CRC Health Corp. growth rate plunges

[Ursus]

Newswires
CRC SAME FACILITY GROWTH PLUNGES: 1% 2Q GROWTH VS 7% GROWTH IN 2007

- ATIN - 09/03/08 - Amid widespread talk of operational difficulties at the nation's largest treatment provider, as well as high-profile staff defections, CRC Health Corp.'s growth rate has fallen sharply this year, with very slow growth continuing into the second quarter, according to SEC filings.

After registering strong same facility growth - a key measure that strips out the effect on growth of CRC's numerous acquisitions - of over 8 percent year-over-year in 2006 and almost 7 percent in 2007, the same facility number plunged to just 1 percent in the March quarter, with the latest filings also showing 1 percent growth in 2Q and confirming the slowdown trend.

Driving the downturn appears to be, in retrospect, a very poorly timed late 2006 acquisition by CRC of therapeutic boarding schools leader Aspen Education, which has been hit by the credit crunch as parents are unable to access second mortgages and tuition loans to finance the huge cost of helping their children. CRC has admited it has had major difficulty filling beds at one school in particular - likely Excel Academy in Texas - since the fall of 2007.

Same facility growth in the CRC's Youth Division - Aspen Education - has been falling at more than 10 percent all year. And some are wondering whether problems may be on the horizon for the well performing Recovery Division - treatment centers and the main cash cow methadone dispensing - as key players defect. Sierra Tucson CEO Keith Arnold left in July to work for CRC's arch mergers and acquisitions competitor Subacute Holdings.

Newswire Staff

[email protected]
Addiction Drug Rehab Alcoholism

[Anonymous]

Think we're having an impact?

[Ursus]

Think we're having an impact?

Dunno... I think parents just can't afford it at the moment, given a reduced ability to borrow against the future... We might have the ability to make an impact now, as they try to rationalize their choices.

Either that, or "Claudette's Jamaican jerk chicken and twice baked potatoes" at Excel Academy just aren't enough of a draw to offset the rest of the exciting 12-step fare!  
 

Posted: Aug 14, 2008; 05:15

EXCEL Academy of Texas
Conroe, TX

Recovery Month At Excel Academy Texas

Contact:
Don Vardell
Executive Director
800-260-9178
http://www.excelacademy.com

August 13, 2008

EXCEL Academy of Texas, the Sober Academy within the Youth Treatment Division of CRC Health Group will host a variety of activities, events and programming to celebrate Recovery Month 2008. On September 10th our normal 8am -3pm academic class schedule will be adjusted to accommodate a whole host of educational sessions, guest speakers, fun activities, 12 step meetings and events to support the company wide efforts to focus on recovery from substance abuse.

Beginning in the morning, students, staff and invited guests from the local community will be treated to an extra special breakfast buffet artfully prepared by Claudette Reid and her culinary team. No doubt Claudette's Jamaican heritage will come through and we have pleaded with her to make her soon-to-be famous bread pudding (a favorite of Executive Director Don Vardell). After breakfast our official program will begin with a guest speaker who has been in recovery for 38 years. Mr. Bob will share his experiences and uplifting, funny stories to help set the tone for the day. Immediately following that, students will move to assigned classrooms in our academic center where the EXCEL Academy teaching staff will facilitate a recovery knowledge competition between groups of students who will answer questions as a team from books such as "Getting Started in AA". Teams will be awarded prizes after lunch for the number of questions answered correctly. Prizes include off-campus dinners, pizza parties, and movie rentals to watch on weekends on our big screen TV in the "Lodge".

At noon, students, staff and guests will form a large circle in the center of our beautifully landscaped campus and participate in a simultaneous release of environmentally friendly balloons along with over 100 other CRC and Aspen Education Group programs. A Texas style BBQ lunch will immediately follow where again students, staff and guests will be treated to specialties including Claudette's Jamaican jerk chicken and twice baked potatoes among other local favorites.

The afternoon will consist of 12 step activities and meetings and a young person speaker at the end of the day. We know this will be a special day to enhance the focus on recovery from drugs and alcohol and support the efforts of EXCEL Academy students in their quest for sobriety.

EXCEL Academy of Texas is the only Sober Academy in the Aspen Education or Youth Treatment Division of CRC Health Group serving co-ed adolescents in the 9th through 12th grades. As such, we offer an unmatched program design consisting of full time, traditional teacher led college preparatory academics, daily 12 step meetings, weekly off-campus AA/NA meeting attendance, adolescent focused 12 step activities and meetings on and off campus, weekly group and individual counseling by licensed therapists, family seminars and sober fun activities. Students remain with EXCEL from one trimester (4 months) to a full year and longer and each academic and recovery focused plan is individualized based on the student and family's needs. For more information and current tuition rates, go to http://www.excelacademy.com or call 800-260-9178.

[dishdutyfugitive]

These large corporations always make the same mistake.

Overhype themselves.
Overbuild
Overstaff
Overeverything....

And then when shit hits the fan like right now, you can be sure all the CRC department heads point fingers at other department heads, talk shit and undermine eachother in a determined effort to cover their own ass.


It all comes down to their incongruent business model. They're so far removed from the actual problem, the real solution, their employees and their clients that they're destined to make the original problem worse.

Look at Brown schools / CEDU. (not that cedu wasn't already a fucked up place).

These huge corporations dable in plenty of different industries that they have no business being in. They know themselves it's bassackwards but they just can't resist the profit margins.

I'd sooner send my priest to the porno store to pick up Latina Jug Fest 18 then have a large corporation try to effect 'personalized therapeutic care' on anyone.

[Anonymous]

Excel Academy is interesting.

They were FORCED to change. The new sheriff in town had the courage to stop the "scrared straight" aspect of the program - the jail visit and undressing part.

Without this step in the program they could as well stop taking clients for behavior issues. Now they are only taking clients with addiction problems and they don't allow transport firms anymore.

This change in strategy did cost them clients. They had about 110 clients before and right now they have 20-30. The targetgroup are simply smaller. If they ever reach full capacity with their new concept they will only have about 60 clients, which is almost the haft of the previous number.

It will cost them maybe 250,000 dollars each month. Auch!

More info is to read on strugglingteen. (Normally no good news from there but in this case it is).

Don Vardell, Executive Director, has become the driving force behind the 'new' EXCEL. He arrived on the EXCEL scene in August 2007. At that time, EXCEL Academy had 110 students. From August 2007 to January 2008, through attrition, redirection to more appropriate programs, and a large graduation in December 2007, the enrollment shrank to 15 students. The restructuring of EXCEL Academy began in earnest in January 2008.

When we visited, there were 20 students registered at the Academy. The plan of the 'new' EXCEL is to increase enrollment to 35, and plans for the future have a maximum enrollment of 56 students.

Of course it is not a total loss. When you work with people who comes for help voluntary, you dont need so much staff, but still the income is lower than in the old days.

[Ursus]

Here are some interesting observations made by Ed Con organization Thomas J. Croke & Associates, Inc. (FamilyLights™) regarding Aspen's marketing strategies.

Please note that I am not by any means endorsing what Croke et al do. I just find it interesting that -- even amongst the Ed Con crowd -- the way CRC choses to go about marketing their product does end up raising some eyebrows. (Perhaps they are naive? WWASPS has been doing it this way for years and years. Perhaps they don't approve of WWASPS either; I can't tell, since clicking on the requisite page link gives me a 404.).

This site is currently under construction, and what you find by following the link may or may not resemble what I quote below.

  =================  =================  =================

Aspen/CRC Marketing

We are very concerned about the aggressive marketing conducted by the Aspen Education Group. Too often we hear of clinicians advising parents that sending their child to a therapeutic program away from home is only a good idea if it is an Aspen program. Clinicians who give that advice are falling victim to this aggressive marketing. Many Aspen programs are good programs, but people who speak as if they are the only good programs are at best misinformed. Aspen is very generous with perks for their loyal referral sources.  We are not suggesting anything as black and white unethical as cash  payments. In a future revision of this page, we will include more detail on how this process actually works.

An example of aggressive marketing that applies to individuals searching on the Internet (as opposed to potential referral sources) is http://www.teenboardingschools.com/ .  The website http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/r ... chools.com checked on March 6, 2008, indicates that http://www.teenboardingschools.com/ is a domain owned by "Aspen Education Group, 17777 Center Court Drive, Suite 300,Cerritos, CA 90703, US." Until we called attention to this on the listserv for the IECA, this website gave the appearance of being a neutral search website for parents seeking resources on the web. (We have edited this page on March 15, 2008, as we note that the CRC logo was then added to this website, acknowledging who is behind it and no longer totally concealing the conflict of interest). We also believe that if CRC/Aspen really wanted people to know that this website is a marketing arm of the Aspen programs, it would put the Aspen and CRC logos at the top and bottom of every page and turn it into a link to the the web sites of those companies.

Until that correction was made, that website appeared to direct users only to Aspen facilities while concealing that Aspen, CRC Health, or Bain Capital had anything to do with it. Articles, such as the one at http://www.teenboardingschools.com/bootcamps.htm entitled "Boot Camps Don't Work" did not disclose that it was posted on the web site of a company that does not operate boot camps but does operate many programs considered by people to be competitors to boot camps. We at FamilyLights™ agree with what the article says, but we are concerned about the value system of a business that would run this kind of self serving web site without disclosing their financial interest in the guidance offered.

We repeat for emphasis that the correction occurred only after FamilyLights™ discovered the existence of this website and circulated the information throughout IECA. The acknowledgment of ownership appears only on the home page, so far as we are aware. If Aspen/CRC really wanted people to see it, we suspect it would be on every page.

When you get a recommendation suggesting that only Aspen programs should be considered, you need to challenge at once the competence and/or the ethics of the person making that recommendation. If the recommendation is for a specific program, the recommendation might be solid, based on solid reasons why that particular Aspen program is right for your situation. However we see no reason why a competent and ethical referring professional would claim that Aspen programs in general are so superior to all others in general, that only Aspen programs are appropriate for consideration, but we do hear of people making that claim. If you hear that from a person recommending programs, you need to ask that person two questions immediately, then be skeptical regarding any advice and direction from that person. The two questions are: (1) What comparable non-Aspen programs have you actually investigated? and (2) What favors, travel, perks, educational benefits and other items of value has the Aspen/CRC organization provided you? Then find a second opinion, if not a replacement for the person who gave you that advice.

FamilyLights™ sometimes recommends some Aspen programs to some families. We are not stating that there is no quality here. There are also some Aspen programs to which we will not refer. We are not alleging actual bribery or cash payoffs. But we are concerned that people are choosing Aspen facilities due to manipulation of referral sources and manipulation of families searching on the web. We think it is a shame that this company, that does offer a great deal of quality, damages its credibility with the behavior of its marketing divisions. (Web marketing and personal marketing to referral sources are handled by different divisions).

Remember, an Aspen/CRC program might still be right for you or your child. Do not exclude consideration of Aspen/CRC program just because of what we say here. But make sure you base your decision on information from sources that can evaluate the benefits and shortcomings of both Aspen/CRC and non-Aspen/CRC programs and will do so objectively.

Also, remember that the problem is with marketing efforts at the corporate level. At most Aspen facilities, the admission people tell a straght story.

Last revised August 15, 2008

[Ursus]

After that upbeat tale released just shy of two months ago, detailing the "variety of activities, events and programming to celebrate Recovery Month 2008" at Excel Academy (the festivities having ostensibly just wound down), we hear of their imminent closing:

—•?|•?•0•?•|?•— —•?|•?•0•?•|?•— —•?|•?•0•?•|?•—

Aspen Education Group
Cerritos, CA

Letter Regarding Excel Academy of Texas' Consolidation of Services

Contact:
Karen Fitzhugh
Senior Vice President, Residential Eastern Region
802-592-3344
[email protected]

October 8, 2008

Dear Friends,

Today it was announced that as of November 21, 2008, Excel Academy of Texas will discontinue operations and consolidate services. With the robust continuum of services within Aspen Education Group, we are in the fortunate position to consolidate Excel's services with other Aspen programs to weather the current economic downturn. Our network of solid, quality programs will allow us to continue providing the highest level of care for our current students and those still seeking treatment. We anticipate a smooth transition for our current students and families, and are providing resources and support to place students in the most appropriate care. This includes offering highly discounted tuition rates at other Aspen programs and waived enrollment and transportation fees for transferring students and families.

This decision to consolidate comes after much careful deliberation as to how we could best serve youth and families struggling with substance abuse and related issues in this challenging economic climate. While we regret any inconvenience to our students, families and professional partners during this transition, we are working hard to ensure that the best placement decisions are made, and will continue all operations at Excel until the last student is successfully placed.

We wish to thank the many talented staff of Excel for their years of dedicated service. Our employees have always shown a commitment to excellence and a passion for helping youth and families. We will do all that we can to ensure that this process is as smooth as possible for them as well.

Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions. Thank you for your continued support.

Sincerely,

Jim Dredge, President
Aspen Education Group

[dishdutyfugitive]

Robust continuum.....


nothing like the smell of napalm and coroporate speak in the morning.

[Anonymous]

I suspect  you really don't know what we do.   Lumping all educational consultants together is like lumping all people of the same race together. It is stereotyping.  

If you take a close look, you will very likely disagree with us on some things, but if you really take a close look, you will see that different educational consultants do different things.  Most (not quite all) of the young people we have worked with have feedback for us on  the range from neutral to positive.  We have made mistakes along the way and we try to learn from them.  We are not aware of any young people who think we have abused them or knowingly allowed others to do so.  (Maybe posting this will lead someone to raise that, but we haven't heard it from them)    Oops. I know one who might be pretty unhappy with us. Initials are JS and he's from New York City.  I would not mind an opportunity to sit down with JS on equal terms and discuss what happened and how that situation got messed up. He's a neat kid.  But that sort of thing is pretty unusual.  

If you are trying to shut down every school or program that works with kids, we are at odds. If you want to see the quality improved -- both with respect to effectiveness and positive and respectful treatment of young people -- we are allies.  Look at http://www.familylight.com/link3/3.05/3 ... sitive.htm as an example. Some readers here will disagree with us and that is your privilege, but we think prodding all programs to move that direction is a good thing. I am sure some of you will think we don't go far enough, but I think most of you will believe this is an improvement over what has gone before.  

If you disagree  (or if you agree)  with what we say, send us a note at http://www.familylight.com

PS.  The quotation below is accurate.

Here are some interesting observations made by Ed Con organization Thomas J. Croke & Associates, Inc. (FamilyLights™) regarding Aspen's marketing strategies.

Please note that I am not by any means endorsing what Croke et al do. I just find it interesting that -- even amongst the Ed Con crowd -- the way CRC choses to go about marketing their product does end up raising some eyebrows. (Perhaps they are naive? WWASPS has been doing it this way for years and years. Perhaps they don't approve of WWASPS either; I can't tell, since clicking on the requisite page link gives me a 404.).

This site is currently under construction, and what you find by following the link may or may not resemble what I quote below.

  =================  =================  =================

Aspen/CRC Marketing

We are very concerned about the aggressive marketing conducted by the Aspen Education Group. Too often we hear of clinicians advising parents that sending their child to a therapeutic program away from home is only a good idea if it is an Aspen program. Clinicians who give that advice are falling victim to this aggressive marketing. Many Aspen programs are good programs, but people who speak as if they are the only good programs are at best misinformed. Aspen is very generous with perks for their loyal referral sources.  We are not suggesting anything as black and white unethical as cash  payments. In a future revision of this page, we will include more detail on how this process actually works.

An example of aggressive marketing that applies to individuals searching on the Internet (as opposed to potential referral sources) is http://www.teenboardingschools.com/ .  The website http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/r ... chools.com checked on March 6, 2008, indicates that http://www.teenboardingschools.com/ is a domain owned by "Aspen Education Group, 17777 Center Court Drive, Suite 300,Cerritos, CA 90703, US." Until we called attention to this on the listserv for the IECA, this website gave the appearance of being a neutral search website for parents seeking resources on the web. (We have edited this page on March 15, 2008, as we note that the CRC logo was then added to this website, acknowledging who is behind it and no longer totally concealing the conflict of interest). We also believe that if CRC/Aspen really wanted people to know that this website is a marketing arm of the Aspen programs, it would put the Aspen and CRC logos at the top and bottom of every page and turn it into a link to the the web sites of those companies.

Until that correction was made, that website appeared to direct users only to Aspen facilities while concealing that Aspen, CRC Health, or Bain Capital had anything to do with it. Articles, such as the one at http://www.teenboardingschools.com/bootcamps.htm entitled "Boot Camps Don't Work" did not disclose that it was posted on the web site of a company that does not operate boot camps but does operate many programs considered by people to be competitors to boot camps. We at FamilyLights™ agree with what the article says, but we are concerned about the value system of a business that would run this kind of self serving web site without disclosing their financial interest in the guidance offered.

We repeat for emphasis that the correction occurred only after FamilyLights™ discovered the existence of this website and circulated the information throughout IECA. The acknowledgment of ownership appears only on the home page, so far as we are aware. If Aspen/CRC really wanted people to see it, we suspect it would be on every page.

When you get a recommendation suggesting that only Aspen programs should be considered, you need to challenge at once the competence and/or the ethics of the person making that recommendation. If the recommendation is for a specific program, the recommendation might be solid, based on solid reasons why that particular Aspen program is right for your situation. However we see no reason why a competent and ethical referring professional would claim that Aspen programs in general are so superior to all others in general, that only Aspen programs are appropriate for consideration, but we do hear of people making that claim. If you hear that from a person recommending programs, you need to ask that person two questions immediately, then be skeptical regarding any advice and direction from that person. The two questions are: (1) What comparable non-Aspen programs have you actually investigated? and (2) What favors, travel, perks, educational benefits and other items of value has the Aspen/CRC organization provided you? Then find a second opinion, if not a replacement for the person who gave you that advice.

FamilyLights™ sometimes recommends some Aspen programs to some families. We are not stating that there is no quality here. There are also some Aspen programs to which we will not refer. We are not alleging actual bribery or cash payoffs. But we are concerned that people are choosing Aspen facilities due to manipulation of referral sources and manipulation of families searching on the web. We think it is a shame that this company, that does offer a great deal of quality, damages its credibility with the behavior of its marketing divisions. (Web marketing and personal marketing to referral sources are handled by different divisions).

Remember, an Aspen/CRC program might still be right for you or your child. Do not exclude consideration of Aspen/CRC program just because of what we say here. But make sure you base your decision on information from sources that can evaluate the benefits and shortcomings of both Aspen/CRC and non-Aspen/CRC programs and will do so objectively.

Also, remember that the problem is with marketing efforts at the corporate level. At most Aspen facilities, the admission people tell a straght story.

Last revised August 15, 2008

[psy]

I suspect  you really don't know what we do.   Lumping all educational consultants together is like lumping all people of the same race together. It is stereotyping.  

If you take a close look, you will very likely disagree with us on some things, but if you really take a close look, you will see that different educational consultants do different things.  Most (not quite all) of the young people we have worked with have feedback for us on  the range from neutral to positive.  We have made mistakes along the way and we try to learn from them.  We are not aware of any young people who think we have abused them or knowingly allowed others to do so.

OK.  Now that is a bald face lie, if you are in fact Tom Croke.  I know for a fact of a kid who you referred to Benchmark who was not happy at all with his placement (I think we both know who we are talking about.  Initials are BW) and would definitely contest that statement.  I'm pretty sure you knew about his dissatisfaction as well, either directly, through his parents, or through me, personally.

Secondly, I doubt those kids you sent to Samoa (which you referred to, unless I'm mistaken) were extraordinarily pleased with your referrals.  Tell me.  Have any of the places you have referred to been shut down due to lawsuits, state action, or other consequences as a result of allegations of abuse and/or fraud?

How many "young people" do you interview after the fact regarding their satisfaction/sucess?  Long term?  Or do you rely on the parents for satisfaction? (because that's what this industry is really about: satisfying parental whims)

You were careful to state "We are not aware of any young people who think we have abused them or knowingly allowed others to do so." (emphasis on knowingly).  What about negligently?  Is that any better?  Just because you didn't know does not excuse it if you didn't want to know.  Do you even make an effort to follow up on allegations of abuse / mistreatment / fraud / fraudulent misrepresentation?

(Maybe posting this will lead someone to raise that, but we haven't heard it from them)    Oops. I know one who might be pretty unhappy with us. Initials are JS and he's from New York City.  I would not mind an opportunity to sit down with JS on equal terms and discuss what happened and how that situation got messed up. He's a neat kid.  But that sort of thing is pretty unusual.

I think I know who you're talking about there (initials and location match, anyway), and no, he wasn't happy with your referral at all...  Yet (if we're taliing about the same person) you still refer to the program he was in.  Why is that?  Exactly how many allegations of abuse and/or fraud (as in fraudulent misrepresentation) does it take with you?  What is your cut-off point?

If you are trying to shut down every school or program that works with kids, we are at odds.

Oh it works, does it?  Can you prove it works compared to a group with no treatment at all?  Have there been independent double blind studies done?   It seems to me that if you advertise a product as "working" you need to prove it as such, otherwise it's false or misleading advertising.

If you want to see the quality improved -- both with respect to effectiveness and positive and respectful treatment of young people -- we are allies.

With all due respect, I don't believe you really care about the quality of the places you refer.  I suspect you, like many others in your profession, take kickbacks for referrals as there is nothing illegal about it.  You can deny it, sure, and I might be wrong, but how is a parent (or anybody for that matter) to know for sure?  If you're honest, the answer is: they can't.  So then the question is: why should they trust you?  Because you purport to have experience in the area?  Because you have a nice website and a nice smile?  Because you sound professional?  What are your actual academic credentials to be dealing with kids or recommending ANY sort of treatment.  Are you a doctor?

Look at http://www.familylight.com/link3/3.05/3 ... sitive.htm as an example. Some readers here will disagree with us and that is your privilege, but we think prodding all programs to move that direction is a good thing. I am sure some of you will think we don't go far enough, but I think most of you will believe this is an improvement over what has gone before.  

If you disagree  (or if you agree)  with what we say, send us a note at [email protected].  We don't publish flames.  We wil publish what people say when they can disagree without being disagreeable.

Here we leave it up to the reader to decide what is and what is not disagreeable and/or a flame.  Anything else is censorship based on a subjective judgment.  Nobody has the right to tell you what you can or can not read.  Anybody who says differently seeks to control you.

We agree that some educational consultants do things that are not appropriate.  I can assure you that not all of my colleagues love me.

Again, with all due respect, I've heard that exact same line from other educational consultants (who take kickbacks) who have said the exact same song and dance (again, I think you know who I am talking about.  Initials are SS).

I believe our common concern is to stop abuses and get young people meaningful help in ways that do not inflict needless pain.  Readers here will disagree with each other and with me on how best to do that and who are the good guys and who are the bad guys.  But I believe we all really want the same things in the end.  

If you think I am onto something, help me out. Link to my website. Steer people to my website.

LOL.  You could hardly pick a worse place to advertise.

Give me responsible comments and feedback (not flames).  I won't publish specific allegations of wrongdoing with programs

Of course not.  And you'll actively defend any accusations against programs without bothering to even respond to an email to follow up on the allegations (again, I think we both know what we're talking about here).  Yet you'll actively defend the programs and go to bat for them in court without even talking to the "other side".  It's almost as if you're not interested in the truth at all or are so single-mindedly *sure* of what you *know* to be true you aren't even willing to consider any other possibilities.  Whether that is out of blind faith or malice based on greed is irrelevant.  At best it's negligent.  You aren't selling any ordinary product here.  You're selling what you represent as a medical treatment.

but I will call attention the questions people should ask programs.  Posting flames on this website, you folks can't be reached with lawsuits.

Wrong.  If a lawsuit has *merit* there is a course of action.  Even here.  It is perfectly possible to sue a john doe and has been done *many* times in the past.  If the lawsuit, on the other hand, is a baseless slapp, it's going to end up hurting the plaintiff more than anybody else in the long run (and again, I think we're both on the same page here).

I can and I must be careful. But if I know a program is abusing kids, that knowlege will have an impact on what I do, and I will find a way to make that facts surface.

OK.  Without investigating (even following up on an email) and without publishing anything, how, exactly, will you do that and how will anybody know if you are actually doing anything?

[Anonymous]

Michael:

>>OK. Now that is a bald face lie, if you are in fact Tom Croke. I know for a fact of a kid who you referred to Benchmark who was not happy at all with his >>placement (I think we both know who we are talking about. Initials are BW) and would definitely contest that statement. I'm pretty sure you knew about his >>dissatisfaction as well, either directly, through his parents, or through me, personally.


>>>I think I know who you mean, but if I am correct you are the only person who has told me that about him. And frankly, I don't have confidence in what you >>>tell me.  One of my top fans is a young man who went to Samoa then to the program that you attended in California, who, by the way, does not share your >>>views of eithe program.

I do not interview kids routinely following placement.  A significant number contact me. I am sure some are dissatisfied that I don't know about. I am also sure that some who are not happy feel as they do as a result of parents not following my advice.

The only Samoa program I have used is the one now known as Coral Reef Academy.  It has its issues, but I don't think anyone who has been there would confirm your generalities about Samoa programs.  It is not an abusive program. The last two people I have arranged to go there went by their own choice.  That is probably the program where I have actually had the largest number of people who have told me they appreciated the fact that I had recommended the program they attended.  If you were referring to Paradise Cove, I would understand where you were coming from on that.  I don't refer to programs out of country unless the young person understands what is at  issue and wants to go.  

>(Maybe posting this will lead someone to raise that, but we haven't heard it from them) Oops. I know one who might be pretty unhappy with us. Initials are JS and he's from New York City. I would not mind an opportunity to sit down with JS on equal terms and discuss what happened and how that situation got messed up. He's a neat kid. But that sort of thing is pretty unusual.

>>I think I know who you're talking about there (initials match, anyway), and no, he wasn't happy with your referral at all.

The person I am referring to is 16 years old, has attended schools and programs only in New York State near his home and I am rather sure you do not know him. I did make a mistake there.  

I leave the rest of this up to the reader.

[psy]

For the reader, I present a thread on A Better Way's Coral Reef Academy including an article written by Tom Croke (above poster) himself:

viewtopic.php?t=14029#p174297

THE CRISIS BEFORE US

What Happened In Samoa?

By: Thomas J. Croke,
Publisher

Because of the sensitivity of the information in front of us, we are not reporting everything we know or believe to be true regarding the account below. We are certainly not reporting everything we have been told. We will update on the web site as we can confirm or refute some of the issues that remain unresolved.

Several years ago, the owners and founders of Cross Creek Manor established a boys' version of their program in Samoa ? Paradise Cove. A few years later, another group, also from Utah, known as A Better Way, llc., started the program known variously as Robert Louis Stevenson Youth Academy, A Better Way Youth Academy, and Mole Ole Ava. One of the principals in this group was Sterling Deveraux, a man I had known, respected and trusted since his days as a therapist at Heritage Center when I marketed there, and again at the Western Youth Network (now part of YSI). Based upon that knowledge and trust, I was the referral person behind the enrollment of their very first student, a young lady who has done extraordinarily well, and swears by the program. Very recently, another program, New Hope, was organized, then disintegrated. According to published reports and multiple sources in communication with us, some of New Hope's students were literally abandoned in the village when that program closed.

The Samoa Story begins with the group of people who have banded together, mostly on the Internet, to attempt to shut down either the Teen Help affiliated programs or the entire industry. (See ?The Crisis Before Us?, page 3.) Perhaps it starts before that, but that is when, where and how Bridge to Understanding became aware of it. A semi-organized group of people was collaborating on the Internet, some to attempt to shut down the entire industry; some to shut down the Teen Help programs in particular.

Another group, which we believe was unconnected with those described in the above paragraph, made up primarily (probably exclusively) of the parents of the young people at New Hope in Samoa, kept in touch with each other via Internet. As a result, as soon as alleged abuses were known, the word spread quickly, to the other parents. Defections followed rapidly. We assume that the drop in enrollment this caused may have dissipated the assets of the New Hope organization, leading to its demise. Published reports and direct statements to us from multiple sources say that some students were simply abandoned. According to similar reports, at the request of U.S. Chargé d'affaires William Warren, both A Better Way and Paradise Cove absorbed some of these, and others were sent home with the assistance of Mr. Warren and Tom Mockett.

The impact of the new students at A Better Way either caused or contributed to a decline in morale at A Better Way. On that, everyone, including the management of A Better Way agrees. Several other events at A Better Way also led to problems. Seemingly with agreement all around, the classroom program carried out in cooperation with the correspondence curriculum from Brigham Young University was not working as efficiently as might have been hoped, and there were some protests from parent regarding that just at the time these events were developing. A fire damaged the building facilities on the older of the two campuses. A Better Way management acknowledges some communication problems. A very charismatic Samoan staff member who was greatly beloved by the students at A Better Way and seen as a father figure by many was let go. We are not at liberty to disclose as many details as we have in our possession, but we are satisfied that this action was not undertaken frivolously. We also believe that this staff member reacted in anger to undermine the program. We have been advised by A Better Way management that the dispute has now been resolved, and others tell us this man is now back on staff.

Another event at the same time was the loss of therapist Jeff Scott, and program director Adrian Faust, just about the time Sterling Deveraux relocated to live in Samoa and take over direction of the program. The issues with Jeff and Adrian seem to be primarily that both parents and students were on overload with change. Both Jeff and Adrian had their followings, but change itself seems more an issue than the particulars of their personalities.

Over this time, and beginning prior to the introduction of the students from New Hope, some of our own parent clients were beginning to complain loudly and energetically about the manner in which they and their offspring were being handled by the program. We could not conclusively establish what went on, but we were alarmed by two A Better Way parents, in very close sequence with each other, coming into sufficient conflict to pull their young people out of the program, following what was in each case their second visit to the island. Both reported deterioration in the functioning of the program between visits, and reported very angry confrontations with program owner / managers.

By February we had our fourth report, confirmed by A Better Way management of possible inappropriate sexual contact between staff and students we had referred (when I use ?confirmed? and ?possible? in the same sentence, I mean that the management was taking the reports seriously, but in at least one case and perhaps three of the four, had some doubt about the allegation).

The first two reports had involved the night staff and we believed had been addressed properly, with respect to the victims, their parents, us as referral source and the alleged perpetrator. Of particular significance, I understood that a procedural change had been put into place to prevent similar incidents. I came back from my April, 1997 visit to Samoa understanding that female students would always sleep behind locked doors when only the all male security staff was on duty. Samoan custom does not permit Samoan women to work overnight without taking on a moral stigma, and A Better Way was limited in the number of Americans they could bring in on work visas. This made it difficult to put female staff on duty overnight. I was uncomfortable with the young women being exposed to a minimally trained all male staff in this manner, but believed the problem to be solved. I later learned (see below) that ?policy? was not maintained.

The third report of staff crossing sexual boundaries was strongly substantiated, and fit no recognizable pattern, as it involved a female staff member. The fourth was recent, and again involved the Samoan security staff. All of these involved students I had referred.

Beginning about February, we began to pick up completely unattributed and unsubstantiated allegations of sexual impropriety at A Better Way on the Internet. Our contacts in the ?opposition? group were quick to let us know they were not responsible and to attribute the source to their opposition in the pro-Teen Help group. They also made a point of not confirming the accuracy of the story, although they repeated their opposition to all offshore programs. The storm really broke for us when we began to receive phone calls and email messages from one educational consultant and several parents who were NOT our clients expressing concern about what was happening at A Better Way in Samoa. We initially doubted these stories because the two parents who had pulled their kids under very angry conditions did not support the particular issues raised. I had several conversations with owner Rodney Rice who vehemently denied most of what was being added by the latest group of protestors. He also denied the reports of the two angry parents who were our clients, although he acknowledged the four sexual incidents referred to above as being at least worthy of serious attention even if not conclusively proven. For purposes of determining procedure, they were assuming them to be true. Nevertheless, in the course of these conversations, I learned that A Better Way had not maintained what I had understood to be its policy of allowing females to sleep behind locked doors and its management denied ever having told me that. They confirmed that students at the ?basement? level had been required to sleep in an open fale (Samoan word for house or hut, pronounced ?FAH lee?), and strongly defended the propriety of that, implying that the policy would continue. I do not suggest that the managers are lying. The assurances I was given on this occurred during my visit in April, 1997, after which there has been almost 100% turnover in staff. David Smyth, one of the owner managers was present for part of this discussion, but I do not know the degree to which he was paying attention. The therapist, at the time, clearly participated in the discussion, and it was primarily he who provided the assurances, but he left the program only a few months later.

As the intensity of the matter escalated, I began to contact other IECA member consultants to gain other perspectives. Except for the one who had initiated a call to me, all reported very positive impressions, including one of great excellence with therapeutic programs, who had just visited in December. However, there was at least one additional story of crossing sexual boundaries from a consultant who believed that was the only case that had ever occurred. If that consultant, who had strongly positive regard for the program, was talking about an actual confirmed case, the total was now five.

Since the downsizing, there has been a rash of allegations of sexual abuse beyond the ones noted above, but referring to a time period before the downsizing. The common element in those complaints is the Samoan night security staff. We can neither substantiate nor refute those allegations.

There have been reports of drugs on campus. Management acknowledges that has occurred. With respect to both drug use and inappropriate sex, management gives a very different description from what some former students are saying. We all know students in behavioral change programs frequently accuse the programs of all kinds of things in order to get out, and that allegations from those sources need to be examined closely. But allegations specifically of sexual abuse can never be ignored. Programs that expect the kids to allege untrue things are in a difficult spot when that happens unless there are witnesses. That is why all staff-student behaviors under these conditions should be witnessed. That is for the protection of both staff and students.

As of this point, A Better Way has downsized, removing many of its negative students. A Better Way has issued two strongly worded letters reassuring parents and referral sources that all is now under control. We have offered to put them up on the Internet, and would like to publish excerpts here, but they will not give us permission to do that at this time. They suggest they might do so later. We will definitely give them space on the Internet for that purpose. They are accepting no female intakes and will transition remaining females out. They have pledged to keep awake female night staff on duty while females remain.

Many parents and other educational consultants, with whom we speak, give rave reviews on this program. Even our parents, who pulled their offspring in anger, confirm that their son/daughter made gains they would not have made any other way. ?Parents Corner - LifeSaver? is another sample tribute by a mother of how a program helped bring her son back to her and their family.

Although we have been less positive in the past about Paradise Cove in particular and the Teen Help programs in general than we have been with respect to A Better Way, we can absolutely confirm that those programs, too, have been lifesavers for many parents.

As I get the opportunity really to understand the volumes of material before me on this topic which I have not yet fully absorbed, I will probably say more on the Internet, and later maybe in print. Maybe by that time concern will have died down. I understand a person of great credibility will be going to Samoa soon to review the program. I hope he is in a position to publish a strong affirmation. This program is too valuable to lose. But we can't afford a repeat of some of the recent past history.

Again, Croke, those are your words. Exactly how many allegations of abuse does it take before you stop referring to a place?  5 instances of abuse not enough?  Collateral damage, i'm sure.  Did I hear you praise Paradise Cove too in that article?  Call it a "lifesaver"?

More on the fornits wiki about the place, including it's over 18 "My Choice" (HAH!) program (from which studnets allege that they are kept past their 18th birthday against their will, which is false imprisonment but more or less not enforced since it's outside US jurisdiction and nobody gives a shit about the rich white kids in 3rd world countries:

http://wiki.fornits.com/index.php?title ... ef_Academy

Read what a parent has to say about Coral Reef in this thread:
viewtopic.php?t=14029#p174297

[psy]

And frankly, I don't have confidence in what you tell me.

Why is that?  Because I was a participant and not a parent?  Some "lumping" going on there or are you just going on gossip?  Frankly, you don't know me at all and have never made an effort to.  Furthermore I have attempted to contact you in the past to rectify the situation but you never bothered to respond to me or question me about the allegations i put in that email.  You then proceeded to forward the email to the program and write a declaration in support of the program that sued me (and lost because it was a frivilous, baseless, SLAPP suit, and have since paid me every single dime spent on my attorneys who took the case primarily on a contingent fee basis because they were so offended).

Tell me.  Is that how you deal with every kid who contacts you and has something negative to say about a program you refer to?  It's no wonder you don't get many kids contacting you if you deal with them like you did me.

[Anonymous]

Tom Croke,
Helen Croke
 thea McCurry
 Jody Adams
of "family light" engage in human trafficking. For money, they arrange abduction and imprisonment without due process. Some of the gulags they have referred to practice thought reform, they organized and systematic destruction of a human mind. The places they refer to, which claim to administer medical care, and the staff who primarily oversees detainees are not credentialed in any way.

He refers to organizations which have multiple allegations of abuse or torture in far away locations which make suing or pressing criminal charges even harder than normal.


Shame on you Tom Croke, Helen Croke, Thea McCurry, Jody Adams.

http://www.familylight.com/link4/index.htm