to File My Taxes?

States that gave you unemployment benefits should send you a Form 1099-G. For those who don’t receive it in the mail, you may need to access the form on your state’s website. This form calculates all the unemployment income you received and tells you how much (if any) was withheld for taxes. This should help you calculate your income when filing your taxes. The IRS also provides special directions for those who repaid part of their 2022 unemployment.

What If My Form 1099-G Is Wrong? If you receive an incorrect Form 1099-G, the IRS recommends contacting the state agency that issued the unemployment benefits to request a revised form. If you’re unable to obtain a corrected Form 1099-G before Tax Day, you should still file an accurate tax return and only report the income you actually received.

In some cases, an incorrect Form 1099-G might indicate that you have been the victim of unemployment fraud, which has been a growing problem. Here is how to recognize if this has happened to you.

Do I Have to Pay to Prepare or File My Taxes If I Receive Unemployment?

It depends on your income and how you choose to prepare your taxes.

If you made under $73,000 in 2022, you are eligible to file your taxes for free. But remember, your unemployment benefits count toward your adjusted gross income. Even if your income surpasses $73,000, some tax preparation services now include a Form 1099-G as part of a “simple” tax return, which they will let you file free of charge. And the IRS offers its free fillable forms — an electronic version of IRS paper forms — to anyone, regardless of income.

Important: So-called free tax preparation websites are often trying to push you to pay them more money. You can find truly free filing options on the IRS website.

Do I Have To Pay Unemployment Back?

No. Unemployment benefits are yours to keep, except for the amount you may owe in taxes. But make sure you’re getting the right amount.

In a few cases ProPublica found, simple mistakes have led states to overpay unemployment recipients and then demand huge sums of money back. A bill to remedy this was proposed in 2020, but as of January it’s still in committee.

Did the Stimulus Bill Change How Unemployment Is Taxed?

Yes, but only for 2020 unemployment benefits. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 changed the tax code so that the first $10,200 of unemployment benefits you received in 2020 was free of federal taxes. That meant that only the money you received over $10,200 counted toward your taxable income.

Congress did not renew this tax relief after 2020. As a result, all unemployment benefits, except for those received in 2020, are treated as income and taxed.

About this guide: ProPublica has reported on the IRS, the Free File program and other tax topics for years. ProPublica’s tax guide is not personalized tax advice. Speak to a tax professional about your specific tax situation.

Kristen Doerer is a reporter in Washington, D.C. Her writing has appeared in PBS NewsHour, The Guardian and The Chronicle of Higher Education, among other places. Follow her on Twitter at @k2doe.

by Kristen Doerer for ProPublica

Legislators Demand Hearings on Illinois Mental Health Facility Where Staff Abused Patients and Covered It Up

1 year 9 months ago

This article was produced for ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network in partnership with Lee Enterprises, along with Capitol News Illinois. Sign up for Dispatches to get stories like this one as soon as they are published.

All 59 Republican members of the Illinois General Assembly are calling for legislative hearings on a state-run mental health center in rural southern Illinois, citing findings of a culture of abuse, cover-ups and poor patient care from a monthslong investigative series by Lee Enterprises Midwest, Capitol News Illinois and ProPublica.

Late last week, the members sent a letter to key Democratic committee chairs in the Illinois House and Senate asking them to schedule a bicameral public hearing on the facility.

The districts that include and surround Choate Mental Health and Developmental Center are represented by Republicans, but as the minority party in both chambers, they lack the authority to convene a legislative hearing.

On Thursday morning, several downstate GOP lawmakers reiterated their call to action at a news conference at the Capitol. Rep. Paul Jacobs, R-Pomona, whose district includes Choate, and others stressed that they want to see conditions fixed.

“The residents there can’t suffer. The most profound developmental and mental disabilities in the state can’t suffer. They have to be treated well,” Jacobs said.

In addition to the in-person hearing, the lawmakers requested access to high-ranking Illinois Department of Human Services officials who oversee the facility, including Secretary Grace Hou.

The facility is one of 13 psychiatric hospitals and developmental centers operated by IDHS across the state. Choate is located in the rural community of Anna near the Missouri border about 120 miles southeast of St. Louis. The 270-bed facility serves people with mental illnesses and developmental disabilities, including people diagnosed with “profound” disabilities and some who are nonverbal.

Since September, the news organizations have detailed startling cases of patient beatings, neglect and poor medical care, as well as coordinated efforts by staff to cover up patient mistreatment. A story published this month disclosed that patients with pica, a disorder in which people feel compelled to swallow inedible objects, had been forced to dig through their own feces to recover the items.

Over a 10-year period ending in 2021, the IDHS Office of the Inspector General fielded more than 1,500 allegations of abuse and neglect at Choate. And the state’s attorney in Union County, where the facility is located, has filed charges against at least 48 people — both patients and employees — since 2015.

Several GOP lawmakers stressed that while they want to see improvement at the facility, they want Choate to remain open. The call for hearings comes after Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker reiterated his position last week on the situation at Choate: Fix it or close it. Some parents of longtime Choate residents have expressed concerns about where their loved ones would go if the facility closes, including state Sen. Jil Tracy, R-Quincy, whose brother lives at Choate with more than 230 other residents.

We don’t have facilities to house them up in other parts of the state,” Tracy said. “They have the type of care that is needed by the population that resides there. As I mentioned, many of these have tried group homes, ourselves included. It didn’t work for the specific needs of my brother and several others or many others that resided there.”

Closure would also mean the loss of state jobs in far southern Illinois, an economically depressed area largely represented by Republicans.

Pritzker’s threats of closure didn’t sit well with Sen. Terri Bryant, R-Murphysboro, whose district neighbors Choate, and she called on the governor to take a more active role in finding solutions.

“When the governor says, ‘They have to fix it or I’m going to close the facility’ — he’s ‘they,’” Bryant said. “So he’s the one who has to fix it. And fixing it might mean a total and complete shake-up of the administration.”

A statement from the governor’s office said he is closely monitoring the situation and will move forward on additional reforms in the coming weeks.

In addition to the request for a hearing, the lawmakers outlined a series of steps they’d like to see immediately implemented to improve conditions. Those include the installation of cameras in common interior areas, the appointment of a new director or assistant director with expertise in turning around troubled facilities and the hiring of at least 50 new front-line and health care workers at Choate. Currently, the facility employs around 500 and has approximately 80 vacancies.

Rep. Charlie Meier, R-Okawville, whose southern Illinois district includes the state-run Murray Developmental Center, has also introduced legislation that would allow authorities to report negative findings against workers who help cover up abuse to a statewide registry, barring them from working in a health care setting in the future. Peter Neumer, the IDHS inspector general, called for this change in law last month after the news organizations reported on three Choate workers who were fired for similar misconduct — but who remain eligible to work with vulnerable populations in other health care settings. Meier also introduced legislation mandating that OIG investigations be completed within 30 days, allowing IDHS to fire employees found culpable of abuse or neglect.

In one case featured in the reporting, in which eight workers were accused of abuse or failure to report the beating of a developmentally disabled man, the OIG investigation took eight years to complete. The investigation was suspended while the case was under criminal investigation by the Illinois State Policeand during a subsequent criminal prosecution.

Sen. Ann Gillespie, D-Arlington Heights, chair of the Senate Health and Human Services Appropriations Committee, said she’d received the Republicans’ letter and is considering next steps with her Democratic colleagues. She also said she’d read the news organizations’ reports about conditions at Choate and found them “horrifying.” But she stopped short of joining the call for a special joint hearing, saying that the current committee process may be most expedient for hearing bills and concerns about the facility. Regardless, Gillespie said, problems at Choate will be addressed by the General Assembly.

Gillespie noted that improving conditions at the facility has also been named a top priority for the bipartisan Illinois Senate Women’s Caucus, which she co-chairs with Tracy.

“The knee-jerk reaction might be to shut it down, but then it becomes where do these residents go? And so we can’t do anything knee-jerk that’s going to put the residents in continued or worse danger,” Gillespie said.

IDHS has not disputed any of the news organizations’ findings.

In a statement, IDHS maintained that Choate employees provide crucial care to vulnerable patients and that those who violate the standard of care will be held accountable.

IDHS has implemented reforms at the facility including additional training, increased security, surveillance cameras for the exterior and common area, increased security and management presence in living areas, and physical improvements. The center will undergo a review by the federal monitor Equip for Equality and the OIG, as well as working with the Illinois State Police.

IDHS has also brought in an onsite liaison to report to Hou and the director of the Division of Developmental Disabilities..

“We take the longstanding problems at Choate very seriously and remain committed to providing good, quality care for residents and patients at the facility. We will continue to work with families, staff, residents, and other stakeholders to carry out the mission of helping people with disabilities and others in need across Illinois,” the statement said.

The Republicans speaking at the news conference Thursday agreed that the problems are long-standing and span multiple administrations of governors from both parties, but they called for immediate solutions.

AFSCME Council 31, the union that represents some Choate employees, said in a statement following the news conference that it welcomes the support of “anyone of good will who wants to work to improve” the facility. The union said it has for years urged legislators and IDHS to increase staffing, expand training and invest in maintenance of the buildings.

“It’s regrettable that it took disturbing media reports of past misconduct to underscore the need for improvements at Choate, but the wrongful actions of a few cannot overshadow the deep commitment of the overwhelming majority of employees to Choate’s residents and to making the facility the best it can be,” the statement said.

by Molly Parker, Lee Enterprises Midwest, and Beth Hundsdorfer, Capitol News Illinois

Texas Governor Says Most Gun Crimes Involve Illegally Owned Weapons. That’s Not True for Mass Shootings.

1 year 9 months ago

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

This article is co-published with The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan local newsroom that informs and engages with Texans. Sign up for The Brief Weekly to get up to speed on their essential coverage of Texas issues.

Without mentioning the Uvalde mass shooting, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott last week declared school safety a priority for the current legislative session and again dismissed calls for more laws that would restrict access to guns.

“Some want more gun laws, but too many local officials won’t even enforce the gun laws that are already on the books,” the governor said during his annual State of the State address. Without providing a source or clear data, he then asserted that “most gun crimes are committed by criminals who possess guns illegally.” Abbott proposed a 10-year mandatory minimum sentence for people who are not legally allowed to have a firearm but have them anyway.

“We need to leave prosecutors and judges with no choice but to punish those criminals and remove them and their guns from our streets,” said Abbott, a Republican.

But Abbott’s speech avoided a glaring reality: The majority of the state’s 19 mass shootings over the past six decades were carried out by men who legally acquired firearms, according to an investigation by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune published before his speech. Guns were legally obtained in 13 shootings, including two in which the shooter was not allowed to have one but took advantage of a loophole in the law that does not require background checks for firearms that are acquired from private individuals. Firearms were obtained illegally in three instances. The rest of the cases were unclear.

The news organizations’ analysis found that lawmakers failed to pass at least two dozen bills that would have prevented people from legally obtaining the weapons and ammunition used in seven of the state’s mass shootings. Such measures included requiring universal background checks, banning the ownership of certain firearms and raising the minimum age to purchase an assault weapon from 18 to 21 years old.

State lawmakers instead have loosened restrictions over the years on publicly carrying guns while making it harder for local governments to regulate them.

Brett Cross, whose 10-year-old son was among the 19 children and two teachers killed last year at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, agreed with Abbott that criminals should not have access to guns. But, Cross said, the governor’s comments ignore the fact that the people responsible for many mass shootings did not previously have a criminal background.

“Before May 24, our shooter was not a criminal,” Cross said. “If this shooter hadn’t been able to just go in and buy those guns literally two days after his 18th birthday, then my child would still be alive.” Abbott, he said, “wants to be reactive instead of proactive, and proactive is what we need to stop these things.”

The governor did not respond to multiple requests for comment on the news organizations’ investigation or about his remarks during his State of the State address.

Little evidence exists to support Abbott’s claim, said Bill Spelman, who worked for a national police association for seven years and has spent the last 30 years teaching and researching criminal justice policy.

“To just say that most gun crimes are committed by criminals who possess guns illegally is a statement you can’t back up,” said Spelman, an emeritus professor of public affairs at the University of Texas at Austin.

James Densley, who co-founded the Violence Project, a nonpartisan nonprofit research center best known for its extensive mass shooter database, said that Abbott’s 10-year mandatory minimum sentence proposal would do little to deter mass shootings because the shooter does not survive in most of those cases and in others is already facing life in prison. In the vast majority of the nationwide cases in which it is known how the shooters obtained their firearms, they did so legally, Densley said.

Densley said different forms of gun violence require targeted approaches. For instance, restrictions on assault-style weapons and large-capacity magazines could be effective at reducing mass shootings, but less so at curbing “everyday gun violence,” he said.

“And I think politicians actually know this,” Densely said. “They understand it intuitively. But they have to say what is politically convenient to satisfy the needs of their constituents and others. And so they often conflate these different forms of gun violence to be perceived to be talking about one thing when they’re actually talking about something else.”

by Jessica Priest and Perla Trevizo

This “Climate-Friendly” Fuel Comes With an Astronomical Cancer Risk

1 year 9 months ago

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

The Environmental Protection Agency recently gave a Chevron refinery the green light to create fuel from discarded plastics as part of a “climate-friendly” initiative to boost alternatives to petroleum. But, according to agency records obtained by ProPublica and The Guardian, the production of one of the fuels could emit air pollution that is so toxic, 1 out of 4 people exposed to it over a lifetime could get cancer.

“That kind of risk is obscene,” said Linda Birnbaum, former head of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. “You can’t let that get out.”

That risk is 250,000 times greater than the level usually considered acceptable by the EPA division that approves new chemicals. Chevron hasn’t started making this jet fuel yet, the EPA said. When the company does, the cancer burden will disproportionately fall on people who have low incomes and are Black because of the population that lives within 3 miles of the refinery in Pascagoula, Mississippi.

ProPublica and The Guardian asked Maria Doa, a scientist who worked at the EPA for 30 years, to review the document laying out the risk. Doa, who once ran the division that managed the risks posed by chemicals, was so alarmed by the cancer threat that she initially assumed it was a typographical error. “EPA should not allow these risks in Pascagoula or anywhere,” said Doa, who now is the senior director of chemical policy at Environmental Defense Fund.

In response to questions from ProPublica and The Guardian, an EPA spokesperson wrote that the agency’s lifetime cancer risk calculation is “a very conservative estimate with ‘high uncertainty,’” meaning the government erred on the side of caution in calculating such a high risk.

Under federal law, the EPA can’t approve new chemicals with serious health or environmental risks unless it comes up with ways to minimize the dangers. And if the EPA is unsure, the law allows the agency to order lab testing that would clarify the potential health and environmental harms. In the case of these new plastic-based fuels, the agency didn’t do either of those things. In approving the jet fuel, the EPA didn’t require any lab tests, air monitoring or controls that would reduce the release of the cancer-causing pollutants or people’s exposure to them.

In January 2022, the EPA announced the initiative to streamline the approval of petroleum alternatives in what a press release called “part of the Biden-Harris Administration’s actions to confront the climate crisis.” While the program cleared new fuels made from plants, it also signed off on fuels made from plastics even though they themselves are petroleum-based and contribute to the release of planet-warming greenhouse gases.

Although there’s no mention of discarded plastics in the press release or on the EPA website’s description of the program, an agency spokesperson told ProPublica and The Guardian that it allows them because the initiative also covers fuels made from waste. The spokesperson said that 16 of the 34 fuels the program approved so far are made from waste. She would not say how many of those are made from plastic and stated that such information was confidential.

All of the waste-based fuels are the subject of consent orders, documents the EPA issues when it finds that new chemicals or mixtures may pose an “unreasonable risk” to human health or the environment. The documents specify those risks and the agency’s instructions for mitigating them.

But the agency won’t turn over these records or reveal information about the waste-based fuels, even their names and chemical structures. Without those basic details, it’s nearly impossible to determine which of the thousands of consent orders on the EPA website apply to this program. In keeping this information secret, the EPA cited a legal provision that allows companies to claim as confidential any information that would give their competitors an advantage in the marketplace.

Nevertheless, ProPublica and The Guardian did obtain one consent order that covers a dozen Chevron fuels made from plastics that were reviewed under the program. Although the EPA had blacked out sections, including the chemicals’ names, that document showed that the fuels that Chevron plans to make at its Pascagoula refinery present serious health risks, including developmental problems in children and cancer and harm to the nervous system, reproductive system, liver, kidney, blood and spleen.

Aside from the chemical that carries a 25% lifetime risk of cancer from smokestack emissions, another of the Chevron fuels ushered in through the program is expected to cause 1.2 cancers in 10,000 people — also far higher than the agency allows for the general population. The EPA division that screens new chemicals typically limits cancer risk from a single air pollutant to 1 case of cancer in a million people. The agency also calculated that air pollution from one of the fuels is expected to cause 7.1 cancers in every 1,000 workers — more than 70 times the level EPA’s new chemicals division usually considers acceptable for workers.

In addition to the chemicals released through the creation of fuels from plastics, the people living near the Chevron refinery are exposed to an array of other cancer-causing pollutants, as ProPublica reported in 2021. In that series, which mapped excess cancer risk from lifetime exposure to air pollution across the U.S., the highest chance was 1 cancer in 53 people, in Port Arthur, Texas.

The 1-in-4 lifetime cancer risk from breathing the emissions from the Chevron jet fuel is higher even than the lifetime risk of lung cancer for current smokers.

In an email, Chevron spokesperson Ross Allen wrote: “It is incorrect to say there is a 1-in-4 cancer risk from smokestack emissions. I urge you avoid suggesting otherwise.” Asked to clarify what exactly was wrong, Allen wrote that Chevron disagrees with ProPublica and The Guardian’s “characterization of language in the EPA Consent Order.” That document, signed by a Chevron manager at its refinery in Pascagoula, quantified the lifetime cancer risk from the inhalation of smokestack air as 2.5 cancers in 10 people, which can also be stated as 1 in 4.

In a subsequent phone call, Allen said: “We do take care of our communities, our workers and the environment generally. This is job one for Chevron.”

In a separate written statement, Chevron said it followed the EPA’s process under the Toxic Substances Control Act: “The TSCA process is an important first step to identify risks and if EPA identifies unreasonable risk, it can limit or prohibit manufacture, processing or distribution in commerce during applicable review period.”

The Chevron statement also said: “Other environmental regulations and permitting processes govern air, water and handling hazardous materials. Regulations under the Clean Water, Clean Air and Resource Conservation and Recovery Acts also apply and protect the environment and the health and safety of our communities and workers.”

Similarly, the EPA said that other federal laws and requirements might reduce the risk posed by the pollution, including Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s regulations for worker protection, the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act and rules that apply to refineries.

But OSHA has warned the public not to rely on its outdated chemical standards. The refinery rule calls for air monitoring only for one pollutant: benzene. The Clean Water Act does not address air pollution. And the new fuels are not regulated under the Clean Air Act, which applies to a specific list of pollutants. Nor can states monitor for the carcinogenic new fuels without knowing their names and chemical structures.

We asked Scott Throwe, an air pollution specialist who worked at the EPA for 30 years, how existing regulations could protect people in this instance. Now an independent environmental consultant, Throwe said the existing testing and monitoring requirements for refineries couldn’t capture the pollution from these new plastic-based fuels because the rules were written before these chemicals existed. There is a chance that equipment designed to limit the release of other pollutants may incidentally capture some of the emissions from the new fuels, he said. But there’s no way to know whether that is happening.

A redacted section of an EPA consent order covering plastic-derived fuels. The agency withheld basic information on the grounds that it is confidential business information.

Under federal law, companies have to apply to the EPA for permission to introduce new chemicals or mixtures. But manufacturers don’t have to supply any data showing their products are safe. So the EPA usually relies on studies of similar chemicals to anticipate health effects. In this case, the EPA used a mixture of chemicals made from crude oil to gauge the risks posed by the new plastic-based fuels. Chevron told the EPA the chemical components of its new fuel but didn’t give the precise proportions. So the EPA had to make some assumptions, for instance that people absorb 100% of the pollution emitted.

Asked why it didn’t require tests to clarify the risks, a spokesperson wrote that the “EPA does not believe these additional test results would change the risks identified nor the unreasonable risks finding.”

In her three decades at the EPA, Doa had never seen a chemical with that high a cancer risk that the agency allowed to be released into a community without restrictions.

“The only requirement seems to be just to use the chemicals as fuel and have the workers wear gloves,” she said.

While companies have made fuels from discarded plastics before, this EPA program gives them the same administrative break that renewable fuels receive: a dedicated EPA team that combines the usual six regulatory assessments into a single report.

The irony is that Congress created the Renewable Fuel Standard Program, which this initiative was meant to support, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and boost the production of renewable fuels. Truly renewable energy sources can be regenerated in a short period of time, such as plants or algae. While there is significant debate about whether ethanol, which is made from corn, and other plant-based renewable fuels are really better for the environment than fossil fuels, there is no question that plastics are not renewable and that their production and conversion into fuel releases climate-harming pollution.

Under the EPA’s Renewable Fuel Standard, biobased fuels must meet specific criteria related to their biological origin as well as the amount they reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared with petroleum-based fuels. But under this new approach, fuels made from waste don’t have to meet those targets, the agency said.

In its written statement, Chevron said that “plastics are an essential part of modern life and plastic waste should not end up in unintended places in the environment. We are taking steps to address plastic waste and support a circular economy in which post-use plastic is recycled, reused or repurposed.”

But environmentalists say such claims are just greenwashing.

Whatever you call it, the creation of fuel from plastic is in some ways worse for the climate than simply making it directly from fossil fuels. Over 99% of all plastic is derived from fossil fuels, including coal, oil and gas. To produce fuel from plastics, additional fossil fuels are used to generate the heat that converts them into petrochemicals that can be used as fuel.

“It adds an extra step,” said Veena Singla, a senior scientist at NRDC. “They have to burn a lot of stuff to power the process that transforms the plastic.”

Less than 6% of plastic waste is recycled in the U.S. Scientists estimate that more than a million tons of that unrecycled plastic ends up in the environment each year, killing marine mammals and polluting the world. Plastic does not fully decompose; instead it eventually breaks down into tiny bits, some of which wind up inside our bodies. As the public’s awareness of the health and environmental harm grows, the plastics industry has found itself under increasing pressure to find a use for the waste.

The idea of creating fuel from plastic offers the comforting sense that plastics are sustainable. But the release of cancer-causing pollution is just one of several significant problems that have plagued attempts to convert discarded plastic into new things. One recent study by scientists from the Department of Energy found that the economic and environmental costs of turning old plastic into new using a process called pyrolysis were 10 to 100 times higher than those of making new plastics from fossil fuels. The lead author said similar issues plague the use of this process to create fuels from plastics.

Chevron buys oil that another company extracts from discarded plastics through pyrolysis. Though the parts of the consent order that aren’t blacked out don’t mention that this oil came from waste plastics, a related EPA record makes this clear. The cancer risks come from the pollution emitted from Chevron’s smokestacks when the company turns that oil into fuel.

The EPA attributed its decision to embark on the streamlined program in part to its budget, which it says has been “essentially flat for the last six years.” The EPA spokesperson said that the agency “has been working to streamline its new chemicals work wherever possible.”

The New Chemicals Division, which houses the program, has been under particular pressure because updates to the chemicals law gave it additional responsibilities and faster timetables. That division of the agency is also the subject of an ongoing EPA Inspector General investigation into whistleblowers’ allegations of corruption and industry influence over the chemical approval process.

Do You Live Near an Industrial Facility? Help Us Investigate.

Correction

Feb. 23, 2023: This story originally misstated how much plastic ends up in the oceans each year. It is millions of tons, not hundreds of millions of tons.

Correction

March 1, 2023: A corrected version of this story misstated what happens to U.S. unrecycled plastic. Scientists estimate that more than a million tons of it end up in the environment each year. It is not known precisely how much of this plastic from the U.S. winds up in the oceans.

by Sharon Lerner

Help ProPublica Journalists Investigate the Dairy Industry

1 year 9 months ago

Para saber cómo compartir su historia con nosotros en español, haz click aquí.

Dairy farms in the Midwest produce millions of gallons of milk each month. The people working on these farms, often immigrants from Latin America, do so while facing a variety of safety risks, often for low pay. Employees are injured in machinery accidents, get trampled by cows, risk exposure to chemicals and face other workplace hazards.

In reporting our story about the death of the 8-year-old son of an immigrant worker on a dairy farm in Wisconsin, we learned that there’s little oversight of worker safety. We’ve interviewed workers who suffered debilitating injuries and were then fired and unable to access medical care. Often, records and interviews show, people are barely trained before they’re sent to work with potentially deadly animals and equipment.

Workers sometimes live with mold-covered walls, holes in the floor, no heat or air conditioning, or in other substandard conditions. In some states, undocumented immigrants are barred from obtaining driver’s licenses, yet we’ve talked with dozens who say they need to drive to get to work, putting them at risk of getting ticketed by police.

We plan to write stories that can shed light on these issues, about farms both in the Midwest and across the country. We would like your help. If you have any insights into the industry — perhaps you’re a medical provider, a state or federal employee, a workers’ compensation lawyer, an occupational safety expert, a researcher, or someone who works or grew up on a dairy farm — we would love to hear from you.

We take your privacy seriously. We are gathering these stories for the purposes of our reporting and will contact you if we wish to publish any part of your story. We are the only ones reading what you submit.

by Maryam Jameel and Melissa Sanchez

Death on a Dairy Farm

1 year 9 months ago

This story contains a description of a child’s fatal injuries.

Lea esta historia en español y una carta a nuestros lectores.

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up for Dispatches, a newsletter that spotlights wrongdoing around the country, to receive our stories in your inbox every week. This article was co-published with the USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin and El Faro.

The call to 911 came in a little after 11 p.m. A man said a small boy on his dairy farm had severe head injuries. He said he thought the boy had been trampled by a cow.

Ann Ingolia, a deputy for the Dane County Sheriff’s Office, was in the middle of her shift when she heard the dispatch on this warm summer night in 2019. She turned on her siren and headed over, down winding roads and rolling hills, past the farms and fields that mark the landscape of this part of south-central Wisconsin.

Lights from an ambulance and other emergency vehicles flickered over the property. When she arrived, Ingolia could see paramedics attending to a boy on the ground near the milking parlor. His head was split open.

Ingolia approached the owners of the farm. Daniel and Kay Breunig pointed out a slender man wearing jeans covered in manure and blood who was walking in circles near a windmill — the boy’s father. Daniel Breunig said workers had told him that the child had been injured. But Breunig didn’t know more because he couldn’t speak Spanish and his three workers on duty that night, including the boy’s father, didn’t speak English.

Ingolia wasn’t fluent in Spanish, but she considered herself proficient enough to do her job. She walked up to the boy’s father, José María Rodríguez Uriarte, and tried to talk with him.

Rodríguez was screaming for his son, Jefferson, 8. He sat on the grass and rocked back and forth. “He was literally trying to dig a hole in the ground and bury himself,” Ingolia later said. At one point, she said, Rodríguez’s “demeanor went from frantic to catatonic to back to hysterical to back to catatonic to the point where I was afraid that if a milk tanker drove by, he would run out in front of it.”

In her report, she noted that it was difficult to extract information. Rodríguez told her that he “had not seen exactly what had happened.” He took her to an area near some corrals on the property and pointed to a skid steer, a 6,700-pound machine used on the farm to scrape up manure. Ingolia tried to ask about how the boy was injured and, eventually, this is what she understood: Rodríguez had been driving the skid steer, didn’t see the boy behind him and ran him over when he put the machine in reverse.

Ingolia’s interview with Rodríguez, as halting and incoherent as it was, became the foundation of the official account of the night of July 26, 2019 — Rodríguez accidentally killed his son.

That account would be repeated by other agencies, publicized by local media outlets and remembered by farmers in the area and residents who speak only English.

It is an account that torments Rodríguez because, he said, it isn’t true.

He and the other workers who were at the farm that night, along with the friends who arrived in the hours after the boy died to console an inconsolable father, know another version of what happened. To this day, theirs is the only version that many in this community of Nicaraguans and other immigrant dairy workers have heard.

Jefferson at D&K Dairy (Courtesy of José María Rodríguez Uriarte)

What happened to Jefferson and his father is a story of an accumulation of failures: a broken immigration system that makes it difficult for people to come here even as entire industries depend on their labor, small farms that largely go unexamined by safety inspectors, and a law enforcement system that’s ill equipped to serve people who don’t speak English.

The night Jefferson died, two people in addition to Rodríguez were working on the farm. One worker told Ingolia she didn’t see what happened.

It was the other worker’s first day. Video from patrol car cameras show him standing off to the side while Daniel Breunig and then a deputy and then paramedics took turns pumping the lifeless boy’s chest. He remained there after a white sheet was draped over the body.

At some point that night, another deputy identified him as a farmhand who “did not speak very good English.” That deputy handed him a notepad, and the man wrote his name.

Nobody interviewed him, though his account could have changed the course of everything that was to come.

D&K Dairy sits on about 300 acres in the rural town of Dane, about a half hour north of Madison, the state capital. Daniel and Kay Breunig both grew up on farms, and in 1991, a couple of years after they married, they bought their own.

They lived on the property with their two adult sons in a large white farmhouse with an American flag out front. Like many farming families, they worked there, too, though they left jobs such as milking cows and cleaning stalls to their employees.

At any given time, the farm had about six immigrant workers who alternated shifts to meet the needs of an operation that milked hundreds of cows three times a day. Those who could speak some English also took on some of the farm’s day-to-day management, such as hiring and scheduling.

“I would have to say I left all of that up to the lead fellow after he was trained to oversee all the rest of the employees,” Daniel Breunig said in a deposition tied to an ongoing lawsuit over Jefferson’s death. “Just because of the language barrier.”

Workers appreciated the Breunigs’ hands-off approach, unlike some more overbearing farmers they’d previously worked for. But workers complained of cow manure and cat feces in places that were supposed to be kept clean. So many cats roamed the property that it was known to Spanish-speaking residents as “El Rancho de los Gatos,” the Cat Farm.

State officials who inspected the milking parlor in the months before Jefferson’s death noted manure on the walls and cows with dirty flanks and udders, signs that the milk was at risk of becoming contaminated. D&K’s violations of sanitary standards put it in the bottom 20% of dairy farms in the state, according to the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection.

D&K Dairy also had a reputation for frequent turnover, which meant it was often hiring.

First image: D&K Dairy. Second image: A cow barn at the farm on the night of Jefferson’s death. (First image, Melissa Sanchez/ProPublica; second image, Dane County Sheriff’s Office)

Over the decades, Wisconsin’s small farms have struggled to compete with larger, more efficient operations and to stay afloat amid fluctuating milk prices. When the Breunigs bought their farm, there were more than 32,000 dairy producers in the state. By the time Jefferson and his father arrived in 2019, about 7,900 remained. Today, some 6,100 dairy farms are left.

Farms got bigger to survive, adding more cows, more automation and more workers.

But the work is dangerous and dirty and it pays poorly. Few Americans are willing to do it. And so farm operators across the country have been turning to immigrants to scrape the manure off barn floors, herd the heavy animals from corrals to milking parlors, and attach cows’ teats to machines that pump the milk that fills gallon jugs in supermarket refrigerators.

It is an open secret in the dairy industry that many workers lack authorization to work in the U.S. They get jobs using fake papers that employers, knowingly or not, accept. “The less I know the better,” one farmer in Dane County told ProPublica.

Over the years, the workforce at Wisconsin dairies has shifted; where it was once mainly immigrants from Mexico, it now includes asylum-seekers and other immigrants from Central America. Around Dane County, many are Nicaraguan.

Until recently, Nicaraguans had migrated to the U.S. in much lower numbers than people from neighboring countries. But in 2019, as their government slid into authoritarianism and the economy faltered, thousands of people fled. More Nicaraguans were intercepted at the border that fiscal year than at any other time in the previous decade.

For some, the Breunigs’ farm was a first stop.

There are about 6,100 dairy farms in Wisconsin, including about 180 in Dane County. (Sebastián Hidalgo for ProPublica)

Rodríguez grew up in poverty, one of 16 children of farmworkers who moved from one rural community to another to work other people’s land. Eventually his parents bought a few acres of their own where they planted beans, corn and rice, and raised a few cows. He said he stopped going to school after the first grade.

He wanted something better for his sons, Jefferson, the oldest, and Yefari, who was four years younger.

For several years, Rodríguez traveled back and forth from Nicaragua to Costa Rica for work, a common migration pattern among Nicaraguans. While he was away working, his sons grew up with their mother, María Sayra Vargas, in Murra, a remote community in a coffee-growing region of Nicaragua’s Nueva Segovia state.

But Rodríguez said he was finding it harder to get a job in Costa Rica. In late 2018, he started reaching out to friends who had migrated north to ask about their experiences working in Wisconsin.

Rodríguez had been hearing from other Nicaraguans that adults traveling with children were more likely to get into the U.S. after making an asylum claim at the border.

But he and Vargas weren’t sure whether he should take Jefferson. Vargas feared something might happen to their son on the long, sometimes dangerous trek through Central America and Mexico. Rodríguez worried about how he would care for his son while working. But a friend eased his worries, explaining that while she worked, her children went to school.

Jefferson was eager to go to the U.S. A skinny, dark-haired boy, he liked to play with toy cars with his brother and exhausted his mother by running down the hallway in their small home. He was a second grader with a deep, personal sense of faith and a closeness to God that surprised even his parents. “He spoke about creation, sin, things I had never taught him,” Vargas said. “He asked so many questions I didn’t even know the answers to, or have the words to explain.”

Jefferson told his father he wanted to learn English so that, one day, he could share the word of God with the children he met in the U.S.

In late February 2019, they left Murra. Rodríguez was 29; his son, 8. There were times on the journey when they went without food or water. “It breaks your soul to know a child is going through that,” Rodríguez said. “Jefferson was braver than me. He would always tell me, ‘We will get there. We will get there.’”

A little over two weeks after leaving Nicaragua, Rodríguez said, they entered the U.S. late one night by crossing the Rio Grande in Texas, a few miles from a port of entry. He said they walked for about two hours before reaching a road, where a Border Patrol agent eventually picked them up. They spent several days in detention, he said, but were able to make an asylum claim and get released with a date to go to court, a common immigration path at the time. Soon they were heading to Wisconsin.

While his immigration case was making its way through court, Rodríguez couldn’t get a work permit. He got the job at D&K Dairy the way so many dairy workers do: using fake papers he’d purchased that showed somebody else’s name and Social Security number.

He earned $9.50 an hour and was paid by check with taxes withheld. Some days he worked six hours; others, 12. Agricultural work is excluded from many of America’s labor protections, so he didn’t receive overtime pay when he worked more than 40 hours a week. In a typical two-week period, Rodríguez and his coworkers clocked 150 hours, according to interviews and records.

The job came with free housing, a major draw for new immigrants desperate to pay down debts to smugglers who’d helped them cross the border. Rodríguez owed more than $10,000 to the man who loaned him money to get to the U.S.-Mexico border. For undocumented immigrants, who are barred from obtaining driver’s licenses in Wisconsin, there’s another benefit to living where they work: they can avoid getting behind the wheel and risking run-ins with law enforcement officers on traffic duty.

Rodríguez and Jefferson moved into one of two bedrooms in an apartment above the milking parlor, the barn where cows were milked day and night. The floors vibrated from the motor that powered the loud machinery, while the smell of manure penetrated the apartment they shared with two other workers. Rodríguez and his son shared the top bunk in one of the rooms.

José Rodríguez and his son Jefferson in a photo taken soon after their arrival in Wisconsin. (Courtesy of José María Rodríguez Uriarte)

“It was not a place for children,” said a worker who slept in the bottom bunk and grew fond of his young roommate.

No data exists on how many children live on the dairy farms where their parents work. But stories are plentiful: A worker on a small farm about an hour from D&K Dairy set up a crib in an unheated parlor so she could watch her infant as she milked cows because she could not afford child care. An interpreter in the area knows of several parents who leave their children alone in farm housing while they work overnight shifts. And with some regularity, records show, law enforcement officials encounter the children of workers when they respond to incidents at dairy farms across the state.

In a court deposition, Daniel Breunig pushed back against the notion that Rodríguez and his son lived above the parlor, saying workers only stayed there between shifts or when the weather was bad. “I wouldn’t say lived,” he said. “I would say — I mean, the property that they’re speaking of is built as a break room and a rest area.”

The Breunigs had a two-bedroom unit for their workers in another house a short walk down the road. But there wasn’t enough room for everybody, so the supervisors assigned some workers to live above the milking parlor, several former workers said. More than a half-dozen former workers and visitors to the farm said Rodríguez, his son and other workers lived there.

Breunig told deputies on the night of the accident that he didn’t know the dead boy’s name or age. He later said he’d told Rodríguez that his son could only be outside during the day, under adult supervision.

Jefferson often recorded himself singing and speaking about his deep Christian faith, including in this video taken in a loft space above the milking parlor. (Courtesy of José María Rodríguez Uriarte)

Watch video ➜

Jefferson never attended school in Wisconsin, though there were about five weeks left on the local school district calendar when they arrived. Rodríguez said he couldn’t get a day off or find someone who spoke English to help him enroll his son, but he planned to do it in the fall. He asked around about child care, he said, but couldn’t afford it.

Rodríguez knows some people think he was a negligent father. He said he had two competing responsibilities: working and taking care of his son. He couldn’t always do both at the same time.

Jefferson was often alone in the rooms above the parlor. There was no TV there, just a handful of toys: a small bus, a cow, a plastic water gun he’d use to shoot at the cats. His father gave him an old cellphone that had no service but could catch personal hot spots from other workers’ phones. Jefferson used it to call his mom and brother on WhatsApp, although their cellphone service in Murra was limited. He made videos of himself set in the wood-framed loft space, singing hymns he made up about creation, sin and Jesus Christ.

When he got bored, Jefferson would pull on a pair of oversized black rubber boots and wander downstairs to play with the cats and talk with the adults while they worked.

More than 100 children are killed each year on all kinds of farms, according to national estimates. They fall off their parents’ laps while riding on tractors, get crushed by the heavy metal buckets of skid steers, suffocate in grain silos. Thousands more are injured.

No national system tracks all farm injuries and deaths, but researchers with the federally funded National Children’s Center for Rural and Agricultural Health and Safety maintain a database of these incidents using information gathered primarily from news reports and obituaries. The week of Jefferson’s death, at least three other children were killed on farms across the country, including a 14-month-old girl who was run over by a horse-drawn wagon about an hour north of the Breunigs’ farm.

People who study farm safety discourage the use of the word “accident” because it “implies it’s an act of God. That it was random, a freak thing,” said Barbara Lee, a senior research scientist at the National Children’s Center. “If you ask anybody who understands this, you have an 8-year-old in a dangerous worksite: It’s something terrible waiting to happen.”

The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration is responsible for investigating workplace safety. OSHA has few safety standards for agricultural work sites, and small farms get significant exemptions. Still, all employers are required to maintain workplaces that are free of hazards that can cause injury or death.

The night Jefferson died, an investigator from the medical examiner’s office called OSHA because the boy “was at work with his father when the accident occurred,” according to her report. But because Jefferson was not a worker, the investigator was told, OSHA likely would not investigate.

It didn’t. In a statement, an agency spokesperson said OSHA’s jurisdiction is limited to incidents that affect workers. “A fatality involving a non-employee, regardless of age, would not generally result in an OSHA investigation unless such workplaces also have employees where hazardous conditions, such as those that may have been a factor to the non-employee’s death also exist,” she said.

The notoriously understaffed and underfunded agency has, in recent years, attempted to inspect fewer than a dozen Wisconsin dairy farms each year. The year Jefferson died, six of the nine inspections that OSHA initiated ultimately did not take place because the farms were too small to fall under the agency’s jurisdiction; three of those six involved fatalities.

As a result, it’s usually up to local law enforcement and, sometimes, child welfare agencies to investigate deaths of and injuries to children on farms. Records show that Dane County’s child protective services division, which is charged with investigating the deaths of children due to suspected maltreatment, was notified the night of Jefferson’s death.

It does not appear the agency opened an investigation. Jefferson’s death is not listed in a state registry of deaths and other serious incidents investigated for possible abuse or neglect. Rodríguez said nobody from child protective services spoke with him. The agency denied a request for records regarding its response, citing state laws that protect juvenile records.

Lee, the researcher, said child welfare and law enforcement agencies are rarely trained in farm safety. That makes it difficult for investigators to recognize whether those deaths or injuries could have been prevented.

“Who was legally responsible for the child at the time of the injury or death? In that case it was the father,” Lee said. “But was the employer turning a blind eye to the fact that the child was spending time at night in the dark in a work environment?”

“You have an 8-year-old in a dangerous worksite: It’s something terrible waiting to happen.”

—— Barbara Lee, scientist at the National Children’s Center for Rural and Agricultural Health and Safety

In the hours after Jefferson died, the farm filled with deputies and other officials who used flashlights to inspect the darkened property. About a half-dozen of Rodríguez’s friends and acquaintances came, too.

Deputies took photographs of Rodríguez standing against a white door, his face red and puffy from crying, his mouth twisted into a grimace. They escorted him to the rooms above the parlor so he could change out of his blood-smeared shirt, pants and boots.

As the night progressed, Rodríguez tried to make sense of the investigation that was unfolding in a language he didn’t understand. He said he didn’t know then, and he wouldn’t know for several days, that authorities believed he had killed his son.

Deputies and other officials seemed to treat Rodríguez gently, records and interviews show. Several officials said Jefferson’s death was one of the saddest incidents they had ever responded to.

Rodríguez said he remembered talking briefly with Ingolia and telling her that he didn’t see what happened. He said he understood what she said in Spanish but did not think she understood everything he said. At one point, Ingolia asked for his phone number but didn’t seem to catch it; it wasn’t until one of his friends repeated the numbers in English, Rodríguez said, that she wrote them down.

At another point, Ingolia asked Rodríguez when he and Jefferson had immigrated to the U.S., as well as about the boy’s mother. She wrote in her report that the boy’s mother had returned to Nicaragua three months earlier. It wasn’t until a native Spanish speaker talked to Rodríguez the following afternoon that authorities learned Jefferson’s mother had never been in the U.S.

Rodríguez said he has no recollection of being asked by Ingolia or anyone else if he was driving the skid steer. He wonders if it was because he was so clearly devastated that they didn’t want to cause him more pain.

But “if they had asked me how I did it,” Rodríguez said, “then in that very moment I could tell them that it wasn’t me.”

That night, he asked a friend to send word back home. He wanted to tell Vargas himself that their son was dead, but knew she had no cell service where they lived.

About 5 a.m. in Murra, Vargas awoke to loud banging on her door. A woman she knew had come to deliver the news: “Your son has been killed in the United States.”

Vargas said she was in disbelief, convinced it was a cruel prank. Then her younger brother arrived. He walked toward her then stood there for a few moments, unable to speak. That’s when she knew.

She cried and screamed, then fainted.

Ingolia learned Spanish in school, taking classes starting in the fifth grade in her native Louisiana and continuing through her freshman year at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. After graduating in 1991, with a degree in history and secondary education, Ingolia used her Spanish intermittently at work, first as a correctional officer and then, after joining the sheriff’s office in 2003, as a deputy.

Although much of her job consists of traffic stops, Ingolia has interpreted for colleagues and officers at other agencies. She was commended in 2014 for her role in helping detectives investigate a stabbing involving Spanish-speaking workers at another dairy farm.

Ingolia considers herself proficient in Spanish, though she acknowledged she struggles with legal and medical terminology. “Asking someone what happened here, basic type of questions, information gathering questions,” she said in a deposition, “I have no issues.”

Deputy Ann Ingolia (Dane County Sheriff’s Office)

The Dane County Sheriff’s Office does not test the language skills of employees; they self-report their proficiency. The office has no written policies on what officers should do when they encounter people who speak a language other than English or when to bring in an interpreter, said Elise Schaffer, a spokesperson for the department.

But in general, Schaffer said, patrol deputies are supposed to put out a call to ask if any of their colleagues speak that language and, if none are available, ask for help from other agencies in the county. According to agency records, on the night Jefferson died, Ingolia was the only Dane deputy on the scene who self-reported speaking Spanish at any level.

Law enforcement agencies that receive federal funding, like the Dane County Sheriff’s Office, are required by the Civil Rights Act to ensure that their services are accessible to people who speak limited English.

In 2021, the Department of Justice settled a civil rights investigation into a Pennsylvania police department over a complaint from a Spanish-speaking resident who spoke limited English and had to rely on his young son and a co-worker to communicate with the police. Under the settlement, police agreed to assess the language skills of its bilingual officers and train staff on when to use interpreters, among other measures.

In Wisconsin, what happens in practice can vary wildly from department to department and officer to officer. Law enforcement officials routinely acknowledge language barriers when they respond to incidents on dairy farms, ProPublica found. Sometimes they call interpreters or seek the help of bilingual colleagues. Just as often, records show, deputies rely on Google Translate, workers’ supervisors, co-workers and even children to interpret for them. Sometimes they fail to even do this.

In Madison, the Dane County seat and the state’s second-largest city, department policy calls for police officers to request bilingual officers when they need interpretation or translation. If one isn’t available, officers can consider a bilingual civilian employee. As a last resort, they can turn to a certified interpreter who works over the phone.

Zulma Franco, a police detective in Madison who immigrated from Colombia as a child and whose first language is Spanish, said there is a difference between speaking enough of another language to “muddle your way” through a traffic stop and having the skills to respond to a complex, emotionally charged or high-stakes situation.

Even in the Madison Police Department, which takes pride in its Latino outreach group, Amigos en Azul, there is no way to measure officers’ proficiency in another language. As in Dane County, the city relies on officers to self-report their ability.

In contrast, the state’s court system has guidelines to ensure access and provides qualified interpreters for people who need them.

But even for experienced interpreters, a number of factors — including the speaker’s country of origin, dialect and education level — can hinder understanding. When a police officer is involved, communication can be even more challenging, especially in a crisis. The results can be life-changing: a victim’s inability to make clear what has happened to them, a suspect’s difficulty in explaining their side of the story.

(Sebastián Hidalgo for ProPublica)

As part of a broader investigation into conditions for immigrant workers on dairy farms across the Midwest, ProPublica began looking into Jefferson’s death last summer. We heard repeatedly from Nicaraguan community members that law enforcement got the story wrong. Rodríguez has consistently said, in Spanish, to friends, acquaintances and even complete strangers, that another worker accidentally ran his son over that night. That worker has also openly spoken about what happened, though the sheriff’s office never interviewed him.

In January, we found that worker.

ProPublica is identifying him by his last name, Blandón, a common surname in Nicaragua. He agreed to explain what happened on the condition we not use his full name, identify his hometown or say where he is today. A soft-spoken man, he said he doesn’t want to be publicly named because he hasn’t told his family about the incident and worries about scaring his elderly parents. As an undocumented immigrant, he is also aware of the ever-present possibility of deportation.

There is no criminal investigation into Jefferson’s death.

Blandón grew up in a part of Nicaragua that, like Murra, has seen an exodus of residents seeking opportunities in the U.S.

Unlike Rodríguez, he went to a private Catholic school and attended college. He studied civil engineering and got a job in that field after graduation. But he decided to immigrate to the U.S. because his family struggled to get ahead in Nicaragua, and he wanted to better support his parents financially.

Blandón was 27 when he entered the U.S. in the late spring of 2019 and moved to Wisconsin, where he had relatives who worked on dairy farms. He found a job on another farm that paid $8.50 an hour to milk and corral about 500 cows, duties he shared with just one other worker each shift. He said he was shown how to operate a skid steer on that farm but was still learning to use it when he quit after about a month because of the exhausting working conditions.

He then got the job at D&K Dairy. He said he was hired as a “corralero,” tasked with corralling cows in and out of the milking parlor, feeding them, and using a skid steer to clear the ground of manure. He said it was a different type of machine than the one he’d been learning to use at the other farm.

Blandón said he met Rodríguez and his son earlier on the day of the incident, during a 12 p.m. to 6 p.m. shift, in the rooms above the milking parlor. He remembered noticing that Jefferson was a chatty and active boy, but said their interaction was brief.

He said he sympathized with Rodríguez for having his son on the farm. He knows many immigrant parents have no choice but to have their children with them at work.

During that first shift, another worker showed him how to use the skid steer and perform his other corralling duties. Before he knew it, Blandón said, he was expected to return two hours later to do the job on his own. It all felt rushed, he said. “Farms need workers and they’re not going to have you practice before getting to work,” he said. “Everything is risky.”

The skid steer Blandón was operating the night of Jefferson’s death. (Dane County Sheriff’s Office)

At 8 p.m., Blandón — who said he had been assigned to live in the house down the road — returned to the farm alone for the overnight shift.

Rodríguez was in the milking parlor, along with another employee, Sandra Rosales Torres, according to Rodríguez and Blandón. Rosales declined to speak on the record with ProPublica, but, speaking through an interpreter in a deposition, she also said Rodríguez was in the milking parlor.

Blandón said it was very dark in parts of the corrals. In her deposition, Rosales said Blandón didn’t have a cellphone and asked to borrow hers to use as a flashlight. She said he told her the lights on the skid steer didn’t work.

At some point, Jefferson came down from the loft and into the milking parlor. He was wearing a blue T-shirt, swim trunks printed with an American flag design and a necklace made from a red shoelace tied around a rock he’d found on the farm. Jefferson chatted briefly with his father, asking for a towel to dry his hands, Rodríguez said. Then he wandered outside.

Blandón said he doesn’t know exactly when Jefferson appeared, but he remembers spotting the child while clearing the corrals. “I didn’t expect to see the boy in a work area,” he said.

It was difficult for Blandón to hear what was happening around him; the skid steer was loud and he was enclosed in its cabin. Blandón said he was focused on getting to the next corral quickly to clean it so that he could then move the cows on time. He began moving the skid steer in reverse to turn it toward the corral.

It all happened within seconds: The skid steer’s movement felt strange, like the ground became uneven beneath him, he said. Suddenly he saw the boy’s body in front of the machine.

In horror, Blandón ran to the parlor where Rodríguez and Rosales were milking the cows. “Accidenté a su niño,” he remembers shouting to Rodríguez. I accidentally hit your son.

Rodríguez followed Blandón outside and saw Jefferson on the ground near the skid steer. Rodríguez said he attempted to do CPR. His mouth filled with blood and what seemed like a piece of a tooth. He felt his son suck in a breath before his tiny body went limp. Rodríguez carried him back toward the milking parlor.

Meanwhile, Rosales hurried across the driveway to the Breunigs’ house. She let out a “terrifying scream,” Breunig would later recall. She said she used some of the few words she knew in English: “José’s baby.”

Breunig said he looked out and saw Rodríguez near the parlor, holding Jefferson. He ran over and called 911. A deputy from neighboring Columbia County arrived less than 10 minutes later. His headlights shone over Breunig, who knelt on the ground as he pumped Jefferson’s chest with his hands.

The boy’s head was scalped and a piece of his skull was detached. His eyes and lips were swollen. Jefferson’s boots and a red baseball cap had fallen off near the skid steer.

As paramedics and Dane County sheriff’s deputies arrived, Blandón stood nearby.

“He was saying things to me like, ‘Sandra, Sandy, I’m going to end up in jail, I’m going to die in jail, never go back to Nicaragua,’” Rosales said in the deposition. “He was very scared. … He was just waiting for a policeman to call him, but they never spoke to him.”

Another deputy identified Blandón and Rosales by asking them to write their names in his notepad. In his report, he noted that he “was not able to communicate with them, as I do not speak Spanish.”

Blandón nervously wrote his first name, middle initial, and last name in the notepad. Then he waited to be questioned.

About an hour later, he said, Breunig asked him to get back to work. The cows needed to be milked.

“He was just waiting for a policeman to call him, but they never spoke to him.”

—— Sandra Rosales Torres, a D&K Dairy worker, of the man driving the skid steer

More than three years after Jefferson’s death, Ingolia said her memory of what happened is clear. “You can never unsee what you saw,” she told us in an interview. “You can never unsmell what you smelled. And I can never unhear José screaming and trying to dig a hole in the ground.”

She said it took her a half hour to get Rodríguez to stop screaming. Finally, she said, she asked him to show her where it happened. He took her to an area near some corrals on a hilly part of the property and pointed to an orange-and-white Bobcat skid steer.

Ingolia said she didn’t know the word for skid steer in Spanish. So she tried to ask whether he hit his son with the machine.

These are the words she said she used: ¿Golpe su hijo con la máquina?”

A reporter told her what those words actually mean: Hit your son with the machine.

The word “hit” in this construction is a noun, as in a “blow” or a “hit,” and not a conjugated verb that would indicate a subject.

The sentence in Spanish has no subject. It’s not clear if she’s asking if Rodríguez hit his son, or if it was somebody else, or if it was the machine itself that hit his son.

“I did the best I could for José and Jefferson the night of the incident,” Ingolia said, “and I can't really account for what anyone else did or didn’t do.”

Does she think it’s possible that she got it wrong?

“It’s possible that I did not get the question laid out so José understood exactly what I was asking,” she said. “When I asked, ‘Did you hit the child with the machine?’ I pointed at him and the machine. I thought I made it clear I was asking, ‘Did you do this?’”

News of Jefferson’s death spread in Spanish on Facebook and WhatsApp. Latino groceries, bakeries and restaurants in the area put up donation boxes to raise money to send his body home.

People who had never met Jefferson showed up to his viewing at a funeral home in Madison. They were moved by Rodríguez’s quiet sadness. “He told me he felt an enormous frustration that he had brought his son here only to die,” said María Teresa Villarreal, who got to know Rodríguez after Jefferson’s death.

The Breunigs attended the viewing, as did Timothy Blanke, the detective on the case. He gave Rodríguez the red shoelace necklace his son had been wearing when he died.

A few days later, Villarreal saw a news article in English based on the sheriff’s office’s account of what happened. By that point, an autopsy had ruled Jefferson’s death an accident. Nobody would be charged criminally.

But Rodríguez was blamed.

Villarreal said she called Rodríguez and told him, but he had already seen it. He told her it made him feel even worse than he already did.

Abarrotes Yuremi, a small grocery store in Waunakee, Wisconsin, is frequented by Nicaraguan dairy workers and other immigrants. (Sebastián Hidalgo for ProPublica)

Rodríguez found Blanke’s card and gave Villarreal his phone number to try to set the record straight. Unlike Rodríguez, Villarreal spoke English. She said she called Blanke. “I told him, ‘Your report says José caused the accident, and it wasn’t José,’” she said. “He asked who did it. I told him it was the other guy who was there.”

In an email, Blanke called Jefferson’s death “one of the most emotionally difficult investigations of my career.” He recalled getting a call about the case and handing it off to another detective. According to a sheriff’s report, that detective tried following up with the caller in early September but never heard back. Villarreal said she was never contacted by anybody from the sheriff’s office.

The detective also talked to a bilingual county official about setting up a meeting with Rodríguez, but that meeting never happened, according to the report. It does not appear that anybody contacted Rodríguez directly.

A year after their son’s death, in August 2020, Rodríguez and Vargas filed a wrongful death lawsuit in Dane County against D&K Dairy, its insurer, and the skid steer driver, first identified as “John Doe.” The sheriff’s office is not a defendant in the lawsuit.

The case is scheduled to go to trial in June.

Rodríguez said he wants to clear his name. He also wants the Breunigs to take responsibility for what happened; he doesn’t think a new employee should have been driving a skid steer alone at night just hours after learning how the machine worked.

One of the key facts in dispute in the lawsuit is who was driving the skid steer. Rodríguez’s attorneys have questioned whether Ingolia knew Spanish well enough to understand him. In 2021, Blandón gave a statement to a private investigator working for Rodríguez’s lawyers acknowledging that he was driving, but the statement was pre-printed with the wrong name and wasn’t properly notarized. A judge struck it from the court record. Since then, lawyers from both sides have been unable to locate Blandón, who has been dismissed as a defendant in the lawsuit.

Rodríguez’s attorneys declined to comment on this story.

Attorneys for the farm and the insurance company, Rural Mutual Insurance Company, have pointed to the sheriff’s department’s report as proof Rodríguez was driving.

Meanwhile, an engineer hired by Rodríguez’s attorneys to inspect the skid steer two and half months after Jefferson died said the machine’s horn, back-up alarm and rear lights didn’t work. “Each of these systems by themselves is designed to make the skid loader more visible, or get the attention of persons near the machine,” the engineer wrote in an August 2022 report. “Had these systems been functioning, it is more likely than not that this accident would not have happened.”

Attorneys for the farm and the insurance company have said in court filings that Daniel Breunig inspected the machine twice a week, on average. In a deposition, Breunig said that, as a new employee, Blandón would have been assigned to the milking parlor that night, while Rodríguez was supposed to corral the cows and drive the skid steer.

Breunig said he had trained Rodríguez on the skid steer months earlier and that, “generally every shift he worked, he was the one pushing the cows to the milking facility and cleaning up their stalls with the Bobcat.”

Rodríguez and three other workers told ProPublica that Rodríguez’s job had always been in the parlor.

The insurance company’s lawyers have said Rodríguez has a financial incentive to claim somebody else was driving. In court filings, they said he “would be unable to recover any damages arising out of [Jefferson’s] death if Jose was driving the Bobcat. If someone else was driving the Bobcat, however, Jose could recover damages.” An attorney for the insurance company declined to comment for this story, citing the lawsuit.

In court, the farm’s lawyer has repeatedly cast doubt on Rodríguez’s credibility, in part because he used an alias to get the job, even as the Breunigs’ business depended on undocumented workers who used aliases to get hired. In his deposition, Daniel Breunig said he did not know the citizenship status of Rodríguez and his son.

Through an attorney, the Breunigs declined to comment about the accident and the operation of the farm.

In his deposition, Daniel Breunig described Jefferson’s death as “an awful tragedy.” He said that, as a father, he, too, felt Rodríguez’s pain. He said he was not aware there was another account of what happened until he heard from Rodríguez’s attorneys.

The farm ceased operations in April 2022; it’s unclear what prompted the closure, though records show that the farm had been struggling to meet state sanitary standards for years.

Jefferson’s death did not attract any additional attention from authorities.

In response to ProPublica’s findings, the sheriff’s office issued a brief statement.

“Our hearts go out to the Rodríguez family on the loss of their young son,” wrote Schaffer, the sheriff’s department spokesperson.

She said investigators would welcome any new information from any witnesses or parties who wanted to come forward. “Our goal is always to conduct a thorough and factual investigation.”

In an interview, Ingolia said she was unaware there was anybody else on the farm that night that she should have talked to.

“José never said, ‘Did you talk to [Blandón]?’” she said. “Never brought up anybody else's name.”

At one point that night, Ingolia asked Rodríguez for consent to do a blood draw to test for drugs or alcohol in his system. She said she began the question by stating that he was “the driver of the machine that killed Jefferson.” Rodríguez gave his consent, though he later said he thought the purpose of the blood draw was to prove his paternity. “I suspect that by the time I asked José about the blood test he was so inside his own head,” she said. “I don’t know if he wasn’t listening or it wasn’t sinking in.”

On an accident scene that size, she said, it would have been up to a supervisor or a detective to decide who needed to be interviewed or re-interviewed. Not her.

Ingolia said none of her native Spanish-speaking colleagues were working the night Jefferson died. She mentioned a phone-based interpretation service available to deputies, but she said it’s not always reliable in rural areas with few cellphone towers.

She knows some agencies test employees’ language skills — and pay an incentive to those who are or become fluent. The sheriff’s office doesn’t do that, she said. She isn’t sure if testing would have been helpful.

Ingolia said the case is “one of the ones that sticks with you. At the end of the day, there is a small child that is dead for no good reason. It’s a very complex situation and, you know, I’m sure José was trying to do the best he could for his family.”

Even if authorities had gotten it right, though, and spoken with Blandón the night Jefferson died, it’s unclear whether much would have changed. More than likely, Jefferson’s death would still have been ruled an accident. OSHA wouldn’t have examined conditions on the farm. Immigrant parents would continue to live and work on dairy farms with their children.

A few days after Jefferson’s death, Blandón said, he met with Rodríguez at the farm and apologized. He said he told him he was so sorry. “That I never …” Blandón paused. “That it wasn’t intentional. It was an unexpected accident. It wasn’t something I meant to do, but it was something that just happened.”

Rodríguez said he knows that what happened wasn’t intentional. He doesn’t want to see Blandón, another immigrant like him, punished. “It’s not something that just goes away. I know he didn’t do it on purpose, but …” he trailed off. “It is difficult.”

Blandón continued working at D&K Dairy for about two weeks after Jefferson died, until he found a job on another dairy farm. He wanted to get away from the horrors of that night.

For some time afterward, he said, any loud noise or sudden movement would startle him and make him want to cry. He said he talked with a psychologist, a pastor and a priest to try to process what had happened.

About a year ago, Blandón left Wisconsin. He now lives in a small city in another state and works in a different industry. He said he doesn’t want to return to work on a dairy farm but he knows that he might have to one day if he has no other option.

Rodríguez never went back to work at D&K Dairy. He works on another dairy farm nearby.

When he looks back, he said, he’s still baffled by the investigation. It’s not just that law enforcement incorrectly concluded he was driving the skid steer, he said, but that they missed the bigger picture.

“Shouldn’t they have taken a closer look at what was happening on that farm, after seeing what a disaster that place was? Shouldn’t they have paid more attention?” he asked. “Don’t the police have to do that?”

If he was still alive, Jefferson would now be 12. Rodríguez said he thinks about him daily and wonders what he would be like today. He imagines that, by now, his son would have accomplished his goal of learning English in school.

He remembers how Jefferson would tell him to work hard and save up enough money so they could return home quickly. He talked about hugging his little brother again.

Lately, Rodríguez has been thinking about going back to Nicaragua. He wants to be with the only son he has left.

The gravesite and memorial to Jefferson in Murra, Nicaragua (Courtesy of María Sayra Vargas)

Help ProPublica Journalists Investigate the Dairy Industry

Alex Mierjeski contributed research.

by Melissa Sanchez and Maryam Jameel

A Norfolk Southern Policy Lets Officials Order Crews to Ignore Safety Alerts

1 year 9 months ago

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

Norfolk Southern allows a monitoring team to instruct crews to ignore alerts from train track sensors designed to flag potential mechanical problems.

ProPublica learned of the policy after reviewing the rules of the company, which is engulfed in controversy after one of its trains derailed this month, releasing toxic flammable gas over East Palestine, Ohio.

The policy applies specifically to the company’s Wayside Detector Help Desk, which monitors data from the track-side sensors. Workers on the desk can tell crews to disregard an alert when “information is available confirming it is safe to proceed” and to continue no faster than 30 miles per hour to the next track-side sensor, which is often miles away. The company’s rulebook did not specify what such information might be, and company officials did not respond to questions about the policy.

The National Transportation Safety Board will be looking into the company’s rules, including whether that specific policy played a role in the Feb. 3 derailment in East Palestine. Thirty-eight cars, some filled with chemicals, left the tracks and caught fire, triggering an evacuation and agonized questions from residents about the implications for their health. The NTSB believes a wheel bearing in a car overheated and failed immediately before the train derailed. It plans to release a preliminary report on the accident Thursday morning.

ProPublica has learned that Norfolk Southern disregarded a similar mechanical problem on another train that months earlier jumped the tracks in Ohio.

In October, that train was en route to Cleveland when dispatchers told the crew to stop it, said Clyde Whitaker, Ohio state legislative director for the Transportation Division of the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers, or SMART. He said the help desk had learned that a wheel was heating up on an engine the train was towing. The company sent a mechanic to the train to diagnose the problem.

Whitaker said that it could not be determined what was causing the wheel to overheat, and that the safest course of action would have been to set the engine aside to be repaired. That would have added about an hour to the journey, Whitaker said.

But Whitaker said the dispatcher told the crew that a supervisor determined that the train should continue on without removing the engine.

Four miles later, the train derailed while traveling about 30 miles per hour and dumped thousands of gallons of molten paraffin wax in the city of Sandusky.

Records from the Federal Railroad Administration, the agency responsible for regulating safety in the railroad industry, show that Norfolk Southern identified the cause of the October derailment as a hot wheel bearing. Whitaker said this bearing was on the same engine that originally drew concerns.

A spokesperson for the FRA said the agency’s investigation into the derailment is ongoing. The agency did not say whether it was examining the role of any Norfolk Southern officials in deciding to keep the damaged engine on the train. It’s still unknown what role, if any, the help desk played in the final decision.

This month, 20 miles before Norfolk Southern’s train spectacularly derailed in East Palestine, the help desk should have also gotten an alert. As the train rolled through Salem, it crossed a track-side sensor. Video footage from a nearby Salem company shows the train traveling with a fiery glow underneath its carriage.

If, like the Sandusky train, this one was dangerously heating up, a key question for investigators will be whether the help desk became aware and alerted the crew, and if it did, why the crew was not instructed to stop. The NTSB told ProPublica it is reviewing data from the Salem detector and those before it on the train’s route.

Norfolk Southern declined to say whether members of the train’s crew received an alert before the derailment and, if they did, whether the help desk told them to disregard it. The company did not address questions about its policy giving its help desk leeway to ignore such alerts. A spokesperson said that the company’s detector network is a massive safety investment, and that its trains rarely require troubleshooting.

ProPublica asked officials at the six other large freight railroad companies whether they have similar policies allowing employees to disregard such alerts. CSX and Burlington Northern Santa Fe said they don’t, and Canadian National said that no one can instruct a crew to continue traveling when they receive an alert “requiring them to stop the train.” Union Pacific, Canadian Pacific and Kansas City Southern did not respond.

While some employees and outside experts say there are times in which such policies safely benefit business operations, union officials believe they are emblematic of Precision Scheduled Railroading, the most controversial — and profitable — innovation that’s come out of the country’s seven biggest railroads, the so-called Class 1s, in the last decade. It prioritizes keeping rail cars and locomotives in constant motion.

Gabriel Sandoval and Danelle Morton contributed reporting.

by Topher Sanders and Dan Schwartz

Help ProPublica and The Salt Lake Tribune Investigate Sexual Assault in Utah

1 year 9 months ago

If you need to report or discuss a sexual assault in Utah, you can call the Rape and Sexual Assault Crisis Line at 801-736-4356. Those who live outside of Utah can reach the National Sexual Assault Hotline at 800-656-4673.

The Salt Lake Tribune has partnered with ProPublica, a nonprofit investigative newsroom, to investigate sexual assault in Utah, and we’d like to hear from survivors and others with knowledge about this topic to help guide our coverage.

We’re reporting on sexual assault by health care professionals, an issue we highlighted in our story about a Provo OB-GYN who was sued by nearly 100 women who said he sexually assaulted them during treatments. You can fill out our confidential form below to tell us about other practitioners and health care institutions you think we should report on.

Salt Lake Tribune reporter Jessica Miller has written multiple stories about sexual assault, including at Brigham Young University, and ProPublica has worked with survivors across the country to tell their stories. We hope our continued coverage of this issue will lead to further impact.

We appreciate you sharing your story, and we take your privacy seriously. We are gathering these stories for the purposes of our reporting, and we will contact you if we wish to publish any part of your story. We may not be able to look into every tip, but we appreciate each one we receive and they will help shape our reporting.

If you would prefer to use an encrypted app, see our advice at propublica.org/tips. You can reach reporter Jessica Miller by email at jmiller@sltrib.com.

by Jessica Miller, The Salt Lake Tribune

94 Women Allege a Utah Doctor Sexually Assaulted Them. Here’s Why a Judge Threw Out Their Case.

1 year 9 months ago

This story discusses sexual assault.

This article was produced for ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network in partnership with The Salt Lake Tribune. Sign up for Dispatches to get stories like this one as soon as they are published.

At 19 years old and about to be married, Stephanie Mateer went to an OB-GYN within walking distance of her student housing near Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah.

She wanted to start using birth control, and she was looking for guidance about having sex for the first time on her 2008 wedding night.

Mateer was shocked, she said, when Dr. David Broadbent reached under her gown to grab and squeeze her breasts, started a vaginal exam without warning, then followed it with an extremely painful examination of her rectum.

She felt disgusted and violated, but doubt also creeped in. She told herself she must have misinterpreted his actions, or that she should have known that he would do a rectal exam. Raised as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, she said she was taught to defer to men in leadership.

“I viewed him as being a man in authority,” Mateer said. “He’s a doctor.”

It was years, Mateer said, before she learned that her experience was in a sharp contrast to the conduct called for in professional standards, including that doctors use only their fingertips during a breast exam and communicate clearly what they are doing in advance, to gain the consent of their patient. Eventually, she gave her experience another name: sexual assault.

Utah judges, however, have called it health care.

And that legal distinction means Utahns like Mateer who decide to sue a health care provider for alleged sexual abuse are treated more harshly by the court system than plaintiffs who say they were harmed in other settings.

The chance to go to civil court for damages is an important option for survivors, experts say. While a criminal conviction can provide a sense of justice, winning a lawsuit can help victims pay for the therapy and additional support they need to heal after trauma.

Mateer laid out her allegations in a lawsuit that she and 93 other women filed against Broadbent last year. But they quickly learned they would be treated differently than other sexual assault survivors.

Filing their case, which alleged the Utah County doctor sexually assaulted them over the span of his 47-year career, was an empowering moment, Mateer said. But a judge threw out the lawsuit without even considering the merits, determining that because their alleged assailant is a doctor, the case must be governed by medical malpractice rules rather than those that apply to cases of sexual assault.

Under Utah’s rules of medical malpractice, claims made by victims who allege a health care worker sexually assaulted them are literally worth less than lawsuits brought by someone who was assaulted in other settings — even if a jury rules in their favor, a judge is required to limit how much money they receive. And they must meet a shorter filing deadline.

“It’s just crazy that a doctor can sexually assault women and then be protected by the white coat,” Mateer said. “It’s just a really scary precedent to be calling sexual assault ‘health care.’”

Mateer in 2008, the year she first saw Dr. David Broadbent, an OB-GYN, in advance of her wedding night (Courtesy of Stephanie Mateer)

Because of the judge’s ruling that leaves them with a shorter window in which to file, some of Broadbent’s accusers stand to lose their chance to sue. Others were already past that deadline but had hoped to take advantage of an exception that allows a plaintiff to sue if they can prove that the person who harmed them had covered up the wrongdoing and if they discovered they had been hurt within the previous year.

As a group, the women are appealing the ruling to the Utah Supreme Court, which has agreed to hear the case. This decision will set a precedent for future sexual assault victims in Utah.

Broadbent’s attorney, Chris Nelson, declined an interview request but wrote in an email: “We believe that the allegations against Dr. Broadbent are without merit and will present our case in court. Given that this is an active legal matter, we will not be sharing any details outside the courtroom.”

States have varying legal definitions of medical malpractice, but it’s generally described as treatment that falls short of accepted standards of care. That includes mistakes, like a surgeon leaving a piece of gauze inside a patient.

Utah is among the states with the broadest definition of medical malpractice, covering any acts “arising” out of health care. The Utah Supreme Court has ruled that a teenage boy was receiving health care when he was allowed to climb a steep, snow-dusted rock outcrop as part of wilderness therapy. When he broke his leg, he could only sue for medical malpractice, so the case faced shorter filing deadlines and lower monetary caps. Similarly, the court has ruled that a boy harmed by another child while in foster care was also bound by medical malpractice law.

Despite these state Supreme Court rulings, Utah legislators have so far not moved to narrow the wording of the malpractice act.

The lawsuit against Broadbent — and the questions it raises about the broadness of Utah’s medical malpractice laws — comes during a national reckoning with how sexual assault survivors are treated by the law. Legislators in several states have been rewriting laws to give sexual assault victims more time to sue their attackers, in response to the growing cultural understanding of the impact of trauma and the barriers to reporting. Even in Utah, those who were sexually abused as children now have no deadline to file suits against their abusers.

That isn’t true for sexual abuse in a medical setting, where cases must be filed within two years of the assault.

These higher hurdles should not exist in Utah, said state Sen. Mike McKell, a Utah County Republican who works as a personal injury attorney. He is trying to change state law to ensure that sexual assault lawsuits do not fall under Utah’s Health Care Malpractice Act, a law designed to cover negligence and poor care, not necessarily deliberate actions like an assault.

Utah Sen. Mike McKell introduced a bill that would clarify that sexual assault claims should not be considered medical malpractice, removing legal obstacles for survivors who have been assaulted by health care workers. (Leah Hogsten/The Salt Lake Tribune)

“Sexual assault, to me, is not medical care. Period,” he said. “It’s sad that we need to clarify that sexual assault is not medical care. But trying to tie sexual assault to a medical malpractice [filing deadline] — it’s just wrong.”

“Your Husband Is a Lucky Man”

Mateer had gone to Broadbent in 2008 for a premarital exam, a uniquely Utah visit often scheduled by young women who are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Leaders of the faith, which is predominant in Utah, focus on chastity when speaking to young, unmarried people about sex, and public schools have typically focused on abstinence-based sex education. So for some, these visits are the first place they learn about sexual health.

Young women who get premarital exams are typically given a birth control prescription, but the appointments can also include care that’s less common for healthy women in other states — like doctors giving them vaginal dilators to stretch their tissue before their wedding night.

That’s what Mateer was expecting when she visited Broadbent’s office. The OB-GYN had been practicing for decades in his Provo clinic nestled between student housing apartments across the street from Brigham Young University, which is owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The Provo, Utah, office building where Broadbent once practiced (Leah Hogsten/The Salt Lake Tribune)

So Mateer was “just totally taken aback,” she said, by the painful examination and by Broadbent snapping off his gloves after the exam and saying, “Your husband is a lucky man.”

She repeated that remark in her legal filing, along with the doctor’s advice for her: If she bled during intercourse, “just do what the Boy Scouts do and apply pressure.”

“The whole thing was like I’m some object for my husband to enjoy and let him do whatever he wants,” Mateer said. “It was just very violating and not a great way to start my sexual relationship with my new husband, with these ideas in mind.”

Mateer thought back to that visit over the years, particularly when she went to other OB-GYNs for health care. Her subsequent doctors, she said, never performed a rectal exam and always explained to her what they were doing and how it would feel, and asked for her consent.

She thought about Broadbent again in 2017, as the #MeToo movement gained momentum, and looked him up online. Mateer found reviews from other women who described Broadbent doing rough examinations without warning that left them feeling the same way she had years before.

Then in December 2021, she spoke out on “Mormon Stories,” a podcast where people who have left or have questioned their Latter-day Saint faith share their life stories. In the episode, she described the painful way he examined her, how it left her feeling traumatized and her discovery of the reviews that echoed her experience.

“He’s on University Avenue, in Provo, giving these exams to who knows how many naive Mormon 18-year-old, 19-year-old girls who are getting married. … They are naive and they don’t know what to expect,” she said on the podcast. “His name is Dr. David Broadbent.”

After the podcast aired, Mateer was flooded with messages from women who heard the episode and reached out to tell her that Broadbent had harmed them, too.

Mateer and three other women decided to sue the OB-GYN, and in the following weeks and months, 90 additional women joined the lawsuit they filed in Provo. Many of the women allege Broadbent inappropriately touched their breasts, vaginas and rectums, hurting them, without warning or explanation. Some said he used his bare hand — instead of using a speculum or gloves — during exams. One alleged that she saw he had an erection while he was touching her.

Broadbent’s actions were not medically necessary, the women allege, and were instead “performed for no other reason than his own sexual gratification.”

The lawsuit also named as defendants two hospitals where Broadbent had delivered babies and where some of the women allege they were assaulted. The suit accused hospital administrators of knowing about Broadbent’s inappropriate behavior and doing nothing about it.

After he was sued, the OB-GYN quickly lost his privileges at the hospitals where he worked. Broadbent, now 75, has also voluntarily put his medical license in Utah on hold while police investigate 29 reports of sexual assault made against him.

Prosecutors are still considering whether to criminally prosecute Broadbent. Provo police forwarded more than a dozen reports to the Utah County attorney’s office in November, which are still being reviewed by a local prosecutor.

A spokesperson for Intermountain Health, the nonprofit health system that owns Utah Valley Hospital, where some of the women in the suit were treated, did not respond to specific questions. The spokesperson emphasized in an email that Broadbent was an “independent physician” who was not employed by Utah Valley Hospital, adding that most of the alleged incidents took place at Broadbent’s medical office.

A representative for MountainStar Healthcare, another hospital chain named as a defendant, denied knowledge of any allegations of inappropriate conduct reported to its hospital and also emphasized that Broadbent worked independently, not as an employee.

“Our position since this lawsuit was filed has been that we were inappropriately named in this suit,” said Brittany Glas, the communications director for MountainStar.

Debating Whether Sexual Abuse Is Health Care

For the women who sued Broadbent, their case boiled down to a key question: Were the sexual assaults they say they experienced part of their health care? There was a lot hanging on the answer.

If their case was considered medical malpractice, they would be limited in how much money they could receive in damages for their pain and suffering. If a jury awarded them millions of dollars, a judge would be required by law to cut that down to $450,000. There’s no cap on these monetary awards for victims sexually assaulted in other settings.

They would also be required to go before a panel, which includes a doctor, a lawyer and a community member, that decides whether their claims have merit. This step, aimed at resolving disputes out of court, does not block anyone from suing afterward. But it does add cost and delay, and for sexual assault victims who’ve gone through this step, it has been another time they were required to describe their experiences and hope they were believed.

The shorter, two-year filing deadline for medical malpractice cases can also be a particular challenge for those who have been sexually abused because research shows that it’s common to delay reporting such assaults.

Nationwide, these kinds of malpractice reforms were adopted in the 1970s amid concerns — largely driven by insurance companies — that the cost of health care was rising because of frivolous lawsuits and “runaway juries” doling out multimillion-dollar payouts.

Restricting the size of malpractice awards and imposing other limits, many argued, were effective ways to balance compensating injured patients with protecting everyone’s access to health care.

State laws are generally silent on whether sexual assault lawsuits should be covered by malpractice laws, leaving courts to grapple with that question and leading to different conclusions across the country. The Tribune and ProPublica identified at least six cases in which state appellate judges sharply distinguished between assault and health care in considering whether malpractice laws should apply to sexual assault-related cases.

An appellate court in Wisconsin, for example, ruled in 1993 that a physician having an erection and groping a patient was a purposeful harm, not medical malpractice.

Florida’s law is similar to Utah’s, defining allegations “arising” out of medical care as malpractice. While an earlier ruling did treat sexual assault in a health care setting as medical malpractice, appellate rulings in the last decade have moved away from that interpretation. In 2005, an appellate court affirmed a lower-court ruling that when a dentist “stopped providing dental treatment to the victim and began sexually assaulting her, his professional services ended.”

Similarly, a federal judge in Iowa in 1995 weighed in on the meaning of “arising” out of health care: “Rape is not patient care activity,” he wrote.

But Utah’s malpractice law is so broad that judges have been interpreting it as covering any act performed by a health care provider during medical care. The law was passed in 1976 and is popular with doctors and other health care providers, who have lobbied to keep it in place — and who use it to get lawsuits dismissed.

Broadbent’s name has been removed from the directory outside his former office suite. (Leah Hogsten/The Salt Lake Tribune)

One precedent-setting case in Utah shows the law’s power to safeguard health care providers and was an important test of how Utah defines medical malpractice. Jacob Scott sued WinGate Wilderness Therapy after the teen broke his leg in 2015 when a hiking guide from the center allowed him to climb up and down a steep outcrop in Utah’s red rock desert.

His parents are both lawyers, and after they found that Utah had a four-year deadline for filing a personal injury lawsuit, court records said, they decided to prioritize “getting Jacob better” for the first two years after the accident. But when Scott’s suit was filed, WinGate argued it was too late — based on the shorter, two-year deadline for medical malpractice claims.

Scott’s attorneys scoffed. “Interacting with nature,” his attorneys argued, “is not health care even under the broadest interpretation of … the Utah Health Care Malpractice Act.”

A judge disagreed and threw out Scott’s case. The Utah Supreme Court unanimously upheld that ruling in 2021.

“We agree with Wingate,” the justices wrote, “that it was acting as a ‘health care provider’ and providing ‘health care’ when Jacob was hiking and rock climbing.”

Last summer, the women who had sued Broadbent and the two hospitals watched online as lawyers debated whether the abuse they allegedly suffered was health care.

At the hearing, attorneys for Broadbent and the hospitals argued that the women should have pursued a medical malpractice case, which required them to first notify Broadbent and the hospitals that they wanted to sue. They also argued to Judge Robert Lunnen that the case couldn’t move forward because the women hadn’t gone before a pre-litigation panel.

Attorneys for Broadbent and the hospitals argued, one after the other, that the painful and traumatic exams the women described arose out of health care treatments.

“Accepting the allegations of the complaint as true — as we must for purposes of this proceeding — we have to assume that [Broadbent] did something that was medically unnecessary, medically inappropriate,” argued David Jordan, a lawyer for Intermountain Health.

“But it doesn’t change the fact that it’s an act performed to a patient, during the patient’s treatment,” he said. “Because that’s what the patient is doing in the doctor’s office. They’re there for treatment.”

The attorney team for the women pushed back. Terry Rooney argued that if Broadbent’s actions fell under medical malpractice laws, many women would be knocked out of the case because of the age of their claims, and those who remained would be limited in the amount of money in damages they could receive.

“That’s really what this is about,” he argued. “And so it’s troubling — quite frankly it’s shocking to me — that we’re debating heavily the question of whether sexual abuse is health care.”

The judge mulled the issue for months. Lunnen wrote in a September ruling that if the allegations were true, Broadbent’s treatment of his patients was “insensitive, disrespectful and degrading.”

But Utah law is clear, he said. Malpractice law covers any act or treatment performed by any health care provider during the patient’s medical care. The women had all been seeking health care, Lunnen wrote, and Broadbent was providing that when the alleged assaults happened.

Their lawsuit was dismissed.

“I Felt Defeated”

Brooke, another plaintiff who alleges Broadbent groped her, remembers feeling sick on the June day she watched the attorneys arguing. She asked to be identified by only her first name for this story.

She alleges Broadbent violated her in December 2008 while she was hospitalized after experiencing complications with her first pregnancy.

Brooke, one of the women suing Broadbent, says the OB-GYN groped her when she was in the hospital after having complications with her first pregnancy. (Leah Hogsten/The Salt Lake Tribune)

The nearest hospital to her rural town didn’t have a special unit to take care of premature babies, and her doctors feared she might need to deliver her son six weeks early. So Brooke had been rushed by ambulance over a mountain pass in a snowstorm to Utah Valley Hospital.

Brooke and her husband were terrified, she said, when they arrived at the Provo hospital. Broadbent happened to be the doctor on call. With Brooke’s husband and brother-in-law in the room, Broadbent examined her late that evening, she said, listening to her chest with a stethoscope.

The doctor then suddenly grabbed her breasts, she recalled — his movements causing her hospital gown to fall to expose her chest. She recounted this experience in her lawsuit, saying it was nothing like the breast exams she has had since.

“It was really traumatizing,” she said. “I was mortified. My husband and brother-in-law — we just didn’t say anything about it because it was so uncomfortable.”

Brooke voiced concerns to the nurse manager, and she was assigned a new doctor.

She gave birth to a healthy baby a little more than a month later, at the hospital near her home.

Hearing the judge’s ruling 14 years later, Brooke felt the decision revealed how Utah’s laws are broken.

“I was frustrated,” she said, “and I felt defeated. … I thought justice is not on our side with this.”

If the Utah Supreme Court rules that these alleged sexual assaults should legally be considered health care, the women will likely refile their claims as a medical malpractice lawsuit, said their attorney, Adam Sorensen. But it would be a challenge to keep all 94 women in the case, he said, due to the shorter filing window. Only two women in the lawsuit allege that they were harmed within the last two years.

The legal team for the women would have to convince a judge that their claims should still be allowed because they only recently discovered they were harmed. But based on previous rulings, Sorensen believes the women will have a better chance to win that argument if the civil suit remained a sexual assault case.

Regardless of what happens in their legal case, the decision by Brooke and the other women to come forward could help change state law for victims who come after them.

Last week, McKell, the state senator, introduced legislation to clarify that civil lawsuits alleging sexual assault by a health care worker do not fall under Utah’s Health Care Malpractice Act.

“I don’t think it’s a close call. Sexual assault is not medical care,” he said. “I know we’ve got some bizarre rulings that have come down through our courts in Utah.”

Both an association of Utah trial lawyers and the Utah Medical Association, which lobbies on behalf of the state’s physicians, support this reform.

“We support the fact that sexual assault should not be part of health care medical malpractice,” said Michelle McOmber, the CEO for the Utah Medical Association. “Sexual assault should be sexual assault, regardless of where it happens or who’s doing it. Sexual assault should be in that category, which is separate from actual health care. Because it’s not health care.”

MountainStar doesn’t have a position on the bill, Glas said. “If the laws were to change via new legislation and/or interpretation by the courts, we would abide by and comply with those new laws.”

But lawmakers are running out of time. With only a week and a half left in Utah’s legislative session, state senate and house leaders have so far prioritized passing new laws banning gender-affirming health care for transgender youths and creating a controversial school voucher program that will provide taxpayer funds for students to attend private school.

Utah lawmakers were also expected to consider a dramatic change for other sexual assault victims: a bill that would remove filing deadlines for civil lawsuits brought by people abused as adults. But that bill stalled before it could even be debated.

Brooke had been eager to share her story, she said, in hopes it would help the first four women who’d come forward bolster their lawsuit against Broadbent. She later joined the case as a plaintiff. She read in their lawsuit about one woman who complained about him to the same hospital seven years before she did, and about another woman who said Broadbent similarly molested her two days after Brooke had expressed her own concern.

“That bothered me so much,” she said. “It didn’t have to happen to all these women.”

Brooke doubts she’ll get vindication in a courtroom. Justice for her, she suspects, won’t come in the form of a legal ruling or a settlement against the doctor she says hurt her years ago.

Instead, she said, “maybe justice looks like changing the laws for future women.”

Help ProPublica and The Salt Lake Tribune Investigate Sexual Assault in Utah

If you need to report or discuss a sexual assault in Utah, you can call the Rape and Sexual Assault Crisis Line at 801-736-4356. Those who live outside of Utah can reach the National Sexual Assault Hotline at 800-656-4673.

Mollie Simon contributed research.

by Jessica Miller, The Salt Lake Tribune

Regulators Overhaul Inspections of Hospice Providers

1 year 9 months ago

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

In late January, amid intensifying scrutiny of the quality of care provided by the American end-of-life care industry, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has reformed how it inspects hospice providers. The changes, detailed in a 196-page document, went into effect immediately.

Under the new protocol, inspectors must sample data from multiple locations where the hospice operates and evaluate a broader range of metrics. These include records on the hospice’s inpatient care, bereavement practices and reasons patients are leaving the service alive. “An unusually high rate of live discharges could indicate that a hospice provider is not meeting the needs of patients and families or is admitting patients who do not meet the eligibility criteria,” the revised rules note.

The rules also include directives for inspectors to evaluate the abuse and neglect of patients — an issue that has long plagued hospice providers, according to investigations from both the media and the Department of Health and Human Services Inspector General’s Office. In fact, surveyors are now required to consult news reports, previous complaints and patient reviews about the hospice in question before they begin an inspection.

In November, a ProPublica-New Yorker investigation exposed the way easy money and lax regulation have transformed a charity movement into a $22 billion juggernaut rife with exploitation. It also described an alarming network of entrepreneurs propping up for-profit hospices in Nevada, Texas, Arizona and California. State and federal licensing data showed that addresses in Phoenix, Houston, Las Vegas and Los Angeles were reportedly home to dozens — sometimes hundreds — of hospice startups, many with the same owners.

The overhaul of the inspection requirements is the most concrete reform to date to emerge from the recent push for and discussion surrounding greater oversight of the American end-of-life care industry.

The demands continue to grow. Last week, a bipartisan coalition from the House of Representatives sent a public letter to CMS Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure calling for a crackdown on fraud and abuse of the hospice benefit.

“As you know, ProPublica and The New Yorker published an article on November 28, 2022 detailing horrific allegations of fraud ​​from newly certified hospices that run the gamut of wasting taxpayer dollars to putting vulnerable patients in danger,” the letter states. “The various instances of gaming the system and harming patients raises a number of questions about how the hospice benefit is currently implemented and how the federal government can better partner with stakeholders and state agencies to stop this going forward.”

The letter from the House is the latest instance of lawmakers asking CMS to protect dying patients and their families. In December, three weeks after the publication of the ProPublica-New Yorker exposé, a bipartisan group of senators sent their own letter to Brooks-LaSure noting that “further evidence of apparent Medicare fraud cannot be ignored.”

Both sets of lawmakers have requested briefings from CMS on the agency’s plans to penalize bad actors and what additional authority, if any, it will need from Congress to carry them out.

“Hospice can be an important part of a patient’s care, but only if it is operating as intended,” the representatives wrote in the letter sent last week. “We stand ready to work with CMS to ensure that this continues to be a safe option for patients while ensuring that congressional oversight is carried out.”

Industry leaders have echoed these concerns. In an effort hailed by experts as “unusual and impressive,” the national trade associations for palliative care providers have banded together to advocate for more regulation. Just last week, the groups met with Brooks-LaSure to discuss a joint list of 34 recommendations for strengthening program integrity. At the meeting, the trade groups spoke to CMS about developing a list of “red flag criteria” that would trigger additional scrutiny before hospice owners could start billing Medicare. The groups also reiterated their suggestion that the agency implement a targeted ban on new hospices in high-growth areas.

A CMS spokesperson told ProPublica that the agency “takes the oversight role of the Medicare hospice program seriously and is aggressively focused on reducing and eliminating fraud, waste and abuse.”

Do You Have a Tip for ProPublica? Help Us Do Journalism.

by Ava Kofman

School District Pays Legal Fees After Banning Mothers From Reading Sexually Graphic Passages at Meetings

1 year 9 months ago

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up for Dispatches, a newsletter that spotlights wrongdoing around the country, to receive our stories in your inbox every week.

A group of conservative Georgia mothers on a quest to ban library books has won a key victory against a school district that sought to limit their ability to recite graphic passages from those books at school board meetings.

Forsyth County Schools agreed this month to pay $107,500 in legal fees to the group, called the Mama Bears. Like many conservatives nationwide, the Mama Bears have taken to trying to get books removed from school libraries by reading sexually explicit passages aloud at school board meetings.

The agreement to pay legal fees stems from a late January consent judgment and injunction against the school district. The Mama Bears’ July 2022 lawsuit against the district detailed how Forsyth’s school board banned one mother from attending its meetings. The woman, Alison Hair, had insisted on reading sexually explicit material aloud before the board.

“The hope is that other elected officials, people who are on school boards and thinking about running for school board, or school officials that interact with them like superintendents, see this result and are more careful when they are tempted to censor other parents in the future,” said Del Kolde, a senior attorney with the Institute for Free Speech, a D.C.-based nonprofit that opposes campaign finance restrictions and represented the Mama Bears pro bono.

The January injunction prevents the district from enforcing what a federal judge called its “respectfulness requirement,” which school board members used as grounds to prohibit the Mama Bears’ read-alouds. The policy also had prevented the public from personally addressing board members and the superintendent or from using profane, uncivil or abusive remarks.

A spokesperson for the Forsyth County School District said its leaders are considering a revision to the policy, which most notably would eliminate language that speakers must conduct themselves in “a respectful manner.” It would also eliminate a rule that speakers not address board members individually nor be loud and boisterous. The revised proposal makes clear that law enforcement may get involved should speakers make physically threatening remarks, hateful racial epithets or other comments that would result in a meeting disruption. The board is set to vote on the new policy tonight

Kolde said emails discovered in the course of the lawsuit showed how school officials worked to make it harder for parents to criticize them.

In a March 24 email, Forsyth County Superintendent Jeff Bearden wrote to the board and a district spokesperson: “We must stop the ‘playing to the audience, pep rally mentality.’ One way to do that is limiting the amount of time for public participation.” He went on to suggest cutting total public participation at each meeting to 15 minutes.

Days earlier, Jennifer Caracciolo, the district’s communications director, urged the board to “take back the purpose” of the meetings.

“We must get back to our BOE meetings being about the work of the district and not about providing a public platform,” she wrote.

In a statement, the district said the emails Kolde cited were sent 11 months ago: “A lot has happened since they were sent, including this lawsuit which was settled between both parties. As such, as a district, we have moved forward from this issue.”

Individual school board members declined to comment on the settlement itself.

Cindy Martin, a mother of four and chair of the Mama Bears, said the group, dissatisfied with the district’s refusal to remove titles from shelves, continues to challenge books at meetings. The lawsuit, she said, was a victory even for people who disagree with their cause.

“The message is, you are servants of the American people, and you cannot silence those you serve,” Martin said in an email. “The freedom to speak is essential for our constitutional republic to survive. Government officials must always respect it and uphold it, even when it's speech they don't like.”

Kevin Goldberg, an attorney and First Amendment specialist with the nonprofit free-speech advocacy group Freedom Forum, said the Mama Bears’ victory could lead to even more challenges of restrictions on what people can say at school board meetings and who can be banned from them.

“It’s going to embolden other individuals and groups to stand up to school boards,” Goldberg said. “Because now they’re seeing one organization come out of this with success.

“This is a loss for the school board and, frankly, it’s a success for free speech.”

by Nicole Carr

Settling With Kushner Companies Was Hard. Getting Money to Former Tenants May Be Harder.

1 year 9 months ago

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

A decade ago, Jasmine Cox was living with her young son in the Cove Village rental complex in Essex, Maryland, just east of Baltimore, when she started experiencing a plague of problems. The bedroom ceiling started leaking one day, then maggots started coming out of the living room carpet, and then raw sewage started flowing out of the kitchen sink, she said. She stopped cooking to keep food away from the sink. With so much black mold around, her son started needing an inhaler. When she moved out soon afterward, the landlord, Westminster Management, sent her a $600 invoice for a new carpet and other repairs.

The experience haunted her for years. So she was hit with a welter of emotions when she recently received a letter at her new home from the Maryland attorney general, alerting her that she could apply for restitution from Westminster, the property management arm of Kushner Companies, the family real estate company of Jared Kushner, former President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and a former senior adviser to the president. She has started going through old SD cards and photo-storage apps to find pictures of the apartment woes to submit with the claims form that accompanied the letter. “We were living in a biohazard,” she said. “I’m just glad something has come about to compensate people, to clear things up.”

The letter and claims form are part of a massive, highly unusual effort on the part of the attorney general’s office: trying to alert some 30,000 people who lived in Westminster Management’s 17 Baltimore-area complexes during the past decade that they may be eligible for restitution. In 2017, the office launched an investigation of the company following a report co-published by ProPublica and The New York Times Magazine on the company’s aggressive pursuit of current and former tenants over allegations of unpaid rent and poor upkeep of many of the units, which New Jersey-based Kushner Companies started buying in 2012 and has mostly sold off in recent years.

Last September, the office’s Consumer Protection Division announced a settlement with Westminster: a $3.25 million fine and the promise of uncapped restitution to tenants of the complexes who could show that they had suffered serious maintenance troubles that Westminster was slow to address. Under the settlement, Westminster would also automatically reimburse tenants and former tenants for excessive fees they had been charged over the years in addition to their rent.

Now comes the hardest part: finding the tens of thousands of people who resided at the Westminster Management properties to let them know about their chance at restitution, a task made all the more challenging by the high levels of transience at the complexes. Just 8,700 of the 30,000 people who were mailed claims forms by a claims administrator since mid-December are still living at the complexes.

“Some people won’t be reachable,” acknowledged then-Attorney General Brian Frosh in an interview with The Baltimore Banner when the settlement was announced in September. “Some people will say, ‘Oh my God, I can’t take days off work again to go do this, I mean what am I going to get out of it?’” He guessed that fewer than half of eligible tenants will participate in the process.

By the end of January, 281 claims had been filed. “It’s a little lower than we expected,” said Attorney General Anthony Brown, who took office last month.

The attorney general’s office is contacting tenants to confirm that they’ve received the claims form, according to spokesperson Aleithea Warmack. Any money left over from the initial $800,000 slice of the settlement set aside for tenant restitution will go to a fund to pay for attorneys for people facing eviction, according to recent legislation. If the restitution exceeds $800,000, the company will have to pay that amount on top of the $3.25 million penalty.

Among those the state and Westminster have so far failed to reach is Andre Willingham, a longtime resident of Dutch Village, a complex on the northern edge of Baltimore. The 58-year-old, who is on disability from injuries sustained from years working as a restaurant cook, has lived at the complex with his family for nine years, but he said he had not received anything in the mail.

If he had received it, he said, he would have filed a claim, listing the problems he experienced in the family’s two-bedroom unit, for which they pay $1,100 in rent: rodents, a broken toilet, no heat. But he worried about the fact that he did not have documentation of the problems. “It’s a sad thing they’re just coming out with it,” he said.

Separate from the restitution process for maintenance problems, which requires submitting a claim by Dec. 19, many tenants will be receiving reimbursements for fees they were improperly charged by Westminster. This will not require them to send in claims forms; the company is required to compile a list of eligible tenants by May and send them payments by August.

Those claims alone will likely total several hundred thousand or even a million dollars, Brown estimated. The attorney general’s office will follow up in early 2024 to confirm that payments were successfully deposited or, if not, to make sure former tenants who are owed money are located. Current and former tenants will also have a second opportunity to seek damages for the improper fees in a class-action lawsuit that won a successful appeal last month.

The claims process for maintenance-related issues is somewhat more cumbersome — and the first stage relies on Westminster. The company will make an initial determination of how much compensation claimants are owed. If the tenants are not satisfied, they can elect to have their case heard in court or remotely by retired state Judge Nathan Braverman, who was retained by the attorney general’s office as a special master in the cases, according to Brown. “The rules of evidence are relaxed,” Brown said, adding, “You don’t have to prove any amount of damages — it’s presumed that you suffered damages.”

It’s an approach that he believes his office is the first in the country to implement. “We really think that it’s novel, and we think it can be an effective way to really get recovery for these aggrieved renters.”

But how many current and former tenants will actually take advantage of this process remains an open question, and one that will have a big impact on how much money Westminster is actually required to pay out.

For one tenant, the process has so far proved disappointing. Bonita Barrett, a retired grocery worker, contended for years with a slew of maintenance problems in her unit at Dutch Village, including leaks, mold, and a lack of heat. She was excited to receive the letter and claims form, and checked off most of the 10 upkeep problems listed as eligible for compensation before mailing it off. “They was thieves,” she said. “I hope we get what we deserve.”

But last week, Barrett got a call from a New Jersey number in response to her claims form. The woman on the line told her that she was eligible for $200 in compensation, which Barrett found insultingly inadequate for everything she had dealt with over the years. “$200? That’s nothing compared to what I went through,” she said. “You’re just going to offer us something to say you’re doing something. They’re just trying to give us the cheapest amount they can.” (In response to questions, Kushner Companies Chief Operating Officer Peter Febo wrote: “Westminster takes the Consent Order seriously and continues to comply with it in all respects. The mechanics and details of the claims process were agreed to between the Consumer Protection Division and Westminster.”)

Barrett said the woman told her that she could not qualify for a larger sum because she did not have evidence of the extent of the problems; the woman noted that Westminster’s records showed 16 completed work orders for her unit. But, Barrett said, that didn’t address how long it often took to complete that work.

On the call, the Westminster representative told Barrett that if she was unsatisfied with the $200 settlement, she could appeal to the special master. But that struck Barrett as unappealing. Wasn’t the purpose of this extended process to keep tenants from having to fight Kushner Companies again? The attorney general’s office had designed the appeal process to be as consumer-friendly as possible, but that’s not the impression she got from the call.

“She said you can go to court, but how long would that take? That could take as long as they did here,” she said. “It took them long enough to get to where we are now.”

Do You Have a Tip for ProPublica? Help Us Do Journalism.

If you think you’re eligible to receive settlement money and want more information, you can call the claims administrator at 410-581-0800. If you are a tenant with a complaint you’d like the attorney general’s office to look into, you can call the housing unit within the Consumer Protection Division at 410-528-8662.

by Sophie Kasakove, The Baltimore Banner, and Alec MacGillis, ProPublica

How One Mom Fought Washington’s Special Education System — and Won

1 year 9 months ago

This article was produced for ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network in partnership with The Seattle Times. Sign up for Dispatches to get stories like this one as soon as they are published.

In September, Megan Cummings sat down at a conference table across from four Tacoma, Washington, school officials who could determine the course of her son’s education.

ElijahKing, 14, had run away from his middle school earlier that week during an argument with a classmate. Cummings believed the group, which managed her son’s special education plan, wanted to discuss how to better support him. ElijahKing swiveled nervously in a chair beside her.

Instead, the Tacoma Public Schools educators told Cummings that ElijahKing couldn’t come back. He would be sent to a school for children with complex disabilities, one of a network of private special education programs that serve about 500 public school students.

ElijahKing turned away from the group, his eyes welling up.

Cummings had read online reviews accusing the school’s staff of mistreating kids. She pleaded with the district officials to give ElijahKing a second chance, but it was too late. He had already been enrolled in the new school.

Like other parents, Cummings was confronting a flaw in Washington’s special education system: It has failed to monitor the private schools that serve some of the state’s most vulnerable kids, leading to a wide range in the quality of the programs. Some are highly sought-after schools offering intensive therapy and instruction tailored to specific disabilities. Others, as The Seattle Times and ProPublica recently documented, have faced years of complaints about understaffing, lack of curriculum and a reliance on restraint and isolation to control student behavior.

The disparity among schools forces parents to take extraordinary measures to find a way around the system’s flaws. Some of them hire lawyers to help shepherd their kids toward the best schools — or keep them out of the worst.

“A lot of the advocacy comes down to resources and who has power and can get an attorney,” said Carrie Basas, the former director of the Washington State Governor’s Office of the Education Ombuds. “You have families that understand there are places they can lobby hard for, instead of having their kids sent somewhere else.”

Cummings — a single mother of two children with disabilities who had recently been homeless — didn’t have power or resources. But she did have one thing in common with many of the parents who take on the system: an unyielding determination to defend her child’s education.

Underfunded and Inequitable

Programs like the one ElijahKing was enrolled in, known as “nonpublic agencies,” are meant to offer more intensive services that districts say they can’t provide in public schools.

School districts often work with families to find the right educational setting. Some parents seek out — and push districts to pay for — highly regarded nonpublic agencies that can cater to their students’ disabilities. Others, like Cummings, want their kids integrated in their neighborhood schools with additional support, but districts steer their kids to poorly performing nonpublic agencies instead.

To some extent, this push and pull exists in every state. The federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act allows families to settle disputes about their child’s special education through a due process hearing, where a school district can be ordered to provide certain education services or to place the child in a specialized school.

But Washington’s weak oversight, and its increased reliance on separate schools for students with disabilities, makes educational inequities particularly acute here. That system exposes disadvantaged kids to programs with the worst reputations. Though the state and school districts spent at least $173 million on the programs over the five school years ending in 2021, the state has few academic standards and no centralized system for tracking key measures like how often the schools restrain students.

ElijahKing was being sent to one of the schools with the worst reputations, the Northwest School of Innovative Learning. School districts have complained to the state for years about problems there, including classrooms being led by unqualified aides instead of certified special education teachers, a recent Seattle Times and ProPublica investigation found. The school has also faced allegations of abuse, including an incident, caught on surveillance video, in which a teacher put a 13-year-old boy in a chokehold.

And former staffers reported feeling pressured by the school’s owner, Fairfax Hospital, and its parent company, Universal Health Services, to skimp on staffing and resources while enrolling more students than staff could handle.

In 2019, a speech language pathologist visited the Northwest School of Innovative Learning and found a school “in disarray,” including this teacher resource room. The school director responded that the room was off-limits to students and the building had many unused areas. (Courtesy of Andrea Duffield)

The company previously defended the program in a statement to the Times and ProPublica, saying administrators take seriously the responsibility of addressing students’ complex needs. It denied that Northwest SOIL understaffed campuses and declined to comment on specific allegations of abuse, but said “restraints and seclusion are always used as a last response when a student is at imminent risk of hurting themselves or others.”

Though the state releases only limited demographic data to protect student privacy, the figures that are available — for larger schools — point to disparities in which children get access to better schools. Among the larger schools, Northwest SOIL stands out, with one of the highest proportions of low-income students. It also has above-average shares of homeless students and Black students, an analysis of 2020-21 school year data shows.

Fairfax, the largest private psychiatric hospital in Washington, attributed Northwest SOIL’s student composition in part to the demographics of nearby districts that send the most students to the school, including Tacoma and Olympia, which have lower median household incomes than other parts of Western Washington. But Northwest SOIL also has a campus in Redmond, one of the state’s wealthiest cities.

The company’s response, however, doesn’t fully explain the demographic differences because districts can send their students to any nonpublic agencies that cater to the child’s disabilities and have space for them.

Tania May, head of special education services at the state Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, acknowledged inequities in the system and said the agency wants to increase funding to create more public programs and decrease the reliance on nonpublic agencies.

Washington’s special education system is underfunded overall — a shortfall of nearly $500 million a year, according to state education officials. Following the Times and ProPublica’s reporting, state education officials are considering sweeping reforms to state laws that would give districts more resources to serve students with disabilities.

ElijahKing’s mother felt like she had no control over her son’s academic circumstances, and she didn’t know how to demand better schools, get more resources or take legal action to steer her son toward respected programs.

But some parents did.

“An Attorney Walks in, Everyone Is Shaken”

As the system’s problems overwhelmed Cummings, Mike Hipple and Sam Read were also struggling to get their daughter, Hillary, who has autism, the services she needed in Seattle schools. By sixth grade, she would come home with a backpack full of incomplete worksheets, signaling to Hipple and Read that she wasn’t getting help at school.

Mike Hipple and Sam Read hired a lawyer to get their daughter, Hillary, transferred to the Academy for Precision Learning, where she could get more intensive support. (Ken Lambert/The Seattle Times)

The college-educated, middle-class couple had joined several Facebook groups for parents of children with disabilities and met monthly with others to discuss parenting strategies — support that can be elusive for parents like Cummings, who doesn’t own a car and has at times lacked internet access.

In late 2019, a parent in one of Hipple and Read’s support groups suggested they hire an attorney.

It often costs more than $50,000 and takes months of wrangling to bring a case to the hearing stage, special education attorneys say, although parents can recoup attorney fees if they win.

“We were terrified to get a lawyer because we aren’t super wealthy people,” said Hipple, a freelance music photographer and editor. They knew they didn’t have money for a lengthy legal battle, but they did have the time to learn about the system and push back against the district.

It took just one demand letter from their lawyer, which cost about $4,200, to get the district to pay for Hillary’s transfer to the Academy for Precision Learning, a nonprofit with two campuses and 97 students in Seattle’s University District.

Tuition, plus the cost of a one-on-one aide and a board-certified behavioral analyst, often exceeds $100,000, which the couple hoped the district would pay for. Seattle schools countered by proposing other programs, but Hipple and Read said that one was too small and that the other catered to children with disabilities that seemed more severe than Hillary’s.

“We’re privileged. We have the time, space and luxury to get it done,” Hipple said. “The parents who are working three jobs don’t have that.”

Hillary Hipple-Read is thriving at the Academy for Precision Learning. (Ken Lambert/The Seattle Times)

Seattle Public Schools declined to comment on the students’ individual experiences, citing federal student privacy laws. District officials said they would not respond to questions about students, even if parents signed release forms.

Hiring an attorney doesn’t automatically get a student into their parents’ preferred school, but the legal pressure gives parents more power in special education decisions.

“An attorney walks in, everyone is shaken,” said Chris Willis, special education director at the Orting School District, calling the dynamic one of the “foundational failures” in special education. In his nearly three decades of special education experience, Willis found that most parents don’t seek advocates — who can offer free advice — or attorneys. “Some don’t really engage or perhaps know about their legal rights,” he said.

Lawyers, for instance, can steer districts toward acclaimed out-of-state private schools that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. In the 2020-21 school year, at least 15 students in Washington got placements that cost more than $300,000.

Theresa DeMonte’s son has severe autism and an intellectual disability but didn’t appear to be making any progress in Seattle schools. So DeMonte, a lawyer at a downtown Seattle firm, hired a special education attorney and in 2017 requested a hearing before a judge.

Her son needed round-the-clock support, but Washington has no residential schools that qualify for state special education funding. DeMonte researched top autism programs around the country and suggested the New England Center for Children in Massachusetts, a school staffed by board-certified behavior analysts that offers therapeutic activities and an indoor pool.

The district ultimately agreed to cover her son’s tuition, plus travel costs for multiple visits each year. Seattle spent as much as $412,000 a year on the school, records show.

“He was placed there because I’m a good advocate and I hired a very good attorney,” said DeMonte. “There’s no doubt in my mind that a lot of children’s needs aren’t being met because they don’t have access to the same resources.”

“He Just Needed the Chance”

For a long time, ElijahKing was one of those children.

In 2017, Cummings was living in a homeless shelter and her minimum-wage retail job was in peril because of the time she had to spend attending to ElijahKing’s educational needs. He wasn’t making progress in school, and when he had outbursts, educators routinely called the police, who took him to a local hospital.

Cummings couldn’t afford mental health care for ElijahKing, but she’d heard that the state would pay for in-patient treatment if he was in the foster system. So, she made a painful choice: Cummings let the hospital call Child Protective Services, which eventually placed him at Ryther, a state-supported mental health facility. “It was the hardest decision,” she said.

After returning to her care in 2019, ElijahKing spent nearly two years in a public school for children with behavioral disabilities in Seattle. But when the program shut down at the end of the 2021-22 school year, Seattle Public Schools suggested placing him at Northwest SOIL.

By then, Cummings had moved to Tacoma, where she had found stable housing. ElijahKing transferred to nearby Hilltop Heritage Middle School, the first “normal” school he’d attended in years, as he described it to reporters.

Then he got into the argument at Hilltop while he’d been briefly left without a one-on-one aide. As the situation escalated, ElijahKing reacted by running from school, darting across a busy street.

That’s when Tacoma Public Schools enrolled him in Northwest SOIL. Feeling she had no other option, Cummings kept him home.

In the weeks that followed, Tacoma recommended four other private programs, but none felt appropriate for her son. Some were an hour’s drive from her home, and though the district would handle transportation, Cummings didn’t want ElijahKing so far away. She wanted him in his neighborhood school with more support.

Tacoma Public Schools also declined to comment on students’ experiences, even with a privacy waiver. “Our goal is to always find the least restrictive learning environment for students,” the district said in a statement. “This looks different for every student and requires some flexibility.”

Without the support groups that others, like Hipple and Read, had turned to, Cummings went to the local library to look up laws on special education. She called the governor’s education office and asked a local nonprofit for help. Neither effort panned out. Eventually she found an article describing a student being restrained and isolated at another school, along with the name of a local attorney, who connected Cummings with Cedar Law, a Seattle-based firm that specializes in educational disputes. Lara Hruska, a managing partner at Cedar Law, agreed to take the case pro bono.

Lara Hruska, managing partner at a Seattle-based law firm, stepped in to help ElijahKing’s mother persuade the district to keep him in a local school. (Ellen M. Banner/The Seattle Times)

“She was stuck and needed a lawyer to unstick the situation,” Hruska said. Cedar filed an expedited request for a hearing. After weeks of legal proceedings, Tacoma agreed to bring ElijahKing back to Hilltop Heritage.

Cummings managed to buck a system that has sent hundreds of students to Northwest SOIL in the past few years, Hruska said: “She was extraordinary in her ability to disrupt that pipeline.”

Though the dispute kept him out of school for two months, ElijahKing reenrolled in November. A bashful teen with more to say about video games than school, ElijahKing simply said his return to Hilltop Heritage was “really good.” He made friends, he said, and looks forward to school most days.

Within a week, his teachers discussed transitioning him from a special education classroom to a few general education courses, where he’d study alongside nondisabled classmates, Cummings said. In January, he won an award recognizing him as one of the school’s most responsible and respectful students. Cummings described ElijahKing’s potential — he could catch up to his peers, graduate, maybe go to college.

“He’s so bright, I’m telling you,” she said, the same appeal she’d made to district officials just months earlier. “He just needed the chance.”

ElijahKing said he was happy to be back at the first “normal” school he’d attended in years. (Kevin Clark/The Seattle Times)
by Lulu Ramadan and Mike Reicher, The Seattle Times