JCP-28-15-00008-EP Protocols for Interviewing Service Recipients During Investigations of Abuse or Neglect

7/15/15 N.Y. St. Reg. JCP-28-15-00008-EP

NEW YORK STATE REGISTER

VOLUME XXXVII, ISSUE 28

July 15, 2015

RULE MAKING ACTIVITIES

JUSTICE CENTER FOR THE PROTECTION OF PEOPLE WITH SPECIAL NEEDS

EMERGENCY/PROPOSED RULE MAKING

NO HEARING(S) SCHEDULED

 

I.D No. JCP-28-15-00008-EP

Filing No. 559

Filing Date. Jun. 30, 2015

Effective Date. Jul. 01, 2015

Protocols for Interviewing Service Recipients During Investigations of Abuse or Neglect

PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE State Administrative Procedure Act, NOTICE is hereby given of the following action:

Proposed Action:

Addition of Part 705 to Title 14 NYCRR.

Statutory authority:

Executive Law, sections 553(20) and 561(6); L. 2014, ch. 394, section 3

Finding of necessity for emergency rule:

Preservation of public health, public safety and general welfare.

Specific reasons underlying the finding of necessity:

The immediate adoption of this Part is necessary for the preservation of the health, safety, and welfare of individuals receiving services as defined by the Protection of People with Special Needs Act (PPSNA).

In December, 2012, the Governor signed the PPSNA, which, effective June 30, 2013, created the Justice Center for the Protection of People with Special Needs (Justice Center) and established many new protections for vulnerable persons, including a new system for incident management in certain programs and facilities operated, licensed or certified by the Office for People with Developmental Disabilities (OPWDD), the Office of Mental Health (OMH), for Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services (OASAS), the Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS), the Department of Health (DOH) and the New York State Education Department (SED). Under the PPSNA, all allegations of abuse or neglect that are accepted by the Justice Center must be investigated, either by the Justice Center or by another agency delegated to conduct such an investigation.

By Ch. 394, L. 2014, the Justice Center is required to establish protocols to ensure the safety of persons with special needs who are interviewed during investigations of abuse or neglect reported to the Justice Center, including a procedure to inform vulnerable persons and/or their personal representatives that the vulnerable person may be questioned or subject to an interview. Under Ch. 394, L. 2014, the Justice Center is required to develop protocols and procedures to implement the requirements of the law. Regulations describing and implementing these protocols are to be finalized by April 1, 2015. Because these final regulations would not become effective until they are published and promulgated through the SAPA process, the new regulations must become effective on July 1, 2015.

Part 705 is necessary to implement the protocols required by Ch. 394, L. 2014.

The promulgation of these regulations is essential to preserve the health, safety and welfare of service recipients who may be interviewed as part of an investigation of abuse or neglect. If the Justice Center did not promulgate regulations on an emergency basis, many of the protections established by Ch. 394, L. 2014, that are incorporated into the Justice Center’s protocols would not be implemented in a timely manner, or would be implemented ineffectively. According to the sponsor’s memorandum in support of this Chapter, the protocols that would be implemented by these regulations are meant to protect the health, safety and welfare of service recipients. As a result, it is crucial that this regulation become effective immediately to ensure that the new requirements under Ch. 394, L. 2014, and the protocols issued thereunder, are implemented in a coordinated fashion.

For all of the reasons outlined above, this rule is being adopted on an Emergency basis until such time as it has been formally adopted through the SAPA rule promulgation process.

Subject:

Protocols for interviewing service recipients during investigations of abuse or neglect.

Purpose:

To enhance protections for people with special needs during investigations of abuse or neglect.

Text of emergency/proposed rule:

Part 705 The Justice Center Protocols for Interviewing People Who Receive Services

§ 705.1 Background and Intent

(a) The Protection of People with Special Needs Act (the “Act”) established the Justice Center for the Protection of People with Special Needs (the “Justice Center”). The Act charges the Justice Center with establishing consistent safeguards for vulnerable persons to protect against abuse, neglect and other conduct that may jeopardize their health, safety and welfare.

(b) To accomplish this goal, the Act requires the Justice Center to establish procedures for the timely response to, and effective investigation of, allegations of reportable incidents against individuals who receive services. During the course of an investigation of abuse and neglect it is often necessary for individuals who receive services to be interviewed. This regulation outlines the procedures developed by the Justice Center to ensure that interviews of individuals who receive services during the course of an investigation of alleged abuse and neglect are conducted in a safe and appropriate manner.

§ 705.2 Applicability

This regulation applies to all investigations of alleged abuse and neglect conducted by the Justice Center, as well as investigations conducted by state agencies whose programs are under the jurisdiction of the Justice Center and by the facilities and programs defined in section 488(4) of the Social Services Law when acting as the delegate investigatory entity.

§ 705.3 Legal Authority

Subdivision 28 of section 553 of the Executive Law requires the Justice Center to develop protocols to ensure the safety of individuals receiving services who may have evidence relevant to an investigation of alleged abuse or neglect. The Executive Law requires that the protocols be developed in consultation with the Justice Center’s statutorily created Advisory Council and the relevant State Oversight Agencies. These agencies include: the Office of Mental Health, the State Education Department, the Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services, the Office for People With Developmental Disabilities, the Office of Children and Family Services and the Department of Health.

§ 705.4 Definitions

Whenever used in this Part:

(a) “Delegate Investigatory Entity” shall mean a facility or provider agency, or any other entity authorized by the regulations of a state oversight agency or the Justice Center to conduct an investigation of a reportable incident.

(b) “Justice Center” means the Justice Center for the Protection of People with Special Needs.

(c) “Personal Representative” shall mean a person authorized under state, tribal, military or other applicable law to act on behalf of a vulnerable person in making health care decisions or, for programs that serve children under the jurisdiction of the State Education Department or the Office of Children and Family Services, the service recipient's parent, guardian or other person legally responsible for such person as defined in subdivision 10 of section 488 of the Social Services Law. For other programs that serve children, the personal representative of the child would be the parent, guardian or other person authorized under law to make health care decisions.

(d) “Potential Witness” shall mean any service recipient known to be physically present in the place and at the time of the alleged abuse or neglect. It can also include any service recipient known to have information that could be useful to an investigation.

(e) “Service Provider” shall mean a provider of services as defined in subdivision 4 of section 488 of the Social Services Law.

(f) “Service Recipient” shall mean an individual who resides or is an inpatient in a residential facility or who receives services from a facility or provider agency, as defined in subdivision 9 of section 488 of the Social Services Law.

§ 705.5 Notification Protocols

(a) Process for providing notification to alleged victims and/or their personal representatives.

(1) When a service provider is notified that a report of alleged abuse or neglect in their program has been accepted by the Justice Center, the service provider or state oversight agency shall immediately attempt to notify any service recipients who are alleged victims of that alleged abuse or neglect, and/or their personal representatives, that the service recipient may be interviewed as part of the investigation. This notification may be completed through oral communication or in writing.

(2) The service provider or state oversight agency shall not make such notification to a personal representative if the alleged victim objects to such notification or if it would violate relevant confidentially laws, be contrary to court order, or is otherwise contrary to the best interests of the alleged victim or if the investigator has notified the service provider or state oversight agency that such notification would compromise the investigation. Service providers who are required to provide notifications pursuant to section 33.23 of the Mental Hygiene Law shall do so regardless of the exemptions outlined here.

(3) The service provider or state oversight agency shall document in writing that such notification was made or that there was a diligent effort to make such notification. Such documentation should be included in the investigative record. Those service providers or state oversight agencies who do not have access to the investigative record should give the documentation to the investigator for inclusion in the investigative record. If an alleged victim’s personal representative is not notified for the reasons outlined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of this Section, the service provider or state oversight agency shall document the reason.

(b) Process for providing notification to potential witnesses and/or their personal representatives.

(1) When a service provider is notified that a report of alleged abuse or neglect in their program has been accepted by the Justice Center, the service provider shall make a good faith effort to ascertain whether any service recipients in its program are potential witnesses to such incident, and shall attempt to notify those service recipients and/or their personal representatives that the service recipient may be interviewed as part of the investigation. This notification may be completed through oral communication or in writing.

(2) The service provider or state oversight agency shall not make such notification to a personal representative if the potential witness objects to such notification or if such notification would violate relevant confidentially laws, be contrary to court order, or is otherwise contrary to the best interests of the potential witness or if the investigator notifies the service provider that such notification would compromise the investigation.

(3) The service provider or state oversight agency shall document in writing that such notification was made or that there was a diligent effort to make such notification. Such documentation should be included in the investigative record. Those service providers or state oversight agencies who do not have access to the investigative record should give the documentation to the investigator for inclusion in the investigative record. If a potential witness’ personal representative is not notified for the reasons outlined in Part 705.5(b)(2), the service provider or state oversight agency shall document the reason.

(4) If the personal representative of a potential witness is contacted, the service provider or state oversight agency shall not disclose confidential information regarding the allegation of abuse or neglect to the personal representative.

(c) Inquiry of personal representative. The service provider shall ask the personal representative if he or she has additional information not known to the service provider concerning the most effective ways to communicate with the service recipient in order to support the interview process.

(d) Exceptions to notification requirements.

(1)Those service providers who are required to provide notifications pursuant to section 33.23 of the Mental Hygiene Law are not required to provide additional notification pursuant to this regulation.

(2) If an alleged victim or potential witness does not have a personal representative, there is no need for a service provider to comply with these documentation requirements.

§ 705.6 Interview Protocols

(a) Determinations regarding appropriateness of conducting an interview.

(1) Prior to commencing an interview, an investigator must determine if the interview can be conducted in a safe and timely manner. To make this determination, an investigator may consider any relevant facts or circumstances, including: the setting where and circumstances under which the interview is to be conducted; the opinion of a service recipient’s personal representative; the service recipient’s diagnosis; any information received after consulting with the service recipient’s licensed health professionals; information in the service recipient’s files; observations of the service recipient’s behavior; information obtained from service provider employees; the service recipient’s capability to provide information to assist the investigation; and information obtained from engaging in preliminary inquiries with service recipients to establish that proceeding with an interview would be appropriate.

(2) A formal clinical assessment is not required prior to interviewing a service recipient.

(3) If conducting an interview of the service recipient would be clinically contraindicated, despite the provision of appropriate accommodations, the interview shall not take place, except where certain circumstances exist. These circumstances include but shall not be limited to: an investigator reasonably believes that a service recipient has information relevant to maintaining or securing the safety of service recipients; an investigator reasonably believes that failure to interview a service recipient may allow for the destruction of evidence; the delay in interviewing a service recipient may allow a subject to evade law enforcement; or an investigator has been directed to proceed with the interview after consultation with his or her supervisor. An investigator shall document in the investigative record the reason why it was appropriate to proceed with the interview under these limited circumstances.

(b) Information from a service provider.

(1) An investigator must notify a service provider if he or she will need specific information from a service provider to determine whether to proceed with an interview, including the identity of any additional service recipient witnesses for whom the service provider did not make the required notification as set forth in Section 705.5(b)(1).

(2) The service provider shall supply the Justice Center or the delegate investigatory entity with the requested information within 72 hours of receiving such notification from an investigator.

(3) The requested information may be conveyed verbally or in writing.

(c) Communication. If an investigator determines that a service recipient may have difficulty comprehending questions due to cultural or linguistic barriers, such investigator shall work with a service provider to provide the service recipient with the means to communicate with the investigator.

(d) Personal Representative Presence at an Interview.

(1) A personal representative may be permitted to accompany a service recipient who is an alleged victim or a potential witness during an interview, except under the following circumstances: the service recipient objects to the personal representative being present during the interview; or the investigator believes the presence of the personal representative would impede the investigation. Objections by a service recipient to a personal representative being present during an interview should be reviewed on an individual basis consistent with the existing standards a service provider uses to determine the ability of a service recipient to consent to services, programs and treatment.

(2) Even if the personal representative requests to be present for an interview, the request need not be honored if the confidential nature of the information that would be disclosed during the interview would preclude the personal representative’s presence.

(3) If a personal representative is allowed to be present during an interview, the personal representative may not interfere with the interview. If an investigator believes that the personal representative is interfering with the interview, the investigator may take appropriate actions to stop the interview. If an investigator determines that a personal representative should not be present or should leave an interview once it is underway, the investigator must document the rationale for such decision in the investigative record.

(4) If a personal representative cannot attend an interview in a timely manner, the service provider may provide appropriate technology to allow the personal representative to participate in the interview. This may entail the use of a conference call line or a video conference, if available. An investigator shall not be required to unreasonably delay an interview to allow for a personal representative to participate.

(e) Information for service recipients. Prior to beginning an interview with a service recipient, the investigator shall advise service recipients and/or their personal representatives about what to expect in an interview. The investigator shall explain that participation in an interview is voluntary. In addition, and as applicable, the investigator shall advise the service recipient and/or his or her personal representative about searches of the service recipient’s personal property and searches of the service recipient’s person for the purposes of non-criminal investigations.

This notice is intended:

to serve as both a notice of emergency adoption and a notice of proposed rule making. The emergency rule will expire September 27, 2015.

Text of rule and any required statements and analyses may be obtained from:

Robin A. Forshaw, Justice Center for the Protection of People with Special Needs, 161 Delaware Avenue, Delmar, NY 12054, [phone], email: Robin.Forshaw@Justice Center.ny.gov

Data, views or arguments may be submitted to:

Same as above.

Public comment will be received until:

45 days after publication of this notice.

Regulatory Impact Statement

1. Statutory Authority: Executive Law § 553(20) authorizes the Justice Center for the Protection of People with Special Needs (Justice Center) to take any actions necessary to carry out its functions, powers and duties. Executive Law § 561(6) provides that the Justice Center’s Advisory Council shall advise and assist the Justice Center in developing proposed regulations to carry out its functions, powers and duties. Section 3 of Ch. 394, L.2014, requires the Justice Center to develop and promulgate regulations to carry out new protocols for interviewing service recipients, as established by that chapter.

2. Legislative Objectives: These regulations further the legislative objectives embodied in Ch. 394, L. 2014.

3. Needs and Benefits: The regulations include new requirements that must be followed when service recipients are being interviewed in connection with an investigation of an allegation of abuse or neglect that has been accepted by the Justice Center. These new requirements are embodied in protocols developed by the Justice Center, as required by Ch. 394, L. 2014, and the protocols will be implemented by these regulations.

4. Costs:

(a) Costs to the Agency and to the State and its local governments: The Justice Center will not incur significant additional costs as a result of these regulations. The regulations will impose some new requirements on providers, including State and local governments that operate programs subject to the Justice Center’s jurisdiction, but it is difficult to estimate the cost impact on these entities. However, the Justice Center expects that costs to providers will be minimal. The Protection of People with Special Needs Act (PPSNA), Ch. 501, L. 2012, which created the Justice Center, already requires the reporting and investigation of alleged abuse and neglect of service recipients served by programs under the Justice Center’s jurisdiction. Ch. 394, L. 2014, requires the Justice Center to develop new protocols governing investigations of these allegations, and specifically requires that this protocol contain a provision requiring that service recipients and/or their personal representatives be notified when a service recipient will be questioned or interviewed during such an investigation. The burden to provide these notifications will necessarily fall on the provider agencies, which know which service recipients are self-advocating, and which have personal representatives and who they are. There also may be minimal one-time costs associated with training of provider staff on these protocols. Moreover, Ch. 394, L. 2014, creates these new obligations, and the Justice Center is required to establish protocols to implement them.

(b) Costs to private regulated parties: It is difficult to estimate the cost impact on private regulated parties, including licensed and certified provider agencies whose programs and facilities are under the jurisdiction of the Justice Center. However, the Justice Center expects that costs to providers will be minimal, as set forth in (4)(a), above.

The Justice Center anticipates that generally any potential costs incurred will be mitigated by savings that the provider will realize from the improvements implemented by the PPSNA. The Justice Center expects and hopes that in the long term, the reforms made by the PPSNA will ultimately reduce incidents of abuse and neglect in the systems of care under the jurisdiction of the Justice Center. The Justice Center is not able to quantify the minor potential costs or the savings that might be realized by the promulgation of these amendments.

5. Local Government Mandates: There are no new requirements imposed by the rule on any county, city, town, village; or school, fire, or other special district.

6. Paperwork: The new regulations require additional paperwork to be completed by providers. This includes the need to document that the statutorily required notifications to service recipients and/or personal representatives have been made before a service recipient is interviewed or questioned in connection with an investigation of an allegation of abuse or neglect.

7. Duplication: The amendments do not duplicate any existing State or Federal requirements that are applicable to investigations of abuse or neglect of vulnerable persons.

8. Alternatives: The Justice Center considered other methods to satisfy the statutory requirements, including requiring facilities and provider agencies under the Justice Center’s jurisdiction to make only a general notification, either at the time of admission of a service recipient to a facility or program, or on a periodic basis, that service recipients could be subject to being interviewed or questioned any time they witnessed or were victims of abuse or neglect. However, this alternative was deemed to provide fewer protections for the health, safety and welfare of service recipients, and the Justice Center chose instead to include in its protocols a requirement that notification be given each time that a service recipient may be interviewed or questioned. The Justice Center also considered requiring the investigator assigned to conduct the investigation to make the personal representative notification. This was determined not to be feasible for two reasons: (1) the investigator typically will not have the contact information for the personal representative, and obtaining that information would cause additional delays in completing the investigation; and (2) even after obtaining the information, the investigator would then have to make the notification and wait for a response before he or she could question a service recipient, resulting in additional delays in the investigative process. Because the law requires that investigations be completed in a timely manner (Social Services Law § 493(1)), these delays were determined to be unacceptable, in particular because they could lead to additional costs to provider agencies by increasing the length of time that staff who are the subject of investigations may be on leave.

9. Federal Standards: The amendments do not exceed any minimum standards of the federal government for the same or similar subject areas.

10. Compliance Schedule: The regulations will be effective on July 1, 2015, to ensure compliance with Ch. 394, L. 2014. The Justice Center has already developed and published the protocols implemented by these regulations, and has developed and made available to regulated parties training to assist them with compliance.

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

1. Effect on small business: The Justice Center for the Protection of Special Needs (Justice Center) has jurisdiction to investigate or cause the investigation of abuse or neglect of vulnerable persons served by certain facilities and provider agencies licensed or certified by six State agencies: the Office for People with Developmental Disabilities (OPWDD), the Office of Mental Health (OMH), for Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services (OASAS), the Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS), the Department of Health (DOH) and the New York State Education Department (SED). The Justice Center is unable to unable to estimate the portion of these providers that may be considered to be small businesses (under 100 employees).

However, the statutorily mandated regulatory requirements included in Part 705 have been reviewed by the Justice Center in light of their impact on small businesses. The Justice Center anticipates that generally any potential costs incurred will be mitigated by savings that the provider will realize from the reforms enacted by the PPSNA. The Justice Center expects and hopes that in the long term, these reforms will reduce incidents of abuse and neglect in the systems of care under the jurisdiction of the Justice Center. The Justice Center is not able to quantify the minor potential costs or the savings that might be realized by the promulgation of these regulations. In any event, these changes are required by statute and the Justice Center considers that the improvements in protections for people with special needs will help safeguard individuals from harm and abuse; thus, the benefits more than outweigh any potential negative impact on providers.

2. Compliance requirements: The regulations add several new requirements with which providers must comply. New regulations associated with the implementation of Chapter 394 include a requirement that providers make notifications to service recipients and/or their personal representatives that a service recipient may be questioned or interviewed during an investigation of abuse or neglect, and that the fact of the notification be documented.

Current law already requires that certain personal representatives be notified when a service recipient has been the victim of abuse or neglect, and in those cases the burden of making the additional notification required by Chapter 394 will be minimal. In other cases, where personal representative notifications are not currently required, any additional compliance activities associated with these enhanced requirements are expected to be minimal.

3. Professional services: There are not expected to be additional professional services required for small business providers as a result of these new regulatory requirements.

4. Compliance costs: There may be modest costs for small business providers associated with documenting that the newly required notifications have been made, but the Justice Center is unable to determine the cost impact. In the long term, compliance activities associated with the implementation of the PPSNA and Chapter 394 are expected to reduce future incidents of abuse or neglect, resulting in savings for providers as well as benefits to the wellbeing of individuals receiving services.

5. Economic and technological feasibility: The new requirements in Part 705 do not impose any requirements for the use of new technological processes on small business providers.

6. Minimizing adverse impact: The amendments may result in an adverse economic impact for small business providers due to additional compliance activities and associated compliance costs. However, as stated earlier, the Justice Center expects that compliance with these new regulations will result in savings in the long term.

The Justice Center has reviewed the regulations to determine if there were any viable approaches for minimizing adverse economic impact as suggested in section 202-b(1) of the State Administrative Procedure Act; no feasibly alternatives were readily identified. The Justice Center did not consider the exemption of small businesses from these amendments or the establishment of differing notification or compliance requirements since the legislation mandating this notification requirement clearly states that compliance with the new notification requirement is crucial to the health, safety, and welfare of the individuals served by small business providers.

7. Small business participation: Ch. 394, L. 2014, was not proposed by any State agency, but was introduced in the legislature and available for public review and comment before it was enacted. Providers have had the opportunity to become familiar with its provisions since it was made available on various government websites. Furthermore, drafts of the protocols that are implemented by Part 705 were shared with both State agencies impacted by them, and with some private provider agencies whose programs will be impacted by the protocols, and their comments were considered in the final version of the protocols that are now posted on the Justice Center’s website. Finally, in accordance with statutory requirements, the proposed regulations to implement Chapter 394 were presented to the Justice Center’s Advisory Council, which includes members from providers of services, for review and recommendations.

Rural Area Flexibility Analysis

1. Types and estimated number of rural areas: Programs serving vulnerable persons who are subject to the protections contained in Chapter 394 are present in every county in New York State. Forty-three counties have a population of less than 200,000: Allegany, Cattaraugus, Cayuga, Chautauqua, Chemung, Chenango, Clinton, Columbia, Cortland, Delaware, Essex, Franklin, Fulton, Genesee, Greene, Hamilton, Herkimer, Jefferson, Lewis, Livingston, Madison, Montgomery, Ontario, Orleans, Oswego, Otsego, Putnam, Rensselaer, St. Lawrence, Schenectady, Schoharie, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben, Sullivan, Tioga, Tompkins, Ulster, Warren, Washington, Wayne, Wyoming and Yates. Additionally, 10 counties with certain townships have a population density of 150 persons or less per square mile: Albany, Broome, Dutchess, Erie, Monroe, Niagara, Oneida, Onondaga, Orange, and Saratoga.

The Justice Center has reviewed the regulatory requirements contained in Part 705 in light of their impact on rural areas. The regulations contain new obligations, as required by Chapter 394, with respect to conducting interviews of service recipients who are victims f, or witnesses to, abuse and neglect. These new requirement will necessitate some changes in compliance activities and may result in additional costs and savings to providers, including those in rural areas. However, the Justice Center is unable to quantify the potential additional costs and savings to providers as a result of these new requirements. In any event, the Justice Center considers that the improvements in protections for people with special needs will help safeguard individuals from harm and that the benefits more than outweigh any potential negative impacts on all providers.

The geographic location of any given program (urban or rural) will not be a contributing factor to any additional costs to providers.

2. Compliance requirements: New regulations associated with the implementation of Chapter 394 include a requirement that providers make notifications to service recipients and/or their personal representatives that a service recipient may be questioned or interviewed during an investigation of abuse or neglect, and that the fact of the notification be documented.

Current law already requires that certain personal representatives be notified when a service recipient has been the victim of abuse or neglect, and in those cases the burden of making the additional notification required by Chapter 394 will be minimal. In other cases, where personal representative notifications are not currently required, any additional compliance activities associated with these enhanced requirements are expected to be minimal.

3. Professional services: There are not expected to be additional professional services required for small business providers as a result of these new regulatory requirements.

4. Compliance costs: There may be modest costs for small business providers associated with documenting that the newly required notifications have been made, but the Justice Center is unable to determine the cost impact. In the long term, compliance activities associated with the implementation of the PPSNA and Chapter 394 are expected to reduce future incidents of abuse or neglect, resulting in savings for providers as well as benefits to the wellbeing of individuals receiving services.

5. Minimizing adverse impact: In the long term, compliance activities associated with the implementation of the PPSNA and Chapter 394 are expected to reduce future incidents of abuse or neglect, resulting in savings for providers as well as benefits to the wellbeing of individuals receiving services.

The Justice Center considered other methods to satisfy the statutory requirements, including requiring facilities and provider agencies under the Justice Center’s jurisdiction to make only a general notification, either at the time of admission of a service recipient to a facility or program, or on a periodic basis, that service recipients could be subject to being interviewed or questioned any time they witnessed or were victims of abuse or neglect. However, this alternative was deemed to be less protective of the health, safety and welfare of service recipients, and the Justice Center chose instead to include in its protocols a requirement that notification be given each time that a service recipient may be interviewed or questioned. The Justice Center also considered requiring the investigator assigned to conduct the investigation to make the personal representative notification. This was determined not to be feasible for two reasons: (1) the investigator typically will not have the contact information for the personal representative, and obtaining that information would cause additional delays in completing the investigation; and (2) even after obtaining the information, the investigator would then have to make the notification and wait for a response before he or should could question a service recipient, resulting in additional delays in the investigative process. Because the law requires that investigations be completed in a timely manner (Social Services Law § 493(1)), these delays were determined to be unacceptable, in particular because they could lead to additional costs to provider agencies by increasing the length of time that staff who are the subject of investigations may be on leave.

6. Participation of public and private interests in rural areas: Ch. 394, L. 2014, was introduced in the legislature and available for public review and comment before it was enacted. Providers have had the opportunity to become familiar with its provisions since it was made available on various government websites. Furthermore, drafts of the protocols that are implemented by Part 705 were shared with State agencies impacted by them, and with some private provider agencies who run programs throughout New York State whose programs will be impacted by the protocols, and their comments were considered in the final version of the protocols that are now posted on the Justice Center’s website. Finally, in accordance with statutory requirements, the proposed regulations to implement Chapter 394 were presented to the Justice Center’s Advisory Council, which includes members from providers of services from throughout New York State, for review and recommendations.

Job Impact Statement

A Job Impact Statement for these amendments is not being submitted because the Justice Center does not anticipate a substantial adverse impact on jobs and employment opportunities.

The new Part 705 implements statutorily required protocols governing the process by which service recipients may be interviewed when they are victims of or witnesses to abuse or neglect. However, it is not anticipated that these reforms will negatively impact jobs or employment opportunities. The new regulatory provisions that impose new requirements on providers, such as additional notification and documentation requirements, will not result in an adverse impact on jobs. The Justice Center anticipates that there will be no effect on jobs as agencies will utilize current staff to perform the required compliance activities.

It is therefore apparent from the nature and purpose of the rule that it will not have a substantial adverse impact on jobs and employment opportunities.