Wisconsin Shares Day Care Providers Sound Off

Department of Children and Families (DCF) Secretary Reggie Bicha had been touted as the headliner at the July 24 Community Brainstorming meeting devoted to the problems in the Wisconsin Shares day care program.

But Bicha didn’t show up to hear what Milwaukee’s day care providers had to say about the witch hunt-like strategy DCF has used to clamp down on suspected fraud in the program.

Although Bicha was absent, panelists included NAACP attorney N. Lynnette McNeely, child care provider La Tonya Johnson, Lisa Patrick, interim executive director of the Milwaukee Early Care Administration, and Henry Wilde, deputy secretary of DCF.

The crowd had quite a bit to say to the panelists, although all were in agreement that deliberate defrauding of the taxpayer-supported program should be identified and punished.

But reforms enacted in 2009—egged on by sensationalized reporting in the Journal Sentinel—have allowed DCF to cast a wide net in its fraud investigations. Thanks to a creative line item veto by Gov. Jim Doyle while signing the reforms, DCF can suspend payments to providers that it “reasonably suspects” have committed fraud—a very low hurdle to overcome. Mass suspensions began in September 2009, and the majority of those providers are appealing their suspensions. Almost a year later, few have had their cases resolved and their businesses continue to be shuttered.

Inadequate Training, A Rigged Appeals System

If DCF Secretary Bicha had attended the meeting, he would have gotten an earful, including these complaints about his administration of DCF and the fraud investigations:

n A lack of due process. Karyn Rotker, senior staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Wisconsin, said that suspended providers are being deprived of their right to due process since they are being suspended before they are given a chance to defend themselves and address any questions about their business records. “Before something can be taken away you must be given notice and be heard,” Rotker said. Instead, providers were sent letters informing them of their immediate and indefinite suspension from the program.

n A disproportionate impact on Milwaukee’s African-American child care providers. An estimated 90% of child care providers in Milwaukee’s primarily African-American central city participate in the Wisconsin Shares program and serve parents who cannot pay without a subsidy. Therefore, suspending these providers from the Wisconsin Shares program effectively shuts down their businesses and forces low-income working parents to try to find new child care options. “Technically, DCF is saying that they are not shutting down these businesses, but they are,” McNeely said.

n Errors automatically attributed to providers. McNeely argued that discrepancies in a provider’s records and the county’s or state’s database are automatically attributed to the day care provider and labeled “fraud.” And thanks to the new regulations, counties may keep money they attribute to fraud. “It’s an integrity issue,” McNeely said. “There is no recourse or repercussion for a [county or state] staffer who misrepresents information and has an interest in keeping their job.”

n Harsh punishment for old offenses. The state can now permanently revoke a day care provider’s license based on old offenses turned up in background checks—offenses that the state knew about before it initially issued the license. One provider, now out of business because of an offense she committed 10 years ago, said, “They knew about my background when I got my license. I’ve never been written up [for day care-related infractions] and now I’ve been shut down.” Another provider said, “Why can DCF go so far back? We should have been grandfathered in.”

n A lack of proper training. Providers say they have not been given the state’s official day care provider manual, nor have they been properly informed of changes in regulations.

Provider La Tonya Johnson said that Community Coordinated Child Care (“4C”), which offers training for child care providers, has been teaching “incorrect information” about attendance record-keeping, which has contributed to discrepancies in records that get providers in trouble with DCF. “But still the provider is responsible,” Johnson said. “The department needs to clarify their rules.” Even DCF’s Wilde admitted that there’s been a “systematic failure of training.”

n An appeals process that favors DCF. Suspended providers have been appealing their cases within the state’s administrative law system. But DCF Secretary Bicha issued an order in February demanding that all decisions made by the independent administrative law judges be sent back to DCF for final approval. In fact, DCF does not even have to issue a final decision on cases, leaving some providers in limbo indefinitely. According to the ACLU’s Rotker, 98% of all decisions that favor the provider are overturned by DCF. “DCF has set up a process that doesn’t allow the administrative law judge to make independent decisions,” Rotker said. DCF’s Wilde defended the system, saying, “Anyone who disagrees with the final decision can go to circuit court to argue their case.”