Tag: Ohio Center for Journalism

Utility and fossil fuel influence in Ohio goes beyond passage of bailout

This article is provided by Eye on Ohio in partnership with Energy News Network

Dark money loopholes remain, while people linked to utilities and fossil fuels hold public office or enjoy ongoing access to government officials.

by Kathiann M. Kowalski

Dark money loopholes remain in Ohio law, despite last month’s surgical repeal of part of the law at the heart of a $60 million corruption scandal. Meanwhile, more evidence has emerged in recent months, detailing the flow of money by groups engaged in the House Bill 6 scandal and showing close ties between current and former utility lobbyists and Gov. Mike DeWine, as well as various lawmakers.

“We need to learn from our mistakes,” said Catherine Turcer, executive director of Common Cause Ohio, a group that advocates for more transparency and accountability in politics. She noted that the House Bill 6 case is just the latest in a line of corruption scandals that have rocked state politics in the past two decades.

A federal complaint released last July alleged an unlawful conspiracy to elect lawmakers who would favor Rep. Larry Householder as House speaker, secure passage of House Bill 6 and defend it against a referendum. A court filing by FirstEnergy in March admits that millions of dollars went from one of its subsidiaries either directly or indirectly to Generation Now, the primary dark money group at the center of the alleged scheme, or to other entities alleged to have played roles. Some funds were paid at the direction of FirstEnergy Solutions, the document claims.

In addition to promptly repealing the whole law, legislators should have pursued action to prevent such a situation from happening again, Turcer said. Instead, “there was not any indication in place during the summer of a path of how to make sure we don’t create a space for misdeeds.”

Efforts by FirstEnergy and others to make political contributions through dark money organizations — 501(c)(4) nonprofits and some political for-profits that are not required to disclose their donors — have touched numerous entities with connections throughout the Ohio government, according to data from various sources.

The Accountability Project is a national database that collects records of federal campaign contributions, grants from nonprofits, expenditures by political action committees and more. The database also identifies shared addresses and other links among individuals and organizations.

Among other things, the database reveals that Generation Now’s address shown on a 2017 corporate filing was the same as that for co-defendant Jeff Longstreth and his business JPL & Associates. JPL & Associates was shown as the president and secretary on an October 2019 IRS filing by Generation Now.

The Accountability Project information also indicates that in 2018 Generation Now and JPL & Associates did business at a Capitol Square office tower. The same suite address was used at various times that same year for Friends of Larry Householder, the Committee to Elect Bill Roemer, Harris for Ohio and Barhorst for Ohio.

In earlier years the same suite address had been used by the Coalition for Growth and Opportunity, which received money from an American Electric Power-funded group. The office suite is unoccupied now, but at some earlier point the suite also had been the office address for a bespoke tailoring business. (The company moved out of the space years ago, Eye on Ohio and the Energy News Network learned.)

Nonetheless, utilities and fossil fuel interests seek to continue to tailor Ohio energy policies to their benefit. Among other things, most candidates elected in 2018 whose campaigns got money from the alleged HB 6 scheme were reelected in 2020. Their incumbent statuses would have given them a bump, according to David Anderson, policy and communications director for the Energy and Policy Institute. Federal filings indicate substantial additional spending for the last election cycle as well, he added.

FirstEnergy and its political action committee reported more than $1.1 million in campaign donations for 2019 and 2020, primarily to Republicans, the National Institute on Money in Politics reports. Nearly half a million of that went to candidates in Ohio.

Those reported amounts don’t include spending by any dark money groups the company or other energy companies with utilities in Ohio might have donated to. The Growth & Opportunity political action committee had spent money in early 2020 to influence several Ohio primaries, Anderson noted.

Close ties

DeWine signed HB 6 into law within hours of its passage in July 2019. Even after HB 6 passed, close ties have remained between utilities and fossil fuel interests, on the one hand, and leadership in Ohio’s legislative and executive branches.

Since the federal complaint was released last July 21, DeWine has stood by Dan McCarthy, whom he appointed as his director of legislative affairs in early 2019. As a lobbyist at the Success Group in Columbus, McCarthy had long been active in state politics and has contributed to a variety of campaigns, as data from the Accountability Project shows.

McCarthy was a registered lobbyist representing FirstEnergy in 2017 and 2018, when the events alleged in the HB 6 conspiracy began, according to data from the Ohio Lobbying Activity Center. He also was president of Partners for Progress, the FirstEnergy-funded “Energy Pass-Through” organization that allegedly funneled millions of dollars into efforts to pass and preserve HB 6.

The bio released by DeWine’s office when he appointed McCarthy in 2019 shows that he had previously managed several political campaigns in addition to working for the Success Group. McCarthy resigned from Partners for Progress before assuming his current government position.

His former Success Group colleague McKenzie Davis was a director for Partners for Progress through at least 2019, according to a November 2020 IRS filing by the group. The report also shows R. Scott Davis as president and secretary, and lawyer Michael Van Buren at Calfee, Halter & Griswold in Cleveland as treasurer.

The IRS filing showed that $13 million went from Partners for Progress to Generation Now in 2019, plus additional amounts to other organizations for “political campaign intervention,” lobbying and “educating the public about utility options.” Funds from two of those dark money groups supported DeWine’s campaign, as well as an unsuccessful campaign by his daughter Alice DeWine, the Cincinnati Enquirer has reported.

Other lawyers at Van Buren’s firm represented FirstEnergy in cases before the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, including one begun after news of the HB 6 scandal broke, for the purpose of determining if funds from FirstEnergy’s utility ratepayers were spent on HB 6 activities. Attorneys from Jones Day are now counsel in some of those cases.

“It looks a bit different when the lawyers who defend you work for the firm that was part of that political spending,” Anderson said. Van Buren and a colleague did not respond to an inquiry about the reason for the change.

On call

FirstEnergy was not the only utility with ongoing links to the governor’s office. An October 2019 email recently released by Common Cause Ohio last month shows that the DeWine-Husted campaign held a weekly finance call, even though they’re not up for reelection until next year. The call list included multiple people with ties to utilities and fossil fuels, including FirstEnergy lobbyist Josh Rubin of the CJR Group, Duke Energy Business Services lobbyist Chip Gerhardt of Government Strategies Group, and Ohio Coal Association lobbyist Richard Hillis of Governmental Policy Group. The Governmental Policy Group’s address has been used by several political action committees throughout the years, Accountability Project data show.

Also on the DeWine-Husted finance call list was J.B. Hadden, who has been president of Empowering Ohio’s Economy, one of the dark money groups that had also paid money to Generation Now. As of last summer, American Electric Power had contributed a total of $8.7 million to Empowering Ohio’s Economy since 2015, including $700,000 in 2019, according to company spokesperson Scott Blake. “We will continue to legally and ethically advocate on behalf of our customers and our company,” Blake said.

AEP’s vice president for external affairs, Tom Froehle, also has been a board member of Empowering Ohio’s Economy, dating back to 2016, Blake confirmed.

Froehle and AEP Director of Government Affairs Maria Haberman met with Householder in February 2020, after HB 6 was law but before the scandal broke last summer, Anderson noted. Householder’s calendar didn’t indicate what the meeting was about.

As for Empowering Ohio’s Economy, its 2019 tax filing showed more than half a million dollars going to Generation Now. Donations to several other organizations included a $25,000 contribution to the Ohio Governor’s Residence & Office Fund, which is yet another dark money group. It has spent nearly $200,000 on meetings at the residence “to promote better and more efficient government.”

Another $2 million went from Empowering Ohio’s Economy to another dark money group, Open Road Path, in 2019 “to promote economic and business development within Ohio.” Hadden did not respond to a request for additional information for this article.

Regulatory connections

Anne Vogel, former managing director of AEP’s government affairs office, became DeWine’s assistant director for energy and natural resources starting in March 2019. By July, HB 6 was passed.

In December 2020, Vogel became a finalist to replace Sam Randazzo as chair of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio. Randazzo resigned the day after a FirstEnergy government filing stated that the company had paid $4 million in early 2019 to an entity apparently linked to Randazzo. After criticisms surfaced about last December’s list of PUCO nominees, DeWine ultimately asked for additional names and appointed Jenifer French to the post.

The PUCO nominating council likewise has connections to utilities and fossil fuel interests. Chair Michael Koren was a registered lobbyist for FirstEnergy through 2019. He chaired the committee that nominated Randazzo for the PUCO in 2019. Ohio Lobbying Activity Center data shows Koren also has been a lobbyist for Columbia Gas and Boich Companies, which made its fortune in the coal industry.

Randazzo’s calendar for the time he was PUCO chair shows multiple meetings with people from utility companies or their parent corporations, as well as with coal fleet lobbyist Michelle Bloodworth.

“I am unaware of any meeting in which a commissioner held a discussion of pending proceedings,” said PUCO spokesperson Matt Schilling, noting that meetings otherwise “could have been regarding any number of general energy or commercial transportation matters relative [to] the delivery of adequate, safe and reliable utility service.”

Nonetheless, the Energy and Policy Institute’s Anderson said, the absence of detailed notations in the calendar presents “definitely a lot of potential conflicts.”

Accountability Project data also shows that AEP’s Froehle, Randazzo and Scott Elisar, the PUCO’s current legislative and policy director, all had worked at the same law firm, McNees, Wallace & Nurick. The firm has long represented Industrial Energy Users-Ohio, which has pushed for limiting clean energy standards, and whose members have long enjoyed favorable rates from utilities.

Still ahead

Dark money loopholes made the alleged HB 6 scheme possible. “Dark money is a breeding ground for corruption,” former U.S. attorney David DeVillers said when the indictment was filed last July. The federal investigation continues, although the pandemic delayed some grand jury proceedings, he told the Ohio Consumers’ Counsel Governing Board on March 16. In-person meetings of the grand jury have recently resumed, he noted.

“[For] a lot of these cases that have been on the back burner, you can expect to see a lot more indictments coming,” DeVillers said.

This year, House Bill 13 aims to address some dark money issues. A hearing will be held in the coming week, so there’s at least some potential for lawmakers to take action this session. But so far, Turcer said, “it’s just that they have completely dragged their feet.”

__________________________________

This story is part of a collaborative journalism project produced by the Energy News Network and Eye on Ohio, the Ohio Center for Investigative Journalism. Funding is provided by the Cleveland Foundation, the George Gund Foundation, and the Accountability Project at American University’s Investigative Reporting Workshop.

This article first appeared on Eye on Ohio and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

This article provided by Eye on Ohio, the nonprofit, nonpartisan Ohio Center for Journalism in partnership with the nonprofit Energy News Network. Please join our free mailing list or the mailing list for the Energy New Network as this helps us provide more public service reporting.

Apr 29, 2021
Ohio Department of Job and Family Services tries to bolster its own workforce by posting jobs with no medical benefits in pandemic

By Boniface Womber and Bonnie Jean Feldkamp December 18, 2020

This article is from Eye on Ohio, the nonprofit, nonpartisan Ohio Center for Journalism. Please join their free mailing list, as this helps provide more public service reporting.

Amid a raging pandemic, Ohio’s agency responsible for looking out for workers’ welfare has started posting full-time temporary jobs with no benefits for its own workforce.

For example, this week the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (ODJFS) sought to hire an “electronic design specialist,” a job that requires a bachelor’s degree, years of experience, or some combination of both. The hours listed are full time, with a schedule that is “not negotiable” and the position is “not eligible” for benefits.

As total COVID-19 cases in the state soared to nearly 600,000 and deaths rose to almost 8,000, Eye on Ohio asked why the positions are listed without medical benefits when large employers have to give most of their workforce— even temporary workers— medical insurance eventually under the Affordable Care Act, or pay a penalty.

A spokesman for ODJFS said “Benefit eligibility under the ACA for temporary or part-time positions is determined based on the length of time employed and hours worked during that period of time.”

Eye on Ohio further inquired if the positions have a set end date and why officials listed positions with no health care as the chances of getting a debilitating disease have risen. Officials did not respond to multiple requests to comment.

Each job posting begins with, “The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services’ mission is to improve the well-being of Ohio’s workforce and families by promoting economic self-sufficiency and ensuring the safety of Ohio’s most vulnerable citizens.”

But it’s not clear if ODJFS’ own workers could be self-sufficient with its own positions: according to Heatlhcare.gov, a monthly premium for a nonsmoking family of four in Columbus is approximately $810. That’s about 24% of what an ODJFS electronic design would make after taxes. And doesn’t include money for a deductible, or other costs associated with getting sick.

Other temporary jobs don’t require a degree or much experience but make much less, such as a temporary customer service representative, who would have to shell out 30% of their post-tax income just for premiums for a similar family. Benefits the Law Requires

When it comes to employee benefits, Lyndsey Barnett, chair of Graydon Law’s Employee Benefits’ Department, said technically “there is no law that any employer provides any employee any benefit regardless of the number of hours that they work.”

The Affordable Care Act does however place a penalty on what’s called Applicable Large Employers (ALE) if they do not offer “minimum essential coverage” after a specified waiting period. According to IRS.gov, “applicable large employers have annual reporting responsibilities concerning whether and what health insurance they offered to their full-time employees (and their dependents).” Determining which employees are considered “full-time equivalent” isn’t always as simple as knowing who’s on the payroll for more than 30 hours per week. Also the ALEs are permitted a 90-day waiting period before employees are eligible for benefits so if a temporary position only lasts three months the employee may never qualify for benefits.

Dec 28, 2020
After seven month legal battle, Eye on Ohio wins public records lawsuit over hospital capacity numbers

Eye on Ohio is still waiting for the records

By Bonnie Jean Feldkamp and Kathiann M. Kowalski

This article provided by Eye on Ohio, the nonprofit, nonpartisan Ohio Center for Journalism. Please join their free mailing list as this helps them provide more public service reporting. Loveland Magazine provides support for Eye on Ohio through membership in the Ohio News Media Association.

As the ongoing pandemic continues to surge, the Ohio Court of Claims ruled last week that the Department of Health must share public records with Eye on Ohio, showing the number of beds and ventilators available for COVID-19 patients at individual hospitals throughout the state.

The ruling comes seven months after Eye on Ohio initially sought the records.

“In times of crisis transparency is paramount,” said Rebekah Crawford, who has her Ph.D. in Health Communication, Relating & Organizing from Ohio University.

People want credibility and clear lines around what is known and what is uncertain. “When risk communicators are at their best,” Crawford said, “they remain credible by showing what is known and what is not known and by being clear about why we don’t know, and what we’re going to do to find out.”

View the Eye on Ohio timeline pursuing the Department of Health public records COVID 19

When Eye on Ohio first requested records, at the end of March, the state had only about 2,200 confirmed cases and 55 deaths, according to the online Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. As of November 12, Ohio had approximately 274,500 confirmed cases, and about 5,700 people had died from the disease.

“We are in the midst of our third wave in Ohio,” Gov. Mike DeWine said in his November 11 address to the state. There had been warnings that cases would climb when weather turned cooler and people spent more time indoors again. But, DeWine stressed, the surge is “much more intense, widespread, and dangerous.”

“As of today, every single one of our 88 counties has a high rate of virus spread, and areas of our state that were previously untouched—our rural areas—are being hit especially hard,” DeWine said.

If current trends don’t change, some parts of the state are “maybe two or three weeks out” from hospitals having to crowd out non-COVID-related care as they try to keep up with the surge, reported Andy Thomas, a medical doctor at Ohio State University’s Wexner Medical Center, during the governor’s November 9 press conference.

Eye on Ohio sought records with the data as a way to provide readers with timely, local information about the ability of healthcare facilities in their area to deal with the pandemic.

In a state with nearly 45,000 square miles, that local information could tell citizens more about Ohio’s readiness to deal with emergencies for all its residents. Availability of beds and respirators in Cincinnati, for example, would mean little if hot spots of emergencies were concentrated in Ashtabula, nearly 300 miles away by car.

Transparency Matters

Leaders in times of crisis tend to assume that the public is going to panic, Crawford said, even though “research actually shows that panic isn’t the most prominent or even in the top ten of reactions that people have to communications of risk. People are most likely to be in denial. Studies of 9-11 show that people were excessively polite as they exited the World Trade Center because people don’t panic, they get especially compliant and cooperative in high stress or high risk situations.”

Lack of transparency creates suspicion, hurts credibility, and diminishes trust-worthiness. Crawford said, “people who are untrained in risk communication go to that ‘don’t panic’ communication mode.”

Another misnomer is the assumption that people can’t understand how to interpret the information, so, Crawford said, “rather than taking it upon themselves to communicate in a transparent and understandable way they withhold information and say ‘we’ll make decisions for you’ which doesn’t work when people are anxious.”

“A risk expert cannot look at some numbers and then tell a community ‘this isn’t a problem for you’ because the community may decide that it is a concern ‘because you don’t speak for us or understand what we value,’” Crawford said.

Transparency is key for the public so individual communities can take the information given and decide for themselves what actions should be taken and individual needs addressed based on the needs and values of their demographic.

A Need for Transparency

Reporters initially sought information from individual hospitals but were told that all information was being funneled to the Ohio Hospital Association, which in turn provided it to the Department of Health. And the Department of Health had arranged for the data to be entered into a database called Surgenet.

According to a court affidavit, Surgenet was first developed by the Greater Dayton Area Health Information Network (GDAHIN). The software was subsequently enhanced to its present “all hazards” function as “a tool to be utilized during an emergency involving the public’s health which could severely impact hospital services.” Eye on Ohio was told that only the Department of Health would grant access to the materials.

Eye on Ohio then filed a formal public records request for access to the data or records with it. After cancelling a meeting that had been scheduled to discuss the request, the Department of Health then issued a flat-out denial, claiming the records were “security and infrastructure records” under an exception to the state’s public records law.

Eye on Ohio had no option but to file a case with the Ohio Court of Claims.

The court said the statutory language for that security exception just didn’t fit. That part of the Ohio Revised Code exempts security and infrastructure records that are prepared for the express purpose of protecting against or responding to terrorism, school shootings or similar acts of attack or sabotage. None of those apply to the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Exceptions to disclosure are strictly construed,” wrote Special Master Jeff Clark in his October 20 report and recommendation. “And, in this case, the Department of Health failed to connect the data sought by Eye on Ohio with the prevention, mitigation or response to any existing or anticipated act of terrorism.”

“To meet the burden of proof regarding alleged security records, ODH must offer more than its own conclusory labeling,” Clark wrote. He likewise rejected the Department of Health’s assertion that it should be able to stop release of the records because it didn’t want to discuss them.

“Even assuming, arguendo, that some hospitals would rather not disclose their bed and resource availability, it is well-settled that public offices may not withhold records merely because of a policy preference for confidentiality,” Clark wrote.

Court of Claims Judge Patrick McGrath approved the Special Master’s report and recommendation on November 10.

In 2020, so far there have been 24 public records cases resolved in Ohio. In 14 cases, the party dismissed the action because records were provided. In seven cases, the party just dismissed the case. It’s not clear if the records were provided or they just weren’t relevant any more. Just three were decided by the Court of Claims.

What’s next

Despite the court’s ruling, Eye on Ohio is still waiting for the records. In response to its journalists’ requests for access to the database, attorney Socrates Tuch wrote, “Instead, the Department is preparing a data extract to be provided on an Excel spreadsheet or sheets. Doing so is taking time as the Department staff attempts to accommodate this task with the COVID response.”

Ohio law generally requires a reasonable time for production of public records. However, Eye on Ohio first sought the records with the information at the end of March. And the Special Master’s October 20 report came out more than three weeks ago.

Eye on Ohio again pressed for production of the materials on Friday.

“We are working on gathering the records and when they are ready, we will send them along,” responded Press Secretary Melanie Amato at the Department of Health.

When Eye on Ohio finally gets the materials, it plans to provide further reports on it and on updated data. Its journalists hope that more complete, local information can help the public as the pandemic continues.

Disclosure of the mounting strain on hospitals in their vicinity might also make people more vigilant in their efforts to control the pandemic and to “flatten the curve” of cases. Otherwise, as scientists have previously warned, the pandemic will cause even more deaths that could have been avoided.

As for the resistance against complete transparency, “Far be it from me to criticize people who are providing care at a great risk to their own health in a time of heightened need,” Crawford said. “I’m not talking about the doctors and the nurses who are working in the hospitals, but the managers and administrators who are at the upper echelon of those really hierarchical corporations in some cases are motivated not to cooperate and share information. It really goes counter to public health needs and the demands in care and I would say ethical and medical provision.”

Nov 14, 2020
What can be done to reduce the influence of dark money on Ohio energy policy?

by Eye On Ohio Staff, Eye on Ohio
October 2, 2020

Any changes in the wake of the alleged $60 million Householder conspiracy will ultimately depend on voters, policy experts say.

This article provided by Eye on Ohio, the nonprofit, nonpartisan Ohio Center for Journalism in partnership with the nonprofit Energy News Network. Please join their free mailing list or the mailing list for the Energy New Network as this helps us provide more public service reporting.

The arrest of former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder and others in July revealed how the use of dark money organizations enabled an alleged $60 million conspiracy to sway elections and provide costly bailouts to noncompetitive nuclear and coal plants.

As federal and state court cases move forward, questions remain about what can be done to restore confidence in the legislature and to prevent similar situations in the future.

“Dark money is really how special interests win right now,” said Jay Costa, executive director at Voters’ Right To Know. When corporations use shell groups to hide their political spending, they “gain a level of credibility they wouldn’t otherwise have,” he explained. “I like to think of it as the ‘Wizard of Oz’ effect.”

In other words, voters don’t get to see who’s behind the curtain.

Two months after the federal government’s criminal complaint and indictment in July, Ohio Attorney General David Yost has filed a state court lawsuit. The complaint alleges a “pattern of corrupt activity,” and seeks injunctive relief to prevent FirstEnergy, FirstEnergy Solutions, Energy Harbor and others from reaping benefits from the bailouts under House Bill 6. A hearing on a preliminary motion for that relief is currently scheduled for Friday, Oct. 2.

Meanwhile, it’s unclear whether Ohio lawmakers will actually repeal House Bill 6, the bailout law passed as a result of the alleged conspiracy. Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers called for a swift repeal in late July and early August. However, leadership in the Ohio House has so far refused to allow a full House vote on any pending repeal bills.

‘Dragging their feet’

Rep. David Leland, D-Columbus

“They’re just dragging their feet,” said Rep. David Leland, D-Columbus. “We have 58 members of the legislature who are willing to repeal HB 6 right now.”

Instead, Speaker Robert Cupp, R-Lima, has referred the bill to a House Select Committee on Energy Policy and Oversight. So far, those hearings have largely been a general review of the pros and cons of HB 6, rather than a focused oversight of the alleged corruption that led to its passage and whether it should be repealed in order to repair any claimed harm to public trust in the legislature’s integrity.

“The only way that we can prove that Ohio is not for sale is by repealing HB 6,” Leland said. “The polling we’ve seen shows that people by an overwhelming margin are going to punish those people who have voted for HB 6 and have done nothing to repeal it.” Early and absentee voting in Ohio begins on Oct. 6.

“Our legislators are supposed to act in the public interest,” said political scientist Leah Stokes at the University of California at Santa Barbara. Corporations’ interests may sometimes conflict. But, she adds, “it’s really politicians’ and regulators’ job not to be listening to those special interests. That basic responsibility of democracy has failed in Ohio with House Bill 6.”

A straight repeal would mostly restore Ohio energy law to before HB 6 became effective, subject to some follow-up regulatory matters before the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio. A quick replacement could potentially reenact all or much of the law, which also gutted the state’s clean energy standards.

Advocates say that rushing to ram through anything more than a simple repeal this year would either just repeat bad policy or create more problems, even aside the alleged conspiracy’s past influence on the current makeup of the Ohio House of Representatives. Even at that, a repeal bill would now need either an emergency clause or an injunction sought by the state attorney general in order to stop the nuclear subsidies slated to start in January. The committee adjourned on Sept. 30 and no additional meetings are currently scheduled.

HB 6 “is so questionable at this moment. The vehicle itself and the way it was sold is all just a pack of lies,” said Rachael Belz, executive director of Ohio Citizen Action. “We need them to repeal it, and then we need to go from there.” And that second step will take time, she said.

“It’s complicated and complex legislation and policy. And we have to get it right,” said Chris Neme, a principal and co-founder of Energy Futures Group. “Passing a bill in less than a couple of months like the way HB 6 was just leads us down the road of unintended consequences.”

Shining a light on dark money

The bigger question is how to prevent similar abuses in the future. Utilities and fossil fuel interests have given heavily to Ohio political campaigns since the state enacted a 1999 law calling for competition in electricity generation. And the level of giving went up dramatically once a competitive market actually began to develop in the state.

Utilities’ political spending has continued during this election season. FirstEnergy spokesperson Jennifer Young said that its political action committee has since canceled campaign donations it had originally reported as going out in July shortly before Householder’s arrest.

Campaign donations shown for August have in fact been sent out, Young said. FirstEnergy has denied any wrongdoing in connection with its political donations or the alleged Householder scandal.

Meanwhile, a 2010 Supreme Court case, Citizens United, “really opened up the floodgates of fossil fuel and electric utility influence over politics,” Stokes said. Utilities’ political spending is “particularly pernicious,” in her view, because customers “have to buy from these companies” to get electricity delivered to their homes.

At the same time, reporting requirements currently apply only to immediate spenders on political issues and campaigns. They don’t reach all the way up the chain to the original source of the money.

“It’s basically this Russian nesting doll scenario, where you have one donor giving to another donor, giving to another donor, to get to the person who finally spends the money to influence the voters,” Costa explained.

In the case of HB 6, money flowed into Generation Now from multiple sources, with a lion’s share allegedly originating with Company A — understood to be FirstEnergy — and its subsidiaries, according to the federal complaint.

Some of the money in turn then went to a political action committee. Or, it went to other organizations that directly funded pro-HB 6 ads. One such ad claimed a debunked Chinese conspiracy was behind last year’s failed effort to put a referendum on the law on the ballot this fall. A for-profit group called Ohioans for Energy Security paid for that ad. When asked last year, lawyers at the firm that set up the corporation, Isaac Wiles, would not answer questions about the source of its funding.

“The notion that dark money is something some people don’t like is not part of the elements of the crime,” Mark Weaver, an attorney at that firm, said at a Columbus Metropolitan Club forum after news broke about the Householder arrest.

Asked if there was too much money sloshing around at the statehouse, he said it’s “a lot of money, no doubt,” but it “pales in comparison” to the amount that Americans spend on Halloween candy and costumes every year. And he said that the First Amendment protects the right to conduct political speech anonymously.

“Of course, state and local governments may (depending on how they draft) pass additional 501(c)4 disclosure requirements that could meet constitutional scrutiny,” Weaver later added.

Ian Vandewalker, Ian
PHOTO CREDIT: Courtesy of Brennan Center for Justice

“There is no absolute right to anonymous speech,” said attorney Ian Vandewalker at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law. Elections are treated differently from general speech, because of the overriding interest in making sure elections function properly, he explained at a panel organized by the League of Women Voters of Ohio.

“That requires informed voters. And it requires policies to not be able to cheat the public,” Vandewalker said. “And so those interests require that there be a level of transparency.”

“No regulation, no law, no set of ethical rules substitutes for American voters paying attention to who’s running for office — pressing them hard on what they stand for, looking closely at the issues, and going into the ballot box having done your homework,” Weaver said.

“The reason that information is important and transparency is important is so that voters are educated,” said Catherine Turcer, executive director of Common Cause Ohio. “You can’t make the argument that voters need to be better educated but you shouldn’t give them actual education. It doesn’t make any sense.”

Moreover, disclosure needs to be timely, said Heather Taylor-Miesle, executive director for the Ohio Environmental Council. In the case of HB 6, Generation Now didn’t report its 2017 spending to the Internal Revenue Service until late 2019. By then, millions more had been spent to influence the 2018 elections, the passage of HB 6, and the failed referendum effort against it.

Pending bills

Several bills introduced by Democratic and Republican lawmakers could make a strong start toward improved disclosure, including HB 737, HB 739, and SB 347. Those bills should be broadened to include digital media, as well as more traditional campaign spending, Turcer said.

The bills should also call for disclosure not only of the name of an organization, but the identity of the top three original donors of funding, Turcer added in her Sept. 16 testimony in support of SB 347. “Otherwise, wealthy special interests will attempt to avoid disclosure by creating pop-up shell groups,” she said.

And while Ohio voters won’t know who’s behind all the groups funding attack ads or other political spending this election season, information is available about how lawmakers voted on HB 6. The Akron Beacon Journal has also compiled some information on how some funds were used in the 2018 Ohio House campaigns.

“People should contact their legislators about HB 6” if they want to speak out about the issue, Stokes said, noting that the law passed with support from a mix of both Republicans and Democrats.

“When the public is outraged about an issue and really shows up, these issues get reversed,” Stokes added. “There’s a lot of leverage right now.”

[Note: the original version of this story took additional comments made by Mr. Weaver and summarized them to help the story flow better and to highlight the most relevant points. Mr. Weaver contacted Eye on Ohio and the Energy News Network after publication expressing his concern that the summary was not an accurate representation of his public comments. While we do not share that view, we are happy to share the full text from which that summary was taken. We know our readers are smart and can draw their own conclusions regarding their meaning. Beneath this article is that text, as well as a link to the entire video.]

Partial Transcript of: “Statehouse Rocked by Corruption”

Columbus Metropolitan Club, August 5, 2020

Mark Weaver: Blaming Citizens United for this I think is wrongheaded. The New York Times, it’s sort of been proven that their collusion story about Russia has fallen completely apart and yet I don’t blame the First Amendment for the right to print what they printed. I think they had a right to print all that. I think it was substantively wrong, but I wouldn’t go after their ability to print that stuff.

And so what the Supreme Court said in Citizens United was, if a few of us get together and want to form a group to communicate, we ought to have a right to do that under the First Amendment.

And a lot of donors are looking at what’s happening in America right now with the doxxing, or the releasing of personal information and targeting people for shame. So that’s why some donors don’t want to give. Now some may have less noble notions for wanting to keep their money and their name private. But we saw what happened to Amy Acton for example where her personal home was targeted by protesters– that’s just wrong.

The notion that- I disagree with you so I’m going to personally vilify you and show up at your house where your family or your children are- so many donors see that as part of 2020 current affairs and so many of them want to avoid that. And I know not everyone has that reason.

Mike Thompson: But the problem comes in not just that somebody gives $500 to a candidate or a cause they believe in. It’s that somebody gives– $61 million or $35 million, let’s be conservative, and we don’t know that’s happening. Is there a middle ground where we can say, okay I can protect your identity, your First Amendment rights, but you can’t have THAT much influence?

Weaver: Well, not Constitutionally, no. It’s not just Citizens United. There was a case out of Ohio called McIntyre vs. the Ohio Elections Commission. This is the 7-2 Supreme Court case that said it’s legal to keep yourself anonymous when spending politically, based out of Ohio, in Westerville, Mrs. McIntyre. I used to teach the case. This morning I looked at it again and I had forgotten about this quote. This is not a close call. 7-2. This is Supreme court on anonymous speech: “It’s not a pernicious, fraudulent practice but an honorable tradition of advocacy and of dissent.”

And they pointed to the Federalist Papers that were written anonymously, to avoid scrutiny of the authors and focus on the ideas. So this notion of anonymous speech is one that’s protected by Supreme Court precedent.

Thompson: Laura, there are efforts at the statehouse to make it more transparent. Is it just lip service or are they serious efforts?

Laura Bischoff: You know it’s interesting. I do think the conditions are probably better now for reform than they were six months ago. So, there’s a couple of different bills pending. One is House Bill 737, which is sponsored by Gayle Manning, a Republican from North Royalton, and Jessica Miranda, a Democrat from Cleveland. And it’s got the support of the Ohio Secretary of State, Frank LaRose. And it would require, if you’re going to have a 501c(4) that’s spending in Ohio on political matters then it would require reporting through the state. Louis Brandeis said that the best disinfectant is sunshine. And so, this kind of works on that premise– transparency and disclosure will help clean it up.

Thompson: Derrick, It comes down to the Supreme Court. And the courts have said money equals speech. How much money? We have unlimited amounts of Free Speech. We can stand on a street corner, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and as long as we don’t yell fire in a crowded theatre we can do all we want. Should that same apply to the amount of money someone can give to a campaign? Or to a political cause?

Derrick Clay: Well you know if you have the money to give it, that’s your discretion whether you want to give that money to a c(4). You know, right now we’re under the law from that Citizens United case where people can give unlimited amounts of money to a c(4) nonprofit. So until that court case is overturned or challenged, then that’s the law of the land that we all have to abide by unfortunately.

Thompson: Is it too much money sloshing around at the statehouse? And you guys [points at Weaver and Clay] have both advocated for groups, and helped raise money and spent money that’s been raised. I mean, you’re part of the system-

Weaver: It’s a lot of money, no doubt. But when you look at what America spends on Halloween candy and costumes every year it pales in comparison. There’s lots of money done for lots of things.

Halloween candy and costumes don’t have the protection of the First Amendment. Remember, the Supreme Court has been very clear: the speech that aggravates us the most gets the most protection. And when you’re laying out what’s protected, political speech is the highest. And so whatever laws get passed, and I’m interested to read the details, and I’m interested in whatever laws are being put out there, they will have to withstand First Amendment scrutiny just like the news organizations represented today.

This article first appeared on Eye on Ohio and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Oct 21, 2020
Why did 77 Ohio prisoners die of COVID-19, but just 10 in Pennsylvania?

Outside Pickaway Correctional Institution. (Photo Credit Eye on Ohio)

Ohio’s prisons have incubated two of the four largest COVID outbreaks in the nation

By Cid Standifer and Brie Zeltner at Eye on Ohio

A look at how overcrowding and poor design contributed to two of the worst national outbreaks

This article was provided by Eye on Ohio, the nonprofit, nonpartisan Ohio Center for Journalism. Please join their free mailing list as this helps us provide more public service reporting.

For the first two months after the COVID-19 pandemic hit the U.S., Ohio’s response set an example. Thanks to an early shutdown order, the state’s per-capita deaths from the virus as of late April were less than half of those in neighboring Pennsylvania, a state with similar demographics.

But inside the two states’ prison systems, it was a different story.

By late April , the death rate from COVID-19 in Ohio prisons was 22 per 100,000, a rate more than 4 ½ times the overall Ohio rate and nearly twice the national rate.

As of August 14, there have been 77 inmate deaths known to be caused by COVID-19, and another 10 suspected— a rate of 160 deaths per 100,000 people. Ohio’s prisons have incubated two of the four largest COVID outbreaks in the nation.

In Pennsylvania’s prison system, which houses about 44,000 inmates at 25 facilities, the death rate was comparatively low— 10 incarcerated people have died as of mid August, for a death rate of 23 per 100,000 people, despite the virus showing up in each state just a few days apart. In fact, a Pennsylvania inmate is less than half as likely to die of COVID-19 as a free Pennsylvanian.

Why have Ohio’s prisons failed so thoroughly to control the spread of COVID-19 when Pennsylvania fared far better?

No state has had a model approach for controlling the virus in prisons. All have made missteps that put inmates’ and staff members’ lives at risk, according to prisoners and prisoner advocates. Prison outbreaks have also spread into the communities outside their walls. But, whether through foresight or luck, factors in some states have kept the virus from running rampant as it has in Ohio prisons. As the country faces new waves of cases, corrections departments may be able to learn from what helped or harmed some states during the first stage of the pandemic.

While advocates for incarcerated people in Pennsylvania caution against holding that state’s experience as a model for how to respond to the pandemic, they agree that the answer may lie both in how crowded the prisons are, and how inmates are housed.

Crowded prisons spread disease

Controlling an outbreak of infectious disease in a prison is never easy. As with other communal living facilities such as nursing homes, once a respiratory illness enters, close quarters gives a virus ample opportunity to spread.

Overcrowding only makes the situation worse.

In Ohio, where the prisons were 32% above capacity in February, the virus spread rapidly.

In Pennsylvania’s prisons, at 95% of capacity in February, there were outbreaks in several prisons, but far fewer deaths.

That state’s biggest outbreak to date—183 infections and five deaths among inmates— happened at its oldest prison facility, the 131-year-old State Correctional Institution (SCI) Huntingdon in central Pennsylvania.

“SCI Huntingdon dates from the late 1800’s and has cells with open bars, and four-story housing units with open air shafts to all of the cells,” said Claire Shubik-Richards, executive director of the Pennsylvania Prison Society, a non-profit inmate advocacy organization. “So when the virus came in it spread like wildfire.”

In other, newer Pennsylvania prisons with significant outbreaks, such as SCI Phoenix, the virus proved easier to control. Only 49 inmates at Phoenix, which opened about 2 years ago, have tested positive, and four have died, despite being located in hotspot Montgomery county, just north of Philadelphia.

“The thing about that facility was that the outbreak went up and then went down pretty quickly because it’s a facility where isolating people is pretty easy,” Shubik-Richards said, because it has more single and double-occupancy cells than open dorm units.

In Ohio’s more crowded prison system, the virus was first detected in a staff member in the 66-year-old Marion Correctional Institution on March 29. Less than a month later, nearly 4,000 inmates across the state had tested positive for the virus; 10 were dead, as was one staff member.

Now, the death count is approaching 80. Ohio’s prison system is home to two of the four largest COVID-19 outbreaks in the nation, with 2,440 cases at Marion Correctional Institution in rural central Ohio, and 1,792 at Pickaway Correctional Institution outside Columbus.

Pickaway, built in the 1920s as a mental hospital and converted to a prison in 1984, was designed to hold 1,328 people. As the pandemic began in Mid-March, it held 2,047– 54 percent over capacity.

In one cell phone video that purportedly shows the inside of Pickaway, seemingly endless racks of double-bunked beds are visible, with no barriers and little space between.

“Everybody’s stacked on top of each other, man,” says the person wielding the camera. “Ain’t no social distancing in here….They’re playing with our lives, man.”

Picture of Ohio dorms

Virus runs amok in dorms

Pickaway was designed to have 87% of its beds in open double-bunk dorms, described in a 2015 state prison renovation plan as “barrack-style” (sic), where beds were typically three feet apart. When prisons are overcrowded, staff often squeeze even more beds into the dorms than they were designed to hold, said Meghan Novisky, a Cleveland State University professor who studies how prisons impact health.

In the 2015 master plan, state officials acknowledged that the prison’s dorm-style housing was a problem, not because of disease, but because it elevated prisoners’ stress, setting the stage for unrest.

“A critical need is to improve the dormitory living conditions and reduce the very high levels of crowding,” the report said. “The [Strategic Capital Master Plan] recommends the phased conversion of all dormitory living units to a cubicle-type configuration where inmates will have a higher degree of personal space and privacy.”

Outside Pickaway Correctional Institution. (Photo Credit Eye on Ohio)

Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (DRC) spokesperson JoEllen Smith said that some of the plan’s recommendations for Pickaway have been implemented. The Orient Correctional Institution, a prison adjoining Pickaway that hasn’t been used since 2001, was demolished, as was Pickaway’s dilapidated E block of dorms. But construction of a new unit with over a thousand beds is on hold due to the pandemic.

Around March 29, leadership at Marion – designed to hold 73% of its inmates in dorms – declared that prisoners in dorms would sleep arranged head-to-foot. That way their faces would be more than three feet apart, according to an email between the prison’s medical services director and the Marion County public health department, obtained by the Documenting COVID-19project at The Brown Institute for Media Innovation.

According to daily statistics released from Ohio DRC, on April 21, more than 28,000 of the state’s 48,396 inmates were either “isolated” or “quarantined.” But in overcrowded prisons where most inmates lived in dorms, both happened in groups, according to numerous inmates.

Daily coronavirus reports from DRC noted that “isolation” meant keeping infected inmates away from those who weren’t sick, while “quarantine” meant “limiting the movements” of someone who may have been exposed to the virus. Guidance issued by the DRC early in the pandemic said it was preferable to quarantine inmates in the infirmary, but if not enough cells were available, they could be “quarantined” in “an area large enough to hold beds and equipment for a minimum of 50 patients.”

Marion was designed to hold 450 inmates in cells. On April 16, 2,417 inmates there were listed as “in quarantine.”

The close quarters of dorm-style housing is a problem in other Ohio prisons, too, inmates reported.

Javalen Wolfe, an inmate incarcerated in dormitory-style housing at Belmont Correctional Institution in southeastern Ohio, said that every time a flu or a cold enters the prison, there’s no stopping it.

“This is how it works because we live so close together. If one person gets sick, everybody gets sick,” he said. “We are literally two feet, maybe two and a half feet between the next person, and there’s no divider, no wall.”

At least nine Belmont inmates had died of COVID-19 as of Aug. 10. Belmont was designed to have 1,855 beds, over 90% of which would be in dorms. As of March 17, near the beginning of the outbreak in Ohio, 2,719 inmates were crammed into the prison— 146% of the population it was meant to hold.

Of the 77 confirmed COVID-19 deaths in Ohio prisons as of mid-July, 67 of them were in prisons that were designed to hold at least half their inmates in dorms. Of the deaths in prisons made up mostly of cells, 10 were in Franklin Medical Center, a small prison dedicated to caring for the system’s most seriously ill inmates.

The worst Pennsylvania outbreaks were at two prisons where inmates were housed almost exclusively in cells – Huntingdon and Phoenix. But the system overall houses just 19% of its inmates in dorms. Roughly 60% of Ohio’s inmates live in dorms, according to Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections Director Annette Chambers-Smith. Each dorm can hold anywhere from 40 to 300 inmates.

And even Pennsylvania’s worst prison outbreaks paled in comparison to Ohio’s. At Huntingdon, the prison with the most deaths, 359 coronavirus cases were confirmed, out of 1,835 inmates. Phoenix housed 2,825 inmates as of late July, 89 of whom tested positive for COVID-19 at some point.

Since mass testing wasn’t conducted at any of the Pennsylvania prisons, the death toll is probably a more faithful indicator of the spread of the disease. The inmate death rate at Huntingdon was 272 COVID-19 deaths per 100,000 people. At Pickaway, it was 1,709, and at Franklin Medical Center, it was over 2,000.

In an interview with Eye on Ohio, DRC Director Annette Chambers-Smith acknowledged that the open bays make it difficult to control the virus. She said they have attempted to mitigate dorm crowding by spreading inmates out in other areas that aren’t normally used for housing, such as gymnasiums and classrooms.

”They literally installed lavatories and facilities in a building so that it could be used overnight to house people,” she said.

And administrators are experimenting with makeshift barriers between dormitory beds at most of its prisons to reduce transmission.

Reducing overcrowding– release of prisoners

Pennsylvania started the pandemic in a relatively good position in terms of space after years of modest, gradual population reduction. They freed up more space after the pandemic hit by giving 3,500 people sentence reprieves and shutting down the county court system.

Several other states have taken steps to free up space in their prisons since the pandemic began, with 15 reducing their prison populations 10% or more between March and June, according to data from The Marshall Project.

Connecticut has taken the most drastic measures, cutting its inmate population by more than 22%, from 12,364 on March 8, the day the virus was first detected in a Connecticut prison, to 9,604 on August 12. Six inmates have died so far in the Connecticut system, which houses only 12,000 inmates thanks to a decade-long pre-pandemic decarceration effort that reduced the population from about 20,000 in 2008.

Compared to the state’s prison population in March, its per-capita death rate has been less than half that of Ohio’s prisons.

That’s despite the fact that, according to prisoner advocate groups in Connecticut, the state made many of the same missteps as Ohio in their attempts to quarantine and isolate inmates.

Melvin Medina, public policy and advocacy director for the ACLU of Connecticut, said that the CDC has recommended isolating people with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 together and quarantining close contacts together as a group due to limited space in prisons, but did not indicate how large these groups can or should be.

“Our DOC took that to say that in dorm-style settings if there was one sick person in a dorm of 100 people, that meant that whole block was quarantined together,” he said. “They locked sick and healthy people in together and let the virus run its course. In hindsight, I’m deeply thankful that our death count was really low. We could have had a disaster, and we got very lucky.”

Advocates like Novisky say releasing inmates is the best way to protect them from COVID-19, since any group housing makes it hard to control the spread of disease. Even in places where prison populations have dropped by double-digit percentages, advocates say it’s not enough.

“They need to release those that are medically vulnerable,” based on the CDC’s criteria, not just those who are close to the end of their sentences or incarcerated for non-violent offenses, said Nyssa Taylor, criminal justice policy counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania. The state is home to about 4,000 older adults serving life sentences, she said, one of the highest such populations in the country.

“I don’t think we should be politicizing who to release,” she said. “I think it’s really important to look at how to save lives, not just ‘release all the non-violent.”’

Meanwhile, Ohio’s prison population fell by about 5.2% between March and June. By August 11, it had fallen 9%.

“I think part of the problem that they’re running into is we really haven’t taken advantage of options to reduce our population size,” said Novisky.

On April 15, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine announced he was invoking an overcrowding statute to release some prisoners early. Inmates who were within 90 days of their planned release date could be eligible for early release, but only if they met a list of criteria. That excluded people convicted of most types of violent crime, who had served more than one sentence, who had previously been denied judicial release, or who had committed a serious infraction while in prison.

“It basically eliminated everyone,” Novisky said.

Chambers-Smith said the department has taken multiple steps to reduce the population, including reviewing cases of elderly inmates or those with health conditions that make them especially vulnerable to COVID-19. The list of crimes that disqualify inmates for early release under Ohio’s emergency overcrowding law, she noted, is set by the Ohio legislature. The law would have to be amended to loosen those criteria.

“There are more serious crimes where you wouldn’t want to think about people getting out before they’re ready,” she said. “There’s a balancing act here between keeping the public safe and keeping the people in prisons safe.”

Of the 77 Ohio inmates who have died of COVID-19, 34 — more than half— were in prison for sex offenses. Another 18 had been convicted of murder. The average sentences for rape or murder are more than 20 years. Many of the men killed by the coronavirus had grown old in prison.

But most Ohio inmates are serving time for lesser crimes. Only about 12% of Ohio’s inmates were convicted of murder, and 16% were sex offenders. Meanwhile, 15% of Ohio’s inmates were in prison for drug offenses, with 10% serving time for burglary.

But almost a third of Ohio’s inmates released in 2014 ended up back in prison within three years, according to the most recent recidivism study published by the state. All of those prisoners would have been disqualified by DeWine’s exemptions. And with the prisons packed full of repeat offenders, even low-level ones, it would have been difficult to keep older, more vulnerable inmates serving long sentences for more serious crimes isolated.

A spokesperson clarified that it was a joint decision of the governor’s office and the DRC to disqualify repeat offenders, not a stipulation of the emergency overcrowding law.

The day of his announcement, DeWine said he had found 105 people who were eligible for early release, though he noted that more would be considered as they came within 90 days of the end of their sentence.

Since then, the number of inmates has declined slightly, but more due to court shutdowns meaning fewer people sentenced than the slow trickle of early releases. As of August 11, Ohio’s prison population was still nearly 8,000 people over capacity.

Putting the community at risk

Ohio’s prison pandemics also put those outside of prison walls at risk.

As prisons were cut off from visitors, it may have created the false impression that diseases that spread in prisons would stay in prisons. But the Marion outbreak demonstrated otherwise. County health officials and residents voiced concerns in emails that both staff and inmates who finished their sentences were capable of spreading the virus across multiple counties.

In one email obtained by the Documenting COVID-19 project, Traci Kinsler, the Marion County health commissioner, noted that the Marion prison was not isolating inmates before releasing them. Marion released at least one inmate who was known to be infected with COVID-19. He moved to Ashland County.

INFECTED INMATE RELEASED IN ASHLAND (p. 348)

View entire document on DocumentCloud

Marion staff members who contracted COVID-19 lived in at least 20 different counties, according to one message. Two were from out of state.

APRIL 22 EMPLOYEE INFECTIONS (p. 334)

View entire document on DocumentCloud

Chambers-Smith said the department initially offered staff members the option of staying at the facility where they worked to avoid infecting their families. When that offer had few takers, they contracted with hotels to give prison workers a place to sleep, or at least shower before they went home.

Inmates are tested before their release dates, she said, and those who were selected for early release have their release dates pushed back if they test positive until they are considered recovered— officially defined by the department as 14 days past the onset of symptoms, and 72 hours symptom-free. If they reach their regularly scheduled release date, the department has no authority to keep them incarcerated, but will release COVID-positive people with a quarantine order. She said the department collaborates with health departments and religious organizations to give them a place to liveand supplies so they can self-isolate.

Kinsler told Eye on Ohio that the Marion prison outbreak flooded the Marion Public Health Department with cases all at once, and at first officials in various departments struggled with contact tracing. They were able to contact most of the infected people who were released, though, and alerted the county health departments where they settled.

Parking Spot for the Healthcare Administrator at Pickaway Correctional Institution. (Photo Credit Eye on Ohio)

Ultimately, most of the 2,532 people known to be connected to the outbreak at Marion Correctional were either inmates or staff. But the virus made its way to an additional 58 people outside the prison, including family members, health care workers and food workers.

And there could be other cases where health workers simply forgot to label the infection as related to the Marion prison outbreak in the database.

Chambers-Smith said the danger works both ways.

”If there’s COVID out in the community, there’s COVID in the prisons,” she said.

This story is sponsored by the Northeast Ohio Solutions Journalism Collaborative, composed of 16-plus Greater Cleveland news outlets including Eye on Ohio, which covers the whole state.

Aug 23, 2020

Families weigh the risks of sending a loved one to a nursing home during the coronavirus pandemic

By Ginger Christ and Rachel Dissell

Data analysis and Graphics by Cid Standifer

This article provided to Loveland Magazine was edited by David Miller and is by by Eye on Ohio, the nonprofit, nonpartisan Ohio Center for Journalism. Please join their free mailing list as this helps us provide more public service reporting.

In early March, just as Ohioans were learning about the first cases of novel coronavirus in the state, Anna Bondar’s grandfather fell at his Cleveland home.

Luckily, the 92-year old, who lives with dementia, wasn’t injured badly.

The tight-knit family started to discuss the possibility of a nursing home, though they had serious reservations.

Their tough choice was made even more difficult by mounting fears about the coronavirus. In nearly four months, COVID-19 has infected more than 31,191 people statewide and has proven particularly deadly for residents of long-term care facilities in Ohio.

Seventy percent of the reported deaths in Ohio due to COVID-19 complications have been in long-term care facilities, which is among the highest in the country.

Nationally the portion of COVID-19-related deaths in long-term care facilities has hovered just over 40%, though the amount of testing done in nursing homes varies significantly by state.

Every day, families like Bondar’s are making what can feel like an impossible choice – whether to send a loved one to a nursing home where they will receive around-the-clock specialized care but face a greater risk of contracting COVID-19, or to care for that person at home where risk of transmission is lower but providing care can be more challenging.

Even before the pandemic, sorting through the myriad of quality ratings and measures was daunting enough. Then, COVID-19 deaths started to soar.

Now, families and seniors agonize over what could be life or death choice using confusing numbers on infection “hotspots” and without the ability to visit nursing homes to observe how the staff cares for residents – which is the number one recommendation of most advocates.

Dr. Amy Acton, director of the Department of Health

State officials, including Dr. Amy Acton, the former director of the Department of Health, have emphasized that “congregate” settings like nursing homes are at highest risk of infection. Staff, who often travel between facilities, need to be in close contact with residents to provide care. And residents, who are primarily older and have multiple medical conditions, are more susceptible to COVID-19-related complications.

“All of this makes it high risk. At the same time, it’s really necessary for many patients to be there,” said Dr. Steven Schwartz, a geriatric physician at the Cleveland Clinic who travels to nursing homes as part of the Clinic’s Center for Connected Care.

Ohio National Guardmembers will begin testing all staff members and any residents who likely were exposed to COVID-19 in the state’s nursing homes, Gov. Mike DeWine announced May 27. What are being called Congregate Care Unified Response Teams will focus on facilities where confirmed or assumed positive cases are reported in hopes of reducing the number of COVID-19 cases and deaths in Ohio’s nursing homes, which as of May 27 was 5,324 resident cases and more than 1,442 deaths.

Infection rates in Ohio Nursing Homes

Making an educated decision

Last month, state officials began to release the numbers of reported infections and deaths in long-term care facilities, which include nursing homes, rehabilitation centers, and assisted living centers.

But it’s unclear how much the numbers – which are reported weekly and are also tracked cumulatively – matter for families currently trying to choose a facility.

The state, on its coronavirus website, says the infection and death numbers shouldn’t replace a thoughtful conversation with a nursing facility about infection control practices and that “residents and family members should understand that the presence of COVID-19 at a facility is [in] no way an indicator of a facility that isn’t following proper procedures.”

Yet many in the health care industry say infection information should be considered, along with other factors, when deciding which site to choose.

“If you see a nursing home with a large outbreak, that’s something to worry about. If you see a nursing home with a small outbreak, I’m not sure it means anything but bad luck.”

“If you see a nursing home with a large outbreak, that’s something to worry about. If you see a nursing home with a small outbreak, I’m not sure it means anything but bad luck,” said Dr. James Campbell, department chair of geriatric medicine at MetroHealth.

The infection information provided by the state can be useful, for instance, if a family is choosing between two similar facilities, said Nate Cyrill, a Long Term Care Ombudsman for Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain and Medina counties.

Since information on the virus changes rapidly, most families still rely on the quality measures that were available before COVID-19, including existing state and federal online guides Cyril said.

One of the commonly-used ranking systems, maintained by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, assigns ratings – from 1 to 5 “stars” – to facilities based on performance on quality measures, staffing and inspections.

The number of “stars” Ohio’s nursing homes received, however, does not appear to have a correlation to the number of infections reported to the state, based on a comparison of the publicly available information. The analysis did not include assisted living facilities.

Cases vs. Star rating

“You want to look for a nursing home that’s four of five stars preferably but even that doesn’t tell you the whole story,” Steven Schwartz said.

There are numerous 1-star rated facilities that have reported few infections, like Whetstone Gardens and Care Center in Columbus, which has reported 9 cases or 8 per 100 residents.

Salem North Healthcare Center in northern Columbiana County had 51 patients test positive for the virus as of May 20, as well as five staff, according to the state. It is rated a 5-star facility, the highest rating from CMS.

It’s one of four 5-star facilities with an infection rate over 50 cases per 100 residents, based on Medicare’s calculation of each facility’s average number of residents. (The rate does not include infections among staff because the number of staff in each facility was not available.)

Since April, the focus on high numbers of reported infections, often referred to as clusters, in long-term care facilities has intensified. In some cases, those numbers are a reflection of the level of testing, said Fred Stratmann, general counsel and chief compliance officer for CommuniCare Health Services. It doesn’t mean all of the residents with a positive test had symptoms of COVID-19. The state infection numbers also don’t show the residents who have recovered from the virus, he said.

CommuniCare, which operates close to 90 health care facilities in seven states has been proactive about testing, Stratmann said. When COVID-19 cases started to appear at the North Salem facility, the company enlisted the state’s “strike team” to proactively test all of the residents. It has since re-tested all of the residents who were initially negative and purchased 3,000 testing kits to supplement what the state could provide.

“We wanted to be certain of the extent of COVID in this center in order to be able to properly treat it and to fight back against it,” Stratmann said. The facility does that by isolating any COVID-19-postive patients in a separate unit with its own dedicated staff and by admitting new residents to an observation unit for 14 days to make sure they have no symptoms of infection, he said.

Restrictions on visits make choices harder

The most effective way to scout out a facility typically is to visit it, preferably unannounced, said Dr. James Campbell, department chair of geriatric medicine at MetroHealth. However, because visitors aren’t permitted in nursing homes right now, the next best thing is to ask detailed questions about care, any COVID-19 cases and infection control measures, he said.

Campbell also suggested turning to hospital staff, who work with nursing homes regularly, for advice. Social workers can place five people in a week, while most individuals face that decision, at most, only a few times in their lives, he said.

Cyrill said his agency can also provide information that can’t be found online for families trying to choose between facilities.

Cyrill said his agency can also provide information that can’t be found online for families trying to choose between facilities.

The agency, along with other similar independent agencies across the state, investigates complaints in long-term care, skilled nursing, group homes and rehabilitation facilities and can share what are called “verified complaints” that aren’t otherwise available publicly.

Most of the complaints investigated in relation to COVID-19, Cyrill said, have been related to visitation or the ability of families to get information on a loved one’s condition.

It’s been harder, though, for Cyrill and his colleagues to investigate complaints with COVID-19 restrictions in place.

It’s been harder, though, for Cyrill and his colleagues to investigate complaints with COVID-19 restrictions in place.

Under normal circumstances, an ombudsperson would go to the facility and talk to patients and could do so without announcing the visit in advance. Since visits are restricted for infection control reasons, they have to work through staff to speak to residents or to ask questions, which isn’t optimal. And they aren’t able to make direct observations.

“It makes our job much more challenging,” Cyrill said.

At the North Salem facility, which has had about a dozen new residents admitted or transfered from other facilities, the staff has given “virtual tours” over the phone to family members or prospective residents who were in the hospital, Stratmann said. The company also invested in technology that won’t replace face-to-face visits but enables more family contact and the ability and for staff to help keep residents’ spirits up by making videos of activities, like dancing and singing, to keep them connected with the local community.

In addition, Stratmann said they walk families through the infection control procedures and share techniques they have implemented to improve health outcomes for patients with COVID-19 including, when appropriate:

Treating residents with anticoagulant medications to reduce the risk of blood clots and strokes, which has been a factor in some COVID-19-related fatalities.
Using Amino Acid supplements, which emerging studies show may inhibit virus replication.
Practicing “proning” or positioning residents, while awake, flat on their belly and chest to reduce the buildup of fluid in lung tissue and reduce the risk of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, which has been associated with many COVID-19 fatalities.

The idea of putting their beloved grandfather in a nursing home was gut-wrenching

Choosing home

For Bondar’s family, the idea of putting their beloved grandfather in a nursing home was gut-wrenching, especially as visitation was curtailed to limit the virus’ spread. He speaks Russian, his native language, and would not have been able to communicate well with the staff caring for him.

Medicare Nursing Home Compare Search

“It felt like admitting him [to a facility] would be like saying goodbye,” Bondar said. “Like leaving him to die.”

Bondar’s family ultimately decided to care for her grandfather at home, in his Mayfield Heights senior highrise, where they could limit his exposure to the virus.

Before his fall, an aide visited for about eight hours a week. After the Ohio’s “stay at home” order was put in place March 23, Bondar and her mother were able to work from home and pitch in with care.

The advice of the Clinic’s Steven Schwartz led them to a hospice program, which helped the family find additional aides, including one who speaks Russian, as well as a hospital bed for safer sleeping and a wheelchair.

The home care route isn’t the easiest but Bondar said the family feels like they have more contact and control over the quality of care.

The home care route isn’t the easiest but Bondar said the family feels like they have more contact and control over the quality of care.

“We’ll do this as long as we can manage it,” Bondar said.

Anecdotally, it is a choice more families are making: the decision to use home care or even pull family members out of nursing homes out of fear or because they miss them and can’t visit, Steven Schwartz said.

“Sometimes it’s appropriate. But sometimes, even given everything, it may be safer to have your family member there to get stronger and get the necessary care,” said Steven Schwartz. “I would really try to balance the benefit of going to a nursing home versus the risk.”

Patients with dementia or Alzehimer’s may be unsafe going back home.

Patients with dementia or Alzehimer’s may be unsafe going back home, he said, and families may need to decide if a nursing home really is the safer place.

One of the first orders Ohio put in place to prevent the spread of COVID-19 was to halt in-person visitation in more than 900 nursing and long-term care facilities. The state is not yet ready to lift those restrictions and resume visits in those settings, Gov. Mike DeWine said, but on June 8 will start allowing outdoor visits at assisted living facilities care centers for individuals with disabilities.

“We are not to nursing homes yet and I know that causes anguish for a lot of people who are watching this but we’re trying to do this so that we don’t increase the COVID inside the nursing homes or the assisted living or the immediate care facilities,” DeWine said during a May 28 briefing.

Decisions made harder

Figuring out what kind of care might be best for a patient has become more challenging, too.

Previously, nurses and social workers would visit clients in their homes to assess how they functioned – whether they could independently bathe, cook and grocery shop, said Theresa Foster, a nurse and licensed social worker at Western Reserve Area Office on Aging.

They relied on conversations with clients and family and also observations of the environment in the home and possible risks, said Foster, who runs the agency’s resource center.

Those assessments were used to determine whether a person could safely remain at home with community support or whether they needed facility-level care and what resources, whether subsidized or private, existed to pay for the services.

Now, those assessments are done by phone and can be done successfully, but it is more difficult, Foster said.

At UH’s hospitals, medical staff use a scoring system to determine the best place for a patient being discharged, said Dr. Sean Cannone, UH’s medical director for population health.

Patients are assessed on their ability to perform daily tasks and on their cognitive abilities.

“We’re trying as much as we can to get patients home if at all possible,” he said. The goal is to provide patients with resources so they can receive care in whichever setting they prefer.

**The goal is to provide patients with resources so they can receive care in whichever setting they prefer.**

“We want to respond to what people really want for their own care,” Cannone said.

The shift started before COVID-19 cases surfaced but has accelerated as more families worry about potential exposure to the virus in congregate living situations.

As technology has advanced, the capabilities of what can be done in a patient’s home has also increased. In March, UH introduced a new patient management system, Massimo SafetyNet, for remote monitoring.

When patients are released from the emergency room or from a COVID-19 floor, providers now put a bluetooth sensor on their wrist — it looks like an Apple Watch — that streams data about a patient’s vitals to a central monitoring center, said Jonathan Sague, UH’s vice president of clinical operations. That way, providers can make sure a patient is safe at home.

Douglas Beach is the chief executive officer at Western Reserve Area Office on Aging

Douglas Beach, chief executive officer at Western Reserve Area Office on Aging, has had firsthand experience weighing care decisions amid COVID-19 worries. His mother is rehabilitating in a nursing home after a six-week hospital stay related to a heart condition.

Not being able to visit her in the hospital or the facility has been hard, Beach said. He and his brother, who is a doctor, had to make all of the arrangements by phone, including figuring the best way to transport her that would have the lowest risk of exposure to the virus.

“Home and community-based services is what I do,” Beach said. Part of his mission is to advocate for the setting that allows for any person, whether they are older adults or live with a disability, to be as independent as possible .

But for his mother, a nursing facility was the right choice because she needed 24-hour care that her family could not provide at home.

Beach said nursing homes have had to deal with an unprecedented set of circumstances: a new virus, initial unknowns about transmission and populations at extremely high risk for complications.

Nursing homes will continue to play a vital role and will remain the best option for people who need more care than can be safely provided at home, Beach said.

For the more than 9,500 clients his agency serves in Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain and Medina counties, delivering care at home, with health aides, nurses and community and family supports, has proven a low risk. As of mid-May only 35 clients had tested positive for the virus, he said. That is roughly 0.3% of clients, though not all clients are tested.

Managing COVID-19

Cuyahoga County nursing homes have been paired with one of the area’s three largest hospital systems during the pandemic, Campbell said. The hospitals help the facilities both prepare for and respond to COVID-19 cases.

“The goal is when you have one patient in a nursing home with COVID is to make sure you don’t end up with 30 patients with COVID,” Campbell said.

UH developed what is being called a playbook for local nursing homes. The playbook gives facilities a plan for how to respond if there’s a COVID-19 outbreak on-site, said Sague, who works as a firefighter and medic on the weekends.

“It can be pretty startling and pretty alarming if they’re not ready for it,” Sague said.

The playbook gives guidelines on screening, triaging, determining exposure, testing and isolating those who test positive, as well as how to get personal protective equipment, increase staffing and to eventually reopen safely, Sague said.

Once a case is identified at a facility, what is known as an intercept team is dispatched — either virtually or in person — to help a nursing home handle it, he said.

Patrick Schwartz, director of strategic communications for LeadingAge Ohio, a long-term care trade association, said access to testing and safety equipment has been a consistent problem for Ohio’s nursing homes.

But in the past month or so, the state has made “a definite shift” and started prioritizing testing at nursing homes, which is helping, he said.

Patrick Schwartz said he hoped the expanded testing would enable facilities to test their entire population— of residents and staff — so they can better limit the spread of the virus.

Throughout Ohio, populations that have received mass testing — health care workers, first responders, those incarcerated and those in nursing homes — have had higher numbers of positive cases. Many people with COVID-19 are asymptomatic, so it is unknown if they have the virus until they are tested.

“Since this pandemic first reared its head, it was clear to long-term care providers that the front lines would be in long-term care,” Patrick Schwartz said. The populations at those congregate living facilities, many of whom are older and have multiple medical conditions, are among the most vulnerable for complications from COVID-19, he said.

In Cuyahoga County, and elsewhere, local health departments have deployed limited testing resources to nursing homes quickly in hopes of limiting spread in and between facilities and given guidance to homes about how to isolate patients and trace exposures between facilities to limit the spread of infection.

Cuyahoga County Health Commissioner Terry Allan said nursing homes try to guard against outbreaks but have varying degrees of resources. The assistance from the National Guard will allow more residents and staff at facilities in Northeast Ohio to be tested, he said.

Support for this project was provided by the Center for Community Solutions.

Questions to ask:

How can family members stay in touch with residents while visiting is restricted?
Does staff facilitate video visits? Is window visiting allowed?
How often will the facility provide updates on a resident’s condition?
How much COVID-19 testing is being done? Is the facility proactively testing patients or only those with symptoms?
Are private rooms available?
Do staffing ratios allow for residents to be taken outside?
Are residents currently restricted to rooms?
Are separate units and staffs used for COVID-19-positive patients and COVID-19-negative patients?
How does the facility work to limit COVID-19 complications?

Results List Table for (25 miles) 45140

Nursing home information	Overall RatingSelect to sort Ascending or Descending	Health inspectionsSelect to sort Ascending and Descending	StaffingSelect to sort Ascending and Descending	Quality measuresSelect to sort Ascending and Descending	DistanceSorted ascending, Select to sort descending
OTTERBEIN LOVELAND 6405 SMALL HOUSE CIRCLE LOVELAND, OH 45122 (513) 833-0472	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	1 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Below Average	1.4 Miles
LOVELAND HEALTH CARE CENTER 501 NORTH SECOND STREET LOVELAND, OH 45140 (513) 605-6000	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	1 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Below Average	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	2.6 Miles
FLORENTINE GARDENS 409 WARDS CORNER ROAD LOVELAND, OH 45140 (513) 630-1140	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	3.4 Miles
ARBORS AT MILFORD 5900 MEADOWCREEK DRIVE MILFORD, OH 45150 (513) 248-1655	1 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Below Average	1 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Below Average	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	1 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Below Average	4.2 Miles
THE LAURELS OF MILFORD 934 STATE ROUTE 28 MILFORD, OH 45150 (513) 831-1770	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	4.2 Miles
VENETIAN GARDENS 1650 STATE ROUTE 28 LOVELAND, OH 45140 (513) 722-0700	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	1 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Below Average	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	4.4 Miles
LODGE CARE CENTER INC THE 9370 UNION CEMETERY ROAD LOVELAND, OH 45140 (513) 677-4900	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	5.2 Miles
MEADOWBROOK CARE CENTER 8211 WELLER ROAD CINCINNATI, OH 45242 (513) 489-2444	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	6.3 Miles
OTTERBEIN AT MAINEVILLE 201 MARGE SCHOTT WAY MAINEVILLE, OH 45039 (513) 309-5650	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	6.7 Miles
TWIN LAKES 9840 MONTGOMERY ROAD CINCINNATI, OH 45242 (513) 247-1301	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	6.8 Miles
S.E.M. HAVEN HEALTH CARE CENTER 225 CLEVELAND AVENUE MILFORD, OH 45150 (513) 248-1270	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	7.0 Miles
KENWOOD TERRACE CARE CENTER 7450 KELLER ROAD CINCINNATI, OH 45243 (513) 793-2255	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	7.5 Miles
BLUE ASH CARE CENTER 4900 COOPER ROAD CINCINNATI, OH 45242 (513) 793-3362	1 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Below Average	1 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Below Average	1 out of 5 stars^12footnote Much Below Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	7.7 Miles
MONTGOMERY CARE CENTER 7777 COOPER ROAD CINCINNATI, OH 45242 (513) 793-5092	1 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Below Average	1 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Below Average	1 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Below Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	7.7 Miles
SANCTUARY POINTE NURSING & REHABILITATION CENTER 11501 HAMILTON AVENUE CINCINNATI, OH 45231 (513) 648-7000	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	7.7 Miles
COURTYARD AT SEASONS 7100 DEARWESTER DRIVE CINCINNATI, OH 45236 (513) 984-7274	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	8.1 Miles
MADEIRA HEALTH CARE CENTER 6940 STIEGLER LANE CINCINNATI, OH 45243 (513) 561-6400	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	8.5 Miles
WEXFORD PLACE INC. 3889 EAST GALBRAITH ROAD CINCINNATI, OH 45236 (513) 793-5222	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	1 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Below Average	1 out of 5 stars^12footnote Much Below Average	5 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Above Average	8.6 Miles
WEXFORD CARE CENTER 3875 EAST GALBRAITH ROAD CINCINNATI, OH 45236 (513) 793-5222	1 out of 5 stars^footnote Much Below Average	2 out of 5 stars^footnote Below Average	1 out of 5 stars^12footnote Much Below Average	4 out of 5 stars^footnote Above Average	8.6 Miles
CEDAR VILLAGE SENIOR LIVING 5467 CEDAR VILLAGE DRIVE MASON, OH 45040 (513) 754-3100	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average	3 out of 5 stars^footnote Average

Jun 14, 2020

Tag: Ohio Center for Journalism

Close ties

On call

Regulatory connections

Still ahead

What’s next

Any changes in the wake of the alleged $60 million Householder conspiracy will ultimately depend on voters, policy experts say.

‘Dragging their feet’

Shining a light on dark money

Pending bills

Ohio’s prisons have incubated two of the four largest COVID outbreaks in the nation

By Cid Standifer and Brie Zeltner at Eye on Ohio