A Critical Examination of State Agency Investigations into ...

V. State Agency Investigations of Allegations ofJonathan Carey’ s AbuseThree state entities responded at the time to the Careys’ allegations that Jonathanhad been abused at the Anderson School: the Commission on Quality of Care andAdvocacy for Persons with Disabilities (CQC); the Office of Mental Retardation andDevelopmental Disabilities (OMRDD) Central Office; and OMRDD’s regional TaconicDevelopmental Disabilities Services Office (Taconic regional office), the office servingthe area where the Anderson School is located. As described below, the three entitiesreceived information about the allegations through various means and commencedinvestigations or reviews that had somewhat different focuses. Later, the allegationswere examined by the Dutchess County District Attorney’s office working with the StatePolice, the Governor’s Office, and the State Education Department.In accordance with state regulations, non-state agencies such as the AndersonSchool are responsible for conducting their own investigations of abuse allegations. Inthis case, with administrative staff at the Anderson School implicated in the allegations,the school’s Executive Director requested that the Taconic regional office conduct theinvestigation. However, consistent with normal procedure, John Mizerak, the Taconicregional office’s Director, instructed the Anderson School to conduct its owninvestigation, of which the Taconic regional office would provide “oversight.”As directed by Mizerak, the Anderson School commenced its own investigation.The school’s Incident Review Manager was assigned primary responsibility. In the weekfollowing October 22, the Incident Review Manager took a number of investigative steps,including interviewing some staff and examining records.90