Jacob Schles v. Department of Public Health (SPR 20253729)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records December 31, 2025 SPR25/3729 Helen Rush-Lloyd Records Access Officer Department of Public Health 250 Washington Street Boston, MA 02108 Dear Ms. Rush-Lloyd: I have received the petition of Jacob Schles appealing the response of the Department of Public Health (Department/DPH) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On November 17, 2025, Mr. Schles requested “all emails between DPH employees and employees of Deloitte Consulting LLP between November 1 2024 and November 17 2025 that include the keywords ‘BSAS Dashboard,’ ‘Bureau of Substance Addiction Services Dashboard,’ ‘HealthPrism,’ ‘PeoplePrism,’ ‘Opioid360,’ or ‘ITS81,’ including replies to these emails.” The Department responded on November 19, 2025, November 24, 2025, December 2, 2025, and December 17, 2025, assigning the request reference number BSAS-2025-90. Unsatisfied with the Department’s responses, Mr. Schles petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3729, was opened as a result. The Public Records Law The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A(d); 950 C.M.R. 32.03(4). “Public records” is broadly defined to include all documentary materials or data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by any officer or employee of any agency or municipality of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). It is the burden of the records custodian to demonstrate the application of an exemption in order to withhold a requested record. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). To meet the specificity requirement a custodian must not only cite an exemption, but must also state why the exemption applies to the withheld or redacted portion of the responsive record. One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832 • Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre • pre@sec.state.ma.us

Helen Rush-Lloyd SPR25/3729 Page 2 December 31, 2025 If there are any fees associated with a response, a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. The Department’s Responses In its November 19, 2025 response, the Department stated, “[y]our request has been received and is currently being reviewed.” On November 24, 2025, the Department asked Mr. Schles to narrow his request and stated, “[w]e are reviewing your request, and it has over 3,000 items.” Later the same day, Mr. Schles agreed to limit the keywords of his request to “HealthPrism,” “PeoplePrism,” and “Opioid360.” In its December 2, 2025 response, the Department stated, “[w]e are still gathering information and putting it together. We are requesting for an extension for 10 business days.” On December 17, 2025, following multiple update inquiries from Mr. Schles, the Department stated, “[o]ur apologies for the delay. Since you are considered media, our reviewed records for both requests have to go up to the communications office for review and approval before we get them back to send. We continue to follow up with them and will do so again today, [we] will do our best to keep you posted.” Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Schles stated, “[i]t has now been 18 business days since I updated my original request and 12 business days since the DPH said it was requesting a 10 business day extension. I have not received the records, and am filing this appeal to ensure that I receive the records in a timely manner.” Timeliness in Providing Records G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of the request unduly burdens the other responsibilities of the agency or municipality such that the agency or municipality cannot provide records within 10 business days, the agency or municipality must inform the requestor in writing within 10 business days. With respect to the timeframe to produce responsive records, the written response shall: identify a reasonable timeframe in which the agency or municipality shall produce the public records sought; provided, that for an agency, the timeframe shall not exceed 15 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records and for a municipality the timeframe shall not exceed 25 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records; and provided further, that the requestor may voluntarily agree to a response date beyond the timeframes set forth herein.

Helen Rush-Lloyd SPR25/3729 Page 3 December 31, 2025 G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Where Mr. Schles’ request was submitted on November 17, 2025, and narrowed on November 24, 2025, and the Department has not provided responsive records, nor cited an exemption for withholding records, I find the Department has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Accordingly, I find the Department must provide an estimated date as to when it expects to complete its review and provide the requested records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the Department must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Schles with a response to the request provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within ten (10) business days. A copy of any such response must be provided to this office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of the response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Mr. Schles may appeal the substantive nature of the Department’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Jacob Schles