Behavioral Health and Developmental Services, Department of; list of licensed providers on website. (HB2328)

Introduced By

Del. Ben Cline (R-Amherst)


Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law


Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services; listing of licensed providers. Requires the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services shall list licensed providers included on the website of the Department's Office of Licensing by the name under which the provider is doing business in the Commonwealth, and shall also include any other name of such provider on such website. Read the Bill »


Bill Has Passed


01/18/2013Presented and ordered printed 13103906D
01/18/2013Referred to Committee on Health, Welfare and Institutions
01/22/2013Impact statement from DPB (HB2328)
01/29/2013Reported from Health, Welfare and Institutions with amendments (22-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
01/30/2013Read first time
01/31/2013Passed by for the day
02/01/2013Passed by for the day
02/04/2013Read second time
02/04/2013Committee amendments agreed to
02/04/2013Engrossed by House as amended HB2328E
02/04/2013Printed as engrossed 13103906D-E
02/05/2013Read third time and passed House (100-Y 0-N)
02/05/2013VOTE: PASSAGE (100-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/06/2013Constitutional reading dispensed
02/06/2013Referred to Committee on Education and Health
02/13/2013Impact statement from DPB (HB2328E)
02/14/2013Reported from Education and Health with substitute (15-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/14/2013Committee substitute printed 13105261D-S1
02/15/2013Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/18/2013Read third time
02/18/2013Reading of substitute waived
02/18/2013Committee substitute agreed to 13105261D-S1
02/18/2013Engrossed by Senate - committee substitute HB2328S1
02/18/2013Passed Senate with substitute (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/19/2013Placed on Calendar
02/19/2013Senate substitute agreed to by House 13105261D-S1 (95-Y 0-N)
02/19/2013VOTE: ADOPTION (95-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/22/2013Bill text as passed House and Senate (HB2328ER)
02/23/2013Signed by Speaker
02/23/2013Signed by President
02/28/2013Impact statement from DPB (HB2328ER)
03/16/2013G Approved by Governor-Chapter 451 (effective 7/1/13)
03/16/2013G Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0451)


This bill was discussed on the floor of the General Assembly. Below is all of the video that we have of that discussion, 4 clips in all, totaling 3 minutes.


Pixie writes:

This bill is necessary to prevent unscrupulous providers from hiding their records of abusing residents and other illegal activity. The public needs to be aware of which providers are dangerous.

Susan Lawrence writes:

This is what the new law in 2011 mandated the DBHDS to post ------ Two years later (much less 7 days) - good luck finding anything but blank pages posted for most facilities. And only then if you can find the correct name for the facility ---------

Governor’s 2011 Reconvened Session Executive Amendments (HB 1500)
16 Amendment 32, Upgrade licensing system Item 301
Health & Human Resources FY 10-11 FY 11-12
Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services $0 $50,000 GF
Page 290, line 6, strike "$1,880,728" and insert "$1,930,728".
Page 290, line 12, before "The Director", insert: "A.".
Page 290, after line 13, insert:
"B. The department shall post on its website information concerning (i) any application for initial licensure of or renewal of a license, denial of an application for an initial license or renewal of a license, or issuance of provisional licensure of for any residential facility for children located in the locality and (ii) all inspections and investigations of any residential facility for children licensed by the department, including copies of any reports of such inspections or investigations. Information concerning inspections and investigations of residential facilities for children shall be posted on the department's website within seven days of the issuance of any report and shall be maintained on the department's website for a period of at least six years from the date on which the report of the inspection or investigation was issued."
Explanation: (This amendment provides funds to upgrade the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services' existing licensing system, including analysis, design, development and testing to allow for expedited posting of inspection and investigations reports on the agency's web site.)

Susan Lawrence writes:

Here is the link to the DBHDS Licensing web-site. Seriously, how complicated could it be to set up a simple, efficient, site providing consumer transparency for families and communities trying to find a safe place for a child?

For fun, search for some of these facilities - UHS/Liberty Point, UHS/North Spring, Grafton, Bridges (I'll give you a hint - they are located in Lynchburg!) and UHS/The Hughes Center. Tell me what you find and if you think the $50,000 paid for this website was an appropriate expenditure of your tax dollars.

Susan Lawrence writes:

Can't DBHDS just use this amazing simple, efficient, website format already used for many years by DSS for child care providers? See how easy this is to use? And no guessing the name the facility is listed under or what the facility is physically located.

And DSS is not the only agency that figured how to do this - Check out the Dept. of Health postings for restaurant inspections. Great consumer transparency for media and consumers. (Look under Environment Health!)

I realize stars may be a little corny, but this is an easy to use listing of recent inspections and an overall rating for each nursing home facility. How great would it be to have this information for residential facilities?

Susan Lawrence writes:

"Student 1 informed his therapist on 9/9/12 he engaged in anal sex with a peer on the unit around bed time. Student 1 stated that the peer motioned for student 1 to come into student 2’s room and to engage sexual behaviors. Student 1 stated that he went into the room and student 1 participated in anal sex with student 2 and after a few minutes stopped.
Student 2 said he told student 1 it wasn’t for him and walked out of the room. The therapist asked which staff were working and student 1 named two staff members. The therapist worked with student 1 to narrow down and date, and student 1 reported it was around bed time."
Why does HB2328 matter? And why should the House amendment be removed? Because Penn State has nothing on "professional" residential facilities in Virginia.
Quoted above are the kinds of DBHDS investigations which are hidden through name games on the DBHDS website. They are public documents which should be easily accessible to a parent considering placing their child at a residential facility licensed and investigated by DBHDS. This is a facility called North Spring Behavioral Health by DBHDS, but is NOT the North Spring Behavioral Health facility in Leesburg. Good luck finding it on the DBHDS website, even if you know the alternate corporate name being used. This is why the listed names matter and why ALL the names a facility goes by must be listed together on the DBHDS website vs. "provided if requested" per the House amendment for HB2328.
Investigation Descriptions: License #630-14-002 InvestigationID 73
Date Investigation Received: 09/13/2012
Date Investigation Closed: 01/19/2013
Provider reported a student alleges he had sex with another child without staff detection.

Mary Hawthorne writes:

Why is the General Assembly so interested in getting into the private bedrooms of Virginia women and they cannot get behind the doors of these residential centers where children are being sexually, physically and emotionally abused???
I am sick and tired of this going on and on and nothing ever, ever being done about it!!
Are they (the politicians_ ignorant, don't care, have no conscience or just can't give up those donations.
Surely, there must be someone, somewhere in our government that has the guts and decency to stand up for our children

Bridget Kelley-Dearing writes:

Just repeating what has been said before me by Ms. Pixie and Ms. Lawrence but honestly why no movement on this bill yet?

This is what the new law in 2011 mandated the DBHDS to post ------ Two years later (much less 7 days) - good luck finding anything but blank pages posted for most facilities. And only then if you can find the correct name for the facility - Lawrence

This bill is necessary to prevent unscrupulous providers from hiding their records of abusing residents and other illegal activity. The public needs to be aware of which providers are dangerous. - Pixie

Susan Lawrence writes:

Shame on Virginia. Penn State has nothing on us for hiding heads in the sand. Nice to know the DBHDS is following these posts and tried to fix the postings for the facilities I pointed out. So much for the excuse "It takes time for us to post everything." Apparently they can do it within the hour if they want. The amendment to HB2328 guts the bill. I expected TTI, the Troubled Teen Industry to fight back. I did not expect an agency to complain it's too hard to make a space big enough to list the full corporate names of facilities.

Pixie writes:

This is not a lot to ask for, and will save children from being abused. Please pass this bill for the rights of kids who have no voice of their own.

John Banks writes:

This bill NEEDS to be passed. The abuse of our children is a crime. The problem is that no one in authority wants to stand up to stop these crimes.

Lisa Aries writes:

Pass this bill! Lives are at stake!

Lancegon writes:

I have started an movement on Twitter called #OpTTIabuse that has a three phase plan to stop abuse of Teens by Institutions. Phase 1 began yesterday, and has already acquired a lot of momentum in spreading awareness.

This fits into Phase 2, which is push petitions and contact legislators to invoke change.

I would like to offer my sincerest help in making this bill into law. Please contact me if interested at

Together we can stop the Institutional destruction of our Teens.

Richard Linder writes:

There is so much abuse in centers for "troubled" kids, it is horrifying. Anything we can do to stop the death and abuse is critical. Here is a summary of three Government Accountability Office reports that clearly demonstrate the problem:

1. October 2007
a. RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT PROGRAMS: Concerns Regarding Abuse and Death in Certain Programs for Troubled Youth
i. Link:
ii. This study excluded any public setting (incarceration, psychiatric, and foster)
iii. Stated Objectives:
1. Verify whether allegations of abuse and death at residential treatment programs are widespread
2. Examine the facts and circumstances surrounding selected closed cases where a teenager died while enrolled in a private program.
iv. Findings:
1. GAO found thousands of allegations of abuse…GAO could not identify a more concrete number of allegations because it could not locate a single Web site, federal agency, or other entity that collects comprehensive nationwide data.
2. During 2005 alone, 33 states reported 1,619 staff members involved in incidents of abuse in residential programs. GAO could not identify a more concrete number of allegations because it could not locate a single Web site, federal agency, or other entity that collects comprehensive nationwide data.
2. April 2008
a. RESIDENTIAL PROGRAMS: Selected Cases of Death, Abuse, and Deceptive Marketing
i. Link:
ii. Direct Continuation exclusively concerning private residential programs
iii. Stated Objectives:
1. Identify and examine the facts and circumstances surrounding additional closed cases where a teenager died, was abused, or both, while enrolled in a private program
2. Identify cases of deceptive marketing or questionable practices in the private residential program industry.
iv. Findings:
1. GAO found examples of deceptive marketing and questionable practices in certain industry programs and services.
a. Fake referral services (for example, send all children to one place regardless of circumstance, in one instance the owner of the referral service and the bootcamp were married)
b. Tax Fraud
c. In [all] the eight closed cases they examined, ineffective management and operating practices, in addition to untrained staff, contributed to the death and abuse of youth enrolled in selected programs. In the most egregious cases of death and abuse, the cases exposed problems with the entire operation of the program. The practice of physical restraint also figured prominently in three of the cases.

3. May 2009
a. SECLUSIONS AND RESTRAINTS: Selected Cases of Death and Abuse at Public and Private Schools and Treatment Centers
i. Link:
ii. Explicitly includes both public and private facilities in the investigation
1. This is a big step forward since public facilities have been taking on lawsuits with almost mirror complaints to private facilities
iii. Stated Objectives:
1. provide an overview of seclusions and restraint laws applicable to children in public and private schools
2. verify whether allegations of student death and abuse from the use of these methods are widespread
3. examine the facts and circumstances surrounding cases where a student died or suffered abuse as a result of being secluded or restrained
iv. Findings:
1. Although GAO continues to receive new allegations [in addition to the “thousands” found in ‘07] from parents and advocacy groups, GAO could not find a single Web site, federal agency, or other entity that collects information on the use of these methods or the extent of their alleged abuse. They were able to obtain data showing that thousands of public and private school students were restrained or secluded during the last academic year
2. Found five States that collect and report information on seclusions and restraints.
3. A brief summary of state law as of the study in 2007: Nineteen states have no laws or regulations related to the use of seclusions or restraints in schools. Seven states place some restrictions of the use of restraints, but do not regulate seclusions… while nineteen require parents to be notified after restraints have been used. Two states require annual reporting on the use of restraints

Introduction to the Material Examined in ‘09:
“GAO also examined the details of 10 restraint and seclusion cases in which there was a criminal conviction, a finding of civil or administrative liability, or a large financial settlement. The cases share the following common themes: they involved children with disabilities who were restrained and secluded, often in cases where they were not physically aggressive and their parents did not give consent; restraints that block air to the lungs can be deadly; teachers and staff in the cases were often not trained on the use of seclusions and restraints; and teachers and staff from at least 5 of the 10 cases continue to be employed as educators.”

Concerning the Laws Currently in Place:
“GAO found no federal laws restricting the use of seclusion and restraints in public and private schools and widely divergent laws at the state level.”

Matt Hoffman writes:

Why does child protective servivces simply give a residential treatment center a 6 month probation a slap on the wrist, when serious allegations of abuse occured, and were not reported by The Pines which is managed by Universal Health Services. I would hope that this HB2338 passes with out being altered or gutted.

This is a start in protecting children from the abuse that goes on inside the walls of known abusive programs that are part of the billion dollar "troubled teen industry.

The "troubled teen industry" is very troubled indeed. Child abuse is not therapy. Ask the survivors; of the Elan school or Straights or any WASSP or CEDU program.

Systemic serial child abuse is not therapy, it is against the law.

Richard Linder writes:

Also, the problem in Virgina is not a small one. Note that Virginia is a State with no laws governing secluding children (unless something has changed very recently):

According to the GAO, States that have, “some restrictions of the use of restraints, but do not regulate seclusions” are: Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Michigan, Ohio, Utah, and Virginia.

There have been quite a few abusive "troubled teen" facilities, by my estimation, in Virginia and have included many PSI facilities (they were purchased by UHS, which I also consider very dubious).

elisabeth feldman writes:

I won't reiterate the views and critical information posted above. Enough to say I strongly admire and support your effort as a fierce critic of institutionalized abuse.

Matt Hoffman writes:

To correct my original post, I hope HB2328 passes without being altered or gutted.

Virginia consumers need to know about these troubled facilities, it is good for the commonwealth of Virginia's children.

Mary Katherine writes:

Guys, I do not feel like this is too much to ask for. I am eighteen now, I expect the people I am voting for to know what is going on. I know that we need this Bill, the children of Virginia need this Bill. Do not over think it now.