'CEO failed in moral duty to former wards'

The following are edited excerpts from the Office of the Children's Advocate's 93-page report tabled in the Parliament on the controversial partnership between Jamaica's Child Protection and Family Services Agency (CPFSA) and Carl Robanske, who was flagged in the US over inappropriate sexual contact with a child.

REPORT FINDINGS

1. The Child Protection and Family Services (CPFSA) is the government entity responsible for the care and protection of children. A breach of the CPFSA's duty of care undermines the insulation of the protective environment that the State has entrusted the agency to provide. This report finds that there has been such a breach of duty on the part of the CPFSA under the stewardship of its CEO.

2. Since the news of Carl Robanske's suspension in the USA publicly surfaced in Jamaica in March 2021 and since the onset of this investigation, very deliberate and repeated attempts have been made by diverse representatives of the CPFSA to say that no females under 18 years, i.e. children, are accommodated at The Father's House. This, however, is a recent invention that is a classic example of 'a little too late' and is perceived as an orchestrated effort to exclude the facility from the Office of the Children's Advocate's (OCA's) jurisdiction and duty to investigate. There is a preponderance of evidence that confirms that since the opening of the facility right through to the conduct of these investigations, the CPFSA had routinely accommodated girls who were below 18 years at The Father's House; this was not for “emergency” or overnight accommodation” as the CEO proffered in a belated attempt to qualify her claims regarding anyone under 18 years being at the facility.

3. It is of concern, therefore, that the psychological evaluation of Robanske that was done as a part of the 2016 Hearing in the US initiated against him by the Office of Professional Practices, concluded, inter alia, that: “He appears to have little awareness of the inappropriateness of his behaviour.”

4. The CEO failed in her administrative and moral duty to these former wards of the State. Her responses indicate that she is either unaware of – or has a reckless approach to – the significant vulnerability which attaches not only to them when they are minors (i.e. below 18 years), but also even after and during their transition out of the formal care system.

5. The CPFSA knew of Robanske's antecedents from early 2018. It also knew that it had children accommodated at The Father's House. Its continued partnership with Robanske himself and with Embracing Orphans, given the central and lead role that Robanske plays in that organisation, was not only questionable but betrayed the CPFSA's mandate and undermined its moral authority to be telling Jamaicans that they should be wary of persons who may be around children for fear that they may abuse them.

6. The residents of The Father's House were not only accessible to Robanske but were very receptive to him, perhaps because of the gifts and the attention that he would give to them. Some of the residents were able to speak about knowing and interacting with him from they were residents at Blossom Gardens Children's Home; one even produced a photograph of herself at age 6 that she says Robanske had shared with her from his interactions with her in that facility. He represented to them a person in authority whom they were fond of, indebted to, and liked; he also occupied a position of trust.

7. The CPFSA operated within an environment that allowed Robanske access to children and facilitated his engagement with them. Apart from his liberal access and association with residents from the Father's House, the OCA's investigations confirmed three other such facilities: Blossom Gardens Children's Home, Jamaica Relief Ministries and West Haven Children's Home.

8. The OCA has ferreted out a number of instances in which the CEO of the CPFSA has made written and oral statements that are inconsistent with what the records reveal or are discrepant in some other material, particularly those that go to the root of the matter.

9. The analysis of extracted data from mobile telephones and tablets belonging to the manager of The Father's House and its residents provided useful information. Among other things was "an open intent of the manager of The Father's House to deceive" in her WhatsApp message as communicated via her mobile telephone number ending in -8546 in the a WhatsApp group chat for The Father's House.

10. Both Youth Minister Fayval Williams and the then Youth State Minister Robert Morgan, through no fault of their own, communicated inaccuracies to the public with regard to the Robanske issue and the CPFSA. The Ministers fell into error consequent upon their reliance on what has now been established as the CPFSA's misrepresentation of the facts. Needless to say, this ought not only to be seen as unacceptable, but also a dangerous precedent to allow to persist without being addressed.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. The leadership and management of the CPFSA has demonstrated that it either does not have the capacity or the will to effectively manage sensitive matters in spite of the high level of responsibility that has been entrusted to it in relation to some of Jamaica's most vulnerable citizens. Exposure to extensive capacity building and training in the fundamental principles of safeguarding in relation children in care and the special vulnerabilities of those exiting care is, therefore, strongly recommended.

2. The risk assessment tools and procedures that are utilised by the CPFSA need to be revisited, assessed and aligned with best practices.

3. The material inconsistencies and discrepancies that have been exposed at the instance of the CEO are of concern and special attention needs to be paid to this disposition in light of the reliance that one should be able to confidently place on an office holder at that level. Within the context of this investigation, for instance, it has been highlighted how the flawed information that was provided to the ministers by the CPFSA led them into error and served as the basis for inaccurate information being communicated to the nation on a matter of high public interest and importance to the child protection sector.

4. Due to the CEO's gross breach of the duty of care owed to wards of the State and former wards who are housed in facilities run by the CPFSA that is a finding of this investigation, this matter is hereby referred to the Williams as the person competent to take such disciplinary or other proceedings as may be appropriate against the CEO of the CPFSA.