STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE OFFICE OF

ADMINSTRATIVE HEARINGS

COUNTY OF MECKLENBURG 05 DHR 0262

______

Vicky Richardson )

Petitioner ) )

vs ) DECISION

)

North Carolina Department of Heath )

And Human Services )

Respondent )

______

THIS MATTER coming on for hearing on June 7, 2005, in Charlotte, North Carolina, before the Honorable Beryl E. Wade, Administrative Law Judge. The Petitioner, Vicky Richardson being present, Assistant Attorney General, R. Kirk Randleman, representing the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services; Harry Maney and Angelina Spencer , Licensing Consultants with the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Social Services, Regulatory and Licensing Services; and Linda Waite, Supervisor with Youth Homes, Incorporated.

The matter being before the Court pursuant to the Petitioner's Petition For a Contested Case Hearing, and the undersigned, after considering the testimony of the witnesses, and the arguments of counsel, MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. That Petitioner, Vicky Richardson testified that she was a single parent with two adopted children and had been employed as a paralegal for twenty-five years in the personal injury field. She became a foster parent in 2002, and planned to adopt a foster child named John Fuller, referred to hereinafter as “J.R.”

2. Ms. Richardson testified that, at the time of the incidents discussed herein, J.R. had been notified that he was returning to his birth family, and his behavior had gone “downhill”. She stated that there had been two reported incidences in her home involving “J.R.”.

3. The first incident involved J.R. being made to clean up some water. Ms. Richardson stated she did not remember the incident but did recall shaking an empty glass over J.R.’s head on one occasion.

4. Linda Waite, supervisor with Youth Homes, Inc., the Agency which was responsible for licensing Ms. Richardson’s home, testified that a report received from Social Worker Laura McDowell, indicated that J.R. disclosed to her during a home visit, that Ms. Richardson wrung out a wet rag over his head when she attempted to make him clean up some paint he had spilled. Linda Waite testified that she had a telephone conversation with Ms. Richardson, in which Ms. Richardson admitted putting the water on J.R. and admitted that such behavior was not appropriate for foster parents.

5. The second incident involved a physical altercation between Ms. Richardson and J.R. when he was being made to sit at the dining room table to do his home work. Ms. Richardson testified that he began flailing his arms, and she grabbed his arms and sat him back down in the chair and asked him, “Do you have a problem with me?” Ms. Richardson then said that she called someone at Youth Homes Inc., who came to her home and removed J.R. that night.

6. Subsequent to the second incident, an investigation was made by the Gaston County Department of Social Services of Ms. Richardson for abuse and neglect which was unsubstantiated.

7. That Licensing Consultant Harry Maney testified that he was a former Director of a County Department of Social Services, and was familiar with the process of Child Protective Services Investigations, and that the fact that the investigation of Ms. Richardson was unsubstantiated did not mean that licensing rules had not been violated in this matter. Mr. Maney stated that Ms. Richardson’s case was reviewed by himself and Mrs. Angelina Spencer, and the decision to revoke her foster license was made for her failure to comply with Title 10A; Chapter 70 E: .0401 (a) (9),(10),&(11) of the North Carolina Administrative Code, which provides that the foster parent shall ensure that each foster child is provided training and discipline that is appropriate for the child’s age, intelligence, emotional makeup and past experience; is not subjected to cruel, severe or unusual punishment; and is not subject to corporal punishment . Mr. Maney further stated that it was his concern that Ms. Richardson’s behaviors showed a pattern of improper behavior toward this child, which was taken into consideration in revoking her foster home license.

8.  That Harry Maney stated that the initial letter of revocation sent to Ms. Richardson did erroneously state that the allegations against her had been substantiated by a County Department of Social Services, and that this was in error.

9. That Angelina Spencer testified that she was a Licensing Consultant with the Regulatory and Licensing Services Section of the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Social Services, and that she participated in the consideration of the revocation of Ms. Richardson’s foster home licenses, and she concurred in that decision.

Based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the court concludes as a matter of law as follows:

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. That the undersigned has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter of this action.

2. That revocation of the family foster home license of the Petitioner, Vicky Richardson should be REVERSED.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED, as follows:

That the Revocation of the family foster home license of the Petitioner, Vicky Richardson be and hereby is REVERSED.

NOTICE AND ORDER

The Agency that will make the final decision in this contested case is the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services and is required to give each party an opportunity to file exceptions to the recommended decision and to present written arguments to those in the Agency who will make the final decision. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150-36(a). The Agency is required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-36(b) to serve a copy of the final decision on all parties and to furnish a copy to the parties’ attorney of record and to the Office of Administrative Hearings.

In accordance with N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-36 the Agency shall adopt each finding of fact contained in the Administrative Law Judge’s decision unless the finding is clearly contrary to the preponderance of the admissible evidence. For each finding of fact not adopted by the agency, the agency shall set forth separately and in detail the reasons for not adopting the finding of fact and the evidence in the record relied upon by the agency in not adopting the finding of fact. For each new finding of fact made by the agency that is not contained in the Administrative Law Judge’s decision, the agency shall set forth separately and in detail the evidence in the record relied upon by the agency in making the finding of fact.

This the 9th day of August, 2005

______

Beryl E. Wade

Administrative Law Judge