Judges’ comments:
Michael Berens’ searing reporting on slipshod, superficial licensing and oversight of adult care homes in Washington State skillfully blends accounts of human suffering, attempts by state regulators to dismiss the seriousness of his findings, and dogged data mining. A shocking reflection of the co modification of healthcare generally and of those who cannot defend themselves in particular.
Michael Berens connects the dots between state workers assigned quotas for moving the most fragile among us into shark-infested waters, and the tragic consequences that followed. A fine example of why newspapers still matter.
1. Provide the title of your story or series and the names of the journalists involved.
“Seniors for Sale: How the aged and frail are exploited in Washington’s adult family homes“
A six-part series by staff reporter Michael J. Berens.
2. List date(s) this work was published or aired.
Jan. 31, Feb. 1, Feb. 2, Sept. 12, Sept. 13, Dec. 12, 2010
3. Provide a brief synopsis of the story or stories, including any significant findings.
Seattle Times reporter Michael J. Berens discovered that thousands of vulnerable adults have been exploited by profiteers or harmed by amateur caregivers in Washington’s 2,800-plus adult homes. Elderly victims were roped into their beds at night, strapped to chairs during the day, drugged into submission or left without proper medical treatment for weeks. Owners even listed elderly residents as commodities in the sales ads for such homes. Berens also uncovered at least 236 deaths that indicated neglect or abuse in these homes but were not reported to the state or investigated. Further, the state excused mistreatment even when it knew that home owners had lied to its investigators, provided falsified medical records, or contributed to preventable deaths. The state, Berens discovered, had a hidden agenda: To reduce the state’s Medicaid burden, caseworkers had to meet monthly quotas and relocate thousands of nursing-home residents into less-expensive adult family homes. The state may have saved millions of dollars, but many seniors were placed in inappropriate homes where they suffered harm. “Seniors for Sale” also presented, to our knowledge, the first investigation into the booming senior-placement industry. The market leader, a high-tech Seattle company, is owned by a big Wall Street private equity firm, which charges hefty fees while routinely steering families to adult homes that haven’t been screened for quality.
4. Explain types of documents, data or Internet resources used. Were FOI or public records act requests required? How did this affect the work?
Berens filed more than 50 state public record requests, which included licensing applications; inspection reports; disciplinary actions; administrative court records; criminal court files; civil suits; and state agency e-mails.
5. Explain types of human sources used.
Key sources included officials from the state ombudsman office; community care advocates; police detectives; prosecutors; private attorneys; trade association and union officials; families of victims; residents of adult homes; and owners of adult homes.
6. Results (if any).
“Seniors for Sale” sparked an outcry from readers — including Washington’s governor — and quickly led to several significant reforms, including a governor’s task force to investigate problems. State lawmakers and others will be pushing reforms at the next legislative session, which begins next month. Among the changes so far: ” Adult-home owners must publicly post inspection reports and violations. ” The state now posts all enforcement actions on its website. ” DSHS now reports all cases of suspected abuse and neglect in King County (Seattle) to law enforcement, part of a pilot program launched in November. ” The director of the state department that oversees adult homes was demoted. ” An adult home owner and a caregiver (both profiled in the series) have been sentenced to jail. In response to our lawsuit, DSHS lawyers now admit the agency failed to disclose thousands of pages of emails to our reporter, and have agreed to provide these records once we agree on a comprehensive method to retrieve them. We will use the fruits of our lawsuit to continue reporting in 2011 on the pressing issue of long-term care for seniors.
7. Follow-up (if any). Have you run a correction or clarification on the report or has anyone come forward to challenge its accuracy? If so, please explain.
There have been no corrections or clarifications.
8. Advice to other journalists planning a similar story or project.
Follow the paper — ask for every document. Quantify major themes — create custom databases to track state actions. Listen to everyone — the so-called experts are often wrong or have a vested interest in obscuring deficiencies.