The most serious findings in the state inspection reports we hold: deaths, sexual and physical abuse, restraints that injured a child, suicide attempts, medical neglect and hospitalisations. Every quote below is the licensing agency's own wording, and each one was read against its report by a person before it was listed here.
• Individual 1 reported to staff allegations of physical aggression by a peer to include sexual harassment and threats to harm.
From the state's report. Non-compliance, DBHDS human rights inspection. Cited: 12VAC35-115-260. B. (2d) - Providers shall require their employees to: 2. Protect individuals from any form of abuse, neglect, or exploitation by: 2d. ....
Provider substantiated for sexual abuse based on the following: Review of camera footage revealed the following: On May 3, 2025, at approximately 9:36am, Individual #1 and Employee #1 entered the cool down/sensory room. Employee #1 and Individual #1 engaged in inappropriate touching, to include Individual grabbing Employee #1's waist band, slapping/smacking Employee #1 on the bottom several times, and Employee #1 grabbing/caressing Individual #1's face. [...] Employee #1 then performed oral sex on Individual #1 three times.
From the state's report. Non-compliance, DBHDS human rights inspection. Cited: 12VAC35-115-50. B. (2) In receiving all services, each individual has the right to: 2. Be protected from harm including abuse, neglect, and exploitation.. "[...]" marks text left out between sentences.
Upon review of CHRIS entry, A-20250021, the provider's investigation included the review of the provider's policy which revealed: · Employees #1, #2, and #3 did not adhere to the provider's protocol for active supervision, resulting in peer-to-peer aggression involving Individual #1 being sexually assaulted by another individual.
From the state's report. Non-compliance, DBHDS human rights inspection. Cited: 12VAC35-115-50. B. (2) In receiving all services, each individual has the right to: 2. Be protected from harm including abuse, neglect, and exploitation..
On December 29, 2024, Individual 1 reported to staff that a peer had touched Individual 1 with an unwanted sexual touch under a blanket on December 24, 2024. [...] Individual 1 and peer were separated following a utilization review committee meeting on January 7, 2025, nine days after Individual 1's initial allegation of unwanted sexual touching. The provider failed to take immediate steps to protect Individual 1 following an allegation of peer- on-peer unwanted sexual touching.
From the state's report. Non-compliance, DBHDS human rights inspection. Cited: 12VAC35-115-50. D. (3b) (1) - The provider's duties: 3. Providers shall assure the following relative to abuse, neglect, and exploitation: 3b. The director .... "[...]" marks text left out between sentences.
After reporting that another peer engaged in non- consensual sexual relations with them, Individual #1's mother reported that internal bruising was found during a medical exam.
From the state's report. Non-compliance, DBHDS human rights inspection. Cited: 12VAC35-115-50. B. (2) In receiving all services, each individual has the right to: 2. Be protected from harm including abuse, neglect, and exploitation..
Entity #2 informed Human Rights Advocate via letter dated October 31, 2024, that it was determined the disposition was Founded, Level One, for Sexual Abuse. Entity #2 reported to Human Rights Advocate that Employee #1 was charged with 7 felony counts of VA Code 18.2-370.1, Taking Indecent Liberties with Child by Person in Custodial or Supervisory Relationships.
From the state's report. Non-compliance, DBHDS investigation. Cited: 12VAC35-115-50. B. (2) In receiving all services, each individual has the right to: 2. Be protected from harm including abuse, neglect, and exploitation..
In plain words: A staff member sexually abused a child in the program, sending graphic TikTok messages and arranging meetings in the group home bathroom, and also left other children unattended during the abuse, sometimes in the same bedroom while they slept. The state determined the abuse was substantiated. Our summary of the state's report. The state's own wording follows.
Provider substantiated for sexual abuse and psychological abuse based on the following: Provider found inappropriate TikTok messages between Employee #1 and Individual #1 on Individual #1's phone that were sexually graphic in nature and which discussed meeting up in the group home bathroom on more than one occasion, along with references to sexual interactions which included oral sex and sexual intercourse. [...] While Employee #1 engaged in sexually abusing Individual #1, Employee #1 failed to provide services necessary to the health, safety, and welfare of other minor individuals residing in the group home, leaving those individuals unattended during the sexual encounters with Individual #1, and, at times, engaging in the abuse in the same bedroom with other individuals while they were sleeping. ?
From the state's report. Non-compliance, DBHDS human rights inspection. Cited: 12VAC35-115-50. B. (2) In receiving all services, each individual has the right to: 2. Be protected from harm including abuse, neglect, and exploitation.. "[...]" marks text left out between sentences.
Individual #1 reported a sexual assault to Employee #1 involving Individual #2.
From the state's report. Non-compliance, DBHDS human rights inspection. Cited: 12VAC35-115-50. B. (2) In receiving all services, each individual has the right to: 2. Be protected from harm including abuse, neglect, and exploitation..
Upon review CHRIS entry A- 20230020; the provider's investigation includes review of cameras and eyewitness statements which revealed that Employee # 1 had inappropriate sexual conversations and exchange letters with sexual content with Individual #1.
From the state's report. Non-compliance, DBHDS human rights inspection. Cited: 12VAC35-115-50. B. (2) In receiving all services, each individual has the right to: 2. Be protected from harm including abuse, neglect, and exploitation..
Based on these interviews, information reported was consistent in reports of both consensual and non-consensual sexual acts committed by Individual #1, Individual #6, and Individual #7.
From the state's report. Non-compliance, DBHDS investigation. Cited: 12VAC35-46-800. A. (1) There shall be evidence of a structured program of care designed to: 1. Meet the residents' physical and emotional needs;; 12VAC35-46-800. A. (2) There shall be evidence of a structured program of care designed to: 2. Provide protection, guidance, and supervision;.
The letter from DSS notes a Level 1 finding for the allegation of sexual abuse due to the following: Individual 1 remained fairly consistent with the disclosure made to Employee 3 and the Albemarle County Police Department detective regarding the sexual activity between Individual 1 and Employee 1. [...] Employee 4 reported rumors regarding Employee 1's sexual relationship with people at STARS previous to Individual 1's disclosure. [...] There is a preponderance of evidence to show Employee 1 sexually abused Individual 1. [...] Individual 1 had previously told Employee 2 about Individual 1's sexual relationship with Employee 1. [...] Employee 3 reported Individual 1 had told Employee 3 that Individual 1 had previously told Employee 2 about the sexual relationship with Employee 1.
From the state's report. Non-compliance, DBHDS human rights inspection. Cited: 12VAC35-115-50. B. (2) In receiving all services, each individual has the right to: 2. Be protected from harm including abuse, neglect, and exploitation.. "[...]" marks text left out between sentences.
A program reads every inspection report we collect and picks out findings that describe serious harm, using the state's own severity rating or complaint outcome where there is one. A person then reads the report and approves or rejects each one. Only findings the state substantiated are listed: a citation, or a complaint the investigator upheld. A child running away is listed only when it ended in a death or a serious injury. This page is not complete: it covers the states and reports reviewed so far, and a facility's absence here says nothing about its record. Every report we hold, flagged or not, is on the state trackers.