By proceeding, I agree that I understand the following disclosures:
I. How We Work in Washington. Based on your preferences, we provide you with information about one or more of our contracted senior living providers ("Participating Communities") and provide your Senior Living Care Information to Participating Communities. The Participating Communities may contact you directly regarding their services. APFM does not endorse or recommend any provider. It is your sole responsibility to select the appropriate care for yourself or your loved one. We work with both you and the Participating Communities in your search. We do not permit our Advisors to have an ownership interest in Participating Communities.
II. How We Are Paid. We do not charge you any fee – we are paid by the Participating Communities. Some Participating Communities pay us a percentage of the first month's standard rate for the rent and care services you select. We invoice these fees after the senior moves in.
III. When We Tour. APFM tours certain Participating Communities in Washington (typically more in metropolitan areas than in rural areas.) During the 12 month period prior to December 31, 2017, we toured 86.2% of Participating Communities with capacity for 20 or more residents.
IV. No Obligation or Commitment. You have no obligation to use or to continue to use our services. Because you pay no fee to us, you will never need to ask for a refund.
V. Complaints. Please contact our Family Feedback Line at (866) 584-7340 or
[email protected] to report any complaint. Consumers have many avenues to address a dispute with any referral service company, including the right to file a complaint with the Attorney General's office at: Consumer Protection Division, 800 5th Avenue, Ste. 2000, Seattle, 98104 or 800-551-4636.
VI. No Waiver of Your Rights. APFM does not (and may not) require or even ask consumers seeking senior housing or care services in Washington State to sign waivers of liability for losses of personal property or injury or to sign waivers of any rights established under law.I agree that: A.I authorize A Place For Mom ("APFM") to collect certain personal and contact detail information, as well as relevant health care information about me or from me about the senior family member or relative I am assisting ("Senior Living Care Information"). B.APFM may provide information to me electronically. My electronic signature on agreements and documents has the same effect as if I signed them in ink. C.APFM may send all communications to me electronically via e-mail or by access to an APFM web site. D.If I want a paper copy, I can print a copy of the Disclosures or download the Disclosures for my records. E.This E-Sign Acknowledgement and Authorization applies to these Disclosures and all future Disclosures related to APFM's services, unless I revoke my authorization. You may revoke this authorization in writing at any time (except where we have already disclosed information before receiving your revocation.) This authorization will expire after one year. F.You consent to APFM's reaching out to you using a phone system than can auto-dial numbers (we miss rotary phones, too!), but this consent is not required to use our service.
*If I am consenting on behalf of someone else, I have the proper authorization to do so. By clicking Get My Results, you agree to our
Privacy Policy. You also consent to receive calls and texts, which may be autodialed, from us and our customer communities. Your consent is not a condition to using our service. Please visit our
Terms of Use. for information about our privacy practices.
If anybody knows how to make a screening system work without severely depleting an already pressurised workforce they should copy their ideas to every government in the civilised world. It'd be worth a fortune.
Here in the UK we set up the CRB - Criminal Records Bureau - about ?fifteen ?twenty years ago. This morphed into the Disclosure and Barring Service about ?five years ago. Both bodies were dizzyingly expensive to set up and run, and are extremely effective at deterring volunteers, complicating recruitment, escalating the price of family events and mistaking entirely blameless individuals for convicted felons*.
The government still doesn't know who lives in the country, what their names are, where they're working or what forged documents, stolen documents, stolen identities and other means are being used to circumvent the system.
I'm afraid it will always be down to individuals, families, communities and employers to inform themselves and monitor those they are responsible for safeguarding.
In the case of your family member, the company has met the guidelines, yes? So the company has not been negligent; the guidelines are not good enough. You need to find out who sets the standards, then you need to find out whether they are under review, then you need to bring pressure to bear to extend the range of checks included. I wish you the very best of luck.
And I hope the rat-bag thieving b*st*rds who stole from your family member, failed to provide the care they contracted to provide (which actually is the central point), and turned that person's peaceful life into a Kafkaesque nightmare... well, I hope they burn.
*Very rarely, a tiny percentage of checks carried out. But if that 0.01% or whatever includes you, you don't think it's negligible.