A disability royal commissioner says he has been struck by the fact that "nobody seems to have been held accountable" at a disability service provider in the two years since abuse was uncovered.
At hearings in Brisbane this week, the royal commission heard that no senior staff or board members at Sunnyfield Disability Services had been reprimanded over the abuse suffered by three residents at a Sydney group home.
The provider was called to provide the royal commission with details about what action if any, it had taken since public hearings in 2021 investigated the incidents.
"What seems to me to be striking … is nobody seems to have been held accountable," Commissioner Ronald Sackville said.
"No senior staff, as far as I'm aware from the evidence, have been dismissed or reprimanded for the role they may have played in the institutional failings.
"The board … has issued no public statement or statement to staff regretting the failures of the past and acknowledging responsibility. The board remains largely unchanged."
Last year, the royal commission found the leadership of Sunnyfield failed to protect the three group home residents from violence and abuse by support workers the service provider employed.
Mr Sackville ordered Sunnyfield's legal counsel, Sam Duggan, to respond in writing to the royal commission within seven days.
"Is there any reason why the final report of this royal commission should not find that the board of Sunnyfield has neither accepted nor appropriately attributed responsibility to the institutional deficiencies and failings that led to the experiences of the residents and families recounted in the Commissioners' Report on the Public hearing?" he asked.
Mr Duggan confirmed Sunnyfield would respond in writing within seven days.
Sunnyfield's response will be reflected in the royal commission's final report when it is published.
Commission revisits service providers where abuse was previously uncovered
This week, the royal commission is hearing evidence from service providers that were the subject of previous public hearings that exposed allegations of abuse, neglect and violence against people with disabilities.
The CEOs of those organisations have been questioned about what changes and improvements have been made.
Sunnyfield's current CEO, Andrew Hyland — who did not work for Sunnyfield when the abuse occurred — was questioned on Tuesday about how the organisation had responded to the commissioner's report.
Mr Hyland said he had comprehensively reviewed and changed the way Sunnyfield delivers its services, and was trying to include the voices of Sunnyfield's clients at every level of the organisation.
He said the chair of Sunnyfield's board had met with the families of the residents of the Sydney house to apologise.
Mr Hyland said he was confident that what happened at the Sydney house could never happen again.
Mr Sackville said it seemed that in the past Sunnyfield lacked effective leadership and a culture that valued protecting its clients from violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation.
In their report on the Sunnyfield case, commissioners said Sunnyfield's then-CEO, Caroline Cuddihy, "frequently gave the impression in her oral evidence that she was reluctant to accept that Sunnyfield bore significant responsibility for the abuse and dysfunction that took place at the House".
On Wednesday, Mr Sackville noted that Ms Cuddihy had since resigned to take up a position as the CEO of the NSW Trustee and Guardian, which manages the affairs of people under guardianship orders, many of whom have intellectual disabilities.
"In August 2022, the board in a public announcement on 14 June expressed appreciation for all her contributions and wished her well," Mr Sackville said.
"There's no evidence that Ms Cuddihy was ever reprimanded or disciplined by the board for her part in what seemed to have been institutional failures."
Mr Sackville also noted that Sunnyfield's board of directors still lacked any members with disabilities, and the chair of the board at the time of the 2021 public hearings remained in the same position.
The boards of charities and not-for-profit organisations are responsible for leading and overseeing operations and have legal responsibility for the organisation.
Afford also questioned about board accountability
Mr Sackville expressed similar concerns about the accountability shown by the board of Afford, a disability services provider that was the subject of public hearings in May last year.
On Friday, Afford CEO Joanne Toohey gave evidence to the royal commission about changes at that organisation since the hearings aired allegations of abuse and failings at its day program in Sydney's Mount Druitt.
Ms Toohey, who joined Afford after the period examined in the previous public hearing, said she believed the board of directors had taken action that showed they accepted responsibility for the failings.
However, Ms Toohey conceded she was unable to explain how the board had manifested its acceptance of responsibility and accountability, as she is not on the board.
Mr Sackville told Afford's legal counsel David Lloyd he was unconvinced.
"The findings … demonstrate that Afford was in fact a dysfunctional organisation and that the board over a long period failed to effectively discharge its governance obligations to ensure the safety and quality of services provided and to safeguard its clients against the risk of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation," he said.
"It's not evident on the evidence we have received that the board has actually accepted and been accountable for the failings that occurred.
"So my question to you … is there any reason why the royal commission in its final report should not find that the board has failed to accept responsibility and been accountable for its serious failings?
"I put that question in the light of the evidence that there have only been minor changes to the board, the structure of the board and the composition of the board apparently seems to be pretty much it was during the relevant period."
Mr Sackville gave Afford seven days to respond in writing, and Mr Lloyd said it would do so.
A commissioner's report about the Afford case has been prepared and supplied to Afford, but the final report is yet to be published.
Afford's response will be reflected in the report, as well as the royal commission's final report when they are published.
A spokesperson for Afford said it respected the process of the royal commission and would give a response to the commissioner within seven days.
The ABC also contacted Sunnyfield but a response was not provided by deadline.
