Is the Board of Appeals a neutral forum?

If you have had a found finding of neglect, abuse or financial exploitation of a vulnerable adult or child, you might have come across DSHS’ Board of Appeals. Likewise, if you are regulated by Residential Care Services you or the DSHS might have appealed a matter to the BOA.if you don’t know, the Board of Appeals (“BOA”) is the in-house appellate body for DSHS. The loser in any proceeding may appeal to the BOA to reverse the offending decision. That sounds good doesn’t it? A body that can effectively and inexpensively review decisions of administrative law judges. However, a recent review of its decisions suggests that it is something else. In fact, it is quite the reverse – it appears to be a tool of the DSHS to reverse unfavorable decisions it has experienced. If you are the respondent – the citizen or licensee – it is a barrier to justice.An analysis of BOA decisions found the following astounding pattern of decisions. In 2015 the BOA found for the DSHS eighty six (86) percent of the time. In 2016 the BOA found for the DSHS eighty one (81) percent of the time. And in 2017 the BOA found for the DSHS eighty (80) percent of the time. How can this be explained? I don’t know how DSHS would explain it, but I know how I do. The findings at Administrative proceedings conducted by most departments are reversible by the Director of those departments. In other words, the Director of the Department of Financial Institutions can reverse the initial order of an administrative law judge from the Office of Administrative Hearings. No questions asked. Simply reverse it and find you guilty when, at hearing, you thought you were vindicated. Such is justice in Washington State.Now DSHS is a bid department. Obviously the Director of DSHS is a busy person. Too busy to reverse the decisions from below with his or her own hands. So, they have delegated the task of reversing decisions favorable to citizens. In all fairness, the DSHS handles a lot of cases. I can well understand why the Director needs a Board to delegate this task to. And, it seems so much fairer. So less arbitrary. But if the data is correct, then the BOA certainly is not. It is just another way to deprive a citizen of their right to a fair hearing.