L.L.P.O.F.

An experienced attorney specializing in litigation develops a sense for when a witness or opposing party is being less than forthright and truthful. Seasoned litigators know that liars are like snakes. Both eventually shed their skins. A skilled attorney knows how to make precise, verbal surgical incisions to force a liar to shed their thin skin of false transparency and reveal their true dishonest character.

Non-attorneys have a more succinct, if perhaps even more colorful expression for the same concept. The expression goes by the initials, “L.L.P.O.F.” Our children know it universally as, “Liar Liar Pants on Fire.”

The Highest Degree of Honesty and Transparency from the Eating Disorder Industry is Mandatory and Sacrosanct

For treatment providers in the eating disorder industry, there is an absolute, non-delegable duty to be completely transparent, to be open and honest, to have the highest degree of integrity especially when you solicit families to utilize your services. Parents, gripped by the greatest fear a parent can possibly face, are occasionally forced to turn to those residential treatment centers for even the smallest glimmer of hope. They entrust the most precious thing in the world to these treatment centers... the lives of their children.

The slightest intentional prevarication, exaggeration or withholding of material information is nothing more than an unconscionable, reprehensible taking advantage of those parents … and is rightly met with the highest degree of draconian retribution.

The problems within the cabal of residential treatment centers comprising the Residential Eating Disorder Consortium (“Consortium”) run deep and seem to be escalating on a descending basis not seen since Virgil escorted Dante through hell and purgatory. Prior articles disclosed a possible less than stellar capacity for transparency and integrity practiced by the Consortium. Now, there appears to be definitive proof.

Specific misrepresentations

Language Appearing on September 3, 2018

On September 3, 2018 misrepresentations by the Consortium on its website included the following language:  

The REDC Standards Committee has also been working with the AED Credentialing Task Force to partner with an accreditation agency to implement the AED Credentialing Task Force CLINICAL PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL AND INPATIENT EATING DISORDER TREATMENT.

This statement was believed to be untrue for a number of reasons. First, the hyperlink for the AED Credentialing Task Force on the Consortium's website took you to a page designated, “Page Not Found.”

Second, the “Working Draft of the Clinical Practice Recommendations for Residential and Inpatient Eating Disorder Programs” (“Working Draft”) indicated that the research on that project was performed between 2004 and 2011, during a time in which the Consortium was not even in existence. 

Third, the Working Draft mentioned collaborating with the National Eating Disorder Association (NEDA) in 2004 and later with the International Association of Eating Disorder Professionals (IAEDP) and did not even mention the Consortium. The Working Draft also stated, “The clinical practice recommendations are the product of a 2006 stakeholders meeting and three work groups that met from 2005-2006.” The Consortium did not even come into existence until 5 years after that portion of the Working Draft was concluded.

As a group, the Consortium had nothing to do with the Working Draft. But, they brazenly took credit for it. And they falsely represented to the general public that they took credit for it. Until they were called out.

The truth won out fewer than three (3) days later.

Language appearing on September 6, 2018

After the statement and its deficiencies were disclosed to the public, within two days, the Consortium changed the language on its website so that it now reads:

REDC worked with the leader of the AED Credentialing Task Force to partner with an accreditation agency to implement the AED Credentialing Task Force CLINICAL PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL AND INPATIENT EATING DISORDER TREATMENT. Two accreditation agencies have incorporated these eating disorder standards into their accreditation programs, The Joint Commission and the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitative Facilities (CARF.)  All REDC members are accredited by CARF or Joint Commission.

Let’s carefully examine the changes made by the Consortium and detail the manner in which the Consortium again dropped the ball.

The past questionable language read:

The REDC Standards Committee has also been working with the AED Credentialing Task Force to partner with an accreditation agency to implement …

The new language reads:

REDC worked with the leader of the AED Credentialing Task Force to partner with an accreditation agency to implement the AED Credentialing Task…

The differences are stark. The past language specified that it was the REDC Standards Committee which was still currently working with the AED Credentialing Task Force.

We pointed out that the AED Credentialing Task Force was not even in existence at this time and had not been in existence for quite some time. 

Changing this language immediately after disclosure is an obvious admission that the statement was at best inaccurate and at worst, blatantly untrue. 

The Consortium then attempted to regain part of its integrity by simply stating, “REDC worked.” It also changed the verb tense to reflect the past tense, that whatever work happened occurred in the past. 

And yet, we also can deduce that even now, the Consortium still refuses to be completely transparent. To this end, it failed to state that for at least part of the time, when the Working Draft was issued, the AED Task Force Chairperson was Mary Tantillo. Ms. Tantillo happens to be on the current Advisory Board of the Consortium. So, when the Consortium states, "REDC worked with the leader of the AED Credentialing Task Force to partner with an accreditation agency to implement the AED Credentialing Task..." it simply means one of the Consortium’s Advisory Board members worked on this matter.

To also give complete transparency, identify the accreditation agency implementing the Working Draft. In that manner, any concerned person can verify that indeed, the collaboration and work actually occurred. Presumably, this accreditation agency is the Joint Commission which was started in 1951 and claims to currently oversee approximately 21,000 health care organizations and foundations in the United States.

Perhaps transparency is too difficult of a concept. Perhaps the Consortium cannot think of appropriate language to utilize. Therefore, in the spirit of good faith collaboration, I propose the Consortium tries one more time with perhaps the following language as an initial guideline:

Jillian Lampert, the President of the Consortium and Mary Tantillo, who sits on our Advisory Board and who served as a Chairperson of the AED Task Force, assisted in working with the Joint Commission on Mental Health to implement the Clinical Practice Recommendations for Residential and Inpatient Eating disorder Treatment generated by the AED Credentialing Task Force.

That language is relatively clear and concise and assuming it is accurate, is a fair representation of the work performed. It cannot be attacked for subterfuge. It is the type of transparency that parents and providers are entitled to rely upon.

Other post-September 3, 2018 changes.

There were other changes on the Consortium’s website post September 3, 2018 that were of interest and possible concern. We previously pointed out that although membership in the Consortium was restricted to residential treatment centers, persons who are not employed by an RTC served as officers or directors. Of particular concern was the fact that a person who started her own private equity or investment company, was listed as a director of the Consortium.

Between September 3 and September 6, the Consortium reduced the number of its directors from six (6) persons to three (3) persons. The persons who are no longer directors? Vickie Kroviak, founder of the Tresoro Group. Ms. Kroviak is now listed as the sole “Board Member Emeritus.”

The second person who is no longer a director is Kim Dennis. It was pointed out that Dr. Dennis is employed by Suncloud Health, a strictly outpatient program based outside of Chicago. Since Suncloud Health is not a residential treatment program, it does not satisfy the Consortium’s membership requirements.

The third person who is no longer a director is Chris Diamond, the CEO of Sunspire Health. The curious thing about Sunspire Health is that it emphasizes addiction treatment and not eating disorder treatment. Further, Sunspire Health is not even listed as a member of the Consortium.

Therefore, the three persons on the Consortium’s Board of Directors who no longer serve in that capacity are the private equity owner, the person who oversees an IOP program and a person who is the CEO of an entity which is not even a member of the Consortium. I suppose that coincidences come in all shapes and sizes.

Ordinarily, the reduction in the number of persons who sit on a board of directors and/or awarding a person the title and status of “Board Member Emeritus” must be decided at a directors meeting, a shareholders meeting or a manager’s meeting. This is especially true when your board of directors is reduced by half of its members. It is certainly outside the normal course of business which can be unilaterally decided by a president or CEO of a company. In fact, an entity’s organizational minutes ordinarily set the number of directors of a company and can be changed only after notice of a meeting is given, a quorum is present and the change in the minutes is voted on and approved by a majority of the attendees.

This sudden and dramatic change in the organizational structure of the Consortium is important since representations were made that at the next board meeting of the Consortium, the issue of organizing a Coalition Committee along the lines of that proposed on this site last week would be addressed. Eating disorder organizations, parents, patients, and treatment centers which do not belong to the Consortium await the Consortium’s official position on the matter of collaboration, or working in a collaborative fashion within the industry.

Admissions of inaccuracy on websites.  Their attempt to rectify the inaccuracies being tepid and ineffective at best. No press release acknowledging the change in your organization. Taking credit for work they did not do. A sudden reduction of your board of directors from six (6) to three (3) with the three persons who pursuant to your own rules and guidelines should not have been directors to begin with. All of this done within the span of fewer than three (3) days with no press release or public announcement of any kind.

We entrust the lives of our children to the members of the Consortium. And we have been met with subterfuge, inaccuracies, misrepresentations and prevarications. There may be much more to the Consortium than that which meets the eye. But, they are not responding in the manner in which they are insuring that future inaccuracies do not occur or that the responsible employees, officers or directors have in any way been chastised or held accountable.

When there are no ramifications for misconduct, when an entity proceeds along with a "business as normal" attitude truly then, something is rotten in the State of Denmark.