Hidden Lake academy

[Anonymous]

robert you spend three hours a day on here

wow you suck

[RobertBruce]

do i now? How much time do you spend a day on here and what is the purpose?

[Anonymous]

Robert.....you just don't get it...no one really cares about your day...minute by minute...the same for your biased misinformation.

[Anonymous]

how many worthless posts have there been in the last several days. it seems as if the whole thing is geared to obscure the real topic, HLA. just as robert accused aften of being a staff member, he seems to be acting the same way. perhaps he is the staff member trying to tie up the board so no one will talk about the real issues. he keeps saying that he has all these "facts", yet has shown no proof of anything. I just find it very odd that someone who wants to be seen as someone who is trying to make a change, is doing nothing but getting in petty pissing contests and engauging in "he said, she said, did not, did too".

[RobertBruce]

On 2005-11-16 06:57:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Robert.....you just don't get it...no one really cares about your day...minute by minute...the same for your biased misinformation."

If no one cares then why was the point made originally to suggest that I spend 70% of my day on here?

[RobertBruce]

On 2005-11-16 07:36:00, Anonymous wrote:

"how many worthless posts have there been in the last several days. it seems as if the whole thing is geared to obscure the real topic, HLA. just as robert accused aften of being a staff member, he seems to be acting the same way. perhaps he is the staff member trying to tie up the board so no one will talk about the real issues. he keeps saying that he has all these "facts", yet has shown no proof of anything. I just find it very odd that someone who wants to be seen as someone who is trying to make a change, is doing nothing but getting in petty pissing contests and engauging in "he said, she said, did not, did too". "

Havent I? Call the ORS of GA and see for yourself.

They were not licensed properly and probably still are not.

While your at it call the county registar for Lumpkin Co. They did not for the first 11 years even have a proper business license.

Again though dont take my word for it look it up yourselves.

No Im not staff member, Im here to illuminate the facts about HLA that Buchi and his puppets would rather keep quiet.

Things like food rationing, illegal placement and detention of students, treatment of students with suicidal issues.

You know normal boarding school stuff.

At the moment Im highlighting all the wonderful invalid assumptions Aften has made about students shes never met, as well as drawing attention to the fact that shes behaving exactly like many staff members at HLA do.
Not to mention the whole fiasco with Ridge Creek, we all remember how well that went down.

[Anonymous]

of course I won't take your word for it, you can not, nor have you proved anything.

[Troll Control]

On 2005-11-16 09:01:00, Anonymous wrote:

"of course I won't take your word for it, you can not, nor have you proved anything. "

So then you will make the calls to the agencies to verify Robert's statements and report back what you've found?

I'd really like to know what you find, but I won't take your word for it, so please cite your sources as well as your findings.

[Anonymous]

http://rules.sos.state.ga.us/cgi-bin/pa ... x.html&d=1

Legal Authority:
O.C.G.A. Sec. 49-5-12
? Any bona fide boarding school whose primary purpose of admission is education, provided that such facility in order to claim exemption shall operate under a published academic educational curriculum which meets the requirements of the State Department of Education, shall have classroom facilities which are not used for residential living, shall not have been granted nor have assumed legal custody of children attending the facility, and shall not provide service planning and casework services as described in the licensing rules.


SACS: pg 47 of school directory acredited 2001

If you read the whole code, you might find that they are not required to have a license.

[Anonymous]

Did you miss this or intentionally leave it out?

 ORS  REGS FOR  RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY

Definition:  Any facility providing full time residential care for six or more children under 17 years of age outside of their own homes.

Do you really expect any of us who know anything about the facility to believe that they are not technically an RCF?
Or that they are a traditional boarding school, as the definition you provided?
We are not as stupid as the ORS. HLA found a loop hole. Any facility that diagnoses and treats mental 'disorders'; that subjects kids to more 'therapy' than education; that restricts contact with parents and the outside world; (for starters) should be licensed by the state.
Also:
(b) "Child caring institution" means any institution, society, agency, or facility, whether incorporated or not, which either primarily or incidentally provides full-time care for children under 17 years of age outside of their own homes, subject to such exceptions as may be provided in rules and regulations of the Board of Human Resources. For purposes of these rules, a child caring institution means any institution, society, agency, or facility that provides such care to six or more children.*

They definitely meet the definition of an RCF/CCI. They've simply deceived ORS or bought an exemption, would be my guess.

[Anonymous]

that is very posible, but if it looks like they are following the law, then who is going to look deeper. i'm sure that people will be enticed to do so by robert's wise and impressive way of making his point. :lol:

[Troll Control]

On 2005-11-16 10:11:00, Anonymous wrote:

"http://rules.sos.state.ga.us/cgi-bin/page.cgi?g=DEPARTMENT_OF_HUMAN_RESOURCES%2Findex.html&d=1



Legal Authority:

O.C.G.A. Sec. 49-5-12

? Any bona fide boarding school whose primary purpose of admission is education, provided that such facility in order to claim exemption shall operate under a published academic educational curriculum which meets the requirements of the State Department of Education, shall have classroom facilities which are not used for residential living, shall not have been granted nor have assumed legal custody of children attending the facility, and shall not provide service planning and casework services as described in the licensing rules.





SACS: pg 47 of school directory acredited 2001



If you read the whole code, you might find that they are not required to have a license.

"

Well, I guess there are a few things to discuss here.

First let me say that HLA operated from 1994-2001 without accreditation and falsely advertised themselves as a "school."  The Academy at Ivy Ridge in NY was recently successfully sued by the Attorney General and was found to have committed fraud, heavliy fined, ordered to cease advertising as a school and ordered to pay over $1,000,000 in restitution to former "students" defrauded of a proper diploma.  HLA seems like they ran the same same scam successfully for seven years.

Also, upon reading the requirements for ongoing accreditation from SACS I found that HLA is not in compliance with dozens of regulations imposed by SACS, most especially those concerning student rights.

So, anyone who has recently attended or worked at HLA please read the SACS criteria and notify SACS about which provisions HLA is negligent.

Thanks for the link, anon.  It was very enlightening to see how grossly HLA violates SACS policy while continuing to hold out SACS as their accreditation entity.

[Anonymous]

your welcome, if they are in violation, then there should be corrective action by the agencies involved.
As far as being a residential care facility, hla does not claim to be one, therefore they are exempt, no matter what the reality may seem to some people. Again, it would be up to the specific agency to investigate and make the decision as to what applies to hla. I know of at least one facility in ga, that even though it is licensed by the state, i would not send my dog to it. it make hla look like club med.

[Anonymous]

btw complaints to SACs will result in being told to make the complaint through your agency ( ie through the headmaster who will forward it to SACs)

[Anonymous]

That?s interesting. They are no longer classified as a ?Special Purpose School?, but a ?Secondary School?, which appears to be a ?Public? school classification.

What does that mean? They no longer follow the requirements, as lame as they are, for a SP school?

Standards for Special Purpose Schools:

http://www.sacscasi.org/region/standard ... chools.pdf
A special purpose school is a public, private, profit, or non-profit education institution which offers programs of instruction for elementary, middle, or secondary students. The schools are
organized around a special purpose or are for students whose needs may require variations in patterns of instruction.

Required for a SP school:
There is a charter, LICENSE, or permit issued by the appropriate civil jurisdiction which testifies the school has the authority to operate within that jurisdiction.

In terms of their (SACS) ?oversight?:
An accredited school is expected to demonstrate adherence to the standards by annually reviewing and reporting to SACS CASI its status regarding the standards. Also, at least once every five years, a school must present evidence to a Quality Assurance Review team that the school is in compliance with the standards. In evaluating the school?s capacity to meet the accreditation standards, school officials should use the Standards Assessment Tool that is available for download at http://www.sacscasi.org. For each of the ten standards, a brief narrative outlining the school?s current capacity to meet the standard should be prepared and included in the documentation for the Quality Assurance Review.

Again, SACS is concerned with academics. They are not to be considered an adequate replacement for State regulations and oversight. They will not be monitoring the ?therapeutic? aspect of the program- abuse, restrictions, physical plant, student's rights, etc.