Decision pending after hearing on discharge of Briarcliff Manor resident Shane Vincent

An administrative hearing on Nov. 19, 2025 reviewed a notice of discharge filed by Briarcliff Manor (also identified in paperwork as Briarcliff Convalescent Corporation) for resident Shane Vincent, docket number 251110. The facilitys administrator, Jody Young, said repeated intoxication, daily police responses and aggressive conduct created safety risks for Vincent and 24 other residents.

"We're calling the police on a daily basis," said Jody Young, the facilitys administrator and owner, describing police and incident reports the facility submitted as exhibits. Young told the hearing officer the facility had completed an emergency discharge plan and listed steps it had taken to document incidents and notify regulators.

Vincent, who has lived at the facility since Jan. 15, 2020, denied being a continued danger to others and gave extensive sworn testimony alleging repeated assaults by other residents and staff inaction. "I quit drinking. It's been about 2 weeks now," Vincent said, adding she does not want to become homeless and that she had supplied documentation about injuries to her doctor.

Two behavioral-health clinicians who work with Vincent urged against the discharge as proposed and recommended a higher level of supervised care. "Discharging her after she's been housed for 5 years and make her homeless is not acceptable," said Wendy Hoyle, a licensed addiction counselor with Community Health Center, who cited trauma, PTSD and recent documented assaults. Nina Mancini, Vincents jail-diversion clinician with Southeastern Mental Health Authority, said Vincent is in a voluntary diversion program with weekly check-ins and that she "does not agree with the discharge plan at all." Mancini said sending Vincent to a shelter or an emergency department would not address her clinical needs.

Hoyle also said a provider reported the facility to the Department of Public Health (DPH) and that DPH issued a findings report requiring action; the hearing record included the reference to that report but did not detail DPHs full findings.

The hearing officer repeatedly noted the departments limited remedial authority in this forum. The officer said they can either uphold or deny the notice of discharge but cannot order Vincent placed in a particular facility or resolve superior-court matters such as restraining orders. The officer encouraged off-the-record collaboration among the facility, clinicians and the ombudsman and said a written decision would be issued and mailed to the parties within about 10 days.

The primary factual disputes in the record are: the facilitys characterization of repeated intoxication and police involvement as an ongoing safety risk to other residents; Vincents assertions that she has been assaulted and that staff failed to protect her; and clinicians recommendation that Vincent needs supervised housing rather than immediate discharge to homelessness. The hearing officer took sworn testimony, admitted four exhibits submitted by the facility (police reports, incident logs, arrest paperwork and a protective-order document) and adjourned the hearing pending a written ruling.

What happens next: the hearing officer will issue a written decision expected within about 10 days; parties may also pursue off-the-record coordination about placement options, and any superior-court matters (for example a restraining order) remain subject to the courts, not this administrative proceeding.