Pinnacle Wilderness of Utah

[Deborah]

Utah has some pretty kickass regs. The problem is with enforcement. Sometimes it takes a little outside pressure.

Regarding Probationary licenses:

a. An applicant for an initial license shall permit the Office of Licensing to conduct an unlimited on-site evaluation of the physical facility and grounds, and to interview persons associated with the proposed program to verify compliance with all licensing requirements.

i. The Office of Licensing shall approve an application for an initial human services program license only after verifying full compliance with all licensing requirements.

ii. The Office of Licensing may approve a probationary license only after verifying substantial compliance with licensing requirements.

A. The Office of Licensing shall include an expiration date on a probationary license, which shall not exceed 6 months from the date of issue.

Hmmm. How do they justify giving Pinnacle 9 months? Do they also have the power to alter the regulations at will?

B. A probationary licensee that fails to achieve full compliance with licensing requirements prior to the expiration of the probationary license shall not be granted an extension, and shall not accept any fees, entering any agreements to provide client services, or provide any client services.

C. A probationary licensee that is not granted an initial license may submit a new application for an initial license 3 months after the expiration of the probationary license.

iii. The Office of Licensing shall deny an application for an initial human services program license when substantial compliance with all licensing requirements cannot be verified.

iv. The Office of Licensing shall permit an applicant for an initial human services program license to withdraw the application at any time prior to denying the application when an applicant requests additional time to demonstrate compliance with all licensing requirements.

A. An application that has been voluntarily withdrawn by an applicant may be resubmitted, within six months of the date of withdrawal, for reconsideration without payment of additional fees.

http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code ... -01.htm#T3

So, In conclusion, Pinnacle didn't cut the mustard on their inspection. Stettler gave them 9 months, rather than the 6 months mandated by law, to come into compliance. Ain't it wonderful.

[TheWho]

What "the who" doesn't get is "THE PLACES" don't want to be licensed or regulated.  No one ever said they did.
It is the public that needs and demands licensing and regulation.
Again, "the who" shows his true colors.

Of course they dont want to be licensed or regulated.  What company in their right mind does?  I think we established this a while back.  If the people dont push for it it wont happen.

My question is that it seems once the school/program gets licensed it really doent mean that much.  They can hand in a bunch of rubber stamped paper work, get their license and they are all set, if this is true then the schools are first ones to realize it is a joke.  Why bother? except if someone abuses kids there they can lose their license....just get a new one!

[TheWho]

The Office of Licensing shall approve an application for an initial human services program license only after verifying full compliance with all licensing requirements

Thanks Deborah, that answers my question....... So if they are fully licensed it means they have to meet or exceed certain requirements that the public can have confidence in.

[Anonymous]

The Who,
It does not work that way,and you know it.
Once a facility has lost its license, even in the State of Utah: it does not simply "get a new one."

Don't think for ONE MOMENT that any people who initiate such procedures--license revocation, and closure against a neglectful, abusive facility would turn a blind eye against this facility, or its owners in the future.

YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT and you know it.

[RobertBruce]

THE WHO:
Once these facilities are LICENSED...by whatever means:
When the facility is found to be in violation of student's human rights, neglectful, or when the students are physically abused--then guess what?
The LICENSING AGENCY can be forced to revoke the license, and to close down this facility.
Strange how that works, HUH?

What you have to keep in mind is that Cindy doesnt give a shit about these kids. So far as he is concerned the safety and oversight that regulation/licensure brings is not worth it when faced with the paper work that's involved with licensure.

He's made this point clear many many times.

So, In conclusion, Pinnacle didn't cut the mustard on their inspection. Stettler gave them 9 months, rather than the 6 months mandated by law, to come into compliance. Ain't it wonderful.

Deb do we have this guys number? Maybe he can explain to us why the three additional months were given despite that it goes  against state regualtion.

[Deborah]

My question is that it seems once the school/program gets licensed it really doent mean that much.  They can hand in a bunch of rubber stamped paper work, get their license and they are all set, if this is true then the schools are first ones to realize it is a joke.  Why bother? except if someone abuses kids there they can lose their license....just get a new one!

Your question has already been answered. Troll again with the intention of taking up bandwidth and running the thread into the ditch any and it will be split off of this discussion. This is your second attempt to waste people time and Ginger's bandwidth. Scroll up if y0u need to read the answer to your question again.

If you want to jaw on about the faults that are inherent to licensing start a thread for that. This thread is to discuss the Pinnacle Wilderness Program.

[RobertBruce]

The Office of Licensing shall approve an application for an initial human services program license only after verifying full compliance with all licensing requirements

Thanks Deborah, that answers my question....... So if they are fully licensed it means they have to meet or exceed certain requirements that the public can have confidence in.

Look closer Cindy,

ii. The Office of Licensing may approve a probationary license only after verifying substantial compliance with licensing requirements.

A probationary license being what they have, meaning they only verified a substantial amount of the requirements, not all of them. In order to get a full license all the requirements must be met.

Do you understand?

[Anonymous]

Why not start an email writing "campaign" to Mr. Ken Stettler, the Head of Licensing of Utah, and ask him directly if he can verify that these people are actually "qualified" for the positions for which his Agency has licensed them?  Especially since there are no credentials listed in their BIO on this facility's website?

Kstettler@utah.gov

[Anonymous]

John Bagley:

He was the former Clinical Director of TOP FLIGHT ACADEMY.
He worked at TOP FLIGHT ACADEMY at the same time as Gayle Palmer DeGraff--the woman reponsible for the death of Michelle Sutton in Palmer's newly opened wilderness program.

Bagley lists that he worked at Heritage Youth Services prior to his employment at Top Flight Academy.

Seems these "bad pennies" just keep showing up.

[TheWho]

Look Deborah, this isnt trolling, I was looking for an answer:

Joyce Harris Wrote:

As Deborah stated, this facility is "licensed" but this does not guarantee that that the information provided to the LICENSOR was verified, or that the information provided is truthful.

After reading this I was questioning whether or not the license had any teeth.  Why would the license process not guarantee this?

What "the who" doesn't get is "THE PLACES" don't want to be licensed or regulated. No one ever said they did.
It is the public that needs and demands licensing and regulation.
Again, "the who" shows his true colors.

Then I responded to this post, by indicating we had covered this previously, I wont go into it here.

Your question has already been answered. Troll again with the intention of taking up bandwidth and running the thread into the ditch any and it will be split off of this discussion. This is your second attempt to waste people time and Ginger's bandwidth. Scroll up if y0u need to read the answer to your question again.

If you look at the time line you answered my question before I asked it by about 9 minutes, I didn?t see it when I was posting??.

This was the answer I was looking for (below).  It was an open issue that requirements are verified prior to issuing a license.  If you look back a page it was thought the state didn?t check up on them.

The Office of Licensing shall approve an application for an initial human services program license only after verifying full compliance with all licensing requirements

And yes I was being sarcastic about getting a new license??.  Calm down, I am not trying to run the conversation off course, they were legitimate concerns.

[Anonymous]

What does it mean that The Who's post "will be split off of this discussion?"  There thread is moderated by "NOBODY," so it stands to reason that The Who can post whatever he pleases, doesn't it; regardless if he is annoying, or not?
Who got elected as "posting police?"

[RobertBruce]

No he can't. Cindy works tirelessly to distract real discussions by asking pointless questions or coming to baseless concluscions. He does so both to confuse the issue and to enrage people in the hopes that they will focus more on him rather than the issue. He does this because he's in love with himself and he believes he should be the sole focus of every topic, and because he hates these children and doesnt want the truth exposed about these places.

For a good example take a look at his above post. He knows that the program was given a probationary license and not standard one. Yet he continues to pretend and try and convince others that they were given a standard license.

Oh and Deb is a moderator so yes she can move his posts if she chooses. No sense in allowing Cindy to derail every conversation with his incessant trolling.

Back then to the issue at hand.

In Utah who does the licensing board report to? If we have the same problems with this one that we had with the last one we should be prepared to go up the ladder.

[TheWho]

Deborah Wrote:

Hmmm. How do they justify giving Pinnacle 9 months? Do they also have the power to alter the regulations at will?

I might be able to help with this one:
Many regulations have built in latitude that allow for special circumstances or common sense.  We had a situation with one of our businesses where one of the press cutters had a marginal safety rating because it was one of our oldest pieces of equipment.  The writing of the regulation determined we needed to be brought back within compliance within 30 days.  We entered immediately into a contract to purchase a new piece of equipment but delivery wouldn?t be for 3 months.  The equipment was built to order and they were located overseas.  OSHA approved a special waiver to cover the time period based on reviewing our purchase and we modified our present equipment which held us over.  

So seeing that Pinnacle was given over the 6 month period (9 months) could be an indication they entered into a good faith agreement of some type and will become fully licensed at that time.  So it is probably a good sign.

[RobertBruce]

So seeing that Pinnacle was given over the 6 month period (9 months) could be an indication they entered into a good faith agreement of some type and will become fully licensed at that time. So it is probably a good sign.

Youre speculating Cindy, we're interested in facts here, nothing else. No one wants to hear your justification for endangering your employees.