Things I lose sleep over:

By Joshua Allen

The Business of Child Abuse.

How come some Agency CEO's allowed to pay themselves six figures while working very little? And when office employees know this person is rarely in the office or involved in the day to day dealings, why do county auditors do nothing more than glance at the CEO's time cards if there is any question?

After agencies are shut down for gross mismanagement, how come CEO's who paid themselves millions of dollars over their term of administration allowed to simply walk away without further consequences?

And…Why are these CEO's allowed to continue to consult, and or work with abused and neglected children after numerous ethical breaches?

Why are agency CEO's allowed to use taxpayer money to rent buildings and land from themselves? Why has this practice been allowed to continue? Does anyone think this is proper?

When an agency CEO has settled many-many claims of sexual harassment before reaching trial, then tried to use taxpayer money to pay attorney fees in at least 3 of these cases, then continued to serially sexually harass ladies of all types; (and within the industry this is all common knowledge), well why is he still given clearance to work around abused and neglected children?

When an agency is closed down for mismanagement and there is money left over, what happens to this money? Is it true that some CEO's are allowed to continue on their same salary for quite some time doing very little beyond perhaps running a simple parenting class or putting on picnics for kids?

When somebody is reportedly warned that there are major problems with a foster home, does nothing, and a child dies – why are the involved individuals allowed to move on to other agencies to consult and supervise?

When a CEO brags several times in front of witnesses that a Los Angeles County Supervisor helped him personally get his agency off of administrative hold, and apparently does this without talking to the county officials who know of him and the circumstances of the hold, and then a child dies - how come the Supervisor won't answer the question if what the CEO said was true? And if it is true, what exactly did the Supervisor do to help the CEO get his agency off of administrative hold?

Why is there seemingly never any consequences for Board Members of grossly mismanaged agencies who vote huge salaries for disgraced CEO's, do little deals with the CEO's, and know the whole time this is unethical if not illegal?

If the county because of a change in policy, is now substantiating a much higher percentage of child abuse allegations, what happened to all the children (before the change in policy) who were previously abused when the allegations against their abusers were incorrectly found to be unsubstantiated?

The last one haunts me the most…

Joshuaallenonline.com

Joshuaallenonline@gmail.com