Category Archives: TBI

The First Brain Injury Summit – A Step in the Right Direction

Posted on by
3

While there are some difficult realities surrounding New York State’s Traumatic Brain Injury Waiver, all attendees at the first Brain Injury Summit held in Albany this week agree that the waiver is far more a blessing than it is a curse. Nearly 3,000 adults who live with brain injuries live in the community because of the waiver, and that is good news. There are also no plans to end the TBI Waiver. Deep breath all.

The summit was recorded and once I figure out how to post it online in its entirety, it will be posted. Transparency is critically important.

The attendees at this week’s two-hour summit, hosted by the Kahrmann Advocacy Coalition, pledged in no uncertain terms to work together to address the challenges now faced by waiver participants, providers and, not incidentally, by the New York State Department of  Health which deals with the perpetual pressures faced by any regulatory agency, particularly during hard economic times.

Those who attended the summit were (in alphabetical order) :

  • Marie Cavallo, president, Brain Injury Association of NY State
  • Bill Combes, NY State Commission on Quality of Care
  • Karina Davis-Corr, Providers Alliance
  • Peter S. Kahrmann, Kahrmann Advocacy Coalition
  • Mark Kissinger, Deputy Commissioner, NY State Department of Health
  • Sandra Ryden, Kahrmann Advocacy Coalition
  • Mary Seeley, acting Executive Director, Brain Injury Association of NY State
  • Joe Vollaro, Providers Alliance

While I can’t and won’t speak for the others at this meeting, I can tell you that discussion was wide ranging, direct, deeply respectful on all fronts, and serious. It was and is not lost on any of us that there are real financial pressures on everyone that are not of our own making.

I did say that they number one complaint I hear from people who live with brain injuries (and people with disabilities of all kinds) is we get treated like we are children, and in some cases like we are barely human. Part of the reason for this is a rather global lack of understanding about the brain and brain injury thus putting the most well-intentioned among us in the untenable position of having to make choices and decisions while not fully understanding the role the brain injury is playing in the person they are working with.

I also said, and all agreed, that there were no villains at the table, and this includes the DOH, the most commonly villainized of all. The DOH is like any other large entity. Some of its workers are great, some aren’t. 

As a result of the summit the Providers Alliance will begin to meet with the DOH at a cadence both parties agree on, and that is good news all around.

I am not going to go into a slew of details at this point. But I can tell you this, and if you know me or know of me you’ll know this is true, I genuinely felt everyone at the table truly gave a damn. If I did not feel this way, I would tell you.

I would be remiss if I did not also mention that I raised the subject of Timothy J. Feeney being only “moments” away from being part of the neurobehavioral project again, a disgraceful and despicable reality no matter how you hold it up to the light. However, the “hands” that manipulated the course that is poised to allow a clinical predator like Feeney back into the mix were not at the table. It is not yet clear who pulled the strings, but it will be. Trust me. It is just a matter of time.

One piece of Feeney-related good news that came to light at the summit is this: waiver providers are free to choose not to work with Feeney. Therefore, providers who do choose to work with him are, by default, acknowledging they don’t truly give a damn about the people they serve.

The next summit is scheduled for December 10, 2010.

 

Who Pressured NY DOH into Bringing Back a Clinical Predator?

Posted on by
Reply

Someone must have pressured the New York State Department of Health to enter into a contract that allows a clinical predator back into the lives of brain injury survivors, their families and those who provide services to them. Some political favor or debt has called in, someone with some pull who clearly cares absolutely nothing about brain injury survivors.

I make this observation because it is the only thing that makes sense. There are some truly good people working at the DOH who really do care about brain injury survivors. But who among them (or anyone for that matter) can say with a straight face that they are comfortable with the department’s entering into a contract that allows Timothy J. Feeney, who by all accounts is nothing but a full-blown narcissist, back into the lives of those of us living with brain injuries.

There are some good people at the DOH and I dare say many would be forced to bite deep into their tongues in order to get themselves to say, “I think it is fine that someone who lies about his credentials to everyone provides services related to the TBI Waiver.” Don’t forget, Feeney and his company are already an approved provider of waiver services which makes one wonder what will be done about the obvious conflict of interest now that the clinical predators are back as the “neurobehavioral project.”  But Feeney doesn’t stop there. Let’s not forget that only this week Feeney was up in Washington County’s Fort Ann School District working with disabled children, never mind that school officials know his credentials are bogus. So much for putting children first.

A DOH official who  I will not name said the DOH has been assured by Maria Dibble, the executive director of the Southern Tier Independence Center, the recipient of the more than $250,000 contract that will hand the work to Feeney, that the provisions of the contract will be carried out in the highest professional manner. As presented, Ms. Dibble’s reassurance would actually be funny were it not so morally and clinically troubling – not too mention absent any relationship to  reality. How on earth can you provide quality services when you know the person providing them is lying about their credentials?

An email asking Ms. Dibble to explain STIC’s support for Feeney has gone unanswered.

Back to the question of the day. Who is pulling the strings? Is it solely a coincidence that Patricia Greene Gumson, a former DOH employee and Feeney supporter used to work at STIC? Sources have made it clear that both Ms. Gumson and current DOH employee Bruce Rosen had the reality of Feeney’s invalid college degrees brought to their attention and they did nothing about it.  There is no doubt that Gumson and Rosen did some admirable things over the years, no doubt at all. But this truth does not spare them accountability for supporting a clinical predator who likes to call himself “the angel of death” and has been known to be a bully. I’ve heard him refer to himself like this and the late Dr. Mark Ylvisaker often referenced Feeney’s penchant for this macabre moniker.

But back to the question at hand. Who pulled the strings for Feeney? To where or to whom does the corruption thread lead? One possible clue would be to watch which provider Feeney buddies up with.

Anyway, the truth will out.

 

Responding to a Reader about Feeney’s Work

Posted on by
1

A blog reader recently wrote in asking about the quality of Tim Feeney’s work with brain injury survivors. In short, not impressive. In fact, I consider Feeney nothing more than a clinical predator.

This writer and others have received numerous reports of assessments not being done by Feeney and his staff, assessments done in a haphazard fashion, and a seeming reluctance to put much of anything in writing.

One family set up a meeting with their attorney and their son who lives with a brain injury specifically so Feeney could attend. Not only did Feeney not attend, he didn’t even bother to call them. They set up a second meeting with the same result. Another example would be when Feeney spent 10 minutes with a man with a brain injury, claimed it was an assessment, and proclaimed the man unfit for the waiver.

This writer has heard Feeney refer to himself as ‘the angel of death” referencing his ability to close a waiver provider, stop admissions or refuse to allow a survivor on the waiver or, in some cases, toss a survivor off the waiver. Moreover, several providers, good providers, have talked about how Feeney and his group would place demands on providers that placed unnecessary economic strain on their pocketbooks while at the same time, did not translate into particularly effective care.

I can tell this reader, and others pondering the same question this person asked, that back when I first exposed Feeney’s false credentials I offered to sit down and talk with him about the situation, and offer he began to accept until I told him we needed to record the conversation so neither of us would have to worry about the other making false claims. As soon as he heard this, he declined to talk.

I would sit down with Feeney any time – in an open forum  – which allowed survivors, families, members of the media and others to attend and ask questions; give him a chance to explain why it is okay to go around the state, the country and, for that matter, the world, telling people in real need of help, people with brain injuries, children with autism and more, why it is okay for him to say he is Dr. Feeney or Tim Feeney PhD when he is neither.

A Tarnished STIC Brings Feeney Back

Posted on by
Reply

The New York State Department of Health has signed a contract with the Southern Tier Independent Living Center (STIC) in Binghamton New York giving it the neurobehavioral project for the state’s traumatic brain injury waiver.  Even though STIC Executive Director Maria Dibble knows Timothy J. Feeney misrepresents his credentials to people with disabilities (including children!), the very people she, STIC, and Feeney claim to serve, the neurobehavioral project will once again be handed to Feeney.

While the contract still needs to go through a review by New York’s attorney general and comptroller for approval, sources say it is unlikely the contract will be voided.

Any advocate or advocacy group that does not openly voice its disapproval of Feeney’s presence in the mix, is, by default, part of the problem. It’s like claiming to be a civil rights organization and then keeping your mouth shut when people are being made to ride in the back of the bus. Any provider who allows Feeney anywhere near their program clearly doesn’t think much of the people they claim to serve.

What would be interesting would be to have a public debate between myself and Mr. Feeney (he’d have to find some backbone) at which he can explain why it is okay to mislead people with disabilities and lie about his credentials.

In the meantime, I am urging all advocates and interested parties to file complaints with the government fraud division of the State Comptroller and the state attorney general’s healthcare industry task force. There are other investigations under way now into Feeney that I cannot talk about.

You can also file your concerns and complaints with the Kahrmann Advocacy Coalition at kahrma1(insert at sign)gmail.com

No human being deserves to receive their healthcare services or have their healthcare services influenced by someone who misrepresents his credentials. Imagine your family members receiving care from a doctor and then you find out the doctor is not a doctor at all.

Feeney and those supporting him ought to be doubled up with guilt, but that’s not happening.  It’s hard to feel guilt when you don’t have a conscience.

Is Tim Feeney a Liar?

Posted on by
3

A friend of mine recently wrote to me wanting a closer look at the details surrounding Timothy J. Feeney’s bogus claim in an email to my blog readers that he was awarded a legitimate masters degree and doctorate by  a now defunct diploma mill called Greenwich University. The short answer is, he wasn’t. However, let’s look at the facts.

Feeney’s unsolicited email to my blog readers says Greenwich “functioned as an unaccredited institution in the US, moved it’s physical location to Australia, received legal accreditation in Australia for a two year period – period of time that my doctorate was conferred – and then lost that accreditation and closed.”

First of all, Greenwich was never given legal accreditation by the government of Australia – never.

In fact, according to the Australian Federal Government’s Department of Education, Science and Training, “Between 30 June 1998 and 2 December 2002, Greenwich University (Norfolk Island) degrees were lawfully awarded under legislation approved by the Norfolk Island Government (not the Australian Government), using its powers of self-government. While the Commonwealth Minister for Territories assented to legislation, this does not mean that Greenwich University awards were ever recognized by the Federal Government of Australia.” In fact, in January 1999, Greenwich actually sought accreditation under the  Australian Qualifications Framework. The Australian government set up a review committee that, after review, ruled that Greenwich would “not be listed on the registers of the Australian Qualifications Framework because the standard of its courses, quality assurance mechanisms and its academic leadership fail to meet the standards expected of Australian universities.”

But, for the moment anyway, ‘let’s go back to Feeney’s claim that his “doctorate” (note that he omits reference to the “masters”) was awarded during the time Norfolk Island allowed Greenwich to issue degrees: June 30, 1998 to December 2, 2002.  However, there is a rather critical document that stands in the way of Feeney’s claim. In fact, it disproves it.  It is a document, I dare say, that Feeney himself would  a tough time arguing against, mostly because the document is his resume. His resume says he was awarded his “masters” in 1992 and his “doctorate” in 1996, six years and two years respectively before the time period Norfolk Island allowed Greenwich to award degrees.

And just so we leave no stone unturned, in a January 27, 2009 email to me written by Douglass  Capogrossi, the former president of Greenwich University no less, Mr. Capogrossi writes that Feeney received his “masters” from Greenwich on August 27, 1993 and his “doctorate” on June 14, 1999. So was Feeney lying in his resume when he claimed 1996 as the year he received his “doctorate”? Hmmm, lob pitch anyone?

Having said all this, here is the bottom line. Neither document awarded Feeney by Greenwich is recognized as a valid college degree anywhere in the world and, more importantly, anywhere in the United States, including my home state of New York. The dates he cited in his email to my blog readers were and are disingenuous.

So what does this all mean, other than Feeney continues to knowingly misrepresent his credentials. It means that any business, health care provider and  or government agency who knowingly does business with him has in some way decided it is okay for him to lie about his credentials and mislead survivors of brain injury, their families, children with disabilities, healthcare providers and more.

I would urge any and all to refuse to work with Feeney or any entity he is involved with until Feeney openly acknowledges his dishonesty.