The the most vulnerable citizens were with debt and at risk of losing their home and having their benefits cut off — including Social Security payments and Medicaid — following a plethora instances of cases involving guardianship were transferred by a government agency to a newly formed non-profit.
A state Office of Public Advocacy petitioned to transfer 45 guardianship cases over to under the supervision of Tom McDuffie in 2022, in spite of early warnings from those who are familiar with his work to suggest that McDuffie’s company, Cache Integrity Services, were not prepared enough to handle the cases, as per an examination of court filings from Anchorage Daily News. Anchorage Daily News.
OPA is responsible for taking decisions for clients in guardianship. In requesting the transfer, OPA cited its growing number of cases, a shortage in public guardians, and it’s resignation of one its senior staff members.
OPA has violated law by not protecting the rights of its clients in certain cases an Alaskan state judge Anchorage has ruled in the earlier this month.
In February, the Kodiak Magistrate Judge Dawson Williams found that in another instance, Cache Integrity ” failed to perform its duties.” Judge Williams dismissed McDuffie’s group as a guardian, and stated that the judge “will look into any requests to name Cache Integrity Services with heightened examination.”
However, courts continued to choose McDuffie and he was able to handle the highest number of cases, which included nearly 110 Alaskans who were under his supervision this autumn.
In the meantime, a few clients of McDuffie’s accumulated loans totalling tens of thousands of dollars due to incomplete documents for benefits. Facilities for assisted living were left unpaid.
McDuffie admitted during an interview this week that he was unable to fulfill some of his required obligations, such as leaving months without contact with his clients. However, he claims that OPA refuses to accept back cases transferred.
OPA Director James Stinson said the agency’s actions were “a pure final option to keep the system from crashing.”
This past Tuesday Anchorage Superior Court Judge Thomas Matthews ordered a hearing “on the question that is commonly asked about the ability of Cache Integrity Services and Thomas McDuffie to act as a conservator or guardian.”
A fresh option
The Alaskan Office of Public Advocacy turned to McDuffie in 2021, at an era when public guardians were straining to the pressure of their cases.
According to his own words McDuffie’s work history is diverse before he became a guardian, he’d been a youth minister as well as an accountant. He also working night shifts in hotels and in an assisted living facility and started work from 2020 on as a representative payer that handles much less complicated Social Security benefits. McDuffie reside in Wasilla in the state of Wasilla, and Cache Integrity Services is based in the city.
The public guardianship is a decision made by the courts to act as last resort option for those who are unable to make decisions on their own. Guardians make important decision-making for the clientsregarding healthcare, housing and finances.
If a family member or a friend is willing and able to serve, they will be appointed to act as guardians. If the person can afford it the private guardian may be appointed for a fee that can be thousands in monthly fees. OPA acts as a safety-net alternative for those who have no other options. The majority of people who require the services of a public guardian count on benefits like Social Security payments and Medicaid to meet their requirements. Many are homeless.
Beth Goldstein, who is the OPA’s public guardians has stated that the guardians have been “overburdened.” They are assigned about 80 casesat times, more than 100 cases, resulting in a work load that’s far beyond the national guidelines.
The number of guardians employed at the agency dipped between 2021 and to just 16 this month, following the resignation of two of them recently quit according to Stinson. The remaining staff is taking on less than 1,600 cases. Two of the guardians are responsible for 80 or more clients.
The National Guardianship Association standards require guardians to restrict the number of cases “to an amount that permits guardians to adequately and accurately help and protect the person and their family members, with at least one monthly visit with each individual, and regular communication to all providers of services.”
“Since the beginning 2013 the volume of cases has been steadily increasing, resulting in an additional 285 clients per year,” OPA reported in its budget document this year. On April 1, OPA announced that it would no longer accept any new cases of guardianship.
McDuffie spoke with Goldstein developing a different option that was not in existence in Alaska prior to 2022: a non-profit private guardianship agency that would take on cases normally assigned to OPA which would then be privatized as the public service. Prior to that the services of private guardianship were offered in Alaska only by private individuals rather than an agency and private guardians had not been able to take on a large number of the kind of clients who are in need, which comprise the majority of the cases handled by OPA. There was a shortage of private guardians. in Alaska had always been limited. As of the month of October, only 19 private guardians had been licensed in Alaska.
McDuffie’s idea, as shared by Goldstein in October 2021 was to recruit clients with the financial capacity to afford private guardianship, and offering the “pro pro bono” option for those who are in need and could otherwise be placed in the care of OPA. McDuffie was planning to charge each new client a minimum of $1,000 — an initiation cost that the state doesn’t have to impose.
Goldstein’s reaction to McDuffie’s idea was “Tom This is very exciting.”
McDuffie stated that it was clear through his conversations in his meetings with OPA personnel that there was an demand to be filled, given the unsustainable casesloads of public guardians.
“We really wanted to find how to free ourselves from certain responsibilities on the shoulders of state officials,” he said.
In a follow-up mail, Goldstein said she would assign McDuffie’s company 45 wards as the public guardian who had an 80-caseload was set to leave the organization. Goldstein submitted an administrative request at the end of May in 2022 to transfer Guardianship cases over into Cache Integrity Services.
“OPA was worried that it could violate its ethical obligations if they tried to cover all the instances” of the public guardian who quit, according to Stinson Director of the agency.
As per OPA’s standards it takes about two years to train an official guardian. McDuffie was granted temporary authorization in 2021. His permanent license was approved on the same day that OPA’s motion was submitted.
The employees of Cache Integrity Services held guardianship licenses when that they started their careers. In the last two years, more than five guardians left Cache due to various reasons, after just a few months working for the company.
Anchorage Superior Court Judge William Morse signed off on the transfer on May 4 2022. There is no written contract with OPA with Cache Integrity, and never was there. When the courts transferred instances into Cache Integrity, OPA had no oversight or accountability for Cache Integrity’s clients.
Court documents show that this was not the first occasion OPA requested the court for some the cases transferred onto Cache Integrity. McDuffie claimed he was able to take over OPA clients in June of this year.
To introduce his new services, McDuffie received $100,000 in grants by the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority as well as greater than $50,000 of funding through the Mat-Su Health Foundation.
Goldstein wrote an endorsement letter for McDuffie that was included in an application for a grant. request.
Initial concerns
When transfers of the cases were made for transfer to McDuffie had been completed, in the month of June numerous people had contacted OPA to express concerns about McDuffie’s newest operation.
Sheila Shinn, a court visitor in the month of May 2021, wrote in May 2021 that Cache Integrity “is a sinking ship” and that three cases that the company handled were in debt and could be evicted. Shinn stated that court visitors “are receiving a lot of complaints regarding Tom (McDuffie) as well as his commercial methods.”
Court visitors such as Shinn is appointed by the court to look over conservators and guardianship and make suggestions to the court after an application is made.
“I’ve already informed him that I will never ever recommend him to anyone. The people are without money for months” Shinn wrote to Elizabeth Russo, a supervising attorney at OPA.
Stinson acknowledged that the issues he brought up by the OPA when the case was first brought to their attention concerning McDuffie were similar to “the usual obstacles and difficulties that arise in new Guardianship cases.”
Erin Espiritu, another court visitor who was a court visitor, wrote in a May 2022 message in an email to Goldstein the administrator of her assisted living facility she had worked for “lost her head when she discovered that” Cache Integrity would take care of a resident. Administrator Lucy Bauer, “had numerous negative comments about her experience working with Cache Integrity. She stated that she is one employee with them, that hasn’t received a payment for the last year and won’t be able to fix the problem.”
Bauer stated that she would not keep a new client If Cache Integrity was the guardian “because she is utterly unable to cooperate with Cache Integrity,” according to Espiritu.
Brian Hafferman, the OPA guardian who resigned to cause the transfer of the case, wrote in an email sent to him in May 2022 that “judging by their website as well as the profiles of board members, I doubt their performance, but I hope they will prove my incorrect.” Hafferman also said the OPA administration was “aware of the issues.”
Responding to a court reporter, Goldstein wrote that she was planning to proceed “because the cases are well-established and we’ll be available to assist and answer questions when needed, and the case will be referred back to us with request for a review in the event that there are any issues.”
Stinson has since stated that OPA is not in the capability to allow the cases to “come back” to the agency.
There are no procedural protections
In the last month, an Anchorage Superior Court judge determined that the state breached the law in requesting removal of the wards from public guardianship in Cache Integrity Services. The judge Una Gandbhir wrote that the state failed to provide the wards with an attorney or adequately explain the changes and the consequences.
The decision was made in an action filed in 2022 in 2022 by Northern Justice Project, an Anchorage civil rights firm representing Nick Harp — one of the individuals whose guardianship was transferred.
“The reality the Alaskan Public Guardian is acting to effectively “privatize” its duties and is a non-profit entity as a guardian for Alaska’s most vulnerable citizens and in contravention of the law raises serious public policy issues,” attorney James Davis stated in the complaint.
In her ruling, Gandbhir wrote that OPA “did not provide … procedure-related security” for Harp whom counsel was absent at the time the guardianship was changed. He was not aware that he had the right to counsel and did not receive any in writing about the likely implications of the proposed change of the person who was his guardian.
Northern Justice Project attorneys are seeking to declare the case to be a collective action lawsuit. If this happens the state may be compelled to pay damages to hundreds of clients affected.
A list of accusations
In the summer of 2023, McDuffie and his organization had collected a number of cases, including more than 110 conservatorships and guardianships. As the cases increased and his wards’ relatives as well as court visitors and attorneys began to question his policies.
It was June of this year, Anchorage lawyer Caitlin Shortell who represented another of McDuffie’s conservatorship clients brought a suit on behalf of Cache Integrity along with McDuffie and McDuffie, claiming that he failed to make on time applications for Medicaid and other benefits. He also inability to submit tax returns and overcharged, and then placed the client’s money in one account along with the funds of over 100 other Wards.
The lawsuit provides an extensive list of accusations regarding Cache Integrity, including that Cache Integrity falsely claimed that the client received an allowance per month of $100, despite the fact that there was no allocation paid out for at least seven months; and that the client was in amount of debt after being placed into an assisted-living facility which cost $5,300 per month and was not making use of the long-term care insurance. the client was charged over $9,000 in unapproved charges that were not authorized by the contract.
McDuffie dismissed the allegations in an application to the court. The case is still open.
Family members of those who were in McDuffie’s care have made similar claims, but lawyers familiar with McDuffie’s activities stated that a lot of his clients do not have family members or friends to raise the alarm.
The year was 1991. Susan Pacillo met an Anchorage resident suffering from an intellectual disability. He had been homeless for a long time. In the following many years Pacillo was his advocate and a personal acquaintance.
In the summer of 2021 the man was appointed as a conservator -McDuffie McDuffie to supervise the government benefits upon which he depended to cover his essential needs, according to Pacillo.
However, Pacillo claims McDuffie was unable to establish a trust to receive Social Security payments and allowed fraudulent charges to be accumulated on a debit card that was in the name of the man. As his health declined and doctors suggested that moving him into an assisted living center, the monthly cost of $5,000 had to be paid from the pocket due to the fact that there was no Medicaid application was not submitted, she added.
“If an agency of the state is planning to transfer clients to another agency, there must be a certain amount of supervision. It is imperative to follow up,” said Pacillo.
Then, in March Pacillo eventually decided to be McDuffie’s guardian, after concerns grew over McDuffie’s handling and management of funds and other benefits. Even then, Pacillo said McDuffie did not give her specific information on the way her friend’s public funds were used during the time McDuffie had been in control.
“I’m worried about my friend’s chances of ending up on the streets. I don’t know the whereabouts of his money,” Pacillo said.
“Public and legal pushback”
Then, in July McDuffie sent in July, McDuffie wrote a note in July to the court as well as his state’s Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority and the Mat-Su Health Foundation defending himself in the face of what he called “public and legal backlash.”
“As with any change in systems implemented, this model has proven to be beneficial in certain areas however not in other areas,” McDuffie wrote, noting that McDuffie “recognizes the length of wait and delays in the process of completing paperwork, submitting for benefits and obtaining Social Security for clients has been more difficult than anticipated.”
In a recent interview, McDuffie said he believed that 80% instances were correctly handled, but he left more than 20 clients who’s needs were not fulfilled.
“We looked beyond the box. Shouldn’t we all be ablaze to do that? I don’t think so.” he added. “This was not done with any motive of maliciousness.”
“I believe we’ve accomplished what we can with the resources we’ve had. We’ve caught everyone in the loop,” McDuffie said. “I would like to make sure that people feel that they’ve had a positive experiences with us. This hasn’t always been the situation.”
The letter blames the delays in the processing of claims on claims being processed by the Social Security Administration, the Alaska Division of Public Assistance, Veterans Affairs and other pension administrators.
The company also blamed its employees, who many of them have resigned from Cache Integrity to launch their own businesses, or abandon guardianship completely.
“Never was it the intention for me to be handling cases as well as running the company. That’s what happened in January 2023 when three guardians made the decision to walk away,” McDuffie wrote.
One of the ex-employees, Trudy Storch said McDuffie was able to handle more cases than the staff could handle, causing employees to leave the organization instead of taking on a disproportionate quantity of guardianships.
Storch who was sworn in by McDuffie in July 2022 but didn’t be granted her guardianship until the end of November 2022. For several months, McDuffie expected her and other employees to manage cases without checking that they satisfied the legal requirements necessary for doing the job.
Storch “kept his voice ringing”You’ve need to get your speed down. We’re behind. We’re not able to serve all of those people. The majority of clients on my caseload, I’ve never even had a conversation with or spoken to via phone”” she said in an interview with the media in September.
McDuffie claimed that his pilot project he designed had the goal of maintaining a specific number of cases.
All all the time, mandatory reports for the court — required each year in guardianship cases to ensure that the needs of wards are met often submitted late. Storch claimed she had made an outline of the dates when reports were due. Storch claimed McDuffie said to the girl, “‘Oh, it can be late, but you know but it’s okay.'”
When a court official advised Storch she was in danger of legal consequences because she did not meet the needs of the people she was tasked to take care of and care for, she opted to quit her job according to her statement.
“There’s too many cases and I’m convinced that he spent excessive time out of his office” stated Storch saying that McDuffie “just did not really be aware of what was going on.”
When Storch left, her coworker was expected to take over her 40 client caseload and she resigned also, a mere an entire week afterward. McDuffie claimed that Storch as well as her colleague did not finish their work at the time they left, which exacerbated the issue.
“What I’m sick to hear is I’m not the only person who dropped the ball. Since I hired people to perform the task. They failed to do it and the problem remained on me, and I had to fix it.” McDuffie said. McDuffie.
“Came up short in the majority of regions’
The court heard that in September McDuffie requested that the judge transfer over 60 of his clients to a different guardian, including the majority of cases transferred by Cache Integrity Services from OPA.
McDuffie has stated that he will keep around 40 cases openand focusing on those who have less complex issues and more assets, which would permit him to charge more charges.
Guardianship is “not feasible within the private industry,” said McDuffie. “You don’t have the support of the state the way you do with OPA So we have to be more careful in who we trust.”
McDuffie isn’t yet guardians who are certified who are on the payroll. The original plan was to have each employee to carry 40-50 cases. He now has to carry all cases and it’s not as easy as he was hoping.
He thought that most of them would be “rinse-and-repeat” clients where eligibility for benefits is determined and the agency would have to cover bills and do simple work.
However, he added that OPA chose a few “very complicated” cases to transfer into Cache Integrity. A quarter or more of the clients who were who were transferred by OPA into Cache Integrity were homeless according to McDuffie’s estimates. Stinson claimed that OPA was looking to move “stable cases” as well as to hold those with more difficulty.
Storch, working as an independent contractor she has 23 guardianship clients and receives calls from court officials wanting her to accept more.
“I’ve been told that there’s not an option for them to go, unless one of their family members gets involved,” said Storch.
“I have court visitors that contact me on a regular basis asking me if I can help them, ‘This person will be unemployed if I don’t accept their place for a ride,'” she added. “And it’s like, ‘I’m sorry. I’m not liable for someone else until I’m in the right place with my own personal issues.'”
In the meantime, Stinson said OPA is “working tirelessly to reduce cases” and doesn’t have the ability to retake the cases McDuffie cannot manage. OPA hasn’t suggested alternative solutions, however both OPA as well as McDuffie claim that in some instances the family member may be identified to assume the guardianship responsibilities or a more flexible alternative could be looked for. In the end, it’s the decision of Anchorage Superior Court Judge Eric Aarseth to decide the future of McDuffie’s existing clients.
“Accepting an appointment if we are aware that we’re not able to meet a person’s basic needs is not ethical and could necessitate us to make an untrue statement to the judge,” said Stinson. “It doesn’t provide the security that a conservatorship and guardianship appointment is intended to offer.”
The agency has set up waitlists, and will start accepting new cases only if individual public guardians are served with 65 cases or fewer Stinson announced in a October email. At present, there are 14 waiting clients to be seen by public guardians. They are divided into waitlists specific to regions.
This past Friday OPA advised Alaska courts that it had the ability to take on fresh cases, for the first time in a while since announcing the moratorium in Aprilhowever, it could only take three cases and only if they’re situated within Kenai, Homer or Seward.
In the meantime, “less restrictive means can be utilized” to satisfy the demands of potential clientele, Stinson said, including the use of the power of attorney to handle urgent tasks.
“That doesn’t mean that the person doesn’t require guardianship in the long in the long. However, it does mean concerns like ensuring benefits don’t expire could be dealt with,” he said.
McDuffie has stated that he’s willing to continue with his caseload until a solution can be discovered, but not for a long time.
“A small-scale nonprofit can’t solve problems of the magnitude of Grand Canyon,” he said.
The story first appeared within the Anchorage Daily News and is reproduced here with permission.
