June 30, 2026 · Health and Human Services · 13,244 words · 2 speakers · 29 segments
Are you ready? Welcome to the health and human services Committee.
I'm Senator brian hardin. I represent legislative district 48. I serve as chair of the Committee. I'll start by having the members of the Committee introduce themselves, starting with Senator riepe. Thank you, sir murph riepe. I represent district 12, which is millard omaha, and this fine little town of ralston. Senator glenn meyer, district 17, dakota thurston wayne and the southern part of dickson county. Dan quick, district. 35, grand island. Assisting the Committee today. To my left is our research analyst, bryson bartels and corey bierbaum, our Committee clerk. And our page today is. Matthew, will you stand up and introduce yourself? Hello, I'm matthew greer and I'm a senior at the university of Nebraska, lincoln, and I live here in lincoln. And you're going to be graduating soon? Yes, it will be graduating soon. Awesome. Well, congrats to you, matthew. So today's hearing will be. Wait a minute. Hi. One more person has arrived. Good morning everyone. I'm john fredrickson, representing district 20, which is in central west omaha. Today's hearing will be invited testimony only if you have been invited to testify, please fill out a green testifier sheet located at the sides of the room and hand it to the page or clerk. When you come up to testify. Written material may be distributed to the Committee members as exhibits only while testimony is being offered. Please have at least 12 copies. Hand them to the clerk for distribution when you come to testify. We do not accept oversize exhibits, cds, thumb drives, or other electronic exhibits as they cannot be transcribed. To better facilitate today's hearing, I ask that you abide by the following procedures. Please silence your cell phones. When you come to testify, please state and spell your first and last name for the record. Before you testify, we'll be using a three minute light system. When you begin, the light on the table will be green. Yellow will mean you have a minute remaining. Red means you need to wrap up your final thought and stop. Questions from the Committee may follow, but do not count against your time. With that, we will be open the hearing on LR 425 related to the white hall facility in lincoln. Doctor janicek. Oh, wait a minute, you can't. Doctor janicek bryson just wisely reminded me, beside this pile of information, I need to actually get up and speak. Thanks. Then we'll have you come up. I'll be ping ponging back and forth. So. Welcome chair hardin. You may open when you're ready. Good morning. I am brian hardin. Brianhardin, chairman of the health and human services Committee. I introduced LR 425, which examines the rehabilitation and treatment of youth and the transition back to their communities, which includes programing, placement, fiscal impact and the role of the department of health and human services dhhs.
For this hearing, LR 425 will explore long term facility and treatment options that best serve the unique needs of youth in dhhs care. Currently residing at the white hall campus in lincoln, whitehall campus provides treatment through two programs. The substance use program works with adolescent males who struggle with moderate to severe substance use diagnoses. The youth who sexually harm program serves adolescent males who have engaged in sexually harmful behaviors for more than 30 years. The white hall campus has provided treatment for adolescent males who have engaged in sexually harmful behaviors. In october 2020, whitehall expanded its programing to include serving adolescent males with severe substance use diagnoses. These programs are separate from each other, with the two populations living in different cottages. Both programs attend school and stress the importance of family involvement. Whitehall's principles of care include individualized treatment, trauma informed care, cultural competency, safe and caring environments, nonlinear treatment gains responsibility, and evidence based programing. Over the past year, several concerns have been brought to our attention about the whitehall campus. Many of the buildings are showing signs of decline. For example, there have been reports that the water system is in need of repairs. Many of the buildings are falling out of compliance with the american disability act. Ada, the cost of upgrading this campus has grown tremendously in the last five years. More importantly, we need to ask the question are the youth in whitehall receiving the appropriate care? Many of you have observed the disrepair of the buildings at the geneva y. Rtc in 2019 that resulted in the difficult transfer of youth to the kearney y rtc. I believe that we need to be proactive in examining these difficult issues and not let another geneva happen again. Whenever we discuss possible transfers of youth to another facility, we as senators, as well as the public become very concerned. I understand that the discussion brings about concerns about current staffing. However, we need to recognize that the treatment of our youth is our major goal. I'd like to thank all of those that attended yesterday's tour of whitehall campus and the kearney meyer t c and look forward to this hearing. I'd be happy to answer any questions. Any questions from the Committee. Seeing none. Doctor janicek. Now it's your turn. I think I got the order right this time. Welcome. Thank you. Sure. Okay. Good morning, chairman hardin and members of the health and human services Committee. My name is doctor thomas janicek. Thomasjanousek, and I am the director of the division of behavioral health in the department of health and human services. The whitehall campus is a joint commission accredited psychiatric residential treatment facility that specializes in the treatment of youth with substance use disorders and youth who sexually harm. The program consists of 40 hours of weekly programing, including supervised activities, off campus visits and programing to assist these youth with reintegrating with their families.
These individuals are referred by various organizations including the courts, juvenile probation, dhhs and in some cases by their own families. The youth who sexually harm program is highly specialized and is often one of the only options for youth with these treatment needs. In recent years, multiple buildings on the whitehall campus have been in disrepair, posing several risks to staff and the youth served. The campus requires multiple renovations to make the building compliant with the americans with disabilities act standards. It also requires considerable repairs to fix issues such as flooding in the basements of several cottages. This flooding has posed safety risks to youth and staff during severe weather, and creates the risk of exposing individuals to mold and mildew. Sidewalks on campus are badly cracked, with steep grades and abrupt drops that pose safety hazards. Finally, the campus requires replacement of water and sewer mains and considerable updates to come into compliance with requirements for adequate fire safety. Dhhs is of the opinion that without action, the facilities on the whitehall campus will continue to pose considerable safety risks and do not meet our standards for providing the best possible care for these youth. Today, the department would like to provide information to the Committee on the program itself and the safety risks posed by its current condition. Thank you for your time, and I would be happy to answer any questions related to this topic. Thank you. Questions, Senator fredrickson. Thank you. Thank you, doctor, for being here and for your testimony. So I just had a couple of questions regarding the possible transfer of youth from whitehall to other facilities, as we've kind of seen outlined. So my understanding is, is so whitehall is a pr, is that correct? That's correct. Okay. And are any of the other gcs credentialed as a prtf? I don't believe they are currently. Any of them are currently credentialed as a prtf. Okay. Do you know, would the department's plan b if the youth were to transfer from whitehall to hastings, for example, or kearney or another rtc, would the plan b to credential those wire tcs as a prtf prior to their relocation? Thank you for the question. Yes. Ultimately, wherever we would end up transferring this youth, we would go through the process of making sure that they are in compliance with public health licensure requirements, making sure that they receive the certification for prtf, making sure that they're up to standards with whatever our accrediting organization would be for those standards, whether that's a jay co. Or a carf. So regardless of where a facility would transition, we would be making sure that the receiving facility meets those standards. Okay. And are there, I would imagine, do the staffing ratio, credentialed staff requirements shift with the rtc versus prtf credential? I would have to get you more information on that.
But essentially we would be evaluating what staff we have on campus to make sure that it meets that ratio for a prtf type level of service. Okay. And then my last question for you is that, you know, the whitehall facility, I think sometimes, at least in my own mind, sometimes I sort of lump that as one facility because it's one campus. But, you know, the reality is we have two very distinct programs there. One is obviously for youth who sexually harm, the other is for youth who are navigating substance misuse or abuse histories. So my thinking is if we were to transfer or shift, youth from whitehall, can you walk me through how the department's thinking about this, not just as sort of like one transfer, one shift, but really kind of the two separate programs and how that might be impacting where these youth are relocated. Can you repeat the question? Yeah. Well, I guess it's sort of like the the gist of the question is sort of like, so a youth who might be in a program for sexual harm, for example, might have very different needs than a youth who might be engaged in substance treatment. And so I'm just kind of curious if the department's given thought of, you know, the thought of like, these are almost like two very distinct clinical programs versus like this, like one population that and how that might determine where they where they are relocated. Yes. The department has put that consideration in there. We understand that the population that is currently in this program is unique, that we do have two operating programs. And so as we would transition to another facility, we would be making those considerations in evaluating the staff in terms of their comfort level with treating these this population, what additional training they may need, and whatever it would take to make sure those youth are getting the best care needed. Okay. And my one one concern I've had is, you know, the I've seen previous proposals that would that would indicate the youth from whitehall being sent to to kearney. Obviously whitehall youth being particularly the youth with the history of sexual harm being particularly vulnerable. I think we've all read the news in recent allegations and charges of staff at kearney who have engaged in sexual misconduct towards youth there. I I'm wondering what your thoughts are about transferring youth in the state's care that are already vulnerable to sexual abuse, sexual misconduct, to a location that has a continued history, very recent history of these youth being sexually exploited by by employees there. Thank you for the question. I can't necessarily comment on the occurrences that are happening at tc. It's not. That's over in the division of children and family services.
But what I can say from the perspective of transferring the whitehall program wire tc is just one option that could be considered in any kind of movement that we could do with transferring this program. Our original legislative proposal was to move the whitehall youth over into the wire. Tc hastings, which is a facility that hasn't been subject to those issues. So as we've been just trying to educate the Committee, the goal here has been to say, here's all the possibilities that we potentially have for migrating this program. What would be the best one that we could all be on board with, as a as a legislative and executive body? Okay. Thank you, Senator. Thank you. Chairman, thank you for being here. My concern goes back to the start of this process, and that is that it seems to me that this entire process has been around facility driven planning, as opposed to the needs of the young people that are in here and or even the staff that it would take to support that. I feel like today, all of you may be here to try to convince us or as you, I think, said, the word, educate us as to why your way is the best way. I'm not convinced of that. I don't think that you can put a program with this required staffing requirements, quite frankly, outside of either lincoln and omaha, where you can recruit and retain staff. I think several years ago, and this is a statement, I guess, more than a question, you can respond to it, because I've been on this Committee for eight years. We tried to put some talked about some psychiatric program in hastings, and they were absolutely convinced that they could recruit the staff there. I was never convinced of that. I still don't believe in it because it's a you know, it's it's just not very likely. I guess my question would be is are there no other facilities? And I'm not trying to I'm going to omaha. Senator. I'm not trying to take this to omaha. I'm just trying to say are. There are no other options within the fine city, the big city of lincoln. Thank you for the question. And I can talk a little bit about this at a high level. But I know that we've evaluated a number of different properties that could potentially be appropriate. But even with either leasing or purchasing those properties, we are still at about the same amount of cost it would take to renovate the whitehall facility. So whether it's getting finding a property that may cost $3 million, we've often seen that it takes another $3 million or so to put in the upgrade security features, all that stuff that would be needed to bring the property up to the standard that we would need to license it as a prh. So there are options available.
It's not to say that there isn't anything, but we are sitting in a situation where the investment that would be needed would be akin to the same investment that it would take to bring whitehall campus into compliance. My response to that would be is, everything that you've talked about has been facility driven. It doesn't talk about either the what are the requirements for the young people that we're trying to rehabilitate? Nor did you mention anything about the staffing side of the thing. The facilities is one thing, but quite frankly, you amortize that over a number of years. That's a minor, minor cost in relationship to program failure. I understand that, and I'll say that I have a lot of confidence in the staff that run that program, and I have no doubts that any of them are trying their best and doing their best to rehabilitate these youth. But what my biggest concern is, and why this is so facility driven is because when we have youth that are in a basement, that is flooding, that has had sewer backup, and they are having to be in that setting when they are having a storm, or if we do not have the ability to serve individuals that may have a physical disability. That to me says that those youth are not getting the most the best care at a fundamental level when they're not able to be able to say confidently that they are in a safe facility. It sounds to me that you see this as only one option. I don't see it that way. Thank you. Chairman. Senator meyer. Thank you, chair, good to see you here again, doctor. Janice, I was part of the tour yesterday, and I have an understanding of some of the shortcomings with our sewer and water lines and the opportunity in one of the testifiers behind. You can probably answer this as far as the structure itself more clearly, but in the in anticipating making the fundamental changes that need to be done with the infrastructure, the probability is that those programs cannot continue while those changes are being made. I'm making an assumption here, but from my personal business experiences, I believe that might be accurate. So inevitably we're going to have to shut the program down while the changes are made, or we're going to have to transfer the youth to some other facility. And so now we're looking at licensing the other facility, both federal and state licensees, and which I understand needs to be done. And so then we fix up whitehall and then we transfer it back. Does it make more sense to put a comprehensive plan together, make the move, whether it's to rtc or hastings or whatever facility, a one time do it right and whatever happens to whitehall happens to whitehall. Maybe it becomes a property, a surplus property that can be sold, whatever. It's irrelevant.
Does it make more sense to do that on a one time basis instead of we're over here and now we're going to be over there each time we make a move? If it's not back to whitehall, we're going to have to be relicensed every time. Yeah, I can't, I can't really comment on the feasibility of doing the upgrades to the building without having to shut the program down. Unfortunately, mr. Flachsbart is fell under the weather today, but what I can say is that, I mean, ultimately our goal here is to put the best plan in place to make sure that these youth are getting transitioned, transferred and receiving the best care that they can throughout that process. I, as a clinician, do not want to have a system where we are disrupting youth. The transition of youth, creating a difficult process for them and their families. So there would be some substantial planning involved with that. But I don't know what the feasibility is of doing the required upgrades to the building while simultaneously maintaining the program on campus. I was hoping to be able to ask mr. Flachsbart that, but hopefully he didn't catch what he has from me. Yesterday I was hacking around pretty. I tried to stay away from people so. And that certainly would be a question for him, but I thank. Thank you for your answer. You're welcome. Senator krueger. Thank you chairman. So some of my questions kind of fall under the you know, it's it's about the kids. And I think you've said that, but it seems like we're talking more about the buildings than we are about the kids. And there's also that continuum of care where if you move kids from one place to another, but the staff isn't following now, this now they're starting over with new staff and I just don't want to see any any of these juveniles fall through the cracks. So and that's just more of a comment than it is a question. My question would be, and maybe that's not a question for you, but along the way, ada is not something new. I mean, even in where I've worked at before in other lines of work, we've had to make things ada compliant over time. And so why why is it not? Why are why did we wait so long to say now all of a sudden, this is why we have to move. Because we're not ada compliant, when all along we should have been doing those that type of work. Yeah, I can't comment on decisions and occurrences that occurred for my time here before my time here, but I just I do know that we have conducted an ada study in 2024 to assess the needs of this facility, to get it into clients. And our legal officer here today is will be able to discuss some of the information behind that. Okay.
And my other question would be on the, you know, we've got qualified staff that are at the at whitehall and they're providing care for two different types of, of issues for kids, for those juveniles. We don't really have that in kearney. We don't have that in hastings. I really have concerns about finding the right staff in those locations when we already have it in a, especially in a community like lincoln or even like omaha that have those those resources or those the ability to find qualified staff like that. So I don't know if that's really a question or if that's something you can talk about or not. Well, I can just continue to say, I mean, our goal is to make sure that wherever this program lands, that we're staffing it appropriately to make sure that the needs of the youth are met. Senator meyer. Thank you. Chair, are we fully staffed at whitehall now? I believe so we have about 67 staff employed right there currently. I heard anecdotally when we initially were discussing this situation, some staff left to find other jobs in anticipation of the move. I'd be curious to know if they moved out of town to take those jobs or not, because I'm sure there will be job opportunities in whatever facility, whatever location, whatever community. Certainly those folks could follow that opportunity and relocate and continue that level of care, that good level of care they're already providing. So I was just curious whether we were short staffed in anticipation of the move or not, but evidently we're not. Yeah, it hasn't been evident that that's been a concern at this point in time. Okay. Thank you. Could you. Explain in more detail what all is included in in whitehall's principles of care? Maybe if there are differences between the two populations, they're kind of going to what is that philosophy? Yeah. The overall philosophy is we maintain our treatment standards along with the joint commission, to make sure that all of our programs are receiving the level of care, treatment, planning and engagement that are required for that accreditation. Overall, the program, in about 40 hours of program provided weekly. This includes one hour family sessions and two hours of individual treatment. The patients on the grounds have off site activities to get them familiar with the community as they reintegrate, so we'll take them out for I think they do like golf outings, mini golf, different kinds of community engagement activities where they go out like that. Family visits are on campus, and they also have off campus local lincoln na meetings on wednesdays and conduct other on site visits such as that. So we really try to maintain a broad array of programing for these individuals that are adherent with the best clinical and evidence based practices. Okay. And what's the current population there now in each of the programs.
Last date I had, we were about eight and 8 or 8 and seven each in the let me get this here. We had about eight in the youth who sexually harm program, and then about seven in the substance use program. Okay. The overall facility capacity can handle. 24 youth and I would say in the last three years, the most we had at one time was around 19. Okay. And can you kind of take us through what are the qualifications of the staff that works there? So we have a number of clinical program managers. We have master social workers on staff, mental health practitioners, nurse supervisors, registered nurses. We have teachers that maintain the two rural 18 schools on there because we maintain individual education programs for the youth who sexually harm program and substance use program, we have case managers on site and then also activities coordinators as well. Okay. And when it comes to. Can you just kind of talk us through a typical day if there is such a thing, let's pretend it's not summertime because I think things do change a bit in the summer with the schooling in particular. Kind of give us a sense, what time does the day start, what does it look like, that sort of thing? I mean, I can I be able to get you more information on that? But as I said, we are continuing to provide the 40 hours of weekly treatment or an engagement. Those include group sessions. A lot of times there will be activities during the day for youth. You know, youth have their own individual rooms where they're able to reside when they are not participating in treatment. But I can I'm happy to give you more details on an actual schedule. Okay. And if we were to make a transition from a facility standpoint. Would that be something that would happen gradually? Would that be something that would happen in one fell swoop? Kind of describe what would be the best approach from a timing perspective? It would depend on the facility that we would choose to move the youth to. So what the components of that that have to come into place is making sure that we're meeting all the facility licensure requirements, making sure that we're getting it certified as a psychiatric residential treatment program, making sure that all of the compliance requirements are coming into place for jay, co. Or kauth for the accreditation standards, and then making sure that the staff is appropriately trained and able to accept those youth in whatever receiving facility they're going to. So there would be we would have to discuss the details of a transition process on that, but it would be likely a number of events that would have to come into place to make sure we're transitioning the youth appropriately. Okay. Thank you, Senator. Thank you. Chairman.
In my notes, I have it says that the whitehall is shares a budget with the lincoln regional center. Is that correct? That's correct. And have you explored on the massive campus at the lincoln regional center, opportunities to relocate some administrative offices or anything else to accommodate that. We have, but everything that it would take would require substantial build and developing of new properties. So right now, our lincoln regional center staff is staff to use the entire capacity of the facility. So we don't have a lot of additional space over there that could receive a program such as whitehall. So what that would look like is establishing new buildings on campus or whatnot. That would come at no cost. Okay. Okay. Big picture. Question. One of the things we're trying to do is learn from the past. Would such a move help us to avoid a geneva like situation? In my opinion, yes. Because, I mean, there is valid and significant physical safety concerns that are occurring at this facility right now. So whether there's a choice to invest in making the the repairs, migrating to another campus, or whatever variety of options we have, I mean, ultimately, it's it's a physical safety concern with this facility that is posed against these youth. And I personally don't want to be I don't want to see youth affected like that. I. Physical safety is the foundational element of safety in the program, and I want to make sure that our our youth are having the best and safest facility possible. Okay, question from again, way up in the air, what's the priority, the needs of the students, the needs of the staff? Absolutely. The needs of the youth are the first priority across every service line that we have. The needs of the youth are our highest priority. We are wanting to make sure that they are receiving the best program possible in the safest facility possible. If we were looking at what might happen in, for example, choices stay in lincoln at perhaps some other facility, go to white rtc kearney to a new facility that is in the process of being completed or going to hastings. Which of those three might be the most preferable, preferential or preferable? In my opinion, I would prefer the hastings regional center because that facility is actually set up to be built like a prt. F it is less correctional in nature, and it is a little bit more formed like a residential program, as opposed to something that looks more like a secured facility. Would you kind of unpack that for us for the record, because there is a real difference. And those of us that were at the tour yesterday felt that we you don't only see it, you feel it. Yeah, it's a different situation. Why are. T.c. Is a very different feeling than what happens at whitehall.
Would you kind of describe those two scenarios for us? Correct. So currently at the whitehall campus, our the facility is equipped to have kind of, I'm going to say, more informal living spaces. You have couches that are comfortable, seats, beds. The youth have their own rooms that don't necessarily have, you know, kind of a staff can observe the youth and make sure that they're safe, but it isn't such like a secured facility where in, you know, youth have the perception that they can't leave their room compared to maybe some of our, our like our facility where it is very much it's concrete, it has doors that appear to that are locked without with hinges on the inside. It doesn't appear to be very residential in nature. It does seem more like a cold secured facility. We believe that youth thrive in an environment where, you know, they have a little bit more of that community. They see open access to living spaces. They have a little bit of roam free, roam over their cottages so that they can go and have programing and groups in areas that are better comfortable, warmer spaces. And so that's why our preference has been to migrate them into the hastings center, because it is set up more like a prt, a more residential setting than kind of the more secured setting of a wire. Tc okay, thank you, Senator frederick. Richard, thank you for bringing that up. I was actually going to ask this of the building administrator, but since you brought up sort of the idea of like the secured facility, I mean, one thing that really struck me yesterday and touring the kearney and and the new building there was, it felt like a prison. I used to work in a federal prison. It's everything in terms of the rooms, the layouts, the the, even the tables. It was essentially a prison. And my question is, I mean, so obviously our youth and why rtc settings are not inmates. And, you know, I've worked in various behavioral health settings that have had to be secure facilities as well. And I don't know if you've had the opportunity to tour the new children's facility in omaha, for example, but I think that's a great example of a fully secured facility that does not in any way, shape or form feel like a prison. And so what thought is going behind building a new building, new construction for these from from a therapeutic element? I mean, you and I both know as mental health providers environment significantly impacts treatment response. It significantly impacts patient behavior.
If we have a youth who is in rtc, who is in a facility that feels and looks like a prison, all data would indicate that behavior would look very different than if they were in a facility or an environment that is still fully secure, similar to what we see at children's, but has a therapeutic element to it. And so I don't know if that's a question for building or design, but can you walk me through that a bit more? Well, and again, that's why we were in this last legislative session. We were having the preference of moving them to the hastings facility because it is built more like they, the, I'm going to say, residential feel type setting. It's not feeling like a prison. It is more I'm going to just say friendly, therapeutically friendly. It's a warmer environment to kind of have those those skills develop. So and I know we've been, there's been discussions about potentially doing additional tours to go out and see that facility. And we'd be happy to show the Committee that information as well. So so who is the new building that feels like a prison designed for? Those are for the youth at the the wire. Tc and I can defer to our legal officer to get more information about that. Thank you. Senator quick. Thank you. Chairman, I know yesterday, I know there was some talk about how well the the females were doing at at hastings, you know, working with the community college and that kind of thing. So I'm also looking at what's going to happen to them. If we would have to move to hastings now, they're going to move to kearney to more of a prison like setting. How is that going to set them back then, too? I mean. I appreciate the question, Senator. I can't comment on that because that's the programing of the wire. Tcs are beyond the division of behavioral health. That's through the office of cfs. But again, I believe our legal officer, beau, will be able to answer some of those questions. Okay. All right. Very well. I guess I would just comment and say hastings is a a little town. I'm from a little town. It's interesting to me historically that for almost 90 years, that's where the state mental hospital was. And so it does seem, in fact, that small towns can attract people, the kinds of professionals that it would need. And so I will if I can impose on you something that's. Well, we were hoping that mr. Flachsbart would be able to be here. He's not feeling well. As you indicated earlier. Generally speaking, as you walk in there and take a look at that facility in lincoln, at whitehall, what are just some general impressions you have of it, both as a a person who's done therapy for years and, and overseeing the behavioral world here. What are your thoughts?
I, I again, I totally agree that there needs to be significant investment or migration from that property to make sure we mitigate some of the physical safety risks. What mr. Flachsbart was going to talk about today was some of the repairs that were required, and I want to share a little bit of those at a high level. It's going to require a water main replacement, sewer main replacement, fire panel replacement, about 2.6 to $3.9 million to remediate the americans with disabilities act and make those and build those accommodations. And that includes masonry work for ramps and and mitigating kind of steep slopes throughout the facility, improving basement and storm shelter access, making appropriate shower and bathroom modifications, widening doors and moving recreational spaces. We also are needing to replace gas lines. We are having to replace roofs and air conditioning. Replacement is also another change that we need to make as well. And the grand total is a neighborhood of about $6.3 million to make these facility changes. Okay, just happen to remember from yesterday. Would you discuss kind of the average tenure of stay for the two populations at whitehall? Kind of discuss that for us? Yes. Are youth substance use program. Usually the length of stay is around 90 days for the youth who sexually harm program. It's around 6 to 12 months. Okay. And what does family interaction in particular look like for the whitehall youth. Family are engaging with their their youth constantly as as as appropriate. We it's always a key part of their treatment plan. We're bringing them in as frequently as we can. As I mentioned, we have hourly family sessions every week as a part of the 40 hours of programing, and our ultimate goal is to make sure that those youth are reintegrating with their family appropriately. As I understand why rtcs are something we're required federally to have. Is that correct? I can't comment on that. That would be a question for legal. I'll pick on mr. Botello, but we would not be federally required to have a facility like whitehall as a state. Is that correct? That is correct. Okay. So what would happen to those kids if we did not have something like whitehall? Well, it would drastically reduce our capacity to treat this youth. I mean, the biggest issue here is that the youth who sexually harm program is very unique to that whitehall program, which is why we are wanting to make sure that we have some option to make sure these youth are still taken care of. There are some youth substance use programs throughout the state. I believe there's other proofs through the brandt independence center in nova, a couple others, but this is the highest level of care for youth, and I know we as a state would be concerned to lose capacity in that area. Currently, we have just boys.
If we were to move to one of the other locations, would we have the capability of helping girls as well. With the required statutory changes that we proposed this session? Yes. If we were able to move them over, if we're able to move the whitehall program over to hastings and then move those, the the females over in hastings to wire tc, we would have the capacity to expand our youth who sexually harm program over to females should it be located in hastings. So we currently have no capability to do that. That's correct. I see other questions. Thank you for being here. We appreciate it. Thank you for having me. As we indicated earlier, everyone, mr. Flachsbart is not able to be with us today, but beau beau is here from the department of health and human services. As chief legal officer. So we look forward to having a discussion with you. Thank you, mr. Botelho. Thank you. And good morning, chairman hardin and members of the health and human services Committee. My name is beau botelho, bobotelh, and I'm the chief legal officer of the department of health and human services. The Committee has heard testimony from director of behavioral health and received information on behalf of the state building division administrator. I'll provide some additional information and we'll try to answer any questions, especially those which may be legal in nature. The program is currently operated at the whitehall campus, operate under a state issued health care facility license for mental health and substance use, often referred to as a moser license and a federal psychiatric residential treatment facility. Prtf certification. You need to have the license before you can apply for the prtf certification. The license would have to be obtained on the state level prior to moving. Youth into a new facility would have to be licensed to youth, have to then be residing in that treatment for a period of time, usually 30 to 60 days before. You can then apply for the federal certification. So state license, move the youth, operate the program, and then seek to the federal certification for the program in a new location. These programs operate in a department division of behavioral health general authority. The prtf programs. These programs, although extremely valuable, are not mandated by state or federal law. In other words, the operations of these programs is discretionary. Youth admitted to the prtf programs are typically youth who are under some level of juvenile probation under the juvenile courts delinquency jurisdiction. These youth participate in the program as a condition of their probation and are subject to the supervising court's jurisdiction. Prtf youth are not committed to the custody of dhhs as a condition of participation. Admittance to the programs to differentiate the youth rehabilitation treatment centers are mandated by state law, not federal by state law.
Dhhs must maintain the dcs in accordance with state statute and must admit you've committed to the wire by the courts. The prtf were operated much like a private kauth. They have admission requirements. The youth are admitted if it's suitable to the program, the rtc. If they're committed to the department of rtc, we have to take the youth. The current prtf facilities, the white, what we call in the whitehall campus do not meet federal americans with disabilities act accessibility requirements, thus subjecting to state to federal sanctions or injunction buildings providing public services must comport with ada accessibility requirements. Additionally, the facilities providing health care, mental health care, private or public are subject to ada accessibility requirements. Thank you for your time. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Senator fredrickson. Thank you, chair hardin, thank you for being here. It's good to see you again. I had a couple questions. I know the building facilitated facilities person is unable to be here today, but I did have a couple of questions related to that. And you might be able to shed light on that. Maybe not. And if so, I can wait for another time. But I guess my first question was, have we received like an official report on the building status, whether from like an architect or a building inspector, for example, about the conditions at whitehall? Yes. Building division obtained an assessment and that was with regards to bringing the facility up to ada compliance. So we received that from the state building division. And they have also provided, I think it's been provided to the Committee their assessment of what would be needed to repair the structural deficiencies of the whitehall facilities as well. Okay, okay. And with that, I mean, so I was kind of looking through some of the, the cost breakdown of the repairs required to, to whitehall. And, you know, I know in the Legislature we have like a building planning Committee and this is maybe a question that's our responsibility. But I was talking to a colleague of mine yesterday. It seems like a lot of the repairs outlined are, would be, would kind of fall under the category of, of expected maintenance, right? It talks about like a 25 year old roof needing repair. I think homeowners know 20 to 30 years is sort of the lifeline of a typical roof. You need to replace it at that point. Talks about some hvac repairs. Again, those are all things that are kind of planned for in a way. How how do those expected things, how does that work into facility budgeting? In other words, I'm seeing this report like we have all these unexpected costs all of a sudden, but a lot of these seem like in building planning and building maintenance, that this should be budgeted as part of the expected cost of a facility. Yeah.
First off, that would be a question for the state building administrator. But okay, for some some background, the department of health and human services, we do not own the buildings in which we are operating in, unlike the department of corrections. If you look at the department of corrections statutes, they are actually owners and operators of their facilities. Hhs operates, inhabits buildings that are owned and operated by the state building division administrator. So we we certainly communicate with them for day to day issues. We point things out, but that's not part of our budgeting process. We, in essence, pay rent. That's assessed to us by the building division administration, and that should be covering the cost of that. So how they plan out these types of projects. I think that really is a question for for them. We're basically a a tenant in their building. Okay. I understand you mentioned this sort of the different sort of admission requirements, etc. Pure tf versus a y rtc. I guess from a legal perspective, how does that work when those two programs potentially coexist? So if we were to get a prtf licensure at a rtc facility, have we done an analysis on how those things could coexist? Yeah, the facility itself wouldn't we wouldn't license like an entire y rtc as a prtf or even as a as a motion. The license is actually attached to the building itself, right? So you would whatever, whatever physical location the youth be moved to that, that building in which the program is going to operate would have to be licensed, not necessarily the entire campus. Just the actual building of that. Okay. That's actually really helpful. Thank you. Another question for you related to the educational component. So this came up during the session a little bit, sort of the current education programing at at whitehall versus what we have set up in other locations or facilities. My understanding, I think that whitehall and lincoln currently serve share a principal. Is that correct for this? Yes. They're the when you say lincoln, you're talking about the the y rtc in lincoln. Yeah. So they, they, they share programing. Whereas currently the rtc in kearney, which is where our superintendent is house, which is over all the hhs schools would have a, a school there, a rule. Ten school. Hastings is operating under the same. And whitehall and lincoln are sharing capacities. Okay. So what's the plan for. If there were transfer to occur? What's the plan for kind of education continuity? Iep services, credit transfers. How is that going to work for the youth? So hhs kind of operates its own its own school system. So regardless of where our youth would be, I mean, again, this isn't necessarily attached to the physical location, right? We would be providing the education to youth regardless of if they are through our system.
So that that would not necessarily be an issue moving those kids. I mean, when you talk about credit transfer, transferring credit for kids in any hhs education program is, is yeah, same system. Right. Okay. Once the kids graduate from the program and sharing those credits, transfer back to the public school system as is, you know, that takes some work. But keeping their education, keeping continuity of education within the hhs system is, is all within our control and easily done. Okay. And has the department done like a projected cost savings of closing down whitehall? What do we anticipate would be the cost savings? I don't I mean, I don't know, obviously right now, again, we're paying rent, right. So we would not be paying the rent for those facilities to the department administration for for those buildings, I mean, currently. So this goes back to kind of what Senator beebe was saying. Currently, we have existing buildings when when we're talking about the plan that was spoken of, what the department was trying to do was utilize existing state owned facilities, which is already basically we're paying for. So there would be that. It wouldn't be that increased cost to the department or to the state. If we're no longer in whitehall, then we would not be paying for the maintenance and upkeep of that. We, meaning hhs department administrative services, would have to find another use or or be what they call viva, which is the vacant excess property land and basically move it off of state property rules. Okay, that's it for now. Thank you. Senator quick. Thank you chairman. So kind of off of what Senator fredrickson was talking about with the with the buildings, you know, you heard me ask doctor janicek about the ada and why. You know, that's been around a long time. Yes. Since 1990 something. Yeah, yeah. So what, and you probably can't answer this, but the reasoning for waiting so long to say now, all of a sudden it's do or die. We have to do it now, or we have to end these programs. But, you know, all these previous years, we didn't have to do it. Well, no, you you did have to do it. The state did not do it. Right. So there's a difference there. Again, we don't we're not we hhs is not maintaining these buildings. When it was brought to hhs attention that this building does not comply. We said something. We said there's an issue here. This building is required to be ada accessible. We are being told it is not. Disability rights. Nebraska brought something forward. We brought that to administrative services. They had it looked at, it confirmed. So what we are saying is that we now know that this building does not comport with federal law. Okay.
And I probably should ask this question yesterday, but I and this is probably because it doesn't belong to the department, but there's a staff and training academy building. That's my understanding. Maybe for some of the the corrections staff. At least. Yes. Yeah. And my understanding is that that probably will move to the new prison. And I didn't know what was going to happen with that building. But could that building be utilized or is that a newer building or is that still an old building? Honestly, Senator, I don't I don't know anything about that building. I have not been in it. I can see it from the outside. It looks like a fairly large, large structure, but I don't know. Remember, this is a residential treatment facility. So we would have to have rooms for the youth. We just can't. It's not like a day program. You could run in like a kind of like a big box type of structure. But a residential treatment program is very different. So what it would take to bring that building up to meet the standards, as Senator fredrickson was saying at a therapeutic residential treatment program. I would have no idea. Yeah. Okay. I'm just a lawyer. Yeah, I know. Yeah. Thank you. Senator meyer. Thank you. Chair. Just taking a look at some of the information we've gotten. Our average annual expenses at whitehall is 535,000. Average rent is 534,000. So combined slightly over $1 million in savings to not operate whitehall. But some of those operating expenses would be transferred to another facility. And just for clarification, complying with ada is not the responsibility of hhs. It is with the state of Nebraska that actually owns the buildings and hhs rents those buildings. Is that is that accurate to say? Yes. Yeah. Fixing for ada and ada. And water and sewer. Things of that nature. Roofs. That's not on hhs, bill. That's on somebody else's bill. So it's not a direct savings or a direct debit on hhs. Specific budget. Is that is that accurate? It is accurate. I would say, Senator, that the way the administrative services fixes its rent is it looks at the cost to maintain these buildings and that sort of built into the assessment that we pay. So I imagine the moore a building cost and that we pay. So I imagine the moore a building cost and upkeep, the more money we would be moving to administrative services for that upkeep. In having a common budget to a certain extent with lincoln regional center, one of the experiences I had as part of region four, behavioral health, being on the board was a recognition that after covid, not all of the regional centers drew down their annual budgets, and there was a surplus of roughly $15 million, which went to the lincoln regional center to upgrade staff.
They had been operating as, as most of our regions do, under staff underbudgeted and under undercompensated for budget, let's say that. And so it's just a trickle down. That squeaky wheel gets the grease and all probability delayed maintenance, actually. Required. Delayed maintenance was operational between lincoln regional center and white hollis. Not whitehall's fault. It's not hhs fault that maintenance was not done. That's simply an operational thing between lincoln regional center and whitehall. That would be my assessment. Would you say that would be accurate? I think it is accurate. And lincoln regional center is a very large hospital, and I believe it's even older than the facilities at whitehall and also requires significant keith. And it was the state made a major investment into lrc lincoln regional center to improve the that facility. And so that was a major expense. Yes. Pretty much across the board. We're under we're understaffed in much of our behavioral health delivery areas. I have an appreciation for the fact that there simply would not be room enough beds and enough staff at lincoln regional center to absorb in some fashion, whitehall. Would that be accurate? It it is center, and lincoln would that be accurate? It it is center, and lincoln regional center is largely an adult facility. There. There is not a designated portion for youth in the lincoln regional center. I mean, that has been a consideration for the state for some time. But that official capacity does not exist. And move youth into that building. You have to move adults away from those youth sight, sound separation, which then dramatically decreases your capacity for adult population. Thank you. So the whitehall campus is a psychiatric resident treatment facility, a prh. It is as such, could medicaid reimbursement be jeopardized by the condition of the campus or the programing? If if cms or someone were to determine things are not up to snuff. And possibly if it were to lose its its pure ptfe certification, then that that would in fact occur. I have no knowledge that the current condition, you know, would would do that. But I mean, could if it if it would fail a federal survey, then it could lose certification, and then we would not have access to any federal medicaid dollars. Because I need to ask questions with real small words and have real small answers. Could whitehall be vulnerable to a lawsuit? Yes. Okay. From whom? Anyone such as? What do you see as the trickiest part? Well, I mean, when you say lost, anyone can file a lawsuit, right? So anyone can file that in regards to a an issue of standing under the a d a, it's my understanding that you don't necessarily need to have a specific standing. You can simply say this building is a public building is providing health care does not meet standards. And I think that would establish jurisdiction in front of a district judge.
From your legal perspective, what happens if the youth from whitehall are not moved in a timely fashion, proactively, before such a thing could occur? I mean, what would that potentially look like? Well, I mean. Again, I'm a lawyer, and so I'm never going to advise the state of Nebraska to operate a facility that's that's not comport with law. Right. So I, you know. But we're looking at kind of a 65 year old facility right now and saying, okay, we need to do something. There doesn't seem to be any disagreement over the fact that, well, it's more than six decades old and is in need of repair or replacement. And that's why we want things to be as strong, as good as, as contributing to the wholeness of these youth as possible. I don't think there's any disagreement on any of that. It's just a question of what is the best way forward. What is your thought? If we were to move this population at whitehall to kearney at the york building that we looked at yesterday, are there. Obstacles to that being licensed as a prtf? The building would first have to be licensed on the state level on the motion, which I believe can be done. Okay. We've made that assessment. That's that's feasible. Once that happens, the youth would then have to be moved there. And with after, you know, a month or so of operation, apply for the federal certification, there's no way to simply transfer the license, existing whitehall license to a a new building or simply transfer to prtf. You would you would have to establish that anew. And a new facility. Could you do that? Yes, I believe it's it's all feasible. Okay. What have I missed? What else do we need to discuss? I am not sure. I, I would say again to Senator ruby's previous comments, I think what the department was trying to do was simply point out an issue with existing facility and, and propose a plan that would allow to use existing state owned facilities. Then simply because we already own them and they're already being operated and maintained, and it would not incur additional cost of having to build new facilities or, or perhaps find a, a new building to lease all these programs that we're talking about. They're all residential programs. And as you know, Senator, it's not every building is conducive to a residential program, especially a long term residential programs that we did. Look, those facilities with that type of capacity are few and far between that would meet our requirements. So if we're not using existing facilities, in all likelihood, we're looking at building something. And obviously the department doesn't self appropriate or self fund. We don't have that money to simply just build something. So what we proposed was, hey, there are some issues here. We do own buildings.
We could find a way to do this with what we already own. And that really was just the the intent of the department. We're not trying to force a plan onto anyone. It was just a form of self-help for your consideration. Okay. Senator fredrickson. Thank you, chair hardin, thank you again for being here. So that kind of exercise, my my thoughts, I'm hearing there's been a lot of assessment of like building condition, facility condition, etcetera, etcetera. And I think that's, I mean, I agree that that is a huge component of, as I spoke with doctor danzig about the therapeutic environment and the safety of the youth and. I've also heard a few times that like, you know, the priority is obviously the youth and, and not the staff. And I understand that, but I don't know that we can easily separate the two. Right. In other words, the youth will not receive treatment if the staffing is not adequate. And so it makes me wonder when we do consider. Well, I guess my first question for you is my understanding is the majority of youth at whitehall are from douglas and lancaster county. Is that correct? Whitehall? I would I would say probably yes, only because that's where the majority of our population comes from. But there probably other kids in the whitehall from outside of lincoln and omaha, but it's also a small population, and by far the majority of the kids coming into the juvenile system are coming out of our most populated areas. Right. And so with the family integration part of treatment, which is a key component of evidence based practice, we spoke about this a little bit at kearney. They talked about some of the challenges of families getting out to see their their family members participating in treatment. Now they have made incredible efforts. We have to give them credit, whether that's arranging transportation, whether that's paying for transportation. They've also, from what I understand, have started to arrange for the opportunity for like a tele visit with with families. So really trying to sort of get around those, those barriers, you know, obviously moving youth from whitehall. And again, I'm not saying that this is a bad idea per se, but that is, I think, a consideration of, you know, if the majority of the population is in the lincoln omaha area, moving them further away would potentially jeopardize the ability to provide to adherence and evidence based intervention with those youth. And that's, I think, something we should we should certainly consider. But back to my question about the facilities and the staffing. You know, we I think if we're going to protect the youth, we have to ensure that the staffing is adequate.
And so with that, what work has the department done, whether it's a study, whether it's a feasibility of ensuring that the level of credentialed staff required for a prtf for all these things we're planning to transfer, what type of work is being done to ensure that that workforce exists in hastings or in kearney, or in the other locations that are being proposed for the youth to transfer? So I don't know exactly what has already been accomplished. Senator. Again, this was sort of brought forward as sort of like an idea. And obviously nothing has as has happened. Right. So to your point, before youth can be moved, the program has to be there first. It's not so much the building itself, right? So you would have to have the adequate licensing sort of well, not the certification because you have to move. The kids have to be there and your license before you can get the certification. But in order to do that, you have to have it fully staffed. You have to have the program fully operational. So all of that would have to happen before youth can be moved. But before you can do that, you kind of have to know where you're going to move to youth. So then you can, you can, you can figure that out as, as well. So nothing, nothing in this process happens quickly, right? That's, that's part of the problem. There's no, I'm not here saying there's an easy solution there. There is not our our facilities are getting older. Our facilities even on the wire, you saw the older barracks versus the new one. That's the that isn't aged almost archaic type structure. And the population capacity is lower than probably what we would, we would need. Right. For our, our juvenile system, the juvenile system as a whole is stretched very, very thin. So there's a lot of thought and decision that has to happen as to where we're going to invest, right? Where, where are we going to invest in the infrastructure so that we can invest into staffing and the program, and then we can adequately care for the youth. So given all that, what what do you estimate the timeline is for something like this? Oh, I. I could not even I mean, the easiest part is going to be, you know, getting your, your licensing and, and that type that doesn't take long. Right? I can tell you that's, that's a matter of months. And then you add another, you know, 60, 90 days or so. You're probably at like six months just from licensing and to get our prtf certification. But the hard part is, is, you know, finding the physical location, getting the appropriate staffing, the programing already exists. We know how to do this. So it's just ensuring that we have the people that can run that programing.
But in order to get the certification, you have to have the staff hired. Is that right? Yes. Yes. Okay. Well, yes, you'd have to have the facility and you'd have to have an established program. You have to have all your plans, whether that's, you know, tornado fire drills, established programs, all of that has to be in place before you can get your license. Okay. So no youth will be moved until these are fully staffed. If if. Yes, exactly. No youth can be moved before. And if you're talking about prtf, you youth, that population can even be moved until the facility is at least licensed at the state level. Right? Which again requires the program to be in place to be licensed. Then you can move to youth. And then after some time you can apply for your federal certification. So yes, I mean, nothing. Nothing can happen quickly. Everything has to be in place before youth can be moved, regardless of which population you're talking about, even the rtc population, you can't just pick the youth up and move them to a building, right? The building has to meet. In the case of a rtc, there are statutory requirements as to what ibach has to do and what it needs to look like, that staffing has to be in place to meet those requirements, not just the physical structure and the programing. Before you can move the youth. All of that has to precede the actual moving of youth. Thank you. Senator riepe. Thank you, chairman, I want to respond. First of all, I want to thank you for being here. I think you've been very forthright and directing your answers, and that was that. A lot of this is driven by the financial, maybe the situation of the state, but it is driven financially. My concern remains that it's financially versus service delivery driven, and I'm afraid what that ends up is, you know, penny wise, pound foolish. And in the long run, but maybe the long run is a year or two. But I'm just concerned about the basis, the foundation for how we get to the recommendations that's being brought forward. I think you have to go to service delivery planning model, as opposed to a financially driven model. That's just old hospital administrator. But thank you for being here and thank you for your candor. I appreciate it. Thank you, chairman. Thank you. We appreciate you being here. Thank you. Absolutely, kelly chad winkle, office of public counsel. Welcome. Good morning, chairman and members of the health and human services Committee. My name is kelly chad winkle, kellischadwinkel. I am the deputy ombudsman for institutions and I handle all complaints and investigations made to the ombudsman's office regarding the dhhs operating facilities, veterans homes and juvenile detention facilities.
As part of that role, I do author the annual ombudsman's institutions report, and that report really details the observations that I make regarding the dhhs operated facilities. As I tour those several times throughout the year, and that can be also found on the legislative website and gives just a greater overall look of whitehall, as well as the other facilities. The report contains several data points regarding the facilities, as well as pictures of each of the facilities that might be helpful and kind of show some of the things that we've talked about here today for the sake of time and in light of what's already been shared here, I will just summarize on the ada compliance issues and say that I agree with the list of items that have been mentioned that are in need of repair in order to be in compliance with that, as well as the leaking in the basement. Everything I've heard today here, it would summarize how I've seen it as well. The only thing I would add is on the basement piece of things. Not only do youth and staff need to use that, that space when the weather conditions arise or poor weather conditions arise, but also to do laundry. So that requires them to be in that space, you know, throughout the day and so forth. In addition, it was briefly mentioned that the fire alarm panels may need to be updated. My understanding is that some of the panels were updated since our last annual report, but it is unknown at this time if that has completed all the updates that were recommended by the state fire marshal. In addition, I've observed the bathrooms are outdated and seem to lack proper ventilation to avoid mold and mildew growth. Regardless of the efforts to clean that space, the facility's pest control company has identified evidence of mice and cockroaches, and during a recent visit in the fall of 2025, we noticed the presence of a gas odor, a natural gas odor near the exterior door of one of the living cottages. The odor was the strongest while outside, but also detectable as we entered the unit. The facility administrator was present during our tour and stated that the natural gas company and maintenance crews had been on site on several occasions and had been unable to identify the source of the issue. Eventually, after continued shared concern by our office, a local plumbing company was contacted and found the gas leak coming from underground. Youth were then evacuated from that unit and the leak was repaired. I will also share that much of the furniture has been updated in the past few years. However, most bed frames are stationary to the bedrooms constructed of wood and showing considerable wear, including visible rough edges that have also posed a safety hazard.
The grounds have adequate outdoor space, however, there is a lack of recreational activities for youth, and several sinkholes have recently developed, which is reportedly due to aging plumbing. The sinkholes have been newly newly filled and rock with rock and dirt, and appears to be stabilizing at this time. The gymnasium is repurposed space on campus that is attached to a building operated, from my understanding, by the department of corrections. It has poor lighting and currently lacks air conditioning, making it very uncomfortable in the summertime. However, it is our understanding that air conditioning will be added to the space in the upcoming months as a result of an hvac project being completed by the department of corrections. As mentioned before, capacity is at whitehall's 24 facility currently utilizes 16 beds for the substance use program and eight beds for the youth who have sexually harmed. As of friday, june 26th, there were seven youth in the substance use program and seven youth in the youth who have sexually harmed. For a total of 14. I will add that generally, our office receives an overall low number of complaints regarding the whitehall program and during on site visits with youth on campus. The feedback regarding the programing and their experience with staff is generally very positive. The whitehall campus has reported a relatively low youth on staff assault rate, and none of those assaults in the past five years have resulted in staff requiring outside medical attention. In terms of staffing. Y while whitehall leadership reported to our office that they were experiencing a higher than normal turnover rate, these positions seem to be refilling quickly and on october 31st, 2025, the percentage of youth position or the percentage of filled positions were at 96%, which was one of the highest of all the the facilities that I'm aware of. Thank you, Senator riepe. Thank you, chairman, I want to get this clarified. My head is, I think I heard you say the hvac system was going by the department of correction. So wouldn't that come out of the budget of the lincoln regional center? So where the gymnasium is located is connected to a building that my understanding is currently being operated by the department of corrections. So because it's all one space, I've been told by rtc leadership that the air conditioning that is being updated in the building will also be added into that space that is currently being utilized by whitehall as a gymnasium. Sounds like a rather incestuous relationship to me. The other question that I have is if. If you move, which obviously you're intent on doing whitehall to either, you know, colorado or wherever you're going to move it, then you're going to have to have additional administrative staff as opposed to running it out of one lincoln regional center, is that correct? You're going to have to set up another operation that's not here.
You're going to or are you going to move everything here? So I'm with the ombudsman's office, which is a division, of course, within the Legislature. And so I'm unable to speak to how they will how the department will determine what staffing will look like and where they'll place staff and so forth. Simply report, you know what I've been told by the department. Is the public council. As such, would you be then back and forth between wherever this these new youth are at on a regular basis to. Yes, I do go to each of the campuses on a on a regular basis. With regular. Typically at least quarterly, sometimes more regularly than that. Okay. Thank you. Chairman. Have you had a chance to talk with any of the youth at whitehall, and what concerns have they shared with you about the facility? Have any conversations come to mind? You know, again, generally the youth are are very pleased with the program there. And surprisingly, I haven't had a lot of concerns about the facility itself, voiced by the by the youth. Okay. Gotcha. And can you give us obviously not details, but how often do you interface with dhhs, for example, on these kinds of issues for whitehall? Are these weekly conversations once a month? I mean, what's been the tempo of the communication over these kinds of things as the facility has gotten older? So I talked to someone from dhhs leadership multiple times a week for sure, if not daily. Okay. In regards to whitehall itself, you know, and these types of concerns, I would say we're probably somewhere on the basis of monthly or bi monthly. Okay. This is one of those questions from way up in the air. You're in the ombudsman's office. Do you have a view of other states? And what do those ombudsman offices deal with when it comes to these sorts of things? And I guess what I'm talking about by these sorts of things is moving, sensitive groups of kids from one place to another. It sounds to me like overall, what this particular situation you've said a couple of times, the kids seem happy with the overall treatment, what they're receiving there, what they're doing there. But I'm sure that these moves physically are never easy. What are you hearing from other states? Are there things we can learn from other places? Senator hardin that's a great question. That is not those are not conversations I've been engaged in, but that is an area that happy to do some more research into. Because we like to pick other pockets if we can. So I was just curious about that. Other questions. I'm not seeing any other questions. Just one other thing. To your knowledge, everything with that gas leak has been satisfactorily dealt with. Is that right? That is correct. Okay. Very good. Well, I appreciate it. Thanks so much for being here. Thank you.
Senator hardin will be closing. Well, thank you. And I really appreciate everyone who testified today as well as everyone. I think we had 36 of us that were attending the field trip yesterday. We're going to have another one, and that will happen later this year. Not sure exactly when, but we're going to take a look at some other things. Just because we know that we need to have a situation where our, our facilities and everything else best serve the youth that were helping out. It's obviously important to get on the the right track. The younger we can do it for people, the more likely they are to stay with that trajectory for the rest of their life. And I used to work in a youth prison as a chaplain. I worked as a police chaplain. I've worked as a prison chaplain for adults. And I can tell you it's really important to get on the right track sooner than later. So questions? Sarpy thank you, chairman. You said the secretary later this year, does that mean no decision will be made until later this year? We're not decision makers. We're decision. We're we're in the process of just gathering information. So a lot of these things have been talked about. And I, for example, had never been to whitehall. So it was a good experience for me, as well as to see why rtc kearney. I think we would like to probably take a look at hastings, take a look at what's in omaha, so that we can all get a sense of what's there. So we'll we'll certainly look at scheduling something later, probably. So as we lean towards. This, this Committee hearing was fundamentally a hearing Committee and the decisions already been made. No, not at all. This decision. There's two kinds of meetings in the world. One is to take information and one is to take make a decision, and you never mix them together. Ever take hostages? Yeah. When will the final decision be made? I have no idea. Okay. Yeah, but sooner than later, based on the fact that we do have what feels a little bit like a a lit wick on a stick of dynamite, that the facility is not going to last forever. No. But how long has this been going on? Well. It didn't just pop up over the last 30 days. It didn't. But much like, you know, we take things and I sorry, I, I keep picking on you, Senator riepe, you know, how long did it take us to build up? You're not the first. You won't be the last. This part is true. Just so many things that we deal with, especially in this Committee when it comes to things like how much do we pay a pharmacist for dispersing medicaid prescriptions and so on and so forth? We hadn't touched that one since the 1980s. Yes, exactly.
There's a there's a habit, right, of we don't give money and attention to things until they tend to be screaming at us. And this is one of those things that's now screaming at us. Yeah. So. Okay. Thank you gentlemen. Other questions. Seeing none. Thank you for being here. Now we'll close our hearing on lr for 25.