Letter to Disabled Veterans of America

Dear Members of the Disabled Veterans of America:

I am concerned about the poor treatment of some of our veterans at the Volunteers of America Sheridan Community Homeless Shelter. Please bear with me as I shed some light on this concern, and seek your help in righting this wrong.
As you probably know, the Veterans Administration Medical Center leases one of its buildings to Volunteers of America, which operates its own independent community homeless shelter. Volunteers of America is under contract with the VAMC to provide at least 16 beds to serve homeless veterans in our area.
I worked at the homeless shelter for one year as the service coordinator. During my year of employment there, I witnessed unfair, improper and poor-quality treatment of disabled veterans – mostly through the director and another disabled veteran on staff at the shelter (both employees of Volunteers of America).

A veteran was dismissed from the shelter because he said, “I am not like the other people here” . . . The director talked about charging a veteran for the food he ate at the shelter because he had a job at the VA . . . Veterans are placed on the shelter’s Not Welcome Back List for no more reason than that the director is tired of them . . . A veteran’s diabetic diet was not followed by the shelter . . . A Black Beret Veteran with PTSD was accosted by staff and this brought on a difficult episode on the part of the veteran . . . A veteran was promised a bed upon his return from taking care of personal business in another state, but, when he returned to the shelter, he was told he was not welcome back . . . Veterans are routinely told by the director that they are mentally ill, and are ordered to treatment they do not want or feel they need . . . Veterans are told they can help shape their goals while at the shelter, but, in truth, they are told what their goals will be and must follow directives accordingly or be kicked out . . . Veterans are arbitrarily dismissed from the shelter by the director, who gives them no more reason than, “This is not working out.”

In general, veterans and civilians at the shelter are treated in an authoritarian, dictatorial manner. They are scolded like children and brow-beaten as though they were incarcerated. (Veterans have personally told me they feel that they are either in kindergarten or prison during their stay at the shelter.)

I could go on, but I hope that these examples will suggest to you that there is a problem in the way disabled American veterans are being treated by the Volunteers of America Sheridan Community Homeless Shelter.

I discovered, and you probably know, many of our disabled veterans do not feel empowered enough to register an official complaint about their poor treatment. Some of them have even become accustomed to poor treatment at shelters and elsewhere.

I have continued to work on my own time with disabled veterans who have been kicked out of the shelter, or who have found places to live in the Sheridan area. This is follow-up that the shelter is supposed to provide, but does not. I have worked with enough disabled veterans in Sheridan to know that the quality-of-care problem persists at the Volunteers of America Sheridan Community Shelter.

I am personally outraged at the shoddy treatment that our injured protectors have had to endure at the hands of a few poorly-trained and authoritarian individuals at the shelter.

So concerned was I about this treatment that I angrily confronted my supervisor about this back in December, and she saw to it that I was fired. I wanted you to be aware of this because VOA tends to vilify me as a man who is merely angry about losing his job. I am still angry about the same thing that angered me in December: The poor treatment of homeless individuals, especially disabled veterans, at this shelter.

I suggest that it could help improve the quality of care at the shelter if the DAV were to offer itself to the veterans in the Sheridan shelter in the following ways:

Advertise that any veterans with concerns about their treatment at the Sheridan Community Shelter may be addressed to the DAV, or an individual or committee of the DAV.

Secondly, I advise that you set up a monthly meeting with the veterans at the shelter where vets can safely air their concerns by meeting one at a time with a representative or a committee of representatives from the DAV. I am honestly concerned thatthe social workers who act as liaisons between the VA and the shelter have a tendency to dismiss vets’ concerns and look the other way when serious questions are asked about the shelter. They are good people, but they tend to “side” with the shelter.

I suggest a monthly meeting, because there is a certain amount of natural turnover in the veteran population there, and because different issues regarding poor treatment of people at the shelter crop up fairly routinely. The information obtained in these meetings should be forwarded to someone trustworthy at the VA.

Your presence as something of a quality-control entity I believe would greatly reduce the uncalled-for treatment of disabled veterans at the Volunteers of America Sheridan Community Homeless Shelter, as the corporation is extremely image-conscious. This slight pressure from you could make the director think twice about her treatment of disabled veterans at the shelter. The director is a responsive person, but I don’t believe she realizes how difficult and dismissive she is being, nor the anxiety she is causing some vets at the shelter.

Please advise me as to your response to my concerns and suggestions. I would be happy to meet with anyone who wishes to follow up on this with me. I hope it is clear that I do not intend to ask to be a part of whatever process the DAV wishes to implement in this matter. I just wanted to bring it to your attention and suggest a means by which the DAV could make a significant difference.

Thank you for your time and your attention to this matter.

He Lasted A Week, Then Wanted Escape From Her Clutches

The young man who I reluctantly took to the abusive VOA Sheridan Community Homeless Shelter called me last week and asked for help.
I had left him my card when I let him off at the shelter, telling him that there would come a day, soon, when he could no longer bear the director and at least one of her staff.
The day came, and he called from the library last Saturday.
I met him there and drove him to the bus station for a ticket to Rapid City.
When I asked him what had happened at the shelter, he told me, “Things got weird up there pretty fast.” He didn’t seem to want to elaborate. I didn't press him for details, as much fun as it would have been to blab it all on my blog.
I am not one to believe that my helping a person gives me the right to pry information out of them, or tell them what they should do, or attach rules to my help.
This is one of the places where the director of the abusive shelter and I part company.
Among the inappropriate meddling that I have observed at the shelter include:

Obstructing residents from obtaining spot jobs.
Asking residents whether they are having sex downtown.
Demanding that residents not eat meals at local bar-and-grills.
Threatening to kick out residents who take jobs with employers of which the director does not approve.
Demanding that residents get costly mental health evaluations when they don’t think like she does – or get kicked out.
Demanding that one resident not spend time with another resident’s friend.
Insisting on knowing the resident’s living situation when he or she finds a means to leave the shelter.

This kind of behavior ought to offend every individual and business owner who has supported “the homeless” by giving time, money or items to Volunteers of America and/or the shelter. Any support directed to VOA helps prolong and tacitly supports this kind of behavior against people experiencing some of their most vulnerable moments.
Any support given to the VOA condones this outrageous and manipulative behavior.

New Drug Test Office Beats VOA Hands Down On Ethics

I see where a former Volunteers of America program director of the local drug testing division is forming her own drug testing services.
She is actually going to certify her people according to Federal Department of Transportation regulations for the use of breath test equipment. This is something that Volunteers of America has not gotten around to doing. It was deemed too expensive.
I mentioned this to the DOT, and we have been emailing back and forth for some time. Apparently, the DOT is concerned that Volunteers of America is not holding up its end, which is just another day at the office at VOA Wyoming-Montana.
When I worked in the drug testing division at VOA, we were “certified” as technicians to use testing procedures with Redwood labs of California, and MedTox labs. Our certification required that we take a written test, and it with our administrator’s permission, we did so with the answer sheet in front of us. To do otherwise was deemed too much fuss.
Certification for breath tests was non-existent. Certification for specimen collection/preparation was bogus. Still, on we tested.
It sounds to me like this woman who is starting her own business might have ethics that are missing from the VOA work culture.

No Follow-Up From Shelter; VOA Guilty of Grant Abuse

A former homeless veteran called me last week and said he needed help in his apartment.
I was happy to oblige ...
... But I also wondered where the VOA Homeless Shelter was with the follow-up on veterans who leave the shelter and find appropriate housing. Their Per Diem grant requires this kind of follow-up. Not happening.
The Federal Government grants them more than $26 per day per veteran. The average vet-per-day count is supposed to stay around 16. Where's my calculator ... that's more than $416 per day. The grant contains certain expectations from the grantee organization, and, try as I might, I can't find where it says, "Sit on your a-- and enjoy the free money."

'Human Dignity of Every Person' Not On The Menu At Local Shelter

I have noted during Pope Benedict XVI’s papal visit to the United States, that he has referred several times to “the human dignity of every person.”
It might be thought that it is safe to assume that we do not live within reach, out here in Wyoming, of lapses in this particular area. This is a false assumption.
Our nice town has the potential, or, in the case of the homeless shelter, human dignity issues already in need of addressing.
Any time we care for the vulnerable in our midst, we must hold up the doctrine of the dignity of every person as the standard. Our shelter does this lousily, very lousily.
We must also hold up this doctrine in our nursing homes, our day cares, our medical facilities, our rehabilitative services, the special education components at our schools, our mental health services, our correctional facilities, our alternative schools, our addiction treatment facilities, our youth homes, our probation and parole offices, our courtrooms, our recreational facilities and our social services providers.
Obviously, this doctrine goes wherever people go.
As members of a healthy community, we must be on our toes to guard this human dignity of every person, and not go the way of the Volunteers of American Sheridan Community Homeless Shelter, with its smug dismissive, authoritarian, intrusive, manipulative, counter-productive and controlling ways, which in only the most distorted and twisted of minds would be considered “helping people.”
There is no agency more undignified than the shelter. Any individual or group supporting this shelter is aiding and abetting.
Plenty of dignified works in Sheridan can use your gifts, and will not toss them by the truckloads into the landfill as the shelter did last summer, or make the residents feel like they are either in prison or kindergarten.

Still Here ... Still Noting Weirdness At VOA

1. I have a life … that’s my story and I am sticking to it.
2. My daughter is getting married next month, so we are cleaning the house until the day of.
3. I have had a touch of “blogger’s block.”
4. My temporary job has been kicking my butt.

Please chose one of the numbers above to explain the preceding season of quiet on this here blog.

While I was away …
It seems the Department of Transportation is looking into what looks like a breakage of the law due to a poor management decision by VOA. To save money and avoid inconvenience, the then supervisor of VOA’s Supervision Services (the pee-test people) decided not to certify any of the employees for the use of the breathalyzer.
The DOT apparently thinks this certification is needful, as it is the law.
We mentioned the needfulness of this certification to the supervisor (then the COO) while working there (2006). The matter was let drift away into Don't-Worry-About-It Land.
Last I heard, DOT was looking for names and addresses of all companies using VOA for Commercial Driver’s License testing.
When I was with Supervision Services (before my stint at the homeless shelter watching people get kicked around by the director and staff) we discovered by trial and error that ambient alcohol in the air from cleaning supplies could give the next breath-test person a false positive. Also, one of the Willy Wonka candies will give a false positive. Lord knows what else could pose problems. I bet certification training would have been helpful. It would have been lawful, too.

Senator Enzi Responds To My Letter

On March 6, I posted here a letter written to the Veterans Affairs contact office for a large grant the Volunteers of America Sheridan Community Homeless Shelter gets each year, even though VOA fails to address itself to the expectations of the grant.
This letter caused enough of a ruckus at the main office, behind Wendy’s, that the organization thought it prudent to ban me from setting foot on any of their properties.

On March 12, I posted a letter I sent to U.S. Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo), requesting he do what he could in light of my concerns.

Here is Senator Enzi’s response to my letter, which was postmarked yesterday and received today:

“Dear Tim,

“Thank you for your recent letter concerning your complaints against the Volunteers of America Wyoming-Montana operation of the Sheridan Community Shelter. I appreciate hearing from you.
“In an effort to be of every possible assistance to you, I have contacted the Department of Veterans Affairs asking that they review the situation you described. As soon as they have responded to me, I will be in touch with you again.
“Thank you for giving me this opportunity to be of service to you.
“Sincerely,
“Michael B. Enzi
“United States Senator”

I appreciate the Senator’s responsiveness.

Shelter Features Oppression, Residents 'Pay' By Putting Up With It

Don’t think I haven’t wondered if I should have kept my mouth shut at work at the homeless shelter.
Maybe I should have stood idly by for longer than I did while the shelter director imposed her bizarre brand of behavior modification via control and fear and veiled threats.
It does something to your spirit when you see this day after day – people treated poorly by an authority-addicted crazoid. There is only one word for it: Oppression.
Hit your thesaurus key on Microsoft Word (shift F7, I use mine a lot) with “oppression” highlighted. You will see these synonyms: Domination, Coercion, Cruelty, Tyranny, Repression, Subjugation. Not a very friendly list. Other words in this family include Intimidation, Bullying, Meanness, Duress and Defeat.
Business-As-Usual persists at the Volunteers of American Sheridan Community Homeless Shelter, even though this dysfunctional family of words describe the reality with which vulnerable people live at the shelter.
Don’t get me wrong – homeless persons are not weak or puny underlings. They are fabulous people with deep spirits and a great deal to offer the world around them.
They are, however, vulnerable, as they are in the midst of a critical need for a place to live, a job, a safe place, some stability. They are made all the more vulnerable because they must pay “rent” at the shelter by obeying and bending to the whims of a capricious director and at least one of her staff.
“Oppression” as a word is ugly, but you should see it in action at the shelter.
Usually, oppression of the poor is something folks around here would have to see on the news. But thanks to the shelter, all we have to do is walk up the hill and peek inside.

Shelter Wants Authority Over Medications, But Not The Responsibility

I will try to keep it short. How about a Haiku version?

Shelter locks your drugs,
Then your drugs turn up stolen,
Irresponsible.

Shelter residents who have “controlled” medications with them (mostly prescription pain killers) must turn in these and all other drugs to the shelter for supposed safekeeping.
“Controlled” medications are placed in a small lock box with the resident’s name taped onto it. The two keys to this box go to the shelter director and the resident. The lock box is then placed in a filing cabinet drawer that only shelter staff have access to by key.
The filing cabinet is kept in a locked room. Note, the locked room has only a half-wall. The wall separating the room from the outer office area does not go all the way to the ceiling.
Once the resident turns over these medications, does it not make sense to you that the shelter becomes responsible for the security of these drugs?
A resident called me some days ago and said his lock box had been broken into, and his painkillers stolen. He suspected one of the staff, and let this be known. Of course, from that point on he wasn’t exactly the Man of the Hour as far as the shelter was concerned. He was even grilled by the shelter director as to whether he had been talking to me about this. Apparently I am the least likely to ever be Man of the Hour at the shelter. Maybe they will name a men’sroom stall after me someday.
So, the room was supposedly locked, with staff having the key. The cabinet in the room was supposedly locked, with staff having a key. And, the lock box in the cabinet was broken into, as staff did not have access to a key. This mystery certainly walks and quacks like a duck.
Anyway, the resident was advised by the director to stay “hush-hush” about this. He told me he was led to believe that if he notified the police that a felony had occurred at the shelter, his time there would be significantly and immediately foreshortened.
I advised the shelter director’s boss about this, as the director has a history of telling her supervisor only what she wants them to know. It turns out, she had told Pam about this, which is a step in the right direction. Pam is not a supervisor one can easily sidestep.
Pam wrote me an email and said I only had half the story.
I am sure I missed the usual deception, denial and manipulation of facts.
I asked Pam if all future felonies that occur at the shelter are going to be investigated by the shelter director, maybe with a funny hat, big spy glass and a false mustache as well.
Might as well. The place is a mockery of responsibility and respect for people in need.

PS: The resident, who went without pain pills for days, left the shelter the day after he called me. Apparently, a staff member was “out to get him thrown out,” so he left without that additional affront.

A Backward Look, etc., Continued ...

In Feburary, “Shelter Happens” continued to enumerate offenses against homeless people and problems in the management of the VOA Sheridan Community Homeless Shelter:

Shelter staff harass a resident who was waiting for a technical job; said he would amount to nothing; accused him of “shelter-hopping.” Man gets job he wants in Sheridan and lives happily ever after, but to do so had to ignore shelter “support.”
Resident on probation in court succeeds with job and begins GED; is harassed by staff for being at the shelter for so long.
Shelter’s “Not-Welcome-Back list is as thick as the phone book, and goes back years. One Sheridan woman didn’t think she could return because five years ago she had said a bad word at the shelter.
Shelter takes control of all medications, and, as we will see later, becomes responsible (if not liable) for missed doses, over-doses and loss through theft. Shelter director pretends to be doctor and pharmacist.
VOA pays itself $60,000 per year for “administrative costs” skimmed from donations from well-meaning people. Local execs enjoy fat wallets; shelter residents sometimes don’t get seconds on noodles because of “costs.”
VA Domiciliary does a better job in caring for veterans. Why do we have a vets program that doesn’t work in the shelter?
VOA National website says, “We stay with (the homeless) for as long as it takes to return them to self-sufficiency.” I write to the executives to point out that this is a lie in Sheridan. No response.
Shelter residents are expected to spy on one another when they are not at the shelter.
A woman resident is made even more miserable by the manipulative, control-oriented “care” at the shelter. Now “free,” the woman say she would stay under a bridge before ever returning to the shelter.
A female veteran gets kicked out of the shelter on Christmas morning.
Shelter welcomes only the well-behaved, the polite and the mannerful. Lack a refinement and pack your bags.
Shelter is a bad neighbor to fellow human beings who have hit hard times. Just what they need – a condescending, cruel, threatening, intrusive environment to add to the weight of their already-difficult struggle.

That sums the list from January and February. I hope this catches you up if you haven’t been reading for long, or if you visit once in a while.

All readers, friend or foe, are appreciated.

I repeat my guarantee: If there is anything untrue on this blog, let me know and I will remove it immediately.

A Backward Look O'er Traveled Roads (Thank You, Walt Whitman!)

Blogs are a little difficult to read. As much as it makes sense to place the most recent post at the top, it also makes sense to read things from the beginning. As you scroll down some of my old posts, you run into “Part II” of something first, and then “Part I” underneath it.
With this difficulty in mind, I thought it would be a good time to review what has transpired in this blog since it began on January 17.
We have found much amiss at the homeless shelter, mostly due to the authoritarian and dictatorial ways of the director. The presence of cruelty where compassion ought to be is the main reason I started asking the Volunteers of America Wyoming-Montana Board to set up some measures for accountability and quality of care at the shelter. These seem very rational requests, but for some reason VOA refuses to look at its problem. They instead choose to make me the problem.
Here is a list of the problems pointed out in this “Shelter Happens” blog:

· The shelter condescends to residents, and operates on a control-by-fear premise.
· The shelter further dis-empowers vulnerable people, treating them poorly and unfairly.
· The shelter fails to uphold the dignity and respect due every individual.
· The shelter unreasonably placed a needy Sheridan resident on its “not-welcome-back” list.
· A veteran was kicked out for saying, “I know what these people are like. I’m not like them.”
· Last August, the shelter sent at least four dump-trucks full of donations to the landfill.
· A resident who got a job on his first day the shelter was later kicked out for being too chipper in the morning, and landing a good deal on a rare motorcycle. I know. It doesn’t make sense to me either.

Well, that’s just from January. I will revisit February soon. Even these seven show that there is some kind of problem (or freak show) at the shelter. There’s more in Feburary, and of course this month … and more stories not yet written. Stay tuned, as they say.

Horrible Headmistress In Dahl's Book Is Imitated In Life By Shelter Director

A few days ago I alluded to a Roald Dahl character, Miss Trunchbull, in the book, Matilda.
In case you haven’t seen the movie or had the book read to you, or read it to your kids, I wanted to give you a little taste of this horrible schoolmaster, who believes that the “perfect school is one that has no children in it at all.” (Page 159)

The attitudes of Miss Trunchbull and the director of the VOA Sheridan Community Shelter toward their charges are remarkably similar:

“Now most head teachers are chosen because they possess a number of fine qualities. They understand children, and have the children’s best interest at heart. They are sympathetic. They are fair and they are deeply interested in education. Miss Trunchbull possessed none of these qualities and how she ever got her present job was a mystery.” Page 82

“‘I am never mistaken, Miss Honey!’” Page 86

“‘No, I don’t think she’s mad,’ Matilda said. “‘But she’s very dangerous. Being in this school is like being in a cage with a cobra. You have to be very fast on your feet.’” Page 118

Miss Trunchbull to Matilda’s class: “‘Not a very pretty sight,’ she said. Her expression was one of utter distaste, as though she were looking at something a dog had done on the floor. ‘What a bunch of nauseating little warts you are.’ . . . ‘It makes me vomit,’ she went on, ‘to think that I am going to have to put up with a load of garbage like you in my school . . . I can see that I am going to have to expel as many of you as possible to save myself from going round the bend.’” Page 141

“‘I suppose your mothers and fathers tell you you’re wonderful. Well I am here to tell you the opposite …’” Page 142

“Nigel spelled the word correctly which surprised the Trunchbull. She thought she had given him a very tricky word . . . and she was peeved that he had succeeded.’” Page 146

Other recommended Dahl reading includes James and the Giant Peach, with two despicable aunts last seen directing other VOA homeless shelters, I would suppose.

Weird-But-True: Donations Help Shelter Continue To Hurt People

I see one of the organizations in my town is having a fund-raiser and giving part of its cash to the homeless shelter.
I am pleased that my community gives evidence that it cares about the homeless in our area. A healthy community reaches out to its own.
Any thinking person who wants to help the homeless in their community would conclude that donating to the homeless shelter would be a logical step.
There are a couple of things wrong here, however. First, this particular shelter has such a bizarre and destructive approach to people that it is worse than having no shelter at all. We would be better off as a community to halt any further support until the innate dignity and worth of the individuals seeking assistance there is restored, and people are no longer dismissed by the whims of the director, or discounted as valuable people, or told to their faces that they are mentally ill.
Of nearly every male in the shelter, while I was there, the director would remark, “There goes a sad, sick little man.”
Also wrong in this scenario is that the shelter is the stopping place for thinking about the homeless.
Because of the shelter’s poor and erratic treatment of people, the community is flooded with individuals who are making do in motels, a friend’s couch, or settling for meager shelter sometimes in rooms no bigger than a bed. These people are not being cared for, and any monies given to the shelter will not reach the under-sheltered and the under-assisted who are trying to kick-start a life here.
Our worse-than-nothing homeless shelter is not the only way to reach out with donations. In fact, giving money to this shelter is ultimately like giving away free packs of cigarettes in the name of cancer research.
Some of these people eat at the Lunch Together soup kitchen program in the basement of one of our downtown churches. Some of these people are a month’s rent, or less, away from acquiring a decent apartment. Some of these people are short the few dollars to get an ID card, or to get a certified copy of their birth certificate, or to restore a driver’s license.
Why not work with a property manager to provide a needy person or couple or family with the first month’s rent and/or deposit required to get into a place. This alone stops many from going any further in their quest for a place to live. Why not give money to Lunch Together, which does not have a multimillion-dollar budget, the bulk of which is made up of grants.
My community needs to realize that the homeless shelter in this town does not help the homeless. Although it truly feels good to give money to such a cause, in reality, donations help the shelter continue to hurt people.

Sick Management Culture Induces Pukey Organization

Management culture or workplace culture has been emphasized here and there in businesses and corporations, including those in my town.
Defining or describing the management culture at Volunteers of America, Wyoming-Montana, with offices in Sheridan, Wyoming, is slightly less easy than nailing Jello to a tree.
Maintaining the image of the organization has taken over the management style of the CEO and one of his VP’s such that anything of real concern or value must pass muster with the organization’s image. Even their image of the community’s image of them is distorted.
In this kind of culture, it is no wonder that valid questions about the treatment of vulnerable people at their homeless shelter would lead to defense and denial. It is not possible in their wildest dreams that they have a shelter director who shreds people like no-longer-needed documents.
“Bad things just don’t happen in this organization,” I can hear the CEO beaming at his leadership team all cherubic and artificially comfortable.
I attended a leadership retreat of VOA, and should have known then that the shelter director’s take-charge, interrupt and mow-down style had some sort of validating source. When you ask someone to give a presentation to the group, you shouldn’t interrupt them and help them make their points. When someone raises a concern, you should not turn your back on them and treat them as though they had not spoken.
His veep is worse. I will never forget the forgettable meeting we had with him in Buffalo where he spent a good 20 minutes telling us we were not a non-profit organization, but a not-for-profit one. (I may have reversed these, as the nonsensical blathering never quite solidified in my head.) While there is a distinction in the terms, we were forced to watch and listen as he slowly descended into lunacy. You get used to that after a while.
The integrity of an organization starts at the top and is directed by administration. Integrity asks what part of your organization melts like wax when heat is applied. Integrity asks whether you comply with all protocols for certification in all of your programs; do you comply with the demands and expectations of grantors who provide you funding; do you know where the men’s room is in the shelter you supposedly operate.Or, do you prefer to look like you are in charge and hoist your ego onto the table in front of you, which blocks your view of the valid perspectives of others.
The answer is obvious from an organization that does not train its staff to certification standards, does not comply with grantor expectations, and says it serves the homeless, when instead it floods the streets of Sheridan with people who have been kicked out rather than assisted, and placed on the “Not-Welcome-Back” list rather than given a toe hold on hope.
The easiest and best way to appear to be a good organization is simply to be one. VOA has lost its way thanks to its management culture and “creative” integrity.

My Letter To U.S. Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY)

March 6, 2008

Dear Senator Enzi,
I wish for your office to know that I am concerned about the undignified treatment of American veterans who seek assistance from the homeless shelter in Sheridan, Wyoming, and the shelter’s failure to fulfill its obligations with regard to its award of national VA Grant Per Diem Program monies.
The latter concern is my most salient, as I realize it is not against the law to be mean-spirited or to manage poorly.
Volunteers of America Wyoming-Montana owns and operates this shelter on the grounds of the Sheridan Veterans Administration, under the name of the VOA Sheridan Community Homeless Shelter. This grant is administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Health Administration.
Enclosed, you will find a letter dated Feb. 14, 2008, to Roger Casey, a contact person for Grant Per Diem Program issues. In this letter I have detailed what I believe to be the failures on the part of the VOA Sheridan Community Shelter in following through with the “assurances” that are required by all grant awardees.
I have also enclosed a copy of the Feb. 26, 2008, letter I received from Grant and Per Diem Program Acting Director Chelsea Watson, in which she acknowledges my letter to Mr. Casey, and indicates she has forwarded my concerns to the appropriate VISN coordinator and liaison.
I seek your help in seeing to it that this review is a fair and accurate one, and to see that corrective measures are taken by this shelter to bring its quality of care up to the levels I am sure we all want for our defenders.

My sincerest thanks for your help in this matter.
Best regards,
Tim Cummings
Concerned Citizen

Acting Director of VA Per Diem Program Responds To My Letter

Department of Veterans Affairs
Veterans Health Administration
Washington, DC 20420

"Dear Mr. Cummings:
"Thank you for your letter dayed February 14, 2008, expressing concerns with the Volunteers of America Wyoming, Inc. project number 03-53-WY. Your concerns will be forwarded to the VISN Homeless Coordinator (Mr. Richard DeBlasio) and the VA Liaison (Mr. Will Banks) for review. If you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact this office (toll-free) at 1-877-332-0334.
"Sincerely,
"Chelsea Watson
"Acting Director, Grant and Per Diem Program"

Note -- The VISN is the region of which the Sheridan VA is a part.

Letter Points Out VOA's Failure To Comply With Grant For Care Of Homeless Veterans

Mr. Roger Casey
VA Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program
Mental Health Strategic Healthcare Group (116E)
VAHQ
810 Vermont Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20420

February 14, 2008

Mr. Casey,
I am concerned about the viability of an awardee of one of the per diem program grants.
The Sheridan (WY) Community Shelter, operated by Volunteers of America Wyoming-Montana, has not, in my opinion, followed through with the “reasonable assurances” clause in the grant.
Nor has the shelter provided any transitional housing as part of its program.
Nor has anything been done to provide follow-up services to help veterans achieve stability once they have acquired permanent housing.
Nor does the shelter director allow veterans to make their own program decisions regarding individual goals. They are bullied into accepting conditions forced upon them under the constant threat of being kicked out.
The “reasonable assurance” that not more than 25 percent of participants at any one time will be non-veterans was not attempted in the calendar year of 2007. At the time, I was assigned as the per diem service coordinator at the Sheridan Community Shelter. I was initially told, in November 2006, that I would be in charge of consulting and programming with veterans only. By January of 2007, this had been abandoned, and I was placed in charge of seeing to the programs of all shelter residents by my supervisor. Fully half of my time in the per diem position was spent working with non-veterans. I enjoyed the work, of course, but I believe the per diem “assurances” were consciously ignored.
Transitional housing, if it exists at all at the Sheridan shelter, is only on paper. One room with two beds in it at the shelter was designated “transitional,” but the residents there are given no additional responsibilities or training for moving into their own living situation. Their program is no different from anyone else’s back in the men’s dormitory. There is certainly nothing being done to establish transitional housing outside of the walls of the shelter. If the per diem grant assumes progress in the area of transitional living, no such progress exists.
There is no follow-up on the part of the shelter with veterans who have acquired permanent housing. Once they leave the threshold of the shelter, they are left out of contact, unless they have to return to the shelter because their living situation failed somehow. They are placed in a sink-or-swim situation with no further assistance offered through the per diem awardee.
Programming and goals are dictated to the veteran by the shelter director. Most of these vulnerable individuals simply accept their fate at the shelter, because they need a place to live. Also, veterans are routinely kicked out of the shelter and placed on a “not-welcome-back” list, which certainly stops the flow of care, while the grant monies continue.
I am writing you to find out whether the items above, which I consider improprieties with regard to conditions expected from the per diem grant award, are in fact improprieties. If so, how will your office address these? If not, please assist me where I am misunderstanding this.
I contend that the Sheridan Community Homeless Shelter is not a viable recipient of per diem grant money based on the abuses of conditions as listed above. The shelter is out of compliance, and should either stop its pretence or comply.
I realize that care for the homeless veteran population is currently a public issue and an emotional one. In light of this, I question whether the duplication of services between the Sheridan VA Domiciliary and the Sheridan Community Shelter should result in a rating high enough to award per diem grant funding to a corporation that also does not fulfill the apparent expectations of the grantor.
Sincerely,
Tim Cummings
Concerned Citizen

Trying To Be Nicer, But So Difficult To Turn Away

As a man who feels deeply and thoroughly commissioned by God as a missionary of Divine mercy, I recognize complications in my role as a “foul-caller” regarding the pathetic treatment of people seeking assistance from my town’s homeless shelter where I worked for a year and saw ridiculous undignified and disrespectful treatment launched against scores of people, and tried to tone down the impact of this offensive conduct against vulnerable people.
You see how easy it is for me to use “Divine mercy” and “ridiculous” “offensive conduct” in the same sentence.
That is, indeed, the complication. On the one hand I am bound by faith and conscience to express the mercy of God. On the other, I am bound by faith and conscience to speak up when I observe injustice against another. The former involves the sanctity of my responsibility to God, and the latter involves my responsibility to the sanctity of life as flows out of my relationship with God.
These don’t ride together very comfortably in the backseat of my car.
Some of my advisors – very helpful and wonderful people in my life – want me to nicen things up. I like being liked, but this wrong-doing at the shelter is too horrible to turn away from.
I still need to deal with a question: What is the role of a man of mercy who sees Person A beating Person B? Stop the beating? I think so.
I believe that the person or people responsible for bewilderingly poor treatment of people at the Volunteers of America Sheridan Community Homeless Shelter have perhaps slowed down and thought twice before treating vulnerable people dismissively, patronizingly, and even unauthorizedly and unadvisedly diagnosing people as being mentally ill … to their faces.
They are being watched. This is a good thing. Maybe 2008 will only be half as cruel as was 2007, or 2006, or 2005, or …

Glimmer of Hope: VOA Replaces Director's Supervisor

Volunteers of America made a good move recently by putting someone else in charge of supervising the director of the homeless shelter.
The former COO, happily, is no longer overlooking the shelter, and is off overlooking other aspects of VOA’s many programs. Good luck to those poor devils.
Pam, the new supervisor of the shelter director, is a strong manager, good communicator and personable. I have previously hailed the work of the WySTAR substance abuse treatment program in my town, and, you should know that Pam has been (and continues to be) at the managerial helm of this program, which is successful and meaningful to a lot of people who have sought help to get away from alcohol or drug abuse.
So, this is a good thing. Yay.
Also, Pam is the only Volunteers of America officer who will give me the time of day. Everybody else is either pretending I don’t exist, or hoping I go away. Pam actually called today and wanted to talk AND listen.
I think I was heard. Good heavens, a new experience! A thank-you to Pam.

Lack of Supervision Gives Director Free Reign

You wouldn’t think that something like a shelter director’s position would be under-supervised. Unlikely as it is, in these litigious days when everyone is watching everyone else, the shelter director’s position in my town is practically unsupervised. The director had “weekly” meetings about two or three times a month with her supervisor. She told him stuff, and that was it. His understanding of the shelter was based only on the information she gave him, rendering him completely unaware of problems, the like of which I have made record on this blog.
And, by the way, if anyone finds a word untrue on this site, let me know and I will remove it immediately.
The director’s supervisor, then known as the Chief of Operations, or Chief Operations Officer, or something else that spells coo, was onsite at the shelter only three times in 2007, by my own count – once to fire me, once to get his picture taken with the donation of a dead animal, and once possibly to be seen being there (I don’t know).
Plainly, the man was in no wise supervising and hadn’t a clue about the shelter’s operation. He had seen a few numbers on columns, though.
I think you have probably seen this kind of “administration,” where someone is left in charge, and as long as the place doesn’t burn down, it is assumed that all is well.
All is not well, as I pointed out to my supervisor, her supervisor, the board and CEO, and the national office of the Volunteers of America. Link by link this was my chain of command. Each time the response was either denial or silence … or deftless attacks on me.
I don’t personally need any attention. I like the life of a quiet, shy person. However, I am duty-bound by my faith to draw attention to injustice foisted upon vulnerable souls; to the sanctity of life and basic human dignity being toyed with by people who say they like to “help,” when they mean they like to “control.”