CEDU's collapse comes as no surprise
I am following the CEDU collapse closely, which some find a mystery. I do not.
This bankruptcy is more about child abuse than it is about cash flow.
If you look at the bankruptcy filing, you will see $1 million for assorted lawyers and $500,000 for settlements. Why so much money?'ca
Brown/CEDU was doing bad things to kids, in Texas, in Idaho, in California, and many parents were (and are) suing. Brown, apparently, was not using its liability insurance, but was hiring its own expensive defense attorneys and entering into costly settlements (all now wiped out), no doubt subject to'caa non-disclosure clause.'ca
Brown'd5s/CEDU'd5s practices were beginning to catch up with them. Brown/CEDU first made, and then lost, a lot of money isolating kids in remote locations. These isolation practices, which in my view are abhorrent, are illegal in California, but apparently, not in Idaho. It is the heart of the Brown/CEDU program.'ca
Parents who can'd5t or won'd5t work with their kids, and the educational consultants who feed off their desperation, are attracted to places'calike CEDU that enforce isolation of parent from child. These so-called emotional growth schools are a cynical and sordid industry, which cries out for federal regulation.
I am the father of a then 13-year-old girl, who was forced to spend 4 months isolated at CEDU'd5s Running Springs facility in 2003.'ca
I am also a plaintiff in a lawsuit against CEDU in California.
At the Running Springs facility, which was a profit center for Brown, over a period of years CEDU engaged in outrageous conduct and wholesale violation of the children'd5s rights. Examples of state-issued citations include 40 cases of child on child sexual abuse,'cawith full staff awareness and no staff intervention or reporting; bread, cheese and water meals for three days in a closet, as a routine punishment.'ca
On average, one child a week ran away from the Running Springs campus, which is 6.000 feet up in the San Bernardino mountains.'caA child who disappeared in February 2004 has yet to be found.'ca
Why did the educational consultants recommend and praise such a place? That is a more important question than why CEDU went bankrupt.
In mid-February 2005, after months of investigation by police and social service officials in California, citations were served on CEDU'cafor its cross-the-board policy of denying and monitoring the children'd5s phone calls, censoring and limiting their mail, limiting and disrupting parental visits, failing to have any 'd2needs and services'd3 plans, enrolling kids'cawithout mandated first visits, engaging in out of state transfers that bypassed children'd5s homes, etc.'ca
Dr. George Condas, the last director of CEDU, implemented all of this unlawful policy at Running Springs. He has not been quoted in any of the coverage.
In a'caMarch 10, 2005 Non-Compliance conference, California Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division, ordered CEDU to change its isolation and enrollment practices at once.
The citations'caand the extent of the abuses would have become known. The Teacher'd5s Fund and other investors, which previously may or may not have known the extent of Brown/CEDU'd5s unlawful conduct in California, the quantity of past and future litigation, and the recurring charges of abusive and negligent behavior toward children, could not afford to be associated with such a business.'ca Perhaps this is why chapter 7 dissolution was chosen rather than chapter 11 reorganization.
GEORGE LOCKER
New York, N.Y.