Russian Ombudsman Visits Ranch for Kids UPDATED

It didn’t go well.

“A ranch for troubled children in northwest Montana has found itself at odds with the Russian government.

The Ranch for Kids is a home for youngsters adopted from Russia whose behavioral problems overwhelm their new parents in America. Many suffer from fetal alcohol syndrome and are prone to violent outbursts, reports said. The children do chores, attend church and learn to interact productively with one another and their elders. The facility has been profiled by CNN, the New York Times and others

But Russia’s Ombudsman for Children’s Rights, a high-profile Moscow lawyer named Pavel Astakhov, recently published highly critical comments about the ranch on his website, reported RIA Novosti, a Russian state-owned news agency. “The very form of the children’s being there is shocking,” Astakhov wrote on the website. “What is it, a pre-trial detention facility? A penal colony? Or a trash can for unwanted children?”

Astakhov went on to argue that the children were “completely isolated from the outside world” and that it was not clear whether they “receive the necessary help and treatment.”

Kids get stuck in the middle

The adoption of Russian children by Americans has become a contentious issue in relations between the two countries.

Recent controversies include an adopted Russian boy who died in a house fire in Nebraska and the case of Torry Hansen, an American who sent her adopted child back to Russia after saying he was “psychotic.”

Joyce Sterkel, who runs the Ranch for Kids, issued a stern denial of Astakhov’s charges to Latitude News. Pointing to positive media coverage of the ranch, she said, “This is an open book, come on. We’re not hiding anything or hurting any children. There are no secrets here.”

In fact, Sterkel said, Astakhov never even set foot on the ranch. After refusing a series of written requests by the ombudsman to visit, she said Astakhov showed up yesterday outside her gate with a Russian television crew. She told him to get lost, describing him as “a publicity hound out to denigrate Americans.” (Sterkel said she let other Russian officials tour the premises in 2010 and 2011.)

Illegal leaks?

After Astakhov left the ranch, he went to the offices of Bernie Cassidy, the Lincoln County Attorney.

At the attorney’s office, Sterkel claimed, Cassidy gave Astakhov “confidential information” about several of her young charges, including a nine-year-old girl who tried to run away from the ranch. The information appeared on Astakhov’s website and was credited to Cassidy, RIA Novosti said.

In an interview with Latitude News, Cassidy confirmed that he met with Astakhov but refused to let the encounter be filmed. “I suspected a publicity angle,” he said. Cassidy would not comment on whether he had given the Russian official information on any children, saying he “wasn’t sure what [Sterkel] was talking about.”

Cassidy added that there have been rumors that children are mistreated at the Ranch for Kids but none have been “substantiated” or resulted in formal charges.

Sterkel said she contacted the U.S. State Department and the office of Sen. John Tester (D-MN) about the incident. Of Cassidy she insisted: “He won’t have a job by the time I’m done,” she said. “This is Montana. This is the United States of America, and I have rights. And I will protect my children and their parents.” [Really? In your unlicensed facility with no medically-licensed people employed? okay…]

The Russian Foreign Ministry said it would ask American authorities to shut down the ranch.”

Russian official says Montana ranch abuses adoptees)

[Latititude News 6/29/12 by Nicholas Nehamas]

“Pavel Astakhov has been visiting the Ranch for Kids, in the U.S. State of Montana, which is a respite care home that helps children, most of them from Russia, who have suffered disrupted adoptions..”

“All the children were removed from the facility just before Astakhov’a arrival.

“These children are completely isolated from the outside world, which is grounds for violating their rights. It has not been made clear to us whether the children receive the necessary help and treatment, which is why the condition of the Russian kids at the ranch causes concerns,” Astakhov said.”

“It is difficult to follow any particular kid as the ranch has not kept its records properly, Astakhov’s press service said in a statement. Ranch head Joyce Sterkel declined to disclose information on the children.

The statement also cited a local state prosecutor as saying that children at the ranch were being “subjected to abuse,” and that a 9-year-old Russian girl had recently attempted to escape.”

Russia Ombudsman ‘Shocked’ by U.S. Kids Ranch

[RIA Novosti 6/29/12]

The Russian article on the Ombudsman’s website is here where you can see a picture of him standing next to the sign. At this time, the text appears incorrect and we cannot translate it.

We discussed this unlicensed facility run by unlicensed nurse Joyce Sterkel back in February 2012

REFORM Puzzle Piece

Update: It is a toss-up for which country the US media covers in a slower manner-Haiti or Russia. Foreign media in both of those countries scoops adoption stories by 1 to 2 weeks every time. FINALLY this is covered by mainstream US media.

“Whether it was a made-for-TV confrontation for viewers back home or a serious  bid to gain entry, Sterkel kept the two dozen children nside and away from the  gate. The Russians didn’t try to enter the property, but Astakhov vowed to  return and shut the ranch down.

As a bilateral adoption agreement between the U.S. and Russia wends its way  through the ratification process, Sterkel is concerned that Astakhov will try to  make good on the promise he made that day, June 28.

“This is a test case. This is to test the integrity of the bilateral  agreement to see if they have the muscle to come onto American soil and push  their way in,” Sterkel said Tuesday. “I think they want to see if they really  can come in and visit children without parental consent.”

“These children are completely isolated from the outside world, which is  grounds for violating their rights. It has not been made clear to us whether the  children receive the necessary help and treatment, which is why the condition of  the Russian kids at the ranch causes concerns,” Astakhov said in comments  carried by the news agency RIA Novosti.

Sterkel bristles at Astakhov’s claims and says he is wrong on every  count.

Her ranch for troubled adopted children, many of them Russian and many of  whom suffer from the damages caused by alcohol and drugs ingested by their  mothers while pregnant, has operated in the tiny community of Eureka near the  Canadian border since 2003.

There are now 25 kids on the ranch. Ten of them are from Russia, with others  from China, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Haiti, Ethiopia and other countries. Their ages  vary, and their troubles range from fetal alcohol spectrum disorder to the  aftereffects of spending their early lives in difficult conditions in  orphanages.

Some are violent or have threatened violence. Others have committed crimes  because they don’t understand the consequences of their actions. Many are  developmentally delayed because of brain damage.

“They are living with parents who love them very much, they just need help  with behavior issues,” Sterkel said.

Parents pay $3,500 a month to send their children to the ranch, and the  length of their stay is determined month by month, Sterkel said.

Laurie Jarvis sent her adopted Russian child there in 2005 when he was 11.  Jarvis said the Ranch For Kids gave her son a structured environment with a  strict routine that involved classwork and outdoor activities such as horseback  riding, giving him the chance to step away from the hectic pace of American  culture.

The Ranch For Kids is often the last hope for a lot of parents who have  nowhere else to turn, she said.

“It isn’t that parents can’t handle their children, it’s the exact  opposite,” Jarvis said. “Parents want to handle their children, so they turn to  places where they are able to manage them.”

Russian officials from the consulate in Seattle have twice visited the ranch  before, in 2010 and 2011. Both were friendly visits, Sterkel said. But she was  suspicious of Astakhov when he requested the June 28 visit, sensing that he  wanted to turn her ranch into a political prop with the U.S.-Russia adoption  agreement in the spotlight.

She turned down the request.

“They came anyway,” she said.

Sterkel said she believes the real motive behind Astakhov’s claims is to  bring more lawsuits against adoptive parents. Astakhov earlier this year said  Russia is suing Hansen for $2,300 a month for her former adopted child’s foster  care and “psychological correction.” [Maybe he just doesn’t like Russian citizens being in an unlicensed facility! Why no license Joyce?]

Sterkel said she is concerned that the U.S.-Russian adoption treaty may help  Russian officials like Astakhov establish such legal claims and said any parent  with an adopted child from Russia should be, too.

“If adoptive parents knew what was in this agreement, they’d be freaked  out,” Sterkel said. “The thought that a foreign government can come and harass  me, a property owner, is outrageous. If we don’t have sovereignty within our own  country to protect us against a foreign government, we don’t have anything.” [Check out the nuances at our post here]

A State Department spokesman who would only speak on background said the  agency “has assisted the Russian Embassy in Washington with communicating their  concerns about the Ranch for Kids with the appropriate authorities in  Montana.”

The agency had no immediate comment on Sterkel’s concerns that the agreement  would allow Russian officials access to private property with the cooperation of  local officials, regardless of parental consent.

The adoption agreement must be approved by the Federation Council, which is  the upper house of Russia’s parliament, and President Vladimir Putin. Both sides  must then agree to procedures implementing the agreement before it is  implemented.”

 

Ranch becomes focus for Russian adoption outrage

[WHDH 7/11/12 by Associated Press]

Update 2: Rally’s question of why no license has been answered. The Associated Press has obtained legal information from Montana regulators about Ranch for Kids (or RFK as they say.)

“The Russian government isn’t alone in raising questions about a Montana ranch that cares for troubled children adopted from foreign countries.

Montana regulators are actively involved in a legal battle to shut down the Ranch For Kids near the Canadian border, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press through a public information request.

Those records show the ranch in Eureka has been operating without a license since 2010. The state board that oversees private alternative adolescent residential and outdoor programs ordered it last year to stop operating until it obtains a proper license.

Ranch owner Joyce Sterkel is appealing that order in court, saying the ranch has become part of a church mission and is no longer under the board’s authority. Sterkel did not immediately return a call on Wednesday.

Last month, Russian children rights ombudsman Pavel Astakhov and human rights envoy Konstantin Dolgov showed up at the Ranch For Kids’ gates, demanding entry to check on the adopted children from Russia in Sterkel’s care. They questioned whether the children were receiving necessary care or treatment at the remote ranch.

Ten of the 25 children there are from Russia, with others from China, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Haiti, Ethiopia and other countries. Their ages vary, and their troubles range from fetal alcohol spectrum disorder to the aftereffects of spending their early lives in difficult conditions in orphanages.

The Russians were denied access that day. Sterkel previously denied any claims that the children are mistreated or lacking care. Parents with children at the ranch currently or in the past have risen to Sterkel’s defense, saying her program provides a necessary service for adopted children struggling with medical and behavioral problems.

But neither Sterkel nor the Russians mentioned the Ranch For Kids’ dispute with state regulators that now stretches back more than two years, after the Board of Private Alternative Adolescent Residential and Outdoor Programs declined to renew the ranch’s provisional license in June 2010.

An inspection that was part of the license application process found deficiencies that included a failure to show the ranch’s buildings are up to code, the lack of a disaster plan, no background checks or commercial drivers’ licenses for employees and no student handbook or statement on the rights of the program participants.

Beyond that, Sterkel denied the board any information about the children at the ranch. Board attorney Mary Tapper described the refusal in court documents in which she referred to the ranch as “RFK.”

“RFK flatly refused to inform the Board how many children were enrolled at RFK including their ages and gender. Because many of the children enrolled at RFK are reported to have severe emotional and disciplinary challenges, the Board sought this information for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the children,” Tapper wrote.

The board gave the ranch operators a three-month probationary license to give them time to prove they had corrected the deficiencies, and then extended that license until Nov. 15, 2010, according to board documents and court filings.

Sterkel requested a full hearing on the deficiencies, but Tapper said Sterkel did not provide requested information, or else provided contradictory information, in the discovery process.

Through her attorney, Sterkel in March 2011 requested the hearing be canceled. The hearing examiner ruled in favor of the board, which issued the cease-and-desist order in June 2011.

Since then, the matter has been in state court. Sterkel says the ranch took care of four of the five problems the board had listed, and that the hearing was only supposed to be about building codes. But then she found out through the board’s information requests that the other concerns also would be examined at the hearing, and she claimed that is a violation of due process.

Tapper denies that, saying the matter before the board was the Ranch For Kids’ license and all issues pertaining to it, not just building codes.

Sterkel also said the cease and desist order was not properly served to her, which the board also denies.

But Sterkel’s main defense is that her ranch is no longer under the board’s authority because in October 2011, she signed an agreement with a missionary group affiliated with a small church in Eureka. That agreement makes the Ranch for Kids an adjunct missionary of the Epicenter International Missions Ministry, an organization that works with lepers and orphans in India.

State law says that a program that is an adjunct missionary is exempt from board licensing requirements, ranch attorney J. Tiffin Hall wrote in a legal filing.

The judge in the case has not yet made any rulings.

The dispute between the ranch, state regulators and the Russians is happening as a bilateral adoption agreement between the U.S. and Russia is going through the ratification process.

Yevgeny Uspensky, an official with the Russian consulate in Seattle, said Tuesday that his government has requested assistance from Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer in arranging a visit to the ranch. Uspesnky said the government considers the children Russian citizens, even though they have been adopted by U.S. parents and have American citizenship, and they have the right to check on their situation.

“I believe they have nothing to conceal. We wanted to meet the kids, just talk. I was not able to understand why access was denied,” Uspensky said.

Sterkel and parents with children at the ranch question the Russians’ motives, calling it a political stunt timed with the ratification of the adoption agreement, and the parents say the attention could have the effect of damaging the reputation of a program that is necessary for children who are having troubles adapting to everyday life.

Sharon Houlihan, whose 10-year-old son Shawn is a student at the ranch, said she takes offense at the Russians’ implications that these children are being cast off by parents who don’t love them. Nothing could be further from the truth, Houlihan said.

“I am offended that the Russians who couldn’t take care of my children and had them in orphanage would think now that they have the right to come in here and look at what I’m doing and determine whether it’s appropriate or not,” she said. “These kids come with a lot of things wrong. As a parent you accept the commitment and you do whatever you need to do.”

Gigi Davidson, who enrolled her 23-year-old adopted son in the camp at age 18, said she does not put any stock in the state’s allegations against the ranch.

“Someone’s out to get them and I really don’t know why,” Davidson said. “This is the only place I know that can help these kids.”

Ranch officials have previously refused entry to state inspectors, according to documents from a 2009 lawsuit by the state agency’s Building Codes Bureau that has been combined with the licensing lawsuit.

That lawsuit includes an affidavit by state building inspector Rick Cockrell that says Cockrell, a deputy fire marshal, and electrical and plumbing inspectors tried to look at the ranch property in April 2009. Cockrell also asked a law enforcement official along because of what he believed was “threatening behavior” by ranch manager William Sutley.

Sutley met them and denied them access to conduct their inspections, the first time Cockrell said that has ever happened to him. The ranch manager said that only two of 16 buildings on the property were being used by the program participants and the rest were being used as private residences, Cockrell said in the affidavit.

Sterkel also said in a 2010 affidavit that only a couple of the buildings on the property were being used by the children.”

APNewsBreak: Adopted kids’ ranch denied license

[Mercury News 7/18/12 by Matt Volz]

Update 3: Here is the website of that Indian ministry that she claims to be  umbrella-ed under: http://www.eurekachapelofpraise.org/epicenter.htm  On their ministries page, Ranch for Kids is NOT listed.  See  here.

“25 children, including 10 Russian orphans, still live at the Ranch for Kids, a notorious establishment for adopted children. The ranch has been operating without a license since 2010, when the court ruled that the adopted kids’ camp be closed.
Astakhov seeking Ranch for Kids closure

The ratification of the Russian-US adoption agreement will enable an inspection of the Ranch for Kids organization as well as other companies dealing with adoption practices, Children’s Rights Commissioner for the President of the Russian Federation Pavel Astakhov said.

He has been touring the US, where he visited the Ranch for Kids organization in Montana.

The organization was founded to help US parents who cannot cope with brining up their Russian adopted children.

Mr. Astakhov learned that the Ranch had been re-registered as a religious organization to avoid taxes and inspections and it is not licensed to carry out adoption activities.He said he would seek the Ranch’s closure.”

25 kids remain at illegal adoption camp

[The Voice of Russia 7/19/12]

Update 4: Here are selected Board Meeting Minutes that discuss licensing back in 2008 and excerpts discussing Ranch for Kids. They are publicly available on the Montana Board of Private Alternative Adolescent Residential or Outdoor Programs site.

“April 2008
Linda Carpenter, President of Regional Chapter of NATSAP encouraged the Board to follow the legislation which requires licensure by October 2008 as NATSAP is requiring schools to have local licensure or accreditation by January 2009. In addition Congressman Miller has submitted legislation at the federal level which if passed, will impose strict regulations for schools.”

“June 1 2010
12. RANCH FOR KIDS PROJECT
Motion: Dr. Santa moved to approve the program for a 3-month probationary license contingent on receipt of the following: finger print and background checks, 37-48-108 MCA, fire inspections at Deep Spring Ranch and Pinkham location, building permits and building inspections as new construction has occurred and transfer from residential to commercial building changes have been made, ARM 24.181.608(1), distribution of a student handbook that includes a statement of student rights ARM 24.181.603(2),605(2), emergency exit plans posted at Deep Springs and the houses at Pinkham ARM 24.181.625, vehicle inspections and 6 maintenance as a commercial on a 16 passenger van and a 26 passenger bus, verification that vehicle drivers hold a commercial driver’s license (CDL) as required ARM 24.181.608.
Second: Mr. Callahan
Discussion: None
Vote: Unanimous
Motion carried”

“October 2010
RANCH FOR KIDS PROJECT
No action taken. Ms. White reported that Ranch for Kids has not signed a stipulated agreement. Current outstanding issues include building permits, no proof of fire and safety inspection reports, missing fingerprint and background checks, lack of employees with commercial driver’s license. The next step in the process will be to move forward with scheduling a hearing for the program.”

“December 2010
Ranch for Kids
Mary Tapper, Board Counsel, provided an update on Ranch for Kids. She reported that the school did not sign the stipulated agreement sent to them in June 2010. They have requested a hearing with the administrative law judge which is scheduled for March 2011. Tiffin Hall, attorney for the Ranch, has submitted a discovery request that includes interrogatories and request for documents. The Department will be making similar requests. Board Chair John Santa asked if the department had made every effort to resolve the issues with the Ranch and that they were clearly aware of what was being asked of them. Ms. Tapper confirmed that legal staff had been in ongoing dialog with Tiffin Hall and the expectations were clear. Mr. Santa also asked about the prospect of board members approaching the school in an effort to discourage the legal proceeding and the costs associated with that process. Board Counsel Mary Tapper discouraged the board members from approaching the school because the case has entered litigation.”

June 21, 2011
AGENDA ITEM #4 9:15AM
2010-023-PAP
Consideration and motion on Hearing Examiners decision. Board Counsel Mary Tapper provided a brief history with the Ranch for Kids application leading up to the Hearing Examiners decision.
Motion: Dr. Santa moved to adopt the hearing examiners order as written.
Second: Ms. James.
Discussion: None.
Vote: Unanimous.
Motion carried.
Motion: Dr. Santa moved to enter into executive session at 9:45am forthe purpose of addressing unlicensed practice, 2011-004-PAP.
Second: Ms. Kelly.
Discussion: None.
Vote: Unanimous.
Motion carried.”

“December 30, 2011
AGENDA ITEM #6 Update on compliance/unlicensed practice, Mary Tapper
Executive Session
Motion: Dr. Santa moved to enter executive session at 11:15am.
Second: Ms. Darcee Kelly
Discussion: None.
Vote: Unanimous.
Motion carried.
Ms. Mary Tapper reminded board members that the information disclosed in executive session is attorney client communication with no information to be discussed outside of this session. Ms. Tapper reported on the proceedings with Ranch for Kids. June 2011 the Board moved to issue a cease and desist letter to the program. Ranch for Kids responded by filing an injunction asking the court to not close their program. The Department filed a response and a counter claim asking for the program to be shut down, for a review of the administrative record, and for attorney fees for injunctive relief to order that the operation stop. The Judge in Lincoln county set a hearing by phone in October 2011. The Judge asked that each side brief the issues. Former PAARP Board Counsel Colleen White now serves as Prosecuting Attorney for the Building Codes Bureau. Building Codes also has action pending against Ranch for Kids as they are non-compliant with
that Bureau. Department attorneys agreed to combine the complaints to build a stronger case. Ranch for Kids has petitioned for religion exemption which became effective in October of 2011. The Judge considered this as new evidence and made the decision to remand the case back to the administrative proceeding. A follow-up call by Board Counsel was held yesterday. Legal Counsel for Ranch for Kids reported that it was their intention to get into compliance with building codes. The Department would still like to keep the complaints together. Board members see the religious exemption as dangerous in efforts to protect the public and the Board ought to pursue legislation to eliminate the language. Ms. Tapper has gone back and reviewed the original legislation. She learned from a letter submitted by Pine Haven that an adjunct ministry is “a facility that does not charge a fee for its services, does not accept public funds or accept governmental contracts. A facility is an adjunct ministry of a church which is incorporated in Montana.” Ms. Tapper suggested that the Board could promulgate a rule that outlines the intent of the original exemption by writing a definition for adjunct ministry.
Motion: Dr. Santa moved to exit executive session at 11:35am.
Second: Ms. Darcee Kelly
Discussion: None.
Vote: Unanimous.
Motion carried.”

[So, does that mean Ranch for Kids will operate free of charge?]

The September 2011 rules for Residential Outdoor Programs can be seen in this pdf.

Update 5: Now Russia is DEMANDING that Pavel obtains access to Ranch for Kids.

“Moscow insists that the United States allows Russia’s children rights ombudsman Pavel Astakhov to visit a U.S. ranch where troubled adoptees from Russia have been sent, the Russian Foreign Ministry said on Thursday.

“We demand that the American side grants Pavel Astakhov access to the Ranch for Kids private facility to check on the living conditions of Russian children left there by U.S. foster parents,” the ministry’s spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said.

Astakhov visited the respite care home in the U.S. State of Montana in June, but all the children were removed from the facility just before his arrival.

The official said at the time that it had not been made clear whether the children, who are completely isolated from the outside world, receive the necessary help and treatment.

According to Astakhov, the ranch has not kept proper records and ranch head Joyce Sterkel has declined to disclose information on the children to the Russian Embassy officials.

Adoptions have become a thorny issue in U.S.-Russia relations following a series of scandals, including the uproar surrounding a seven-year-old boy who was sent back to Russia unaccompanied in 2010 by an adoptive U.S. mother.

Russian officials claim at least 19 Russian children have died following abuse by American foster parents since adoption of Russian children by Americans began in the early 1990’s.”

Russia Demands Access to U.S. Ranch for Kids

[RIA Novosti 9/20/12]

Update 6: “On its website, the Ranch for Kidsdescribes itself as “a respite care home for adopted children who are experiencing difficulties in their families due to reactive attachment disorder, prenatal exposure to alcohol and drugs [or] struggling with adoption and post institutional issues.”

“We did not let them in,” Joyce Sterkel, who heads the Ranch for Kids, told ABC News. “They came, and I politely declined their visit. I said this is not a good time. I understood that they were doing a publicity stunt.”

Sure enough, stories began to appear in the Russian media claiming that adopted Russian children lived under poor conditions at the ranch. Astakhov called the ranch a “trash can” for unwanted Russian children.

Sterkel challenged those allegations.

“No one is abandoned,” she said.

“Consular officials visited earlier and saw everything, saw where the [children] live, saw them at school. It was very informal. They know everything is OK here,” she said.

Sterkel also dismissed reports in Russian media that she’d taken  the children to Canada.

“Number one, you need a valid U.S. passport, then you need notarized documentation from their parents, of which I had neither. Of course we didn’t go to Canada. The kids were in school that day. That’s why nobody was there,” she said.

Sterkel said the ranch was “like a therapeutic boarding school that specializes in children who have been internationally adopted. The vast majority have fetal alcohol spectrum disorder and/or attachment disorder. They have a very difficult time integrating into society, let alone families, and many have low IQs. The parents need a little assistance setting kids on the right path.”

Parents pay $3,500 a month to send their children there. At any given time, Sterkel said, there were between 22 and 24 children at the ranch.

Laurie Jarvis sent her adopted Russian son, who has fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, to the Ranch for Kids for two months in 2005. She said the ranch helped calm the boy in a way that was impossible at home.

“He made remarkable changes, because of the setting and the environment. It was peaceful, not like our modern homes. A clock on the wall would set him off. But this ranch, it was a peaceful setting, an amazing thing, and it was all so regulated. A family can’t be that regulated,” she told ABC News.”

Russian Officials Want Access to Ranch Where They Claim U.S. Parents Reportedly ‘Dump Unwanted Kids’

[ABC News 9/22/12 by Kirit Radia]

Update 7: “In the past year, the Ranch for Kids Project has come under scrutiny by top-ranking Russian government officials, who in June arrived at the respite care facility for troubled adopted children, many of them Russian, with a Moscow television crew in tow, criticizing the unlicensed boarding school for warehousing children in a remote corner of Montana.

The facility, designed for troubled adopted children who suffer from fetal alcohol spectrum disorders, as well as the effects of living in difficult conditions in orphanages abroad, also is in the midst of a lawsuit by a Montana Department of Labor and Industry board, which is challenging its exemption from state licensing requirements and fees due to its status as an “adjunct ministry.”

And, most recently, a decree banning Americans from adopting Russian children, signed last month by President Vladimir Putin, effectively stanches the procession of Russian orphans into the country, where American families sometimes find the children unmanageable due to extreme behavioral problems that are the result of gross neglect and damage caused by alcohol and drugs ingested by their mothers while pregnant.

A low-cost alternative for those parents, says Ranch for Kids founder Joyce Sterkel, is a schoolhouse and idyllic ranch located near the Canadian border in Eureka. [Really? Low cost? At $42,000 per year, most adoptive parents can’t put together half of that to complete their adoptions these days.]

At her nearby home, recounting the recent hurdles while bouncing her 3-year-old adopted daughter, Lilia, on her lap, Sterkel, 65, is unfazed, if a little confounded.

“We’ve got international intrigue and controversy going on here in little old Eureka. How did all this happen?” Sterkel says with a laugh.

***

Sterkel has been involved with international adoptions for 20 years. Having worked as a midwife in Russia from 1992 to 1994, she delivered hundreds of babies with fetal alcohol spectrum disorders before adopting three children of her own, two boys and a girl, all of whom have FASD and are now fully grown and independent. [Gee where is it  mentioned that she was involved with Global Adoption Services and collaborated at one time with JCICS (before they finally had a standard to include licensed groups only). See here]

The Sterkel family’s success with the children led other parents to seek assistance, and between 1999 and 2002 numerous children came to live on the family ranch. In 2003, Sterkel realized the need for a full-time professional staff and separate facility, and created the Ranch for Kids Project.

It was one of the first programs licensed by the state Department of Labor and Industry’s Board of Private Alternative Adolescent Residential or Outdoor Programs, but in 2010 Sterkel began having discussions with a local church about becoming an “adjunct ministry,” which exempts the facility from state oversight and what she says are “prohibitive fees.”

She has been operating the ranch without a license ever since.

In October 2011, after the state board sent Sterkel a cease-and-desist order, she and Jeremy Evjene, a ranch employee and the head of the Epicenter International Missions Ministry, signed a memorandum of understanding making the ranch an “adjunct ministry,” exempting the ranch from the state’s authority.

The state charges that Sterkel is using the exemption to sidestep PAARP’s fees and regulations, and argues in its lawsuit that neither the Ranch for Kids nor the religious organization it partnered with qualifies as a real church or ministry.

***

Founded in 2004 by Evjene, Epicenter International Missions Ministry has no building, congregation or ordained clergy, even though Evjene, first hired at the Ranch for Kids as a construction worker, serves as a counselor and youth pastor. He has performed 14 baptisms on students at the ranch, has led more than 40 Bible studies, approximately 52 youth group counseling sessions and two church services.

In court documents, PAARP board attorney Mary Tapper wrote that Epicenter International Missions Ministry “is not a church, but the evangelical philosophy of a young man with no degree or formal theological training.”

“The exemption,” she continued, should “apply to a program having a bona fide relationship with a church, not a program seeking a loophole to circumvent the board’s licensing requirements.”

On Feb. 5, a Libby judge will be asked to decide whether the Ranch for Kids and Epicenter International Missions Ministry qualify as a church, a point that Ranch for Kids attorney J. Tiffin Hall says is indisputable.

Epicenter International Missions Ministry has been incorporated as a not-for-profit ministry in the state of Montana since June 2006, Hall said, and all of the parents who send their children there are aware of the affiliation.

The application form states: “The Ranch for Kids is a ministry affiliated with Epicenter International Missions recognized in the State of Montana. We are non-denominational. We believe that by establishing ourselves as the adjunct ministry of a church we can better serve our population of children.”

In response to the lawsuit, Sterkel submitted numerous letters of support from parents of children in the program. Randy Halpern and Peter Salomon, a Jewish couple, wrote “my husband and I are both aware that the Ranch for Kids is a ministry and not licensed by the PAARP Board,” and that “the closing of the ranch, which has been the last resort for many hurting families, would be a tragedy.”

Even if the judge sides with Sterkel and the ranch, however, it may not matter. A bill introduced in the Montana legislature calls for eliminating the adjunct ministry exemption, which would force Sterkel into licensure or close her doors.

Twenty-five to 30 children between the ages of 5 and 18 live on the ranch. About 10 are Russian, while the others come from Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Ethiopia and other countries. Parents pay $3,500 per month to send their children to the ranch, and some of the children spend several weeks or months with Sterkel before returning to their families. Others require years of respite care before they develop even the most basic life skills.

Lori Jarvis sent her adopted Russian child to the ranch in 2005, when he was 11 and prone to violent outbursts and criminal behavior. She says he benefited enormously from his time there, and is now a functioning member of the family.

“We view this program to be a great asset for Montana and children and parents across the country,” said Jarvis, who lives in Minnesota.

Jenya Davidson, 23, is a former client who now works and lives full time at the ranch performing maintenance tasks and providing some supervision to the organization’s younger clients. His adoptive mother, Gigi Davidson, is the head of a national nonprofit called FASD Communities, which is comprised of many parents from across the country who have tried to raise adopted children suffering from fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.

“Closing this project would be a travesty to the children and their families,” Davidson said.

***

But closing the project is precisely what Russian children’s ombudsman Pavel Astakhov and human rights envoy Konstantin Dolgov had in mind when they arrived at the gates of the Ranch for Kids in June, a camera crew in tow, and demanded access.

Sterkel believes it was the licensing dispute and the timing of the bilateral adoption agreement between the U.S. and Russia that put the Ranch for Kids on the Russian government’s radar, as well as the outrage caused by the 2010 case of Torry Hansen, who sent her then 7-year-old adopted son back to Russia on an airplane with a note saying he was violent and unmanageable.

“It was just a big publicity stunt,” Sterkel said.

Although she has invited Russian officials from the consulate in Seattle to visit the ranch before, Sterkel cast a wary eye on the requested visit by Astakhov. She turned down the request, thinking it was a political ploy to highlight problems with the adoption agreement and keep it in the international spotlight.

He arrived anyway, and was turned away at the door.

“You don’t come in and strong-arm us. This is a foreign government trying to come onto private property, into a private business in Montana,” Sterkel said. “They’re painting us as this remote location in Siberia, where we’re warehousing Russian kids in a primitive village near the Canadian border. Give me a break. We’re an open book.”

While Sterkel has been mostly transparent with regulators, media and Russian consulate officials, she also has balked at government intrusion.

The PAARP board declined to renew the ranch’s license in June 2010 after an inspection found problems, including a failure to show that the ranch’s buildings were up to code. The inspection also found that the ranch lacked a disaster plan and did not require background checks for employees. Sterkel also denied the board information about the children, according to court filings by Tapper, the PAARP attorney.

Sterkel said she’d be more inclined to cooperate if she believed the state board had the children’s best interests in mind.

“If safety was an issue, truly an issue, they would have shut us down by now. The issue is control. They want us to dance their tune,” she said.”

Eureka ranch at center of debate over adoption of Russian children

[Missoulian 1/12/13 by Tristan Scott]

She shockingly continues to argue that she does not need licensure. She is not a licensed nurse and it remains unclear what personnel actually have health licensure.

The licensure regulations are completely standard and  can be found here and are pasted below:

“37-48-103. Registration and licensing requirements — fees.

 (1) The board shall develop and adopt rules and set fees for mandatory registration and licensing programs. Each program is required to provide policies of insurance in a form and in an adequate amount as determined by board rule.

(2) The board shall require the following information to be provided for licensing. The information includes but is not limited to:

(a) a description of the program and facility;

(b) a description of the goals and objectives of the program for program participants;

(c) a description of the population served by the program, including the maximum number of program participants to be served and the gender of program participants;

(d) the location and contact information for each program, including the person responsible for the conduct of the program;

(e) a list of professional and supervisory employees and relevant credentials and other qualifications;
(f) the average daily census;

(g) a copy of program policies and procedures on:      (i) admission;      (ii) behavior management;
(iii) communication with family members;      (iv) the availability of routine and emergency medical and psychological care;      (v) medication management;

(h) any information that the board may require to facilitate a fingerprint and background check by the department of justice and the federal bureau of investigation of a manager or a worker affiliated with the program who has direct access to program participants, including information pertaining to criminal convictions; and

(i) any other related information specified by the board by rule.

(3) The board shall issue licenses upon receipt of the appropriate fees and a finding that the information provided in subsection (2) is satisfactory. The board shall make available to the public information on the name, address, and contact information for each licensed program. “