Staff and Clients Allege SafeHouse Center is Mismanaged and a “Racist, Toxic” Environment
UPDATE 1/22/22: Independent Investigation Confirms Allegations of SafeHouse Mismanagement: Executive Director Barbara Niess-May Resigns
NOTE: SafeHouse Executive Director Barbara Niess-May has alleged that there are unspecified inaccuracies in this article. She has been invited to contact The Ann Arbor Independent and submit all corrections of fact, which the A2Indy posts publicly. On June 16, 2021, Niess-May was sent these questions and requests for follow-up comments, twice, and did not reply.
by P.D. Lesko
In February of 2021, SafeHouse Center clients, staff and interns, present and past, came forward to allege that under Executive Director Barbara Niess-May, who has been at the helm since 2002, a “toxic, racial divide” exists between management, low-paid staff, and survivors who are, according to Niess-May, primarily people “who have run out of resources” and who are “very low-income.” The shelter, say the staff and clients, is filthy and security is lax.
The other concern that arose frequently when speaking to former long-term SafeHouse staff had to do with minimally-trained client-side staff, many of whom are new graduates without licensure and with little experience.
According to Niess-May, none of the client advocates employed at SafeHouse has Michigan licensure (i.e. licensure as a social worker). Niess-May, who is white, claimed that requiring licensure or an advanced degree “could potentially limit our diversity and our ability to hire.” The average hourly pay for workers who provide client services, including advocacy, is $16-$17 per hour ($33,280-$35,360). The assumption that non-whites do not have or could not obtain the appropriate licensure is not supported by licensure data kept by the National Association of Social Workers in Michigan. In our state, approximately 40 percent of licensed mental health professionals are minorities.
Former clients, all of whom are Black, sharply criticized what they saw as systemic racism, and paternalistic policies in place at SafeHouse. In particular, the clients talked about the predominantly white management, being forced to clean the shelter, having a curfew imposed, being forbidden from having food or drinks in their rooms, and unannounced room inspections.
When asked about the potential psychological impacts of limiting, controlling and withholding food from abuse survivors and their children, Niess-May refused to comment.
In addition, former clients and staff pointed out that despite the pandemic, Niess-May got rid of the one nurse who provided health services and resources to the shelter’s residents and their children. This was done despite the presence of Suzette Bouchard-Isackson MSN, RN on the SafeHouse Board of Directors.
The allegations of systemic racism at SafeHouse are particularly concerning considering that SafeHouse Board member LaRonda Chastang is the Vice President for Diversity and Inclusion for Trinity Health. On her LinkedIn page, Chastang says she is: “a result oriented [sic] leader with a strong commitment to inclusive leadership and addressing systemic factors that contribute to inequities.”
Executive Director Niess-May earns $121,000, according to the non-profit’s most recently filed 990 tax return. The Ann Arbor Area Median Income (AMI) for a family of two is $81,000. Pay gaps, racial dissonance between management and clients, and allegedly “oppressive, punitive” treatment of survivors, have a deleterious impact on the SafeHouse shelter clients (women and children) served, so say concerned present and former employees.
The reviews of SafeHouse Center (Domestic Violence Project) on social media are mixed: “My abusive husband is a professor at University of Michigan, not a nice guy. Cut off from financial resources I temporarily stayed [at SafeHouse] for a week. I had a vile experience at this shelter.” Then there is this review: “I was privileged enough to work with Regina during a personal ordeal a few years ago. She was an excellent educator and advocate for me in navigating the confusing judicial system to help me stay safe and protected. I am so grateful that we have this resource in Washtenaw County.”
Barbara Niess-May earned her MSW and MPA from the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. She describes herself as a “lifelong learner,” and defines domestic violence as a “learned behavior,” as opposed to being a result of substance abuse. Among the honors Niess-May lists on her LinkedIn profile is “Congressional Record.” In September 2017, Rep. Debbie Dingell recognized Niess May’s 15 years of service at SafeHouse Center. Dingell remarked, “She has advocated for survivors and implemented programs to help both women and children get back on their feet by finding safe and affordable housing, employment, and childcare. Successful SafeHouse programs include a children’s playroom, Teen Voice Peer Education at local schools, and four different onsite support groups….Her tenure at SafeHouse has greatly contributed to the organization’s ability to provide important services and support to women in need.”
To say there is a need for SafeHouse Center would be putting it mildly. Approximately 1 in 4 women and nearly 1 in 10 men face sexual violence, physical violence or stalking by an intimate partner during their lifetime, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). These numbers have only gotten worse during the pandemic. More than 43 million women and 38 million men have experienced psychological aggression by an intimate partner, the CDC also has said. Ann Arbor and Washtenaw County, according to data from county policing agencies turned over to the Michigan State Police, have seen a significant increase in domestic violence and assault calls and arrests. The docket of Ann Arbor 15th District Court Judge Miriam A. Perry is available online and a look at a single morning in May showed Perry presiding over half a dozen domestic violence hearings.
In March 2021, the release of Ann Arbor Police Department public records to MLive, a resident and The Ann Arbor Independent showed that Ann Arbor City Council member Jen Eyer Irwin (D-Ward 4) and her husband Mitchell Irwin were involved in a domestic violence incident. According to the police report and 15th District Court records, Mitchell Irwin was arrested, charged with misdemeanor domestic violence and sentenced on March 22, 2021. Eyer Irwin, according to the police report, was referred to SafeHouse Center by the responding officers. In a subsequent statement about the incident to the press, Eyer Irwin referred questions about her incident to Barbara Niess-May, the Executive Director of SafeHouse. Niess-May was surprised when told what Eyer had said.
SafeHouse Center’s Annual Reports signed by Niess-May paint a picture of an organization that provides hope to survivors of sexual and domestic abuse, “100% cost free,” according to the shelter’s 2017 Annual Report. The most recent Annual Report says SafeHouse sheltered 190 women and 187 children in 2019. The shelter’s 2019 operating revenue was $2.73 million, up from $2.5 million in 2018. Annual reports do not include year-to-year comparison data, and Niess-May refused multiple requests to release year-to-year data so that a more complete picture of the scope of services could be ascertained.
While the individuals served by SafeHouse may not be asked to pay for their room and board, survivors and staff allege the services come at great expense: the dignity of those served. Several of the policies implemented by SafeHouse management, including Niess-May, paint a picture more akin to a detention center than a nurturing, safe house. Supervision of staff and interns under Niess-May’s leadership was repeatedly described as “silo-ed and punitive.”
Empowerment Through Cleaning?
“Some women clean and some women don’t and it creates a lot of unnecessary frustration,” said a former intern. “Full-time staff don’t clean. There is no cleaning service on the shelter side, but you never see the white people on the office side cleaning their own space. The Black women are not only expected to clean, but if they don’t, they can be reported by their own advocates and exited.”
“Exited” refers to a survivor who is evicted from the shelter.
A former intern alleged that the police had to be called to break up a knife fight between two clients that erupted over neglected cleaning duties. Police records indicate officers were, indeed, dispatched to SafeHouse on the date in question. No one was charged as a result of the altercation.
SafeHouse does not permit access to the shelter side of the facility to anyone except staff and residents. Niess-May explained that tours would impact the privacy of the residents. “It’s someone’s home,” she said.
When it was pointed out that only clients who are in desperate need of services, and people in the employ of Niess-May are permitted to see the state of the shelter and its facilities, Niess-May refused to comment.
Sexual assault and domestic violence shelters in Oakland, Wayne and Macomb counties all regularly offer tours of their facilities.
One former staff member, a Black woman who provided services at SafeHouse for several years, brought up the pictures of the interior of SafeHouse posted online. According to SafeHouse staff former and present, the room, pictured below on SafeHouse Center’s social media, doesn’t exist in the facility. Posting old photos on social media is hardly a crime, but it’s indicative of a lack of care on the part of management that critics allege extends to the upkeep of the facility, and the treatment of the survivors, primarily people of color. A staff member explained that social media photos from SafeHouse are from the side of the shelter where management staff work, not the client side.
Empowerment or Exploitation?
Barbara Niess-May spoke at length about the importance of “empowering” survivors of domestic and sexual abuse. What that empowerment looks like has prompted questions about racism from her own staff. Former staffers say the policies related to the “empowerment” of survivors suggest a lack of understanding of the psychological impacts of abuse. Survivors of domestic and sexual abuse often suffer from depression and PTSD. As a result, they can have difficulties caring for themselves and their children.
At SafeHouse, the survivors, mostly Black women, according to Niess-May (though she says she does not collect demographic data), are “empowered” as soon as they arrive, and assigned cleaning chores. Survivors who don’t clean, or who don’t clean adequately, may be given “chore violation warnings” by their own SafeHouse advocates. If the clients don’t complete their cleaning of the shelter, they are given a warning. The second time a cleaning “infraction” occurs, the survivor must meet with an advocate. According to SafeHouse staff, a victim of sexual and/or domestic violence who gets three warnings related to their cleaning of the shelter may be “exited.”
In interviews, the Executive Directors of shelters in three Michigan counties expressed dismay that survivors of sexual and/or domestic abuse were, in essence, being used as free laborers to clean the Safehouse shelter. Executive Directors of other shelters explained that each employs cleaning services. At those shelters, survivors are never required to clean the facilities and are never threatened with eviction if they don’t or can’t clean. In one shelter, survivors may be asked to “lend a hand” to staff who clean, but there are not penalties for refusing to do so. Likewise, the three shelter directors were horrified that victims of domestic and/or sexual violence could be “exited” for not cleaning, or for cleaning inadequately.
SafeHouse staff confirmed that the side of the SafeHouse Center building that houses the management offices is cleaned regularly by a cleaning service. The side of the building where the predominantly white managerial staff work was described as “spotless” and “meticulously maintained.”
The entrance of the building where management staff enter is neat and tidy, well-landscaped. The entrance of the building on the shelter side is decorated with an abandoned tire, weeds and trash. Christy Summers, Principal Landscape Architect at Beckett & Raeder, Inc., is a member of the SafeHouse Board of Directors.
SafeHouse Center staffers, concerned about the filthy conditions of the shelter side of SafeHouse Center, pointed the finger at Niess-May and the Board of Directors.
“She doesn’t visit the client side to solicit feedback,” said one staffer. “Board members never visit. There is no way to give feedback anonymously to management.” Other shelter officials said they use suggestion boxes to regularly solicit anonymous feedback from staff and clients.
The photos, below, of the client side of the SafeHouse shelter were provided to The Ann Arbor Independent by a concerned former employee. The photos show peeling paint, filthy, broken, bathroom fixtures, dirty bathrooms and sinks in client bedrooms. The shelter has a limited number of rooms for clients, and according to staff, two of the rooms are used for storage. This means that abused women, children and men are turned away because of a lack of available space.
County Money for COVID-19 Cleaning
Public records show that in 2020, SafeHouse Center was given an additional $96,000 from Washtenaw County in order to implement protocols and improvements in the shelter related to checking any spread of COVID-19. Nonetheless, air ducts on the client side of the shelter remained filthy and moldy. Outside cleaning services were not used. “Empowered” Safehouse shelter domestic and sexual abuse survivors were expected to clean the shelter during the height of the pandemic.
Rotting Food
SafeHouse gets the bulk of food made available to survivors and their children from Food Gatherers. According to information provided by Food Gatherers’ Executive Director Eileen Spring, in 2020 SafeHouse received a little under $9,000 worth of donated food, the equivalent of 4,500 meals. Food Gatherers makes weekly deliveries to the shelter.
Niess-May said that while her $2.7 million budget, “can’t buy McDonald’s” for clients, upon request, her facility does purchase some fresh food. A former staff member described shelter staff being invited by management to take items donated by Food Gatherers and meant to feed the survivors and their children.
Niess-May defended her use of Food Gatherers by pointing out that SafeHouse clients are “homeless.” The Executive Directors of other shelters in Michigan said survivors in their facilities are given gift cards to purchase the food items of their choice, including fast food, if they so choose. Those shelters also budget for fresh, as opposed to food-banked, food.
Survivors who’ve stayed at SafeHouse described kitchen cupboards with food left to rot, and filthy refrigerators. Their assertions were confirmed by staff. A staffer currently employed described the kitchen cupboards and main refrigerator as “disgusting, with rotting, and sometimes out-of-date food.”
One former staff member pointed out that thanks to a State audit of SafeHouse in early 2021, two of the shelter’s four refrigerators were replaced. However, as with the rest of the client side of the shelter, staff doesn’t clean the refrigerators, or the kitchen. Survivors are expected to do that. At SafeHouse, the kitchen is closed several hours during the afternoon. Survivors found with food or drinks in their rooms to feed themselves or their children can be written up, or even “exited.”
Safety Concerns
According to multiple SafeHouse staff, in 2020 a Black client who was upset at her treatment by shelter staff, and by rules and policies she alleged were racist, left the shelter and returned home. Her partner shot and killed her. The SafeHouse advocate assigned to oversee the woman’s care was fired, but the shelter’s allegedly racist, punitive, rules and policies were not changed.
According to reporting in the New York Times, “Homicides by intimate partners are increasing, driven primarily by gun violence after almost four decades of decline, according to a recent study looking at gender and homicide.”
James Alan Fox is a criminologist and professor of criminal justice at Northeastern University. He authored a 2019 study on intimate partner violence. Fox says, “The number of victims of intimate partner violence rose to 2,237 in 2017, a 19 percent increase from the 1,875 killed in 2014. The majority of the victims in 2017 were women, a total of 1,527.”
Over all, gun-related domestic killings increased by 26 percent from 2010 to 2017, which Dr. Fox said was cause for alarm. In 2017, 926 of the 1,527 women murdered by partners were killed with guns. In 2014, it was 752 of 1,321 women. The Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization of 2021-2022 was introduced into Congress in March of 2021 and has not yet passed. Ann Arbor’s U.S. Rep. Debbie Dingell was instrumental in the expansion of the Violence Against Women Act in 2019 to include gun control legislation.
Sheriff Jerry Clayton sits on the Board of SafeHouse as does Eddie L. Washington, the Executive Director of the Department of Public Safety and Security at the University of Michigan. Having the County Sheriff and the Head of the Department of Public Safety and Security at a major public university participate in SafeHouse Center Board oversight might lead one to conclude safety at the facility is excellent. Nothing would be further from the truth.
SafeHouse staff (present and past) and interns expressed many of the same safety concerns. For starters, they all pointed to the fact that the shelter is not protected by a video security system. There is a single camera, a fake, so say the staff and interns, which is installed above the door leading into the client side of the shelter.
“The clients are led to believe the camera records the parking area and the entrance. It doesn’t record anything. It’s a joke among the staff,” said a current employee. “Ain’t nobody recording nothin’.” One former staffer allegedly offered to provide a security camera at her own expense, but her direct supervisor refused the offer.
Staffers at sexual assault and domestic violence shelters in Wayne, Oakland and Macomb counties all described robust security systems, including video security and archived footage.
The Executive Director of a shelter in Oakland County explained how her shelter’s comprehensive security camera system worked and how security camera footage was maintained.
Along with the “broken, fake” security camera, there are other serious safety concerns. Via email, a former staffer pointed out that there is “no lighting around [the] perimeter of building. Ground floor windows facing outside [were] unlocked, for weeks, if not months, in an empty room reserved for [COVID] quarantine.” Multiple staffers mentioned a ground floor window in the shelter that is broken, and kept closed with duct tape.
The Root of the Problem
Staff present and former point to the composition of the SafeHouse Board, and the Board members’ “hands-off” supervision of Niess-May as a significant part of the dysfunction and alleged racism suffered by those who seek out shelter and services.
There is no one on the SafeHouse Board who is a physician with an expertise in psychiatry or pediatrics. The closest to a doctor on the Board is the COO of Huron Valley Radiology; he holds a Master’s in Human Resources Development.
Two members of the SafeHouse Board work for Google. One is a sales manager and the other is an account executive. One of the Google employees has an undergraduate degree in French and the other, a white man, has an undergraduate degree in English. Another member of the Board, a white woman, is a customer service representative at an insurance company who attended Michigan State for one year between 1972-1973. On the other side of ledger is a former United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, John Huber–Head of Emerson School, and Washtenaw County Executive Gregory Dill.
“No one is looking past the front door, literally and figuratively,” said a former SafeHouse client who spent three weeks at the shelter.
A former staff member added: “Too many of these inexperienced, low-paid people don’t know what they’re doing, and the people who should be supervising Barbara have no idea what Barbara is doing. It’s negligent and it’s happening because SafeHouse serves poor, Black people.”
[…] response to The Ann Arbor Independent’s July 31, 2021 article outlining allegations of mismanagement, dangerous and filthy conditions at SafeHouse Center, […]
[…] Barbara Niess-May on leave while an independent investigation is conducted into a series of allegations made in July and August 2021 by nearly 20 individuals, including women housed at SafeHouse Center, staff and […]
[…] July 31, 2021, The Ann Arbor Independent published an article in which a dozen former and current SafeHouse Center staff, residents and interns raised serous […]
Hello
The safe house is not safe at all, staff Meggan is very racist, she picks who can do certain things, Caucasians get to get away with a lot of things while blacks get to do nothing, Caucasians get away with things they’re not supposed to , but she will tell the blacks to go to the room disrespectfully, and do not come out anymore. They need to make up a rule for the blacks and rules for the whites and named thing blacks and whites like back in the day. I love people but white people like her need tobe held accountable for their/actions before she really run into someone that’s not going to put up with her bull, she looks at people like she has a problem with then when they did nothing wrong like she did me. If I was still young with out kids to care for things would have been different for her. SHE NEEDS TO FIND A NEW JOB OR CHANGE HER ACTIONS…. THEY ALSO PUT FOLKS OUT WITH NO WHERE TO GO, AND NOT CARING WHERD THEY GO….They have us cleaning after others when we get there, where is our time to heal? One lady(white lady) leave her child all the time to go out for a smoke or after she comes in for smoking crack and she don’t get talked to or anything, I left out to take the trash out and left me kids at the front door to wait on me, And they had the nerve to tell me I need to watch my kids closely 😒 this lady( Caucasian) left her disabled child on the couch oh, and she fell off, no one said anything to her. Some of the Caucasian office staff are very mean. Now that I sent her in think all the nice caucasian, and Black works left 🤫 what was the real reason they left? Because they knew what was going on behind them doors that we didn’t see first be we seen it now, and I needs to be FIXED ASAP…. BEFORE IT CANT BE FIXED, AND THERE WILL BE MORE ISSUES.
I would suggest you do some digging into the practices of SOS and other shelters too. There’s much to be said.
This article is a 1000x accurate. Barbara is very aware of how staff are treated because staff have brought it up in exit interviews with her, advocate forums, staff satisfaction surveys, professional development meetings, etc.. There have been actual large scale staff meetings where ALL OF THIS has been brought up just to be dismissed a month or two later.
The way staff are treated by upper management and supervisors at SHC exactly mirrors the actual power and control wheel.
1) Using intimidation: You watch your coworkers being treated terribly, written up for petty things, being fired – it makes you pretty afraid to come to work. If you have an issue with your supervisor, there is no safe way to address it because you are required to go through your supervisor if you want to talk to upper management. Staff have requested the formation of an actual human resources department or a better policy written but that was always refused.
2) Emotional abuse: There is zero psychological safety for staff at SHC which goes with the intimidation and isolation.
3) Isolation: SHC staff are not allowed to interact with other organizations on their own for the betterment of SHC or it’s clients. They are not allowed to attend board meetings on their own. Every single thing you do has to go through your supervisor first. Often staff do not feel supported or even acknowledged by the board.
4) Minimizing, denying and blaming: Exactly what Barbara did in her response. Classic minimizing, denying and blaming. If you take nothing else from all of this, please take this point with you.
5) Using children: There is no maternity leave policy for advocates. If you are staff with children, forget feeling supported.
6) Male privilege: pretty much how the place is run, especially shelter side – using clients as servants, defining roles, “master of the castle” mentality. SHC staff are not allowed to have a say in anything. The female staff are literally treated like “little girls” who should be seen and not heard.
7) Economic Abuse: Hourly rate of pay was $13 an hour and staff were told that it was comparable to all of the other DV shelters in surrounding counties or it was a “grant restriction”, all of which are lies. It went up to over $16 an hour but that is still not comparable to other DV agencies and it doesn’t offset the required overnight on-call hours, the late nights, the abuse you receive at the hands of SHC, the lack of safety in and around the building.
8) Coercion and threats: If you do anything, say anything, advocate for you or your fellow staff, disagree with a supervisor, disagree with upper management – you will get written up and/or fired. SHC deliberately creates means for you to fail. For example, the complicated, multiple page, Excel timesheets that they refused to change for the longest time. If you made a mistake you were written up and then required to have a meeting with Barbara.
Yes, Barbara pulled SHC out of a bad place many years ago but that time has long passed. It is time for SHC to bring in new leadership who are innovative and willing to make SHC what it should be – a center of excellence for the support of DV and SA survivors and an employer of choice for social service workers.
I also agree that there are many nonprofits across Washtenaw County that should be brought to light for the horrible way that they treat their employees and clients and the racist and punitive nature of many of their directors/presidents. To add to it, a stagnant and uninvolved board culture in many of our nonprofits have perpetuated this issue.
It should also be noted that the coordinated funding model that Washtenaw County uses is not helping this widespread issue. It’s the same bad nonprofits who get money year after year with zero accountability to how they treat staff and clients.
Thank you very much for your comment.
For those who don’t know, here is a link to a diagram of the Power and Control Wheel: http://www.ncdsv.org/images/PowerControlwheelNOSHADING.pdf. It’s from the National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence.
You are absolutely correct! There is “chain of command” that is militaristic and the OPPOSITE of what I expected working there for a self-proclaimed “feminist” organization. The clients/survivors are all hoping desperately to get a Housing Voucher to get back on their feet. They realize pretty quickly how apathetic their advocates are, under the lack of support and constant threatening, diminishing behavior from supervisors under Barbara’s example. Not only are they afraid to get exited and become immediately homeless with the looming possibility their abuser could find and hurt them (perhaps fatally), they won’t complain because they are already flooded with physical, emotional, psychological pain, often busy trying to comfort and parent traumatized children. They have a practically brand-new van that was donated sitting in the parking lot, while survivors have to schlep up to Washtenaw to catch an infrequent bus in the dead of winter to go to appointments. First Step and Turning Point both take women to their appointments, and will shop for them with money/food cards provided to them. Turning Point has one healthy home-cooked meal provided for them. First Step’s rooms each has a kitchenette and a fridge inside them. There is so much more that makes SafeHouse feel like a prison, and the wardens are “feminists” supervisors who treat survivors like errant children and staff like their incompetent older siblings. Barbara and other supervisors ask staff to spy on each other and report back! More people need to speak out. It needs to be gutted from the inside out.
1000000% agree. I’ve worked at Catholic Social Services of Washtenaw County and it was extremely toxic, racist and mismanaged. The CEO drives her BMW to work everyday where staff are paid barely livable wages. As a result of the toxic culture, no competent staff can be retained and the ones left over are inexperienced, overworked, underpaid, resentful and just trying to keep their heads above water while doing extremely stressful and sometimes dangerous jobs. I don’t care who you are, no one can provide competent services to clients when they’re struggling to survive themselves.
This excellent article makes a strong case for change at SafeHouse Center, raising several issues needing immediate attention, such as how the facility is cleaned on a daily basis and how food and other assistance is provided to its clients. Better racial sensitivity is a must.
Positive change at SafeHouse can start with changes to the existing Board of Directors, including its leadership, its composition and how it approaches its job. Here is a full listing of the existing Board of Directors at SafeHouse from the SafeHouse website:
https://www.safehousecenter.org/…/safehouse-board-of…/
Lots of names here, including many serious people who hold major leadership roles in our community, or are retired from such roles. Do they have reactions to this article? It certainly calls their attentiveness, credibility and competence as a board into question, so out of fairness and a desire to get all the facts, it would be good to hear from them. Maybe this article will prompt further reporting from the Ann Arbor Observer, WEMU, Michigan Radio, M-live, and other local media.
I looked at one name of a Board member, and spotted an inaccuracy. Barbara McQuade is not a “Former U.S. Attorney General” as the listing states. According to a box that appears on Google when searching her name, she is “an American lawyer who served as the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan from 2010 to 2017.” That said, US Attorneys like her are very high powered individuals who know how to get things done. They are not fluffy. Not to pick on her at all, I just looked her up because I recognized her name, but what does she do on the Board of Directors of SafeHouse, I wonder?
In general, the long listing of names of those who serve on the Board of Directors of SafeHouse makes me wonder, how much engagement do they have on a day to day basis with SafeHouse as a physical entity and provider of healthcare and public safety services? Worst case scenario, is being on this Board simply something they list on their resumes?
Tara Mahoney is the President of the Board of Directors. I don’t see her name or that of her fellow officers in the article. Was she contacted before the publication of this article that casts her, by implication, in a seriously bad light?
The article describes a “hands off” attitude of the Board in overseeing how the Executive Director does her job, and that looks questionable. Someone needs to be minding the store, and that person’s work needs to be supervised by the Board. A more activist Board, or a subcommittee of it devoted to its day to day operations, would have noticed the dirty airducts and gotten them cleaned, pronto.
Does this Board do an annual review of the Executive Director’s work, in which her job performance is assessed in detail? Do members of the Board spend much time visiting the facility and talking to clients about it?
Suggestions, including some that are drawn from the article:
1. There needs to be a formal investigation by an entity able to periodically assess an institution like SafeHouse credibly, fairly and thoroughly, and report on its operations in detail. Systematically, the article makes me wonder if facilities like SafeHouse are regulated and accredited like hospitals are. If not, why not? Related question: Who audits SafeHouse and its finances?
2. As the article suggests, the Board of Directors of SafeHouse needs to include management level professionals from the field of healthcare, as well as an activist group of social workers, mental health professionals and regular doctors, with credentials, experience, and savvy. People whose professional experience helps them formulate the right questions and get answers.
Ann Arbor and Washtenaw County has a wealth of such people to draw on, and the Board needs to include some. Financial experts should be included who can help chart out a path for positive change.
Yet the Board *does* include high-powered individuals with management experience. So fixing the evident flaws at SafeHouse is partly a question of getting more out of the Board, perhaps by freshening it up with new members and possibly, new leadership.
3. The Executive Director has been in her job for almost twenty years. That’s a long time. Perhaps a new executive director should be found to preside over the transformation of SafeHouse.
4. How SafeHouse is staffed needs attention. The basic patterns of staffing and day to day functioning at SafeHouse should be changed over time to include – or eventually, wholly consist of – licensed healthcare and social work professionals. A new Executive Director can implement these changes, with support from the Board.
That SafeHouse exists at all is good. But its current structural flaws as shown in this report are concerning. With certain changes made, it can be a place Washtenaw County can be *knowledgeably* proud of.
Craig Lounsbury it’s very true. I spent two years there as Director of Development. I was recruited and left a job at the Detroit Historical Society. I had just started looking for jobs closer to home and had lots of opportunities that where coming my way as my team and I had just closed a 20.1 million dollar campaign. I personally was gaslit and emotionally manipulated by leadership. So much so that after about 15 years in fundraising I left the industry and spent a year in therapy trying to recover. Comments ranging from questioning my activity on Facebook over NOTHING (specifically when I liked Sabra Briere for mayor) I was questioned on my second day there about my choices. Mind you, I literally liked EVERY mayoral candidate’s campaign in EVERY race in the county because I thought I should stay in the loop on events to network in the community. I live in Superior Township so I don’t vote for mayoral candidates at all, ever. Long story short this is the TIP of the iceberg. Other incidents include (but are NO WAY limited to) a discussion during the hiring process about the clothing I wore (a navy dress that went slightly below my knees and matching blazer, navy pumps and nude hosiery with a slight pattern to it- super professional) and yet I heard later there was a conversation about my choices. I reported a few of the incidents to a few board members however they didn’t feel they could do anything. I’ve never spoken publicly about any of this only a few close friends and family members know. I realize there are two sides to every story, and I am not a perfect person but in my entire employment history I have never had the issues I had at SHC. And no I was not a source for this article. I saw it last night when it was posted. I also had it sent to me by someone who knows about my experience. While I think the article is mainly true I am confused why Jen Eyer’s situation was mentioned. It didn’t seem relevant to the article and was yet another opportunity for the author to drag Eyer into the mud, which is unfortunate because it imo muddies the waters of a very important topic how staff and survivors are treated.
Kate Conti not to mention how they maliciously attacked your future state benefits causing you to successfully take your case all the way to the Michigan Court of Appeals. I should mention that SHC had to pay costs.
Craig Lounsbury I see the author is forthright to a degree of candor that some people don’t like or even trust. Investigative reporting is described as being one of the hardest jobs of a reporter – it demands a lot of time and effort and enables setting right injustices.
https://www.media.ba/…/ist…/what-investigative-reporting
I share a quote from Michigan Congressional Rep, Debbie Dingell that I believe applies: “while someone can has strong feelings that don’t mesh with mine, we talk. We listened to each other…..we didn’t let the anger we both felt win. We respected each other’s opinions and we need more of that”. Hopefully this report will bring improvements for clients of Safehouse.
Craig Lounsbury here are some reviews on safe house from indeed: https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Safehouse-Center/reviews
I find this very troubling.
Kate Conti: The lack of investigative reporting in our county is truly a problem. Part of my motivation for forming this Facebook Group is that I have brought whistleblower complaints of others to local media and then they have chosen not to publish these true stories of abuse laid at their feet. There are many facts that you will only hear here and no where else. For example:
The many legitimate reasons why Howard Lazarus was fired:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/178850790201740/permalink/190790019007817/
The over $200 million of wasteful capital projects pursued by the City of Ann Arbor, including a pending $50 million solar power boondoggle:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/178850790201740/permalink/280179486735536/
Kate Conti: At one point in my career several decades ago, I helped the black ministers in Washtenaw County form a non-profit and I served on their board as a key advisor. If you listen to them, they will tell you that the non-profits in Ann Arbor are all run by white people who fail to do much to help their clients, who are mostly black people, and every year solicit for more money despite their lack of true accomplishment at doing anything. The ministers are then actually doing much effective work, and given no resources other than what they can raise from their church members.
Whether or not this is still true, I don’t know, having left their board many years ago, however at the time, based on the stories they told me, it appeared to be very true.
Craig Lounsbury While I share your sense of this author’s strong tendency to political obsessiveness, which is borne out – as another commenter points out – with regard to Jen Strayer Eyer’s career path and prospects, this article – if supported by other investigative reporting – is quite a coup and an important moment for the publication involved. A fine article is how reputations are made, and rightly so.
Jeff Clevenger I so so so agree with you. I have bemoaned the lack of media in our community that does any meaningful investigative reporting, because my situation at SHC is not unique. I have many friends that have since left the industry because he’s abusive tactics that go on pretty much universally in nonprofits in Washtenaw County. It’s horrible. A friend of mine and I have discussed writing a book. While the author does have a history, particularly as it relates to Jen Eyer she was brave enough to publish this, and in my experience there aren’t covering when the truth is unpleasant.
Craig Lounsbury: This morning I was contacted privately by a former employee, a person I know, who confirmed the truth of what was written in the article, but would like to stay anonymous.
I also had previously heard from a former client, a survivor of abuse, about an unpleasant experience that she had had interacting with them.
When I read an article like this my first thought is “I wonder how true it is?”
Anymore I don’t trust any news story that doesn’t have more than one independent source corroborating. And I don’t mean news source 2 parroting news source 1.
I mean 2 seperate news sources that came to a similar conclusion all on their own.
Craig Lounsbury, Pat is many things to many people. Her research and journalistic skills, in my experience and humble opinion, beyond reproach.
And I too have received confirmation by those directly affected by the events noted here.
Yes, the Executive Director has made it clear that she prefers answering questions in a semi-secretive fashion, rather than defend herself and the leadership at SafeHouse in an open and transparent way.
I don’t trust this dynamic. And ultimately, if the public cannot trust the leadership at SafeHouse when serious charges are on the table, my hunch is, it is SafeHouse – or at least its current leadership – that will suffer.
Barbara Niess May Thank you for your point of view. Do you have a report from the most recent Quality Assurance Review by the Michigan Department of Health & Human Services you can share?
Hi Barbara Niess May I am not passing any judgments, I am only at a point of asking questions to better understand. Can you or someone from Safehouse explain more about work/chores/cleaning requirements and how they relate to the program goals and philosophy?
I did review your ratings at https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm… along with executive compensation for similarly sized nonprofits in Washtenaw County and your compensation appears to be around the median for the size of the budget, perhaps a bit high as a % of total budget but not an extreme outlier.
I also note that Dawn Fawn which also serves a very vulnerable population has chores -including cleaning and cooking – built into the program, and people can be dismissed for non compliance), so I didn’t think that simply requiring chores is by itself a dark mark on your institution, absent more information about how it ties to core program goals. Thank you.
Laura Shue its an odd comparison re required chores between Dawn Farms, a substance and drug abuse counseling center and Safe House, ostensibly a shelter for victims of domestic violence.
The question of the therapeutic value of such for one or the other is however quite apt.
Barbara Niess May
Thanks for all you do and have done for those experiencing assault and abuse! Here are my questions:
[1] Do you or the Board intend to respond to the specific allegations in the article in a public way?
[Note: Your reply suggests the Mich Dept of Health and Human Services audit is a complete answer to the allegations made here. That seems highly implausible and/wrong if the MDHHS inspectors were not aware of the issues raised here at the time of their exam /inspection.]
[2] Are you making that MDHHS exam / audit public?
[3] Did you or the Board bring each issue raised here to the MDHHS examiners’ attention? If not, why not?
[4] How could it be true that the MDHHS exam or audit takes into account conditions that preceded or came after the state review? [That just makes no sense, at least it does not make sense if the state examiners were not aware of these allegations, they you cannot you rely on their outstanding rating as an answer to the issues and problems raised in this article, right?]
[5] Are you or the Board willing to submit these allegations to the MDHHS inspectors and ask them to pass on conditions or allegations that they were not aware of?
[5] What about the lack of security cameras?
[6] Would SafeHouse agree to an outside independent review and inspection that confidentially accepts reports and complaints — as well as to consider these issues from the article and those that their review brings to light? If not, why not?
Shiao Wong Sadly, your observation on the deficiency of the answer to the story by the Exec Director is accurate. Will the Board be more forthcoming? One can only hope.
As noted above, I will answer any questions via email–barbaran@safehousecenter.org.
This weekend, I was alerted to a lengthy post on the Ann Arbor Independent blog, listing several troubling and untrue allegations about SafeHouse Center. I admit it was painful to read and it is understandable why many in the community have already raised questions about how we fulfill our mission.
We are always willing to accept constructive feedback from inside or outside the organization. The work we do poses constant challenges and, because of its significance, should frequently evolve to best meet the needs of the survivors of sexual assault and domestic violence.
However, in this case, the unverified misinformation provided by a former employee has the potential to impede our ability to serve more than 5,000 survivors this year. Like so many of us who work at SafeHouse, who have dedicated our lives to this work because of a personal connection to our mission, the false allegations in this article are hurtful to me. That is why I would like you to understand some facts.
First, in March of this year, just a few months ago, SafeHouse was the subject of a regular Quality Assurance Review by the Michigan Department of Health & Human Services. We are required to meet 150 strict standards and we received an “outstanding” rating in each of them. If any of the allegations about our facilities was true, we would not have been able to successfully pass that rigorous examination. Yes, we must perform routine maintenance on our facility. But we do not let that get in the way of service to our survivors, as state regulators agree.
Additionally, our financials must annually pass a thorough, IRS-mandated financial audit, performed by professionals from CPAs at Yeo & Yeo, P.C. Once again, in the past year, our audit satisfactorily completed all required review without any concerns from the outside auditors.
Importantly, as an organization committed to serving members of our community of all races and genders, we firmly believe, at all levels of our organization, in the importance of diversity and inclusion in every respect and we are committed to continued progress with our workforce and in other areas to reach our goals. Simply put, SafeHouse Center seeks to be anti-racist. The story in the blog that suggests otherwise is not true.
The blog includes photos and names of our Board of Directors, but did not interview any of them. I want to make sure our community understands the quality and dedication of this diverse group of volunteer leaders who provide strong governance and accountability for our organization, which our Board helped to revive nearly 20 years ago.
I ask members of our community to please not take an unconfirmed, anonymous account as the truth. Instead, if you have questions or concerns, please address them to me directly via barbaran@safehouscenter.org or 734-973-0242, ext. 203.
Thank you for considering SafeHouse’s point of view, as we continue to value, participate in and serve this community.
We are always willing to accept constructive feedback?
“A” former employee?
What about the comments by OTHER former employees and clients here, in the report and on other platforms?
A lovely dismissive response, full of references to administrative facts and figures.
None of which actually touch what was reported nor offer the hint of investigating the allegations or possibility of improvements where able.
Some needed improvements which are blatant to any casual observer regardless of the circumstances of their occurrence.
Sad
Some people have commented that while this was a well written investigative article it would’ve been better if the author had not discussed in the article an incident that involved Safe House and a sitting Council Member. However, my reading of the article was that in the course of doing the investigative research for this article a conflict of interest was uncovered, with an elected official taking personal advantage out of how our local government funds are being spent, and that fact itself was newsworthy.
The City of Ann Arbor along with Washtenaw County give significant annual funding to Safe House. When a current sitting Councilwoman‘s husband was arrested on domestic violence charges and this same investigative reporter uncovered the information, just days before the record of arrest was permanently sealed, the City Council Member directed a reporter at MLive who did a follow-up story to contact Barbara Niess May,
the Executive Director at Safe House. I’m not aware of other cases where a victim of domestic violence has refused to comment to a newspaper reporter, but instead directs the media to talk to a nonprofit, but surely in this case the Councilwoman involved would have known that there was a conflict of interest in making that suggestion, since Safe House receives substantial annual funding from both the City and County where she has served. In this case the Executive Director of Safe House was blameless and was herself being victimized. The full truth of what happened, that the Executive Director was not consulted before her name was given to the media, was only uncovered during the dialogue between the investigative reporter and the Executive Director while she was working on this story. The fact that this was all uncovered by an investigative reporter is a great example of the need for investigative reporting to achieve greater transparency in local government.
following
Thank you for having the courage to expose the tip of the iceberg that is the dysfunctional agency ironically calling itself “SafeHouse Center.” There are many areas of the organization: crisis response, education, volunteer coordination, counseling, support group therapy etc. All of these are under the ultimate control and direction of Barbara Niess-May. I will share my experience with the Shelter side. Everything in the article is factual; in addition, there are many more things that were resolved during my time there through both my insistence and initiative and the impetus for their inspection that occurred BY ZOOM because of Covid. The mad scramble to replace broken, filthy refrigerators and scrub years of crusted-on food of baby high chairs, paint, etc was tragic to witness. The metaphor of an immaculate Admin side where donors come and the locked Shelter side is a reflection of society’s indifference to addressing root problems behind domestic violence. The fact that the Executive Director willfully ignores staff and client’s needs is criminal. Her leadership style in fact mimics the power/control dynamics staff and volunteers are educated on in training, and trickles down through every supervisor under her. She is both venerated and feared. Working there was absolutely the most toxic, stressful experience of my professional life. Women with black eyes and strangulation damage, bruised kidneys, bite marks, and all manner of psychological, financial, emotional, and sexual abuse would be “lucky” enough to be promised 35 day stay at the shelter only to stare at us wide-eyed and questioning when subjected to hostile or indifferent staff and filthy conditions. I was wracked with guilt even as I pushed for change and scrubbed black meat juice from the refrigerators. In the end, I went the way of so many before me, quitting and trying to wrap my head around the gaslighting, abusive leadership. So many employees confided to me how stressful it was to be there, how they tried for years to make suggestions, and were “rewarded” by Barbara refusing to allow them to have employee satisfaction surveys any more, and supportive forums for staff cancelled. I could write so much more. Barbara’s reaction to this article on social media is her classic gaslighting—I have done so much for SHC, I’m a survivor too, these are lies, call me/email me, I can explain, the Board is wonderful and shouldn’t be attacked, the State says we are outstanding…deflect, deny, point the finger. Thank you Ann Arbor Independent for your bravery!
Thank you for writing this. There are so many non-profits in Washtenaw county who have really questionable policies and racist, punitive management staff.
Please look into Catholic Social Services of Washtenaw next!
Melanie, Thanks for your comment. If you have specific information about CSS, please email editor@a2independent.com.
And FOOD GATHERERS after that. Oh how these giants gon’ fall.
Very disturbing and worrying article.
Wow, particularly damning when compared with other county’s domestic violence services.
Very sad to hear this. Many years ago, their services and temporary housing was stated to be postive appreciated by a few of our employees as a safe haven from an abusive spouse or boyfriend. I too have donated to Safe House.
Dianne Brainard I hope that they earned such laurels and have of late simply rested on them.
Not that it was a sham and another one of those orgs that fleece the compassionate for little good works and much personal gain. Be it financial or personal.
This makes me sick. I have trusted Safehouse for decades. Donated much of my professional library a few years back. Former student got her life back on track starting with a professional job there. Ugh
Wow – sounds terrible. The clients (most with children) who came there for help are expected to clean? And other clients can turn them in? No social workers or nurses on staff? Who are the client advocates- any training given? What services are being provided? And definitely get a cleaning team.
Ew.
Now that’s not good
I have very little direct experience with Safehouse other than helping make and install their sign many years ago, and one visit for a political event where I had a very informative conversation with the development director who I knew from another company. One thing she told me that stuck in my mind, and is true, is that Safehouse serves many clients (is that the right word?) on a relatively small budget. I was hoping to get more of our coordinated funding sent their way as the numbers backed up her statement. Compared to other non-profit social service agencies, Safehouse did make their public dollars go far. This article suggests some of the ways this happened may not have been the best ways.
Not long ago I had a woman approach me with concerns over the conditions out there and she showed me some pictures that were pretty bad – beyond what was in the article. I passed on her concerns anonymously to management at Safehouse. Hopefully this article will precipitate the changes needed to allow them to continue to serve a very real need in our community, in a way that is in keeping with community expectations.
Barbara Niess May, I would be interested in hearing your response to these factual reports of a broken security camera, racism and filthy conditions? Sounds like you have some major changes that need to be made asap.
Eric Sturgis
The most chilling parts of the story: (1) leadership of the shelter gets their offices cleaned by a cleaning service, but the resident side has no support from such services, (2) residents suffering trauma are dealt with so punitively for not doing cleaning that others at other shelters are not asked to do, (3) the leadership of the shelter threatens the residents with expulsion if they do not do chores, (4) one resident faced with expulsion threats left the shelter rather than stay and be harassed and was shot by her husband who had been threatening her, (5) the Exec Director who is paid $121,000 has not paid for a simple security camera out of a $2 million + budget.
Patrick Levine Rose Yep, I am curious why she still has a job?
And I was curious regarding something in the article. If you were too…
https://www.newsbreak.com/…/i-told-her-he-would-kill…
How many more were affected this way?