SOS from the Children's Village

Educators at the Carinthian SOS Children's Villages Moosburg systematically subjected children to inappropriate treatment until just a few years ago, locked them in inappropriately, photographed them in an exposed state. The organization knew but kept all evidence and proof under lock and key

Investigation, FALTER 38/2025, 16.09.2025

The photo shows a small boy. He is standing on a playground, wearing a T-shirt but no pants, his intimate area exposed. The educator who took the photo could see it every time he opened his private laptop. The image served as his desktop background.

On the hard drive, the man had stored additional images in an exposed state of small children, such as close-up shots of boys standing in a bathtub. After work, the educator took children to his private apartment.

An educator locked a girl alone in her room every night for three years.

Children were punished with food deprivation. An educator gave them only rice cakes and rationed their drinking water. She observed the children while showering "to prevent secret drinking," as she herself formulated in the daily routine log. She removed the faucet. She is alleged to have bitten the children and subjected them to physical transgressions.

The children's bedroom doors were fixed with ropes. Whoever was inside could look out, but getting out was impossible.

And then there were children who were brutally pinned to the floor. Hundreds of times.

All of these torments and inappropriate treatments did not take place in some distant dark ages. Nor did they occur in some ill-reputed environment — they happened right in the middle of Austria, in a highly respected institution financed by donations to help children: the SOS Children's Villages in the Carinthian community of Moosburg, a few minutes' drive from Klagenfurt. The village director knew the conditions, tolerated them, and, according to statements and documents in Falter's possession, was himself physically transgressive.

This is the conclusion of a study from 2021, which Falter possesses and whose shocking content was covered up for four years. It is still under lock and key and was leaked to Falter anonymously. The study authors speak of a "system of inappropriate treatment in the Children's Village."

One thing up front: whether the facts and the associated allegations recorded in the study and reported here by Falter are criminally relevant may only be decided by the courts. The presumption of innocence applies to all affected employees.

In the executive suite of SOS Children's Villages, the study caused panic. That is why it disappeared into a folder. The management imposed "absolute confidentiality."

"The shower screen is carefully folded out by the adults. Everyone showers independently with verbal instruction and constant observation to prevent secret drinking [among other things, water intake was also sanctioned]."²⁰

The quotes come from the study on the SOS Children's Villages Moosburg. It describes psychological, physical, inappropriate and institutional treatment of children between 2008 and 2020. It was conducted by the Institute for Men's and Gender Research Graz

Image: FALTER

But the abuses can no longer be kept secret, and they raise the question of what is happening in SOS Children's Villages — and who is providing oversight.

SOS Children's Villages is something of an Austrian cultural asset. Everyone knows the donation letters with the green logo. The first village was opened by educator Hermann Gmeiner in 1951 in the Tyrolean community of Imst. Since then, generations of orphaned and neglected children have grown up in Children's Village families. Today there are 572 SOS Children's Villages worldwide.

Austrians donate around 35 million euros annually to SOS Children's Villages. This, even though cases of inappropriate conduct in international Children's Villages repeatedly became public. In Austria, the SOS Children's Villages community enjoys a good reputation. That is now over.

The incidents that Falter has been investigating for weeks show the backstage of SOS Children's Villages: a vast chasm gapes between the image the donation-financed organization paints of itself and the brutal everyday life in the Moosburg Children's Village.

Responsibility lies not only with small cogs but also with the three-person management: Christian Moser, Elisabeth Hauser, and Nora Deinhammer, who sat at the top of the organization at the time. They have known the study for years. According to employees, the executive suite largely ignored its recommendations to this day. They accuse it of inaction and endangering child welfare.

These are not empty claims; whistleblowers substantiate their allegations with internal documents that Falter was able to view. The study is also not just some internal paper but guarantees high scientific quality.

On its cover are the study's commissioners: Heidi Fuchs, then business manager of the Children's Village Region South, responsible for Carinthia, Styria, and Burgenland — new to the organization. And Elisabeth Hauser, then part of the management. The commission was awarded to the Institute for Men's and Gender Research in Graz.

The authors analyzed 600 data sets, including files, letters, emails, and interviews with educators. In the 100-page report, they relentlessly reveal what allegedly happened inside the Moosburg Children's Village between 2008 and 2020: inappropriate treatment, inappropriate conduct, silence. And a patriarchal, closed system that covers for perpetrators and endangers children.

When asked by Falter, Fuchs confirms having commissioned a study together with Elisabeth Hauser. Fuchs, like Hauser, is no longer with SOS Children's Villages; she resigned. She left the organization in 2023, Fuchs says. "At her own request and due to substantive differences with the management."

Around 80 children between two and 21 years old live in the SOS Children's Villages Moosburg. Narrow paths connect the 14 residential buildings on the expansive grounds. Playgrounds, old trees, and a riding facility seem idyllic. But a breeding ground for inappropriate treatment emerged here.

"In the SOS Children's Villages Moosburg, a culture prevailed that promoted, produced, covered, and thus continuously reproduced inappropriate treatment and boundary violations on several levels," the study judges. It explicitly names physical, psychological, inappropriate, and institutional treatment.

Three persons are the focus of criticism: a former educator, a former senior employee, and the former village director himself. But other employees also participated in the inappropriate treatment of children.

The SOS Children's Villages in the 4,600-soul community of Moosburg

The shocking thing: inappropriate treatment of children is said not only to have been tolerated but "demanded" as an educational method, or as formulated in social worker parlance: "Physical inappropriate treatment was to a large extent permitted." This is how an SOS Children's Villages employee describes it. And: "Physical transgressions were commonplace."

Since their founding, SOS Children's Villages have been based on a simple principle: children were to grow up in a family-like "living space ordained by God," with a mother and a father. The substitute mother sacrificed all her strength for the children. She needed no pedagogical training for this: "Instinctive mother love," as Children's Village founder Hermann Gmeiner called it, was more important than pedagogy.

The substitute father was the village director. He ensured order and obedience, when necessary also with inappropriate treatment. "Every village is what the village director is," Gmeiner decreed in 1967 as the pedagogical status quo.

In Moosburg, the original concept was lived until 2020. Men sat in leadership positions, often without pedagogical expertise. Women took care of the children; when they were overwhelmed, they brought in men who intervened with physical transgressions — or they became physically transgressive themselves.

This is particularly vividly illustrated by the case of a long-serving Children's Village mother. She bullied and tormented the children. In the early 2000s, the woman lived with four children, for whom she was responsible as the closest caregiver, in House 16. The single-story 1970s building with dark-stained balcony stands at the edge of the facility. There she is said to have "shielded" the children from the rest of the village.

The Children's Village mother locked the children in their rooms. With ropes, she fixed the doors so that they only opened a crack. The rooms themselves were sparse; their meager furnishings are justified in internal documents by the fact "that the children apparently break everything."

The Children's Village mother sanctioned the children's behavior with food deprivation. As punishment, there were only rice cakes and water. But even the water was "strictly limited," as a family helper who worked in House 16 recorded. The faucet was removed so the children could not drink "unsupervised." While showering, the Children's Village mother observed the children "to prevent secret drinking."

The children's rooms, as can be read in the file memo of PmsLF# N2, were locked by PMA# F8 with ropes so that "the child can look out but cannot leave the room"¹².

Image: FALTER

She sewed the children's trouser pockets shut, presumably out of pure malice. If the children wet themselves at night, they were punished in the morning and had to carry the laundry to the washroom themselves.

In the study, the Children's Village mother is described, based on colleagues' statements, as an "anxious person with clear compulsive tendencies, lack of insight, and high perfectionism." Her pedagogy was "oriented toward dominating the children."

The protocols of her daily routine are a "rulebook of repressions," as her supervisor, the Children's Village director, noted in the files. In 2008, he filed memos about "deprivation of liberty, control, and neglect of children" by his employee. He knew of the children's suffering. He did nothing; on the contrary: for years he ignored internal complaints and covered up the educator's acts. He considered locking children in as a suitable educational measure, according to the study.

Only under external pressure did he intervene. Educators from the public kindergarten and elementary school turned to him "in light of the transgressive behavior" of the Children's Village mother.

After long hesitation, he terminated the employment relationship with the employee — and issued her an impeccable reference. Thus, with his help, she quickly found work again — in a public kindergarten. The director concealed the reason for her departure from colleagues. He never reported the educator.

Although she no longer worked for the Children's Village, she was allowed to continue visiting the children. A ten-year-old girl "returned from one of these visits noticeably irritated and showed psychosomatic symptoms that (…) caused the girl to relapse into old coping patterns believed overcome," as the study states. The child developed "pathological eating behavior" and wet herself. Her new Children's Village mother spoke out against visits from her predecessor.

Six years later, two boys reported inappropriate treatment by the same educator at the Klagenfurt State Hospital. During a health check, they told of how they had been physically subjected to inappropriate treatment, bitten, and locked in inappropriately by the woman years before. The hospital forwarded the information to the authorities. According to the study, the public prosecutor's office closed the investigation again.

For the girl who was re-traumatized by visits from her former Children's Village mother, the inappropriate treatment did not end. The new substitute mother also continued to torment her. From age 13 to 16, she locked the young person in every night. The reason: "difficulties in controlling her urges."

The locked door was intended to prevent the young person from "secretly and unnoticed climbing into her roommate's bed," as the educator's documents state. A long-serving employee criticizes the measure in a study interview: "The approach shows that employees, before engaging with the issue, simply close the door and lock the children in."

Deprivation of liberty, malnutrition, and sadistic punishments were only part of the inappropriate treatment in Moosburg. An educator is said to have violated the children's intimate sphere. How long the man worked in the village cannot be determined from the records. In the mid-2010s, he was certainly employed here as a pedagogical leader.

Deprivation of liberty as a form of psychological exercise of inappropriate treatment is also found in other documents of various children and young people. Some children were repeatedly exposed to new, differently situated forms of inappropriate treatment during their time at SOS Children's Villages Moosburg, as a result of which they were restricted in their individual development (both physical, cognitive, and emotional) over often long periods. The chain of extremely unfavorable and risky developmental factors has with high probability contributed to psychosocial and cognitive impairments on the part of the affected children.

The allegations against him are serious. His supervisor, the Children's Village director, filed several memos, for instance about events that allegedly took place at the Italian holiday camp Caldonazzo. Since 1953, a camp for children and young people from SOS Children's Villages throughout Europe has been located there.

Four hours' drive from Moosburg, children and young people can spend their summer holidays here. They sleep in bungalows or in large tents with bunk beds. Lake Caldonazzo lies right outside the door. Part of the camp is located in the center of the Italian community; it is called an "oasis of tranquility." A wall was supposed to provide protection for the children.

In 2016, the employee photographed children in an exposed state at the camp. He saved the images on his private laptop. The shots show boys in the bathtub "captured in large format, standing alone," the Children's Village director noted in his files. The photos were also noticed within the workforce. An educator reported the photos. But the accused educator downplayed the images: "They want to hang me for a couple of photos," he allegedly told a colleague.

Not only the Children's Village director knew about the images; the hierarchical level above him, the then business management of Region South, was also informed. The responsible parties trivialized the photos as an "unacceptable error." But an "inappropriate material context" was not present, business management wrote in an internal statement.

According to lawyer Barbara Schloßbauer of the reporting office Stopline, such an incident should still have been reported. Having an image in an exposed state of a minor child as a desktop background crossed a line, she says. If only to clarify any endangerment of child welfare. The guidelines of SOS Children's Villages also prescribe reporting to the responsible child and youth welfare office.

The boss never reported the employee, nor pressed charges.

The man, the study continues, is said to have "created situations" in which he was alone with the children. According to conversation transcripts, a girl at the Caldonazzo holiday camp undressed "down below" in front of him. Later, the educator is said to have come out of the bungalow with the child by the arm. The girl was wearing nothing. He repeatedly sat children on his lap, stared at them, or accompanied them while showering.

He allegedly took a boy from House 4 to his home "multiple times," "when there were crises or conflicts, also overnight," the Children's Village director noted in his files. He also reportedly offered children to do homework alone with him in his office. Confronted about it, the man defended himself: The children just liked coming to him so much.

One employee "couldn't just stand by and watch anymore." She distracted the children with other activities to prevent them from approaching the man. "This is how I tried to protect the children."

There is no proof that inappropriate conduct occurred in the educator's private apartment. The study authors speak of "risky constellations" for the children that the employee created. He is also said to have exploited his leadership position to cover up the allegations. For example, the foster parents of a child who was alone with him in his apartment were not allowed to know about the "suspicion of inappropriate conduct," as a file memo proves. The Children's Village boss also knew about this.

"The PFK# R5 saved photos from Caldonazzo on her private laptop, among them five images showing [Boy, Kd_04] (7) and [Boy, Kd_05] (4.5) in an exposed state. The boys are standing or lying in a tub and were captured in large format, standing alone. In one image, [Boy, Kd_04] is shown at the playground with a T-shirt and without pants; PFK# R5 used this image as the desktop background on the laptop."

Image: FALTER

The Moosburg incidents also had no legal consequences for this educator. In October 2016, he separated from the Children's Village by mutual consent — he too received an impeccable reference. Internally, it was assured that the separation had nothing to do with the images in an exposed state on the private laptop.

The village director wanted a quick solution, not a process of coming to terms. He neither reported to the state's child and youth welfare office nor sought external help or supervision. When an employee pointed out his duty to press charges, he ignored this and trivialized the allegations of inappropriate conduct.

The study devotes many pages to the role of the director. His parents themselves had grown up in a Children's Village. He is said to have unswervingly perpetuated traditional, long-outdated, and pedagogically "highly questionable" views. He is described as a patriarch, as a "power-oriented person who locked down and controlled the Children's Village." He had the reputation of being "untouchable"; his word was law.

He is said to have been well connected with the circle of Children's Village pioneers. On his office wall, right next to the crucifix, hung pictures of Children's Village founder Hermann Gmeiner and Helmut Kutin, the long-time president of SOS Children's Villages International. The Moosburg Children's Village director got his job without pedagogical training — allegedly, as one employee speculates in a study interview, due to his connections to Kutin.

He stood passively by in the face of inappropriate treatment by his employees. He knew about it, covered it up, and is said to have engaged in inappropriate treatment himself. According to the study, he kicked in doors, struck children, and threatened them. One employee put it this way: The director had the "license for inappropriate treatment."

Under his regime, the pinning of children — the transgressive holding down and pressing down by one or more adults — was pedagogical consensus, and this too was documented hundreds of times.

Attempts by courageous colleagues to draw attention to their supervisor's behavior failed. Those who rebelled felt the power of the village boss. No one had enough courage to make it public, an educator is quoted in the study. "If something didn't suit him, he tore people to pieces. (…) The longer he was in the village, the more narcissistic and choleric he became."

His system only began to crumble in 2020. Again, the impetus came from outside.

A former Children's Village child accused the village director of inappropriate conduct at the Italian holiday camp Caldonazzo. He was reported and suspended by SOS Children's Villages. Due to lack of evidence, there was no trial against him. But there was against his former charge, whom he reported for slander. The director won the court case in the first instance, but the verdict was overturned on appeal. "The evidence was insufficient for a conviction," says a spokesman for the Higher Regional Court of Graz upon Falter inquiry.

The village director lost his job nonetheless. Officially, because he violated internal guidelines.

The investigations shook up the responsible parties. Former employees came forward; an anonymous letter with new allegations reached the organization. The images in an exposed state on the pedagogical director's laptop also came up again. The Klagenfurt Public Prosecutor's Office investigated the allegations, as its spokesman Markus Kitz confirmed to Falter. No charges were brought. The public prosecutor's office closed the proceedings.

The State of Carinthia imposed a temporary admission freeze in May 2020. The welfare of the children in care was to be ensured; new children were no longer allowed in Moosburg. Nothing of this leaked to the outside.

The new business manager South, Heidi Fuchs, wanted to address the allegations of inappropriate treatment in Moosburg and initiated a study in April 2020. Three months later, together with SOS Children's Villages managing director Elisabeth Hauser, she commissioned the Institute for Men's and Gender Research Graz to conduct the investigation.

But instead of finally cleaning up, the responsible parties shelved the study. "Initially I had the genuine impression that there was a willingness to change things," says study author Elli Scambor upon Falter inquiry. She was even able to present the results to leaders. But the hope for structural change lasted only briefly. Soon the study disappeared onto an encrypted drive.

At least: the cover-up provokes criticism among some SOS Children's Villages employees. In internal documents in Falter's possession, an educator laments the lack of transparency and the absent will to come to terms on all levels. Another employee accuses the management of inaction in conversation with Falter. "The management's response was very unsatisfactory. The measures were cosmetic. On the whole, they didn't want to change anything," he says.

"The study was part of a comprehensive process of coming to terms, served internal analysis, and was not intended for external publication," reads a written statement from SOS Children's Villages upon Falter inquiry. And further: "Findings from the study (…) show that mistakes were made at the Moosburg location and that we could not always ensure complete protection of children."

The study results were shared with leaders at the location and "incorporated into comprehensive measures for further development at the location." The "missed reports" had been made up, leaders had been parted with, and the allegations addressed. Structural changes had been made in Moosburg and new forms of care designed. "On behalf of SOS Children's Villages, I apologize to all affected persons who have suffered harm," says managing director Annemarie Schlack.

At the institutional level, however, little has happened. An important recommendation of the study — open handling of the Moosburg incidents — was not implemented, say employees. Here SOS Children's Villages is doing exactly what the study warns against: the institution conceals its mistakes and withholds information, presumably for fear of image and donation loss, from its own people.

The total lack of transparency, which the Moosburg study identifies as a breeding ground for inappropriate treatment, turns the Children's Village and its housed families into closed systems. No one was allowed to know what was happening behind the seemingly intact facades.

The mixture of strict, patriarchal hierarchies, overload, the lack of safe ways to report transgressions, and a pedagogy based on domination made daily life torture for the children. Modern pedagogical concepts and guidelines existed "only on paper," as the study proves. In practice, they did not take effect.

These questionable structures of the Children's Villages have long been scientifically documented. The organization should have been sensitized for years. Historian Horst Schreiber investigated inappropriate treatment in the villages from 1950 to 1990 in 2014 — also commissioned by SOS Children's Villages. His conclusion: the patriarchal villages promote psychological, physical, and inappropriate treatment. In dealing with allegations, a "great inability" on the part of SOS Children's Villages can be observed. Affected persons were often not believed, blame was sought among the victims, whistleblowers received no support and were considered a burden.

"Physical transgressions were commonplace and I believe that colleagues adopted what was modeled without reflection." (Int_01)

How could all of this happen? Why were the children of Moosburg subjected to inappropriate treatment for so many years? Why did child and youth welfare not intervene? And why did the State of Carinthia, legally obligated to oversee the villages, not help the children out of their plight? According to the study, the authorities contributed to ensuring "that the system of inappropriate treatment in the SOS Children's Villages Moosburg could persist for a long time." These serious allegations will likely also have political consequences.

For at least in the case of one physically transgressive Children's Village mother, "insights into correspondence" would allow the conclusion that it was not openly addressed by either the specialist department of the state government — the Department of Child Protection/Child and Youth Welfare — or by the Children's Village side. One employee describes the absence of the authority thus: "The specialist department was like fog and did not assume its responsibility."

The state's child and youth welfare overlooked the abuses for years. It allegedly only "became aware of them in 2020," as a statement reads. The protection of the affected children "could not be comprehensively ensured at that time." That is no admission of guilt.

The authority wipes its hands on the Children's Village. That no reports were made to child and youth welfare was "pedagogical misconduct." After the allegations became known, child and youth welfare evaluated itself. The authority does not admit failure of its own control mechanisms. The SOS Children's Villages Moosburg was also reviewed. Patriarchal leadership structures, outdated pedagogical concepts, lack of professional standards, and insufficient transparency led to the inappropriate treatment of children.

Apropos transparency: the state authority, that oversight body which is supposed to monitor the welfare of children in Moosburg, does not even have the Moosburg study.