Let the battle begin!

Fri, 17 Jul 2020 01:55:49 +0000

Last updated ****** 30 June 2021 ******

Yesterday, Tanya received notification that the police have concluded their investigations. The findings were that no criminal charges would be laid.

Although officially my services were not required many months ago, I elected to maintain a blog covering the matter as it progressed because I felt it was important to me, as a proud and patriotic Australian, to do something.

Initially in the matter, after reading information posted on the AFFORD website, I was of the view that a non-for-profit organisation providing care services for disabled people, after suffering a tragic incident would indeed be caring and therefore be forthcoming to meet up to resolve the matter in an honest and open manner and work in harmony with me, the police and the regulators. Despite my best intentions, AFFORD elected to deal with the matter differently.

I was not prepared to sit back watching AFFORD, a large multi-million dollar organisation with huge resources team up with their lawyers Clyde and Co, an even larger multi-million dollar organisation with even greater resources, attempting to sweep under the carpet the death of an innocent young woman with disabilities. She deserved better, especially from the very people who were entrusted, and paid 6 figure sums to look after her for her mum, so that her mum being a single mother of 6 children could go to work to provide for them.

In this Part VII of the Merna Aprem blog, I will be providing a bullet point summary of the matter.

I will also show how the 3 main parties deal with the matter from hereon, with the 3 main parties being;

1. Steven Herald CEO of AFFORD

2. Lucinda Lyons and Peter James Beard of Clyde and Co

3. Tanya Petrus representing her deceased daughter Merna Aprem.

****** Update – Thursday, 27 August 2020 ******

Actions speak louder than words, and in the care industry this statement could not be more apt.

Although I have covered the following topic earlier in the blog, it’s worth covering again for very important reasons.

Working as a private investigator is a completely different role than investigating for other entities such as the police department and regulatory bodies. Timing is important as with the sequence of events in many cases, including what action was taken after the incident. Therefore I always take particular note of examining what happened after the incident, ie what did they do? I’ve interviewed many people who cannot explain why they did not report the matter to the police when it happened, or seek medical treatment when they were allegedly seriously injured. The response to an incident is critical.

To give some examples, if your home was invaded by masked thugs last night, there must be a reason why the police were not called. Another classic example is the case where a person who is suing for damages was allegedly seriously injured in a motor vehicle accident, so much so that they can never work again, but immediately after the accident they drove home and later went shopping. There must be a reason why they did not seek medical treatment.

In this serious case where we have the death of an innocent and disabled young woman, I’ve been very carefully observing AFFORD to see what was done after the incident.

Shortly after carers left Merna unattended and she drowned in an AFFORD bathtub, AFFORD told the AAP crime reporter, Perry Duffin, that they would continue to support Tanya and the following statement was published in newspapers all over the country.

“The company that runs the group home, Afford, told AAP they will continue to support Ms Petrus following her daughter’s death. They have hired an external investigator to determine what happened.”

The awful truth here is that statement is false and misleading. There has been zero support delivered to Tanya by AFFORD. They had a golden opportunity to prove that they really do care and instead proved that they don’t care.

Let’s not forget that the other statements made to AAP crime reporter Perry Duffin were also false.

It is my view that the above statement of support was only made with the calculated and untenable intention to capitalise on the media coverage of the death. I believe the view here by AFFORD was twofold. Firstly they set out with that statement to maintain an image in the public eye that AFFORD cares and at the same time with that very same statement set out to nullify any bad press from the drowning. The choice was made to capitalise on the publicity of the death by fooling the public as to the true facts of the matter. They were only worried about the potential loss of business.

It was evident from my observations of the sequence of events post the incident, the carers did not call emergency services first, they called AFFORD management. My information indicated that AFFORD management arrived at the scene before the police and emergency services.

Next point of action we see fabricated statements made to the press to protect the AFFORD brand name. The statements were not factual, and they conveyed false information to the public who were reading the newspaper reports that could reasonably be accepted as being truthful. AFFORD chose to protect their reputation in a disingenuous manner.

AFFORD management also chose to totally disregard their pledge to provide support to Tanya which confirms their intentions to support their brand name rather than Tanya. In other words, the business that provides care services, and widely advertises their care services as being the very best, didn’t care for Tanya.

AFFORD was attempting to capitalise in the media on the death of one of their clients whom they should have been looking after but didn’t even though they promised to do this. The reality of the situation here is that had AFFORD been truthful, they would have told the AAP reporter a completely different story, and they would have provided much needed support to Tanya.

I am certain that AFFORD did not anticipate that social media can act against them too, and I am certain AFFORD is worried by the simple fact of exposing the truth of the matter on this blog.

It’s actually good for business when an organisation providing care services is seen publicly to be caring for someone suffering a huge tragedy. The care should be bountiful. AFFORD know this all too well and that’s why they made those statements to the AAP reporter, to be seen to care.

On the other hand if AFFORD was exposed for not providing any support whatsoever to Tanya, even though they publically promised the support, not surprisingly it could be bad for business. The consequences of their own actions. I call it Karma.

I spoke with Tanya today and she confirmed that that she has received no support whatsoever from AFFORD to date.

It’s very disappointing that an organisation that is allegedly in the business of selling care has not reached out and bent over backwards attempting to provide support for Tanya. The very reason why Tanya put Merna into full-time care was so she could work and provide for her 6 children, being a single mum with little to no financial support. Merna could not be left alone while Tanya worked and there was no sensible alternative other than to put Merna into full-time care. She had no choice.

The theme and title for this part of the blog is “Let the battle begin”. Although Tanya is one of the parties in this battle, her battle actually began on the day Merna drowned in the AFFORD bathtub. Not only was her life shattered beyond comprehension, so were her plans to work and provide for her 6 children.

Tanya still has to cook, clean, wash, iron, shop, do the lawn mowing and maintenance, and all the many other laborious tasks for 5 other children she has in her care. If ever there was a tale of a woman with a huge struggle and broad shoulders, this is it. On top of all this she does not know how to keep going. The physical and mental strain is overwhelming.

Every minute of every day, including the many hours Tanya does not sleep each night, is an enormous struggle. Sleep is not rest, it is nightmare after nightmare. Tanya needs help and the very organisation that promised to support her, the ones who were negligent here, are nowhere to be found. They have not provided her with any support.

It’s actually unbelievable that an organisation in the business of selling care, with huge resources and millions of dollars of funding has not provided any support whatsoever to Tanya. Sure we all know, if you read the papers, that AFFORD offered the support but they did not deliver it in any shape or form. Shame, shame, shame.

As far as I am aware AFFORD has at their disposal – carers, cleaners, gardeners, pshycologists, cooks, secretaries, vehicles, drivers, and a whole host of other services that they could reach out with to support Tanya.

AFFORD could easily have reached out to Tanya and apologised for what happened to her daughter whilst she was in their care. They could have sent flowers, food, and sat down with her to discuss how best they could help her, but they didn’t.

However they did increase their pay by 3.5 %!

So far we have looked at what AFFORD hasn’t done, so let’s take a brief look at some of the things that AFFORD has done,

· Pressured employees to sign confidentiality agreements so they cannot talk to anyone about the incident.

· The door knob and door were replaced on the bathroom where Merna drowned.

· The bathtub was removed.

· Changed the door knobs in many homes despite them allegedly already being 100% fully compliant with regulations.

· Made false reports in the media

· Continued to employ the carer who left Merna unattended in the bathtub

· Sacked Merna’s primary carer for sharing a link to this blog by monitoring her FaceBook

· Met with Tanya and provided her with a false account of the events that led to her daughter drowning in an AFFORD bathtub.

· Engaged Mr Peter James Beard of Clyde and Co to prepare a brief of evidence to mount a defamation case against me.

Hence the title of part VII of the blog should correctly read, “BRING IT ON”.

****** Update 29 November 2020 ******

Over the weekend I received a few comments from followers of the blog. Both offered interesting perspectives. One for reasons I shall publish later on together with my comment, and the other, from Anon, I shall deal with now. Rather than comment in the specified section below the comments section, because of relevance to the current topic I shall comment here in the body of the blog. Followers will recall that I proposed to deal with parallels with iCARE (and quite a few others too) in the decision making process with regards to spending policy.

See below, Anon’s comment of 27 November 2020.

Dear Anon

Your comment offers a plausible reason to account for the CEO’s decisions in some circumstances.

I’m sure your empathy will be greatly appreciated by Tanya. I detect some frustrations in your comment flowing from the way Tanya has been mistreated. I do appreciate your understanding of the situation and thank you for voicing that.

Interestingly your comment suggests a reason why choices were made by the CEO to conduct business in the manner he did. That is precisely the focus of our investigation at present.

Anon, I think it’s really all about the choices you make. I am keenly interested in the choices the CEO has made and highly interested in the reasons why he made those choices. He made choices that he thought would never be made public. Those choices were made with the calculated comfort in mind that there was zero chance of exposure.

I wanted to know what the driving force was behind particular decisions. In other words I want to know why a decision was made, adopting one choice in preference over other choices.

We all have choices but we don’t always base our decision on our choice of preference. Often the choice is made under the guidance of regulation, contract, governance, safety reasons or sheer common sense.

I have reviewed some decisions made by the executive management at AFFORD and some of their actions too. I have also had the opportunity to briefly look at some of the monitoring processes they deploy, together with some of their company policies.

With respect to the AFFORD organisation, I found that the economic concerns were put well ahead of the safety concerns of the clients. I found systems were put into place to acutely monitor economic concerns and risk, yet there was a failure in establishing systems that were adequate to ensure the safety of clients.

It is reprehensible that people with disabilities are put into a situation where the economic concerns of their guardians are the primary focus of their operations, over and above their safety and well- being.

****** Update 21 December 2020 ******

The female carer, who assisted Merna into the bath and then left her unsupervised when she went to the kitchen to prepare some snacks for the following day, made a conscious decision to do that. There was no duress. She did not have a gun held to her head and it was her choice to do that.

It wasn’t a good choice at all and one must wonder why she made that choice when she should have been supervising Merna having a bath that she had just prepared for her.

The carer was new to this group home and it was her very first shift there. After all, NDIS was paying AFFORD to provide 1:1 supervision at the exact time of day Merna took the bath for that specific task of supervising her when she had a bath.. The carer chose to breach this 1:1 supervision to prepare snacks. The decision making process broke down at this point, when really there was no decision to make. Client safety was not a consideration in the decision making process. There is little doubt that the carer went to prepare snacks as we have alleged.

(See intercepted communication below)

The reason why the carer made that choice is an important consideration. It is possible she made that choice because that information was NOT available on site at the time, thus indicating a possible failure on the part of the AFFORD management to ensure that the necessary medical records and notes were available on site. This incident happened on the very same day that both carers had their first shifts there.

I found that the incident was the result of a compilation of factors and I believe that I have identified them. Each factor contributed as a whole and each factor, singularly could have caused the same devastating outcome.

One of the factors, as innocuous as it seemed at the time, had a huge impact on events that evening and I will discuss this in detail in a future blog when I report on the issue of staff having sexual relationships with staff. This point was also the subject of many reports I have received, both as hearsay and an eyewitness account. It also is the subject of a comment mentioned above in my 29 November post where I indicated that I will post it later on. Also because of relevance here, I will be discussing breaches of policies and procedures in the blog in the near future.

As already indicated several times throughout this blog, I was alerted that something was amiss here with safety procedures by the mere fact of the way the executive management behaved. The manner in which the executive management of AFFORD conducted themselves after the incident was suspicious and not consistent with having nothing to hide. AFFORD management concocted a deceitful scheme to allay all blame and responsibility. They even aimed the blame at Tanya. Why did AFFORD management deploy a sophisticated cover up program if indeed there was nothing to cover up and it was simply an error on the part of the carer? Why did they rush in and have employees sign confidentiality agreements, effectively preventing them from saying anything about the incident?

The carer who prepared the snacks might not have known that Merna was an epileptic. This is pure speculation on my part but still a possible reason to consider for her decision making that evening. If she didn’t know that Merna was an epileptic, why didn’t she know? Was she told this by the regular carer that she took over from that day and couldn’t recall which client of the 3 was epileptic? Were the records available for her to quickly refer to? There are supposed to be client records available on site, procedures to follow, and buddy systems all so that the carer can properly care for the client and properly administer any medication that was prescribed, all to avoid situations like this one happening at all.

The issue of making sure all of the necessary paperwork is available on site is a very valid safety concern. If the organisation’s primary concern is to secure the client in their facility in order to access the approved NDIS funds and at the same time do not follow up with making sure the required medical and other paperwork is available from day 1, then there is a huge flaw in the system.

At this point I do not know if all of the necessary paperwork was available on site when the 2 new carers arrived at the Woodbine home on 23 May 2019, however this will be discoverable.

The reason why I am bringing this up is because my inquiries have indicated some grave concerns in this area.

Clients and carers come and go from places all of the time. It’s imperative that the carers arriving on duty, especially for the care of new clients, are acutely aware of the medical conditions of the clients they are meant to be looking after. I really don’t need to explain this but my observations have found this not to be the case at AFFORD.

I found that medical records are often not completed on time and not available until well after the client has moved into care.

The system deployed here at AFFORD is nothing short of pathetic. A simple inspection of Merna’s file will provide a clear indication of what I am concerned about.

Merna moved into the Eschol Park respite centre very late in December 2018 in preparation for her move to a group home. See self-explanatory captions below taken from Merna’s Epilepsy Management Plan.

On about 14 March 2019, Merna was hastily rushed from the Eschol Park facility to the Woodbine group home on the day the NDIS funding was approved. The driver who arrived to transport Merna was uncaring, rude and was not concerned with her wellbeing at all. Merna was crying and did not want to leave and the driver should have been more sympathetic and understanding towards her instead of outwardly making gestures mocking her for being a cry baby. See captions below taken from Merna’s Epilepsy Management Plan and note the date it was signed by the carers. You should also note the omission of the signatures on that document of the 2 new carers on duty for the first time at the Woodbine group home on 23 May 2019.

I am certain the CEO’s brief mandates that he must hold the safety of AFFORD clients and employees over and above every other consideration. Client and employee safety must be top priority. However, my observations have indicated this is not the case at all. AFFORD’s response to this tragedy and my observations of the systems in place have confirmed this.

It is fair to say, if you were going to make a comparison of the systems within an organisation with regards to efficiency and priority, the systems deployed to ensure client safety must take first place. However this is not what I observed was the case at AFFORD. Economic concerns were the primary focus of operations and client safety took a back seat.

The systems used to monitor client safety pales by comparison to the robust surveillance system used to monitor economic concerns. There is a clear mismatch.

AFFORD has a “Surveillance Policy”.

In stark contrast to the haphazard system used by AFFORD to monitor and manage the necessary paperwork on some of their sites, I found that a cutting edge surveillance system is deployed to monitor for economic security and economic safeguard via the Surveillance Policy.

I am able to report with accuracy the workings of the sophisticated monitoring system deployed by AFFORD to protect their economic concerns. For all the wrong reasons I am impressed with the extent AFFORD management have gone to implement a big brother surveillance system that is both formidable and robust. It is also labour intensive. Deploying a monitoring system like this would involve hours of ongoing work by the AFFORD executive management team and IT department.

The AFFORD IT department is tasked with monitoring IT systems, including computer, email and internet surveillance.

What this effectively means is that the IT department can use sophisticated software monitoring systems to monitor everything employees do on devices at the AFFORD premises or at home too. They can and do spy on emails, and whatever IT communications they so choose without any accountability for this. Staff and other employees also have their IT devices monitored checking for breaches of the many company policies and procedures, such as for instance; the social media policy.

There is evidence that the AFFORD executive team breached some company policies and procedures themselves without recourse or punishment. Therefore it is not unreasonable to suspect that the executive management team could also breach the surveillance policy too. In the absence of accountability here, there is nothing stopping them from breaching this policy or ever getting caught if they do.

The surveillance policy allows IT and HR at AFFORD to act as big brother when employees are using either AFFORD’s devices or AFFORD’s IT systems (emails etc) via their own device. However, I have observed that the surveillance monitoring of employees goes beyond that and extends to monitoring employees’ personal Facebook accounts and other personal social media platforms.

If anyone is interested in checking out what the rudimentary computer monitoring systems can do, check out Flexispy or Teramind. Software with similar features could be installed on any AFFORD device and the user will never know.

Not only does the surveillance policy give AFFORD the green light to spy on employees, and monitor their computers and mobile phones, it also gives them the right to download the data from the device, including your browsing history. That device could be your mobile phone!

Other tools can surreptitiously mirror your screen activity without user knowledge and give AFFORD complete ability to remotely control the device too. If anyone is interested in finding out more about similar sorts of programs, check out AnyDesk to see what features it offers to give the reader an idea of the functionality.

AFFORD policy states that computer surveillance is intermittent but ongoing. My interpretation is that AFFORD will monitor when and where they deem fit to do so.

The surveillance policy also gives AFFORD the right to undelete emails and use them against an employee in the event they are suspected of breaching AFFORD’s policies and procedures. There is an interesting peculiarity I have been made aware of with AFFORD breaches in that the breaches of AFFORD policies and procedures only seems to apply to employees under executive management team level. That is, AFFORD executive management show a blind eye when an executive member of the team breaches policies and procedures that they so vehemently enforce. I have seen incidences of the executive management team making a number of serious breaches, and when these were brought to their attention, no action was taken.

I have also observed an incident where an employee at the coalface level had her personal Facebook page monitored by AFFORD’s HR department and then sacked for sharing a link to this blog!

AFFORD staff at a day program centre have had to personally send out documentation to the parents of the many clients using that centre in order to have the necessary paperwork available on site. This paperwork requested included the Medication Management Plans and Epilepsy Management Plans.

The Surveillance Policy does not direct any resources to this very important aspect of client safety as far as I can see.

Information I have indicated that AFFORD also monitors ex-employees to see if they have breached agreements by taking clients with them! Monitoring is also conducted to check if anything, whether it is true or not, is revealed about the failings of AFFORD in the social media platforms.

Referring to “Part IV – Jobs for the Boys” in this very blog, we see another example of the AFFORD monitoring of employees. I will show a few excerpts below taken from this intercepted email communication. You can read the full email of course in Part IV.

Despite the high levels of penetration achieved with the surveillance powers mentioned above, it seems that is not enough. The AFFORD surveillance policy also gives AFFORD the right to use listening devices in cases where it is left up to the judgement of AFFORD.

So all in all we can see that AFFORD has a very powerful and intrusive surveillance system in place giving the AFFORD executive team the ability to conduct surveillance at a level not enjoyed by most law enforcement agencies around the world.

Putting it all together, what this all means is that AFFORD can give an employee a mobile phone, laptop or similar device and then secretly (and easily) turn on the microphone, or camera, or video camera without the user being aware and remotely monitor whenever they want. This is extremely powerful and intrusive stuff here and if used in conjunction with virtual machines (eg VirtualBox, VMware) and PowerShell, is untraceable! This level of intrusion can also easily be achieved if the employee is using their own device.

This in a nutshell is the sophisticated surveillance system deployed by AFFORD to protect its economic interests.

AFFORD also has a management tool called PACES, that AFFORD documentation alleges is a Quality Management tool, they say is a tool to ensure all AFFORD businesses are continuing to deliver exceptional service to AFFORD clients, residents and employees.

****** Updated 23 December 2020 ******

I am surprised to see that the AFFORD “management tool” PACES has little practical applications to do with client safety. I was hopeful after having a cursory look at this system, safety management would have immediately caught my eye. It didn’t.

Therefore I decided to have a closer look at the system and still nothing. My observations indicated that the tool is bonus and alcohol orientated, with a hidden marketing agenda.

PACES is promoted as a “Quality Management Tool” by AFFORD but they do not offer a definition of what that actually means. In a non-for-profit organisation by definition you could safely assume there were some benefits for the clients offered by this system so heavily governing operations.

With the PACES system, again I found the focus was economic concerns. There is evidence that the system actually causes a diversion, with employees busy working to meet PACES goals instead of otherwise focusing their attention on the clients, especially the issue of client safety.

Personal – Centeredness, Attitude, Customer Service, Efficiency and Standards. Safety does not rate a mention. It would not only be pleasing to see, but also a big step forward in client safety if the model was perhaps changed to SPACES by introducing a focus on safety.

I cannot see where safety fits into the model? But it’s clear to see where economic concerns fits into the model.

Management maintains a high level of vigilance on the marketing aspects of PACES. See management instructions to the staff regarding focus of marketing in PACES

“As part of PACES, your site is required to submit two good news stories each month and post at least three Facebook posts each week.”

Sadly I have found evidence of an AFFORD site instructing staff NOT to enter client details into the PACES system because the clients onsite records were either not there, or not up to date, and this would adversely affect the PACES score if they did.

Further evidence of the focus on economic concerns with AFFORD’s PACES monitoring tool.

“As we start a new quarter for PACES, we encourage all of you to send through your stories on time to marketing@afford.com.au. Your stories are important, so send them through when they happen, so our stories are current and relevant. It is also important to note that the photos sent with good news stories must have consent to use and be 1mb or larger (original quality) so they can be shared on our online blog or can be used for advertising. We have set up a common drive folder for you to save your photos:Y:\MARKETING PHOTOS.

Remember, post three times a week on Facebook and send through your good news stories to marketing@afford.com.au.”

****** Update 23 March 2021 ******

Earlier today I received a post from Donna xx posted on the Part IV – Jobs for the Boys part of this blog and I have responded to that post. However for ease of viewing I will cut and past a copy below.

****** Update 6 April 2021 ******

Earlier in this Part VII of the blog, I made the following statement;

“There is evidence that the AFFORD executive team breached some company policies and procedures themselves without recourse or punishment.”

I’m aware that a senior carer at AFFORD was fired for sharing a link to this blog and have already mentioned this several times throughout the blog.

According to information I’ve learned along the way, this employee was fired after AFFORD executives tracked her Facebook page in anticipation of possible violations, as though they don’t have anything better to do with their time.

Cited as one of the reasons why this experienced carer breached AFFORD social media policy and was subsequently sacked, was the allegation by AFFORD executives that this blog posted factually incorrect information about AFFORD and it’s staff members.

The readers of this blog will be well aware that it is AFFORD, not me, who publishes factually incorrect material.

If there are indeed errors of fact in this blog, I would be really pleased to hear from AFFORD or anyone else for that matter, directing me to exactly where the errors are and promptly make corrections.

This blog is about presenting fact in an open honest manner. These facts would otherwise have been covered up if AFFORDS efforts to do this succeeded.

It is a fact that AFFORD and their lawyers actively monitor this site. I find it totally irresponsible to allege this blog contains factually incorrect material and yet do nothing to correct same.

If AFFORD do not direct me to the alleged factually incorrect material, I will accept that simply is because there is none.

The only substantive news I’ve got from AFFORD is that their CEO, 1 or possibly 2 board members, and a slew of other main employees and executive managers have resigned.

On the topic of factually incorrect material, the readers will recall that it was me who approached AFFORD’s lawyer, Lucinda Lyons when the then CEO, Steven Herald, gave a factually incorrect account to Tanya of what happened to her daughter when the AFFORD staff were supposed to be supervising her when she took a bath.

As stated earlier in this blog, I wrote to Lucinda Lyons wanting to present her with the factually correct material about what happened to Merna and her disappointing reply indicated that she was not concerned with the my allegation that the ex CEO of AFFORD gave a factually incorrect account to Tanya.

Fortunately Lucinda Lyons was a witness to what was said at this meeting and she will have the opportunity to set the record straight seeing that the ex CEO cannot recall what he said. Of course other witnesses at that very meeting include Tanya, Stephanie Forsyth and me, can provide the ex CEO with an accurate recollection of what he said.

Still on the topic of factually incorrect material, ex AFFORD executive manageress, Casey Hailes, provided a wealth of factually incorrect material to crime reporter for AAP, Mr Perry Duffin some few days after Merna passed, knowing full well it was factually incorrect. It was published in the news all around the country. Hailes was the appointed AFFORD media officer and she provided this information following upon directions at a meeting held at Brighton-Le-Sands with the ex CEO and other executive managers of AFFORD a day or two after Merna’s passing. Other important things were discussed at this meeting and I shall address this in a later blog.

Recently Tanya lodged a complaint with AFFORD about the factually incorrect material AFFORD’s Casey Hailes provided to the media. The reader should already be aware that the material was fake, misleading, and extremely offensive and emotionally damaging to an already fragile Tanya who was grieving the loss of her daughter at the time. The lack of concern for Tanya at this critical time from an organisation in the business of selling “care” as its core business is disturbing.

On one hand we have AFFORD sacking an experienced carer for sharing a link to this blog alleging an insignificant breach of the AFFORD Social Media policy, and on the other hand we have AFFORD executives, including the ex CEO and Casey Hailes, publically spreading factually incorrect information to the media and Tanya yet NO action was taken despite the many serious breaches of AFFORD’s policies.

Over the next few days, I will publish a list of the AFFORD executives’ violations of AFFORD policy, as well as an account of their refusal to remedy these violations despite their severity.

****** Update 29 April 2021 ******

Let’s take a look at a few of these breaches.

Breach

A few days after this incident, the executive team member and Afford media spokesperson, Casey Hailes met with AAP crime reporter, Mr Perry Duffin and made a number of comments in respect of this incident.

Casey Hailes said,

“The young woman had a medical episode at some point that afternoon, Afford’s executive manager of client services, Casey Hailes, told AAP.”

This Afford executive team member was speaking publicly to a reporter, well aware that anything she said about this incident will almost certainly be reported. Indeed, she said what she said in the hopes of it being released to the public by the reporter, and it was.

The subject matter of the above quote also included the date and time it allegedly occurred. The location of this alleged incident was in the privacy of Merna’s home at the Woodbine group home where she lived.

Information about client medical records and details should be held with the strictest of confidence and oddly the only person where this confidentiality was maintained was with the mother. Nobody told Ms Petros about this medical episode, not even Casey Hailes who deemed it appropriate to discuss details about Merna’s medical records with the reporter.

I should think this statement was in breach of the Procedure – Privacy, Dignity and Confidentiality, with particular reference to the various sections of this policy shown below.

In addition to revealing confidential medical information to the media, Casey Hailes also revealed a lot of other information that was not factual and was simply a lie and therefore should also constitute a breach.

In light of the fact that a very experienced and reputable carer was sacked for simply sharing a link to this very blog, it would not be surprising to suspect that Casey Hailes’s release to the media would be treated seriously by Afford management especially seeing that Afford suggest that this release was done without CEO permission.

Even though there is an acknowledgement by Afford of the “seriousness,” of the media release, Affords’ reaction to it is appalling.

We do know that Casey Hailes left Afford after this incidence and we do know she did not leave because she was sacked otherwise Afford would have indicated that disciplinary action was indeed taken with respect to that breach.

On that basis that Casey Hailes was not sacked even though she ought to have been, it would be interesting to see if Afford provided Casey Hailes with a work reference, and what was said about her in that document so that she could get another job in the industry. Given that there should be at least 3 copies of that document, one with Casey Hailes, one with Afford and the third with her new employer, I believe that there is a very high chance that document will be obtained.

****** Update 6 May 2021 ******

Breach

Merna drowned in a bathtub while she was left unsupervised .So far, my investigations have shown that this was the culmination of a series of mistakes and failures, the majority of which I found was the result of poor management.

Financial interests were given precedence by management over client protection and well-being.

Building codes were disregarded, and group home upgrades failed to meet Australian requirements.

Access reports, prior to occupancy, were either not complied with or not prepared prior to client’s moving into the Woodbine group home.

AFFORD also are duty bound to protect their employees and the clients in their care. This includes providing all employees with a safe and healthy environment in which to work. This includes psychological damage. Harassment, bullying, intimidation, discrimination, and exposure to traumatic incidents can cause psychological damage with resultant long term mental health issues.

The carers on duty, Merna’s bonded carers who were off duty, and all of those other employees who attended the Woodbine group home that evening following this incident were all severely traumatised by that incident. The other residents of that very group home were also traumatised by that incident, especially one of the residents who witnessed the deceased Merna in the bathtub.

Several breaches were evident, including the following;

Procedure – Abuse & Neglect

Code of Conduct

Policy – Work Health & Safety

****** Updated 10 June 2021 ******

One of my trusty sources…..Google Alerts……has produced an alert of a story published today by the ABC. Readers can read that story by following the link below directly to that story.

ABC 7:30 Report Pat McGrath

I have just received news that the ABC’s 7:30 Report will also have a segment on their show tonight.

****** Updated 11 June 2021 ******

Of course I was aware that the ABC had interviewed Ms Petrus some weeks ago but did not know if the matter would be aired or did I know the nature of the story or how the interview would be used in support of that story.

However, the 7:30 Report was an excellent presentation and cleverly pinpointed the exact root cause of the problems within AFFORD. Clearly they did the necessary research.

The 7:30 Report also reported some of the content of AFFORD’s commissioned “independent” report that was mentioned by Perry Duffin in the AAP media release soon after Merna passed.

As I have indicated many times throughout this blog, the internet is a wonderful platform where, with a bit of searching know-how and the right searching tools, you can find almost anything. Fortunately, I had managed to acquire that report soon after it was completed and shall refer to the contents therein shortly.

****** Update 14 June 2021 ******

Investigation Report and Root Cause Analysis (RCA)

Since my last post, I have had a few requests from those wanting to know what software we use to scrape data and or analyse data from the internet. We use many different commercial and open source systems including Maltego Pro, advanced Google operators together with various OSINT sites and some tools from Kali Linux.

Followers of this blog will recall that a meeting was arranged in August 2019 where the agenda was for an explanation to be given to Tanya about what happened to her daughter. In attendance was Tanya, the former CEO Steven Herald, Stephanie Forsyth, AFFORD lawyer Lucinda Lyons and myself.

When this meeting was held I had not seen the RCA that was billed as the AFFORD commissioned independent investigation. I assumed that Steven Herald had read that report seeing he was the one who commissioned it and in his role as CEO had to comply with NSW health regulations and provide one. Thus Steven Herald had the benefit of reading the RCA prior to the meeting. The RCA clearly identified that one of the carer’s on duty that night of the incident lied about what happened, and named her.

What is unclear is whether or not this carer also lied to the police. We do know that the police interviewed the 2 carers on duty well before the investigator preparing the RCA. This of course will be clear when the Coroner’s report is finalised and handed down to the family. When the report is available I shall check the facts to see if this carer lied to the police, and if she did, it raises the question why she would lie to the police yet be truthful to the AFFORD investigation. The suggestion here is, was she paid to lie? Did she receive some inducements or bonus? Did this carer receive any disciplinary action for lying about the incident and submitting a false report to AFFORD?

Prior to the August 2019 meeting, I was aware that the RCA had identified conflicting statements regarding the circumstances on the evening of concern. There were 2 versions of what actually transpired on that night and this was reported very early in this blog in 2019. One version was simply a lie, an excerpt from the RCA is below.

“I said in the (incident) report that Mxxxx was having a shower. This is not the case. She had not agreed to have a shower. In the incident report I said I left Mxxxx on the bed. I did not leave her on the bed. No one was on the bed. It was too early. I meant to say I left her lying on the couch. I said I put Merna on the floor and commenced CPR. However, we could not get her out of the bath. We did not put her on the floor. I did not do CPR….”

Information I have at hand indicated that Mxxxx had a shower later that night after she was moved to another facility following this incident.

It was most disturbing to attend the August 2019 meeting with Tanya only to hear ex CEO Steven Herald provide an account of what happened that night that he knew was a lie. He provided the version that was admitted to being false in the RCA. I am also endeavouring to find out if his lawyer, Lucinda Lyons, also knew it was a lie. People with disabilities deserve to know the truth for obvious reasons, and the NDIS Quality and Safeguards commission must get to the bottom of this. It is not good enough that an organisation can secure millions of dollars of government funding on the back of contractual obligations to ensure safety for vulnerable people who cannot look after themselves, and in the event of neglect and failure in their duties, simply defeat the system by a cleverly orchestrated sophistificated cover-up.

In essence, one could reasonably suspect that the RCA was ordered to find out what went wrong and whose fault it was. This is generally what insurance factual investigators do, and there is an emphasis to establish if any contributory negligence exists . Their work is an attempt to illiminate or at best reduce the insurance company’s liability and thus minimise the payout for damages, which is fair enough. The possibilites of course in this matter were many and included suicide as a possible reason. But this was not the case.

I shall briefly refer to that RCA to add some clarity now that the RCA has been leaked in public and is out in the open.The purpose of the RCA was said to make recommendations regarding key safety and procedural issues which can benefit the organisation and it was billed as “independent”.

A few times throughout the RCA it is stated that the purpose of the report is to identify corrective actions that reduce the likelihood of a similar event happening again. The author stated that the RCA does not proportion blame to any individual or event (because that would lay the blame squarely onto AFFORD). Despite the assertion that the RCA does NOT proportion blame to any individual, I found a section titled “Contributory Factors” where blame is proportioned onto Merna herself.

The author of the RCA is far more skilled with factual investigations than I am. My skill set in relation to factual investigations is to supply the factual investigator with information from which a report is then prepared, something that I am doing here. Given the apparent lubriciousness of the ex CEO, in these situations, I believe the system would best be served if in future the RCA was commissioned by the NDIS rather than the CEO where the incident occured. There were some major errors in the RCA, but in fairness, to investigate these errors might not have been part of the scope of the investigation, but there were errors nevertheless in favour of AFFORD.

The RCA, in my opinion, is not proportionate to the gravity of the situation.

Given the nature of the incident involved a death, I expected far more depth in the investigation, especially given the availability of AFFORD business records and witnesses to the investigator. The RCA stated that Merna locked the bathroom door. There is no evidence that she did this. The RCA investigator did not interview the family.

The RCA also stated that;

“The incident itself occurred some time between 6:45pm and 7:00pm…”

The incident actually occurred between 6:15pm and 7:00pm, maybe even as early as 6:00pm

Overall, the RCA identified AFFORD’s flaws, and given the existence also of several major errors of fact, these reports should be commissioned by an external independent party rather than the CEO of the company where the incident occurred.

The report must be truly impartial.

****** Update 15 June 2021 ******

Pat McGraths’ ABC’s 7:30 Report indicated that “AFFORD’s board has appointed external investigators to look into allegations of misuse of the charities funds by some senior staff.”

This is an incredible statement. The Chairman of the Board is former Mayor of Penrith, Mr Ross Fowler who happens to be a chartered accountant by trade and is principal of his Penrith based firm of Chartered Accountants providing accounting services for businesses. He has been Chairman of AFFORD’s board since 18 February 2004.

No disrespect intended to the AFFORD Chairman, but if he does not know by now that there has been a blatant misuse of AFFORD’s funds, he need look no further than the ABC’s 7:30 Report of 10 June 2021.

To bring him up to speed, let’s have a look at what a client of AFFORD eats for lunch noting the location where he eats his lunch.

Now let’s take a look at what the senior executives of AFFORD eat for lunch and where they eat their lunch on occasion, also taking into account that some executives travelled from interstate to attend this luncheon.

If this example is NOT abundantly clear to the AFFORD Chairman about misuse of the charities funds, perhaps he should dig a little deeper and examine the expenses ledger to get an understanding of who paid for the lunches.

It should not come as a surprise to the Chairman that the gentlemen in the very first picture paid for his lunch out of his own pocket because the NDIS does not cover lunches. This same gentleman also paid for the AFFORD executive’s lunch, and the boat, and the alcohol via open bar, and the other associated costs such as airfares and transport to and fro, because these costs are borne out of his NDIS package.

I am certain that all of a sudden the AFFORD board commissioned this external report into the misuse of AFFORD’s funds solely on the back of the ABC’s 7:30 report.

****** Update 20 June 2021 ******

The Chairman of AFFORD’s board, Mr Ross Fowler, I understand has received an OAM. His business website states;

“In January 2008 Ross was awarded a medal of the Order of Australia for service to local government and to the community of Penrith through a range of service and disabled care organisations.”

Serving as Chairman entails roles and responsibilities that must be upheld in order to keep the position.

One of the major functions is to ensure that when safety concerns are raised, action is taken quickly and that problems are corrected as soon as possible. Earlier in this section of the blog, I listed an excerpt from the OHS policy relating to these roles and responsibilities of the board and for ease of access I will list this excerpt again below.

For the benefit of AFFORD’s clients it is imperative that the Chairman does an outstanding job. It is not acceptable to simply manage safety complaints without instigating remedial action and then ensuring whatever remedial action is taken, is monitored for compliance thereafter. He should be aware that this rates higher on the to do list, over and above flying executive staff from around the country for all expenses paid binges on seafood laden luxury boats that cost $2,500 per hour.

Witnesses I spoke to advised that soon after Steven Herald took over as CEO in 2015 (his contract dated 12 February 2015 signed by the then Chairman Neville Barnier indicating the start date was 30 March 2015), he imposed budgetary constraints on the organisation at the coalface level. These spending cuts were handed down to various Team Leaders to implement. At the same time experienced staff were sacked and new senior management were enjoying increased benefits and bonuses. Steven Herald had brought a whole team of loyal workers from Civic and friends of his children to work at Afford without going through any merit based selection processes. People were engaged who were not suitably qualified or had experience in the specific type of work they were doing. Hence the earlier blog section called “Jobs for the boys”.

These budgetary changes would have been obvious to the Chairman.

One of the team leaders that I interviewed had raised concerns at that time, that the only way to meet the required level of spending cuts was by sacking staff. The team leader was shocked to find out at the very same time spending cuts were forced upon her, AFFORD spending was increased for advertising signage on the AFFORD vehicles, and lavish functions were being held.

The team leader raised concerns about the increased safety risk to clients as a direct result of these cuts, and for her efforts was then pushed out of the AFFORD organisation in a very nasty way. This particular team leader then wrote a lengthy letter to the AFFORD board outlining these concerns. Based on this letter of concern that was sent for valid reasons to the board many years ago, to be honest, I’m not sure if the Chairman did his job properly or not. It certainly does not appear that way, given the manifestation of these safety concerns.

What I initially thought was a simple straight forward investigation, soon headed down a very different path because I really didn’t like what I saw and without instruction elected to continue with investigations even after I had satisfied my initial brief.

This blog is not intended to be a dig against the Chairman of the AFFORD board, the colourful Steven Herald, or his lawyer nor anyone else.

It is an ongoing investigation that began with the goal of providing Tanya Petrus with documents and answers about how her daughter died, and then ended up something you would expect in the Godfather Part V. Cover-ups, lies, and deceit have occurred, as have fake reports to the media, fabricated medical records, allegations of bribery, sex scandals, jobs for the boys, abuse, bullying, neglect, fraud, drugs, and alcoholism fuelling wild parties in exotic locations, all within a charity run by people with unparalleled qualifications, and a high-paid lawyer sanctioning hush agreements with key witnesses for a company with an annual injection of about $100 million generously paid by the government. Forgive me for feeling gobsmacked, but this is a charitable organisation looking after people with disabilities that we are talking about here.

The timing is right for change.

****** Update 30 June 2021 ******

The impressive array of board members at AFFORD did not do their job properly.

Judging from the extravagant and self-indulgent event highlighted on the recent ABC’s 7:30 report that occurred some months after the new acting CEO of AFFORD arrived on duty, it would seem fair to say from observations that AFFORD has not embraced the concept of change after Steven Herald resigned. Some of the actors have changed, but the plot remains the same.

Change, from a safety perspective needs to be proactive, and not reactive as evidenced after the tragic incident on 23 May 2019, when the very next day door knobs were being hurriedly replaced at all AFFORD owned group homes, many within the Penrith precinct. This is the very precinct where the AFFORD Chairman was the Mayor and responsible to ensure people with disabilities were safe. The replacement of existing door knobs to ones compliant with Australian standards should have been done before residents with disabilities moved in.

No one knows exactly when Merna had the seizure and drowned in the bath. It is possible she had the seizure whilst the carers were trying to get into the locked bathroom, and couldn’t get in.

The AFFORD board, according to the ABC 7:30 report, has ordered external investigators to look into allegations of misuse of the charity’s (AFFORD’s) funds. Oddly the AFFORD board sat there for years and watched on as thousands of $’s were spent on extravagant functions, bonuses and alcohol, yet under their watch door knobs valued at $150 were not installed into AFFORD group homes. The board needs to be held accountable. After all their mere existence is to ensure proper management of AFFORD, and safety is one such issue in their job description, and it’s the very issue they didn’t do properly. Making profits and expansion took priority over client safety.

With such an impressive array of AFFORD board members, it has left me wondering why it took the death of a client to suddenly launch AFFORD to replace non-compliant door knobs? What I am getting at here, will it keep on taking clients to suffer fatal consequences before safety issues are addressed? That’s exactly what happened in the Penrith precinct in 2019.

The ABC’s 7:30 Report also indicated that after Steven Herald resigned he wanted his job back but the board declined. In the AFFORD 2020 Annual Report the Chairman is quoted as saying

“I would like to give thanks to our CEO, Steven Herald, and his Executive Team for their relentless pursuit to better Afford as an organisation”.

One must wonder what the ex CEO did since this glowing report by the Chairman in late 2020 to have the reinstatement of his CEO position declined. Maybe the Chairman wants to keep the reason secret. When I ratify the information I have regarding the reasons why the ex CEO, Steven Herald’s re-instatement was declined, I can assure the reader, it will no longer be a secret.

I am left wondering how many door knobs could have been purchased instead of a round of shots!

The post Let the battle begin! appeared first on Inner Sydney Investigations.

Merna - Part VII Archives - Inner Sydney Investigations

Let the battle begin!