Survivor Empowerment and Access Louisiana (SEAL) 

 

Addendum to the Collaborative Charter 

 

 

The Survivor Empowerment and Access Louisiana (SEAL) Collaborative began its work in 
October 2008 comprised of two agencies – the Advocacy Center (AC) and the Louisiana 
Foundation Against Sexual Assault (LaFASA). We developed our Mission and Vision, 
discussed common Values, and initiated the processes by which our Collaborative 
Charter was formed. During the course of our work, we recognized the need to add an 
additional partner to the collaborative effort. In keeping with the guidelines developed 
by the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW), SEAL recognized that the new partner 
would need to be: 

. 
A state-wide organization/agency that had policy-making authority at the local 
level; 
. 
A state-wide organization/agency that had a deep commitment to serving 
people with disabilities who had experienced violence; 
. 
A state-wide organization/agency that had resources (particularly staff 
members) who could commit to playing an active role in the work of the SEAL; 
and 
. 
A statewide organization/agency that was committed to making viable, systemic 
change. 


 

Based upon this criteria developed, only one group emerged – Adult Protective Services 
(APS). After much discussion, including conversations with the Vera Institute of Justice 
technical assistance provider and the program manager of OVW, APS was approached 
by the SEAL project manager regarding inclusion into this project. 

 

 

The SEAL collaboration added a new partner agency, Adult Protective Services (APS) to 
the collaboration in August 2009. SEAL is fortunate to have procured the complete 
commitment from our new collaborative partner and it is the director of APS who shares 
the collaborative table with us at our many meetings both in Louisiana and at the all-site 
visits facilitated by VERA. Subsequent to this addition, SEAL spent time revisiting 
previous conversations and agreements that The Advocacy Center and LaFASA had 
agreed upon and memorialized in the SEAL Collaboration Charter. The information we 
shared about our respective agencies and our experiences led to a deeper 
understanding for each partner of each agency and their respective values/ roles, and 
needs which will assist us as we continue to work toward true systemic change that will 
last beyond the work of SEAL. We fully discussed each element of the Charter and 
clarified information to the point that SEAL believes that LaFASA, AC and APS are fully 
aligned. 

 


SEAL specifically looked the issues of mandatory reporting and confidentiality. This 
addendum serves to memorialize that our new partner, APS, is in agreement with all of 
the expectations and commitments put forth in the Charter. There are a number of 
considerations that SEAL had previously discussed and decided that we revisited with 
APS. In addition, we spent time reviewing and analyzing different case scenarios among 
ourselves, and with our TA provider, to ensure that our collaboration was prepared, in a 
proactive way, to move into the next phase of the project and be appropriately 
responsive to any unforeseen challenges. Some of the questions we discussed regarded 
confidentiality including the following: 

. 
What are the confidentiality requirements for APS staff? 
. 
What is APS’ expectation of LaFASA and Advocacy Center related to 
confidentiality? 
. 
Will they be able to agree to the confidentiality process the Advocacy Center and 
LaFASA developed? If not, what compromises will be necessary? 
. 
What exceptions are there in the APS law? 


 

APS records are confidential. The content is released only under specific circumstances, 
such as consent of a capacitated client or a court order or referral to a service agency for 
the client’s benefit. Confidentiality, as defined by APS has to do with releasing the 
contents of APS investigation files. 

 

 

Some of the questions we discussed regarding mandatory reporting included the 
following: 

. 
What is APS role/position as it relates to mandatory reporting? What is their 
organization’s process in regards to mandatory reporting? 
. 
What is APS’ expectation of LaFASA and Advocacy Center related to mandatory 
reporting? 
. 
Can they agree to the process that LaFASA and Advocacy Center created? If not, 
how can the difficulties be addressed? 


 

APS investigates allegations of abuse, neglect, exploitation or extortion, which are 
reported to the agency. APS has an intake unit, but is not staffed to do outreach, so APS 
is not able to look for unreported cases. During investigations of reported cases, APS is 
mandated by state law to report to law enforcement any allegation made to APS that 
involves physical or sexual abuse. Mandatory reporting is defined in the criminal code of 
the Louisiana statutes and is a law enforcement issue. 

 

 

Since neither APS, LaFASA nor the AC is a law enforcement agency, no member of the 
collaborative is in a position to enforce the mandates We agreed that we will inform 
participants in the program of the reporting requirements and suggest that someone 
with knowledge of a reportable situation contact the appropriate agency as defined by 


law. SEAL hopes, that through this collaboration, and the training opportunities it will 
provide, that the agencies involved will become more aware of the requirements to 
report abuse, neglect, exploitation or extortion of adults with disabilities and make the 
necessary referrals or encourage their clients to self report.