Texas’s State-Sponsored Hell: The Corrupt, Abusive, and Politically-Protected Disaster of State Supported Living Centers

View the Texas Watchdog article Texas’s State-Sponsored Hell: The Corrupt, Abusive, and Politically-Protected Disaster of State Supported Living Centers here. 
In Texas, they like to say everything’s bigger. Bigger trucks, bigger steaks, bigger ego. But what they don’t talk about are the bigger scandals, the bigger failures, and the bigger, uglier bureaucratic monstrosities that exist just under the surface. Take, for example, the State Supported Living Centers (SSLCs), a chain of facilities ostensibly designed to care for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). They should be bastions of compassionate care, but instead, they’ve become the embodiment of Texas’s worst attributes: cruelty, corruption, and cover-ups.
What Texas has built here is nothing short of a state-sponsored hell. It’s a place where the most vulnerable are subjected to unimaginable abuse, where staff members — paid by the taxpayer — are free to run their own Fight Club, and where neglect lea...

View the Texas Watchdog article Texas’s State-Sponsored Hell: The Corrupt, Abusive, and Politically-Protected Disaster of State Supported Living Centers here. 

In Texas, they like to say everything’s bigger. Bigger trucks, bigger steaks, bigger ego. But what they don’t talk about are the bigger scandals, the bigger failures, and the bigger, uglier bureaucratic monstrosities that exist just under the surface. Take, for example, the State Supported Living Centers (SSLCs), a chain of facilities ostensibly designed to care for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). They should be bastions of compassionate care, but instead, they’ve become the embodiment of Texas’s worst attributes: cruelty, corruption, and cover-ups.

What Texas has built here is nothing short of a state-sponsored hell. It’s a place where the most vulnerable are subjected to unimaginable abuse, where staff members — paid by the taxpayer — are free to run their own Fight Club, and where neglect leads to death, all while the government looks the other way. And why wouldn’t they? Protecting the SSLC system is easier than reforming it, and no politician wants to risk losing votes by shutting down a local institution, no matter how rotten it is inside.

So here we are, in the great state of Texas, where oil flows and the money’s green, but if you happen to be disabled and in need of care, well, God help you. Because the Texas government sure won’t.

Fight Club and Abuse: The Texas Tradition of Institutional Cruelty

You’ve probably heard of Fight Club, that Brad Pitt movie where disillusioned men punch each other into oblivion for sport. Well, Texas’s SSLCs decided to make their own version — except the participants weren’t movie characters; they were real people, many of them non-verbal and severely autistic. And instead of it being a voluntary activity, it was coerced by the very people hired to care for them. The Corpus Christi SSLC Fight Club scandal in 2009 wasn’t just some isolated incident, either. It was a snapshot of the systemic abuse rotting away at these centers.

You see, staff members at Corpus Christi didn’t just take advantage of their vulnerable charges; they made a game of it. They forced residents to fight each other for their own twisted entertainment, treating human beings like pit bulls in an underground fight ring. Non-verbal individuals, incapable of reporting the abuse, were pitted against one another while staff members watched and, in some cases, filmed. It’s a scandal so grotesque that it sounds like fiction — but it’s real, and it’s just the tip of the iceberg.

Physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect — you name it, SSLC residents have suffered it. Sean Yates, a non-verbal man with Asperger’s syndrome, died after escaping from the Corpus Christi SSLC. The staff didn’t even bother to inform his family of the abuse he endured in the Fight Club. He wasn’t the first, and he certainly won’t be the last, to meet a tragic end while under state “care.” The Lubbock SSLC saw 17 deaths in one year — 17! — under suspicious circumstances. Imagine if 17 people died mysteriously in a single high school or a corporate office. There would be public outcry, investigations, accountability. But here, in the state-run nightmare that is SSLCs, silence reigns.

The Texas Legislature’s Complicity: A System Built to Fail

So why does this system persist? Why, after multiple investigations, lawsuits, and even a $112 million settlement with the Department of Justice in 2009, do these atrocities continue? The answer lies in the Texas Legislature — those fine, upstanding politicians who love to beat their chests about “freedom” and “justice” while ignoring the rampant human rights violations happening under their noses.

You’d think the people responsible for crafting laws would have some interest in stopping the abuse, but you’d be wrong. Instead, they’ve built a system designed to protect itself. SSLCs provide jobs, and politicians — ever mindful of their reelection prospects — aren’t about to shutter a major employer in their district. That’s all that matters. Forget about the 3,000 abuse, neglect, and exploitation allegations reported annually in the SSLCs. Forget about the deaths, the beatings, the sexual assaults. No politician in Texas wants to be the one to cut jobs, especially not in rural districts where SSLCs are often the largest employer.

And then there’s the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC), the agency responsible for overseeing these institutions. HHSC has repeatedly failed to enforce any meaningful oversight. Year after year, the commission lets things slide. Instead of closing these facilities or holding staff accountable, they respond with cosmetic reforms, like increasing fines for violations — a Band-Aid on a bullet wound.

Let’s face it: the Texas government doesn’t give a damn about the disabled people suffering inside these walls. What they care about is money, power, and political expediency. It’s easier to let the SSLC system continue to rot than to fix it, easier to defend the status quo than to risk a political backlash by shutting them down.

Institutionalized Hell: The Persistence of Abuse

Now, you might think the 2009 DOJ settlement would’ve fixed things. After all, $112 million and a commitment to reform sound like a pretty big deal, right? Wrong. Nearly 15 years later, SSLCs are still riddled with the same issues — understaffing, underfunding, and unrelenting abuse. In 2024, SSLCs are complying with only 42.9% of the provisions laid out in the DOJ settlement. Think about that for a second. Nearly 60% of the reforms promised haven’t even been touched.

And if you ask the politicians, they’ll say the problem is too complex to solve overnight. Complex? Really? Let’s break this down: stop the beatings, stop the sexual abuse, stop the neglect. Hire enough qualified staff, fire the abusers, and close the worst institutions. How is this complex? It’s not — it’s a choice. A choice to prioritize jobs and lobbyists over human lives, a choice to sweep abuse under the rug rather than face the political consequences of real reform.

Meanwhile, staffing shortages have reached crisis levels. SSLC employees are overworked and underpaid, forced to work shifts that stretch over 70 hours a week. It’s no wonder abuse happens; the system is designed to break people. And break them it does. At least 600 caregivers were injured between 2017 and 2022. Some were attacked by residents, but let’s be real — if you cage people in an abusive, neglectful environment, violence is inevitable.

Cost Over Care: Texas’s Budgetary Insanity

What makes this even more infuriating is the sheer waste of taxpayer dollars. Texas spends $661.9 million a year on these institutions, with per-resident costs exceeding $120,000. That’s more than twice the cost of community-based care, which averages $50,000 per year. So not only is Texas locking people up in abusive institutions, it’s paying extra to do it. This is fiscal conservatism, Texas-style: waste more money to do a worse job.

The Texas Legislature’s answer to this mess? Keep the SSLCs open, ignore the systemic abuse, and keep funneling taxpayer dollars into a system that doesn’t work. Meanwhile, the state’s community-based care programs — which could actually provide a better, more humane solution — are woefully underfunded. The waitlist for these programs is seven years long. Seven years! That’s longer than most Texans serve in elected office. So families, left with no options, send their loved ones into SSLCs, knowing full well what could happen. It’s a devil’s bargain, forced on them by a system that treats people with disabilities as disposable.

Families Trapped by a Corrupt System

It’s easy to look at this situation from a distance and wonder why families haven’t rebelled en masse. Why, after all these years, do families still send their loved ones to SSLCs, knowing the horrors inside? The answer is brutally simple: they don’t have a choice.

Texas’s community-based services are a joke. The waitlists are longer than a Texas summer, and families are left with few alternatives. And when families do speak out — when they sue for wrongful deaths, for abuse, for the negligence that led to their loved one’s death — they run into a brick wall of bureaucratic red tape and judicial indifference.

Take the case of David Paul Taylor, whose parents sued after he died while in the care of the Richmond SSLC. They alleged that the facility refused to provide necessary care because of his disabilities, and that refusal led to his death. The case went to court, but like so many others, it was swallowed up in the endless legal wrangling that defines the SSLC system.

Even whistleblowers, people inside the system who try to expose the corruption, face retaliation. Linda Moore, a former employee of the Lubbock SSLC, filed a lawsuit under the Texas Whistleblower Act after she was fired for reporting violations. What happened? The state fought her tooth and nail in court. That’s the Texas way: protect the institution, punish the truth-teller.

SSLCs: Political Lifelines, Not Care Institutions

When you look at the systemic abuses rampant in Texas’s State Supported Living Centers (SSLCs) — the beatings, the deaths, the criminal neglect — the question everyone asks is, why? Why do these places, which are little more than state-run warehouses for the disabled, stay open? If they cost more than community care, if they’re as dangerous as the data and lawsuits suggest, why are they still allowed to exist? The answer, like most things in Texas politics, is simple: power, money, and political survival.

Here’s the dirty secret about SSLCs: they’re not kept open for the benefit of the residents. They’re kept open for the benefit of politicians, their donors, and the local economies that rely on these institutions for jobs. If you think Texas politicians are going to risk upsetting their voters by shutting down a major employer in a rural district, you clearly don’t know how Texas works.

SSLCs are political lifelines. They’re job engines, and those jobs — however dysfunctional the work environment might be — translate into votes. In districts where these facilities are often among the largest employers, shutting them down would be political suicide. It’s not about protecting the people inside, it’s about protecting the political careers of those on the outside.

Let’s break it down: Texas’s rural economies are fragile. Many of these areas rely heavily on a few major employers — hospitals, schools, prisons, and yes, SSLCs. These institutions pump money into local economies, providing stable jobs in places where those are in short supply. In some towns, the SSLC is the only major employer, meaning that if it were to close, there’d be an economic collapse. Politicians know this, and they know that a vote to close one of these facilities is a vote to destroy jobs, alienate voters, and, ultimately, lose elections.

The Political Power of Local Interests

This is where it gets really twisted: the people fighting to keep SSLCs open aren’t the families of residents or even disability rights advocates — they’re local politicians, lobbyists, and contractors. These are the people who benefit from the status quo. They’re the ones who secure lucrative state contracts to provide services to the SSLCs, the ones who campaign on promises of keeping local jobs intact, and the ones who funnel money back into their political campaigns from grateful donors who work at these facilities.