Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout82-538 FriedrichHarvey Friedrich Social Service Director Philadelphia State Hospital Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare 1400 Roosevelt Boulevard Philadelphia, PA 19114 RE: Contracting, Mental Health Center Dear Mr. Friedrich: Mailin Address: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION P.O. BOX 1 179 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610 May 7, 1982 ADVICE OF COUNSEL 82 -538 This responds to your letter of April 13, 1982 in which you requested advice from the State Ethics Commission. Issue: You wish information as to whether or not there is any potential conflict of interest in entering into a contractual relationship with the Community Mental Health Center to provide training for its staff. Facts: You indicate, in your letter, that you are one of three partners in counseling practice (partnership) that is considering contracting with a Community Mental Health Center to provide training for its staff. In addition, you also serve as Social Service Director for the Philadelphia State Hospital which is operated by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Public Welfare. The partners in the counseling practice (partnership) include two other individuals. The second individual is John Duffy who currently serves as Chief Social Worker at the Philadelphia State Hospital and is responsible for the Hospital's admission service. The third individual in your counseling practice is Richard Gladstone who serves as Southeast Regional Mental Health Program Representative in the Office of Mental Health's Bureau of Community Procrams. Mr. Gladstone is responsible for licensing of regional mental health providers of psychiatric, clinical and partial hospitalization program services. State Ethics Commission • 308 Finance Building • Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Harvey Friedrich May 7, 1982 Page 2 The partnership has been approached by the Consultation and Education Department of the North /Central Community Mental Health Center which is seeking a contractor to provide training to its staff in the area of managing aggres- sive clients. Time used for these training sessions would be weekends, evenings and scheduled annual leave from the Commonwealth employment of the individuals involved. Neither you nor Mr. Duffy have any responsibility or jurisdiction as employees of the Commonwealth of Pennsyl- vania working in the Philadelphia State Hospital over any of the Community Mental Health Centers. Mr. Gladstone, however, in his responsibility for licensing regional mental health providers does have some contact with the North /Central Community Mental Health Center. In this responsibility, Mr. Gladstone can and will schedule his work so as not to directly engage himself in 'any review of North /Central's licensure status during the period for which your partnership might provide services to North /Central as a private consultant. Discussion: We will, for purposes of this response, assume that all three partners are within the category of "public employees" as set forth in the Ethics Act. As such, the conduct of each of the.individuals in question would be subject to the restrictions of the Ethics Act- Specifically, no public employee may contract with the governmental body with which he is associated in an amount in excess of $500 without having that contract awarded through and after an open and public process. In your case, however, provisions of the abovereferenced Section 3(c) would not be applicable to any contractual relationship of your counseling practice with a Community Mental Health Center. The prohibitions of Section 3(c) would be applicable only if your counseling practice were to provide contracted services to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Public Welfare, Philadelphia State Hospital. 'given that the Community Mental Health Center is a separate and distinct entity from the governmental body within which the partners serve (Philadelphia State Hospital, Department of Public Welfare) there is no requirement that your contracting with the Community Mental Health Center be awarded through an open and public process. Harvey Friedrich May 7, 1982 Page 3 However, the other provisions of the Ethics Act would still be applicable. These provisions include the require- ment that your contracting services with the Community Mental Health Center should not have been obtained through the use of your or your partners' public office. See Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 403(a). Similarly, this contract could not be acquired through any use of confidential information obtained through your public employment. Within these restrictions, the contract between the Community Mental Health Center and your counseling practice would not be prohibited. However, as you indicate, one of your partners, Mr. Gladstone, does have some relationship in his public service /employment with the North /Central Mental Health Center in relation to licensing of that Center. in order to avoid the appearance of any impropriety as required by Section 1 of the Ethics Act (65 P.S. 401), Mr. Gladstone, would, as you indicate he is willing to do, be required to dissengage himself from any review of North /Central's licensure status during the period of any contract that the partnership would have with North /Central Mental Health Center. This same prohibition would apply to any other Mental Health Center for whom your partnership might provide counseling or other contract services which might similarly be subject to Mr. Galdstone's authority. So long as Mr. Gladstone does not participate in any manner over the review of the licensure status of the entities with whom you might contract as a private consultant his actions would not give rise to even the appearance of an impropriety under the Ethics Act. Conclusion: Within the restrictions outlined above, the partnership and the members thereof can provide counseling or contract services to the North /Central Community Mental Health Center. Pursuant to Section 7(9)(ii), this Advice is a complete defense in any enforcement proceeding initiated by the Commission, and evidence of good faith conduct in any other civil or criminal proceeding, providing the requestor has disclosed truthfully all the material facts and committed the acts complained of in reliance on the Advice given. Harvey Friedrich May 7, 1982 Page 4 This letter is a public record and will be made available as ruch. Finally, if you disagree with this Advice or if you have any reason to challenge same, you may reque..t that the full Commission review this Advice. A personal appearance before the Commission may be scheduled and a °orm.1 Opinion from the Commission will be issued. You should make such a request or indicate your disapproval of this Advice within the next 30 days. SSC /rdp cc: Helen O'Bannon, Secretary Department of Public Welfare Sincerely, andra S. C istiansori General Co 4 nsel