Monday, May 25, 2015
University of South Dakota Assistant Professor of Law Thomas E. Simmons has an intriguing article in the summer 2015 issue of Hastings Women's Law Journal. From his article, "Medicaid as Coverture," here are some excerpts (minus detailed footnotes) to whet your appetite:
Not long ago, married women possessed limited rights to own separate property or contract independently of their husbands. Beginning in the nineteenth century, most of the most serious legal impediments to women enjoying ownership rights in property and freedom of contract were removed....
Three twenty-first century developments, however, diminish some of this progress. First, later-in-life (typically second) marriages have become more common.... These types of couples were not the spouses that reformers had in mind in designing inheritance rights or other property rights arising out of the marital relationship....
Second, perhaps as a product of advocacy for women's property rights, and perhaps out of a larger social remodeling, women's holdings of wealth have made significant advances.... [But] women of some wealth (in later-in-life marriages, especially) may in fact find themselves penalized by the very gender-neutral reforms that were designed to help them; especially, as will be unpacked and amplified below, when those reforms interface with Medicaid rules.
Third, beginning in the late twentieth century, the possibility of ongoing custodial care costs became the single greatest threat to financial security for older Americans.
As practicing elder law attorneys experience on a daily basis, Medicaid eligibility rules, despite the so-called "Spousal Impoverishment" protections, can impact especially harshly on married women as the community spouses. They are often younger and thus will have their own financial needs, frequently have been caregivers before being widowed, but their personal assets may still be included in the Medicaid estate for purposes of determining their husbands' eligibility. This article takes a critical, interesting approach to that problem.
May 25, 2015 in Discrimination, Estates and Trusts, Ethical Issues, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Health Care/Long Term Care, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
Thursday, May 14, 2015
PBS is premiering a powerful documentary special, Caring for Mom & Dad, during the month of May, with Meryl Streep as the narrator. A sample? Many of us might find resonance with one adult's "bad daughter" (or "bad son") feelings of guilt, candidly admitted here.
Even more important than the video itself will be the conversations that follow viewing. Check your local public t.v. schedule to see when the program will air in your area. (You can check here, to see if the documentary is scheduled yet in your viewing area -- go to the drop down menu for "Schedule.") Plus, in some markets, the documentary will be combined with a live call-in opportunity for individuals and families to explore health care, social care, financial topics and legal issues with a panel of experts.
My own university, Penn State, is hosting the special on Thursday, May 28, 2015 at 8:00 p.m. (Eastern time), followed by Conversations Live at 9:00 p.m. That is two weeks from today on WPSU-TV, a station that reaches a viewing area of 29 counties in central Pennsylvania. In addition, the Conversations Live program will be broadcast on WPSU-FM radio and can be viewed "on-line" at WPSU.org.
As a result of an invitation to be part of the WPSU studio panel, I've had the opportunity to watch the documentary -- several times (it's that interesting!) -- in preparation to help in responding to audience comments, emails and call-in questions. Additional Conversations Live guests include:
Ai-jen Poo, co-director of Caring Across Generations and director of National Domestic Workers Alliance, will be joining via satellite from D.C. Ai-jen Poo is featured in the documentary, and she also has a particular interest in enactment of a Domestic Workers' Bill of Rights, to deal realistically and fairly with the work force that will be necessary to meet the boomer generation's care needs.
Dr. Gwen McGhan, Hartford Center for Geriatric Nursing Excellence at Penn State, with a research background on informal family caregiving.
Jane McDowell, Hartford Center for Geriatric Nursing Excellence at Penn State, and a geriatric nurse practitioner.
The documentary was produced by WGBH-Boston, with funding assistance from AARP and Pfizer.
Please join us and share your stories and observations. The documentary starts with personal stories, but the public policy messages that emerge are ones that need to be heard at state and federal levels -- and heard clearly -- for there to be hope for realistic, necessary and timely solutions.
May 14, 2015 in Cognitive Impairment, Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Dementia/Alzheimer’s, Elder Abuse/Guardianship/Conservatorship, Ethical Issues, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Film, Health Care/Long Term Care, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, State Statutes/Regulations | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
The recent issue of Bifocal, the bi-monthly Journal of the ABA Commission on Law and Aging has a great line-up of articles, including a piece by Social Security Administration (SSA) specialist Janet Truhe on Social Security Seeks Pro Bono Lawyers to Meet Need for Representative Payees. She notes that many disabled individuals do not have family members or other trusted persons who can serve as their agents for receipt and management of Social Security benefits. Anticipating the need for "rep payees" will continue to grow as boomers age, SSA is recruiting attorneys to serve:
Recently, the agency announced the implementation of a pro bono pilot in the State of Maryland (where SSA is headquartered), which is aimed at expanding the pool of suitable representative payee candidates statewide. SSA believes that partnership with the legal community for this purpose is a natural fit....
One particular advantage of this pro bono opportunity is that any attorney, regardless of his or her specialty, can serve as a representative payee with SSA providing any needed assistance. SSA has created a web site for attorney volunteers with training and other information about the role of a representative payee. Any licensed attorney in Maryland, or in neighboring jurisdictions, who would like to volunteer as a representative payee for a beneficiary residing in Maryland can go to http://www.socialsecurity.gov/payee/probonopilot.htm and complete an online registration form. SSA will send the volunteer attorney’s contact information to the servicing local field office. When SSA needs a representative payee for a particular beneficiary, that field office will contact one of the volunteer attorneys and make an appointment for the attorney to come in for an interview and meet the beneficiary.
Hat tip to ElderLawGuy Jeff Marshall for pointing out this SSA recruitment effort.
One option for seniors needing more income late in life is using the equity in their homes, and "reverse mortgages" may make it possible for the older homeowner to stay in the home longer. The Washington Post recently explored the option of having family members serve as the source of reverse mortgage funding. When the Kids Provide a Reverse Mortgage for Mom and Dad outlines potential pros and cons of family-based financing, starting with the mechanics of the loan:
Here’s a simplified example: Say you and two siblings want to help Mom and Dad, who are in their late 70s. You and your siblings are all doing well enough that you have at least some cash to spare. Ultimately, you want to retain your parents’ house for the estate once your parents pass away, keep costs to a minimum and sell the property only when you, not a faraway bank, choose to do so.
So you sit down with Mom and Dad and determine that, at least for the foreseeable future, they will need about $1,500 in additional income a month. You and your siblings agree to apportion the payments among yourselves in some way, maybe a commitment of $500 a month each for a period of years. You also pick an interest rate that achieves a win-win result for you and your parents — say, 3 percent annually. That’s much lower than a commercial lender would charge but higher than what you’ve been earning on your bank deposits or money market funds. There are no required fees upfront — hey, it’s Mom and Dad.
Thanks to Maryland elder law attorney Morris Klein for the pointer to this article.
Tuesday, May 12, 2015
We've written on this blog several times about successful prosecutions connected to so-called "off label" drug use, including the use of antipsychotics for agitation in dementia patients. See here and here, for example. Now, courtesy of a New York Times article, there is news of a pharmaceutical company's lawsuit to preempt such prosecutions, raising First Amendment free speech rights as grounds for off-label advocacy:
On Thursday, Amarin Pharma took the unusual step of suing the Food and Drug Administration, arguing that it has a constitutional right to share certain information about its product with doctors, even though the agency did not permit the company to do so. Lawyers for the company said that they believed their case was the first time a manufacturer had pre-emptively sued the agency over the free-speech issue, before it had been accused of any wrongdoing. Other companies have sued the agency only after they have gotten into trouble....
Lawyers for Amarin say the company is not proposing to market Vascepa to a wider population of patients, merely to share with doctors the results of a 2011 company-sponsored clinical trial that showed the drug lowered triglycerides in patients with “persistently high” levels....
More details about the suit available here.
Tuesday, May 5, 2015
Here we go again. Another hard look at why a significant percentage of the public has not signed some form of advanced directive. In April 2015, GAO issued Advance Directives: Information on Federal Oversight, Provider Implementation, and Prevalence, its response to requests made by Senators Bill Nelson (D-Fla), Johnny Isakson (R-Ga), and Mark Warner (D-Va) who were inquiring into the role of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in overseeing providers, including hospitals and nursing homes, that are mandated by law to maintain written procedures and provide information about advance directives.
Perhaps it is just me, but whenever legislators raise this topic, it seems to me the not-so-subtle underlying message is "why aren't people agreeing in writing to forego aggressive health care as they near the end of life so that we can save more money on health care?"
In any event, the report:
- documents current practices for offering living wills, health care powers of attorney, and various alternatives such as DNR and POLST forms (including the potential for some confusion among staff members of health care providers about "who" should be handling the education and signing process),
- refers to a major Institute on Medicine study (Dying in America, 2015) on a similar topic, and
- concludes that there is no "single" point of entry for execution of advanced directives.
As the GAO team observes, "[t]herefore, a comprehensive approach to end-of-life care, rather than any one document, such as an advance directive, helps to ensure that medical treatment given at the end of life is consistent with an individual’s preferences."
Hat tip to Karen Miller, Esq., in Florida for the link to the latest study and report.
May 5, 2015 in Advance Directives/End-of-Life, Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Estates and Trusts, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Health Care/Long Term Care, Medicaid, Medicare | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
Thursday, April 30, 2015
The Long Term Care Community Coalition has released a new report, Safeguarding Nursing Home Residents and Program Integrity A National Review of State Survey Agency Performance. The 30 page report looks at several topics, including resident harm, inappropriate use of antipsychotic drugs , staffing and treatment of pressure ulcers. The report makes a series of recommendations for CMS and state survey agencies:
1. Re-commit to their mission as enforcement agencies. Residents and their loved ones depend on enforcement agencies to ensure that providers are meeting - or exceeding - standards of care. Tax payers depend on CMS and the SAs to assure financial integrity of the billions of dollars spent each year on nursing home care. However, too often (in our experience), CMS and the individual SAs treat the industry as their client, and its interests as paramount, rather than those of the residents, their families and tax payers.
2. Improve resource allocation. CMS and the SAs should be dedicating their limited resources to fostering vigorous oversight, not training, engaging or otherwise trying to encourage providers to attain the minimum standards of care for which they are already being paid to achieve...
3. Comply with federal Survey Agency requirements. CMS and the SAs should focus efforts on achieving both the letter and the spirit of the law, regulations and the State Operations Manual....
4. Improve performance assessment & integrity.
a. CMS and the SAs should improve training and direction of surveyors...
b. The SAs should collect and assess data on their survey teams’ identification of deficiencies and identification of harm and assess these data in relation to relevant measures (including, inter alia, antipsychotic drug use, staffing levels and pressure ulcer rates)...
c. CMS should conduct, on a regular basis, similar performance assessments of the SAs and the CMS Regional Offices to identify and address weaknesses in quality assurance and oversight. CMS should include in its assessment an analysis of SA complaint handling that includes review of a sampling of actual complaints to determine if they were appropriately investigated and resolved.
Tuesday, April 28, 2015
Another change from the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 is that Medicare will stop using beneficiary Social Security numbers on the Medicare cards. Section 501 of the new law provides that
The Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with the Commissioner of Social Security, shall establish cost-effective procedures to ensure that a Social Security account number (or derivative thereof) is not displayed, coded, or embedded on the Medicare card issued to an individual who is entitled to benefits under part A of title XVIII or enrolled under part B of title XVIII and that any other identifier displayed on such card is not identifiable as a Social Security account number (or derivative thereof).
This will appear in 42 U.S.C. 405(c)(2)(C)(xiii). The changes won't necessarily occur immediately and "shall apply with respect to Medicare cards issued on and after an effective date specified by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, but in no case shall such effective date be later
than the date that is four years after the date of the enactment of this Act." The same holds true with reissuing cards; HHS has up to 4 years from the date the Secretary picks for the new cards.
This is a critically important step, what with the rise of identity theft. It has been a long time coming.
According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the "long-time head of [Georgia's] powerful nursing home lobby has resigned after months of internal differences." The resignation appears to be about more than just internal politics, perhaps implicating state ethics. AJC explains:
"The resignation of Jon Howell, first reported by Georgia Health News, came only a few months after he told lawmakers that the industry didn’t need all of the money Gov. Nathan Deal recommended as part of a rate hike for select nursing homes. Several of those nursing homes are owned by one of Deal’s top contributors. But one state official said the 'civil war' within the organization began before this year’s General Assembly session.
The nursing home association is a major player at the statehouse, and owners have a big stake in what happens at the Capitol. The state pays more than $1 billion a year to nursing homes to care for Georgians. Owners have long been politically active, donating big money to state leaders and lawmakers who fund reimbursements. Earlier this year, Deal recommended that select nursing homes get a $27 million a year rate increase, a bump stalled by the Department of Community Health board last year...."
Separate articles in the AJC indicate that federal CMS authorities are now seeking millions of dollars of reimbursement for Medicaid payments made to 34 specific nursing facilities, although whether this claim correlates with the governor's recommended rate increase is not clear from the articles. State officials are reported as disagreeing with the federal CMS ruling that triggers the reimbursement claim.
Recent rate increases recommended by the Georgia governor were rejected by Georgia's General Assembly. Additional coverage on the Georgia nursing home industry's organization is provided by McKnight's Long-Term Care News.
I suspect the Georgia stories are part of a bigger picture. Compare, for example, Al Jazeera's America Tonight report from April 2014 on The Whopping Political Power of the Florida Nursing Home Lobby, describing the nursing homes advocating for placement of children into facility-based care.
Wednesday, April 22, 2015
LTCCC press release says new study assesses nursing home citation rates nationwide, finds little or no punishment when nursing homes fail to provide care that meets the standards they are paid to achieve, even when such failures result in significant suffering.
Widespread and persistent nursing home problems, including serious deficiencies in care, result in unnecessary harm to thousands of vulnerable residents every day. Deficient and worthless services also cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars a year. The nursing home industry frequently complains that it is one of the most highly regulated in the country. But what does that mean when so many nursing homes are consistently paid to provide care that fails to meet those standards?
LTCCC’s new report, , presents a comparative overview of every state’s (50 states + DC) performance on several key criteria. LTCCC assessed overall state citation rates, number and amounts of fines that each state has imposed in the last three years for violations of minimum standards and the rates at which the states identified resident harm when they found deficiencies. In addition to reviewing state citations as a whole, the study focused on three criteria important to quality care – pressure ulcers, staffing and antipsychotic drugging.
“While no data are perfect, we felt that assessing overall citation and penalty rates, as well as citations for three critical quality criteria, would together provide valuable insights into State Survey Agency performance and the extent to which important problems are being addressed in each state” said Richard Mollot, LTCCC’s Executive Director and author of the report.
1. Resident Harm. States only find harm to residents 3.41% of the time that they cite a deficiency. California and Alabama tied for lowest in the country, finding harm only 1.14% of the time.
2. Inappropriate Antipsychotic Drugging. The nationwide average antipsychotic drugging rate is 18.95% while the average citation rate for inappropriate drugging is 0.31%. This indicates that there is a significant amount of inappropriate antipsychotic drugging that is not being cited by the states.
3. Pressure Ulcers. Pressure ulcers (bed sores) are a problem for over 86,000 nursing home residents. Though they are largely preventable, states cite nursing homes the equivalent of less than 3% of the time that a resident has a pressure ulcer. When states do cite a facility for inadequate pressure ulcer care or prevention, they only identify this as harmful to residents about 25% of the time.
4. Sufficient Care Staff. Insufficient care staff is one of the biggest complaints made by nursing home residents and their families. Studies have repeatedly identified it as a serious problem in a majority of US nursing homes. Nevertheless, insufficient staffing is rarely cited by the states. The annual rate of staffing deficiencies per resident is infinitesimal: 0.042%. Less than 5% of those deficiencies are identified as resulting in harm. Twenty one states never connect insufficient care staff to resident harm in their states.
The report is available on LTCCC’s dedicated nursing home website at http://www.nursinghome411.org/articles/?category=lawgovernment. The website includes interactive charts showing key rates for each state as well as national averages. They include state rankings on criteria identified as important to nursing home resident care and the protection of taxpayer funds that pay for the majority of nursing home care. These charts can be used to gain insights into the strengths and weaknesses of quality oversight in any state.
Tuesday, April 21, 2015
If you haven't had a chance yet to read the new law, you should take a look. Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 was signed by the President on April 16, 2015. Among some of the provisions to note is section 211 which provides for a permanent extension of the QI program (which had expired effective April 1 and had been reauthorized a year at a time), a change to Medigap plans (section 401) and a change to the income-related premium increases for higher income beneficiaries for Part B and D (section 402). These last 2 are part of the offsets in the bill. For the Medigap plans, effective in 2020, those newly eligible for Medicare won't be able to buy a gap plan to cover the Part B deductible. The changes to the income-related premium adjustments take effect a little earlier (2018) and those beneficiaries affected by the change will be paying more for their Medicare coverage.
Monday, April 20, 2015
Whenever I look at national programs on "hot topics" in healthcare law, I'm seriously impressed by the number of offerings on regulatory compliance issues connected to Medicare and Medicaid payments. There are abundant reasons for this emphasis. Each year the Department of Justice touts its statistics on "recoveries" for False Claim Act cases. For the fiscal year ending September 30, 2014, the DOJ enthusiastically reported its "first annual recovery to exceed $5 billion" in a single year. No wonder health care law is a hot field. And remember, much of the money is connected to senior care in all of its guises.
A recent $1.3 million settlement on a Medicare-related False Claims Act case might seem like small potatoes at first glance. But, I was struck by the fact that it was a DOJ settlement with a (non-profit) Continuing Care Retirement Community. I don't usually think of CCRCs as being a major target of False Claim Act allegations. Details are a bit sparse, but the size of the payment seemed pretty hefty when you consider that Asbury Health Center near Pittsburgh, PA actually "self-disclosed" its violation of Medicare regulations. The DOJ press release on April 15 explains:
"For post-hospital skilled nursing care, Medicare regulations require that a facility obtain a physician certification at the time of admission or as soon thereafter as reasonable and practical. The facility must also obtain a physician recertification within 14 days of admission and every 30 days thereafter. Based on information provided by Asbury, the United States alleged that it had civil claims against Asbury resulting from Medicare payments for post-hospital skilled nursing services that were not supported by physician certifications and recertifications."
The 2015 White House Conference on Aging held two more regional forums, one in Phoenix and one in Seattle. There are two regional forums left, one in Cleveland on April 27 and one in Boston on May 28.
As well, the WHCOA will be sponsoring a webinar on April 23 on retirement security. The website offers the following information about the webinar
With Americans living longer, pension options changing, and fewer workers spending careers with a single employer, the sources of retirement security are also changing. This webinar will provide an overview of best practices to help ensure greater opportunity and ability to enjoy a financially secure retirement. Speakers will include officials from the U.S. Treasury Department, the Women’s Institute for a Secure Retirement, and Harvard University. Registration is required and open until April 22nd.... This is the third in WHCOA’s webinar series designed to raise awareness of the challenges and opportunities for older adults in the U.S. We hope you will join us for this engaging discussion of best practices for a secure retirement.
The webinar is free; registration is required. Click here to register.
Thursday, April 16, 2015
The U.S. Department of Labor has released a new proposed rule intended to protect consumers from conflicts of interest among an array of folks who want to give advice about how and where to invest 401(c) and IRA retirement funds. The new rule would impose a "fiduciary duty" standard on those advisors, rather than the current, lower "suitability" standard for investment advice.
A DOL press release explains the goal:
"This boils down to a very simple concept: if someone is paid to give you retirement investment advice, that person should be working in your best interest," said Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez. "As commonsense as this may be, laws to protect consumers and ensure that financial advisers are giving the best advice in a complex market have not kept pace. Our proposed rule would change that. Under the proposed rule, retirement advisers can be paid in various ways, as long as they are willing to put their customers' best interest first."
Today's announcement includes a proposed rule that would update and close loopholes in a nearly 40-year-old regulation. The proposal would expand the number of persons who are subject to fiduciary best interest standards when they provide retirement investment advice. It also includes a package of proposed exemptions allowing advisers to continue to receive payments that could create conflicts of interest if the conditions of the exemption are met. In addition, the announcement includes a comprehensive economic analysis of the proposals' expected gains to investors and costs.
The New York Times covers the new rules in "U.S. Plans Stiffer Rules Protecting Retiree Cash," and notes the history of opposition to this kind of reform from -- surprise, surprise -- the "financial services industry." There is a 75-day window for public comments on the latest proposal.
Perhaps my biggest surprise was the remarkably "consumer friendly" presentation of the proposed change by the Department of Labor on its webpage, beginning with this simple video describing conflicts of interest.
Tuesday, April 14, 2015
The Washington Post reminds us that changes to federal law for government-backed reverse mortgages, adiopted in 2014, are about to kick in:
"Interested in a reverse mortgage without a lot of hassles? Better get your application in fast. As of April 27, the federal government is imposing a series of extensive 'financial assessment' tests that will make applying for a reverse mortgage tougher — much like applying for a standard home mortgage.
[D]uring the years of the recession and mortgage bust, thousands of borrowers fell into default because they didn’t pay their required property taxes and hazard insurance premiums. On top of that, real estate values plunged, producing huge losses on defaulted and foreclosed properties for the FHA. The losses got so severe that the Treasury Department had to provide the FHA with a $1.7 billion bailout in 2013, the first in the agency’s history since its creation in the 1930s.
All of which led to the dramatic changes coming April 27. Applicants are now going to need to demonstrate upfront that they have both the 'willingness' and the 'capacity' to meet their obligations. Reverse-mortgage lenders are going to pull borrowers’ credit reports from the national credit bureaus, just as they do with other mortgages.illion bailout in 2013, the first in the agency’s history since its creation in the 1930s."
For more details see the full Post article at Window Is Rapidly Closing to Get Hassle-Free Reverse Mortgage.
Friday, April 10, 2015
ElderLawGuy Jeff Marshall alerted us to this week's ruling by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, affirming the conviction of Eugene Goldman, M.D. for several counts of taking "kickbacks" for referral of Medicare and Medicaid patients for hospice services. Dr. Goldman's sentence of 51 months, followed by three years of supervised release during which he is barred from practicing medicine, was affirmed. The facts, as set forth in the opinion, are interesting:
"Goldman had a geriatric medicine practice in Northeast Philadelphia. In December 2000, he secured the position of Medical Director of Home Care Hospice ('HCH'). Alex Pugman served as Director of HCH, and his wife, Svetlana Ganetsky, was the Development Executive, responsible for marketing HCH to doctors and other healthcare professionals. According to his contract, Goldman was responsible for quality assurance, consultations, and the occasional meeting. In reality, his job was to refer patients to HCH.
Goldman was paid for the number of patients he referred to HCH and the length of their stay. Early in his relationship with HCH, Goldman was paid $200 per referral. By 2011, he received $400 per referral, with an additional $150 for each patient who stayed longer than a month. Ganetsky paid Goldman each month by check. Between 2002 and 2012, Goldman referred more than 400 Medicare patients to HCH and received approximately $310,000 in return.
In 2006 the FBI and Department of Health & Human Services began investigating HCH for Medicare fraud. The FBI followed up in 2008 by obtaining a search warrant and seizing over 500 boxes of documents and information from HCH’s servers. Shortly after the raid, Ganetsky and Pugman approached the FBI and agreed to cooperate in the investigation. Ganetsky then recorded several meetings at which she paid Goldman for his referrals. Ganetsky made these payments with funds drawn from an account opened by the FBI for the investigation."
Thursday, April 9, 2015
On February 27, Pennsylvania's new governor, Tom Wolf, issued Executive Order 2015-05 regarding "participant-directed home care services."
The order reportedly reflects the Governor's interest and support for home care for seniors and persons with disabilities, while also recognizing potential issues such as low wages or absence of benefits, high turnover, inconsistent quality or lack of standards. The order:
- Creates a Governor's Advisory Group to advise the administration on "ways to improve the quality of care delivered" through publically funded home care service programs;
- Recognizes a "representative for Direct Care Workers for the purpose of discussing issues of mutual concern," while also authorizing a procedure for "election" of the representative; and
- Establishes a "Direct Care Worker List" of all workers paid through state programs, and further permits "an employee organization that has as one of its primary purposes the representation of director care workers" to petition the state to represent a particular unit of direct care workers.
As set forth in recent media reports, the Executive Order has met with resistance from some quarters, including those who are challenging the order as unlawfully permitting "unionization" of home care workers. On April 6, 2015, a complaint seeking injunctive relief from implementation of the executive order was filed in the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court by a home care worker and his long-time client, a "quadriplegic adult with muscular dystrophy receiving care from the [state administered] Attendant Care Services Act.." The complainants are reportedly represented by "The Fairness Center, a conservative public-interest law firm."
April 9, 2015 in Current Affairs, Discrimination, Ethical Issues, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Health Care/Long Term Care, State Cases, State Statutes/Regulations | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Tuesday, April 7, 2015
St. Louis University's Journal of Health Law and Policy has recently released a theme issue, focused on "Health Care Reform, Transition and Transformation in Long-Term Care." A great line-up of articles and authors, including:
- Home & Community-Based Long-Term Services and Supports: Health Reform's Most Enduring Legacy? by Marshall B. Kapp
- Care Coordination for Dually Eligible Beneficiaries, by Katie M. Dean and David C. Grabowski
- The Challenge of Financing Long-Term Care, by Judy Feder
- Rationalizing Home and Community-Based Services Under Medicaid, by Laura D. Hermer
- The Broken Promise of OBRA '87: The Failure to Validate Survey Protocol, by Malcolm J. Harkins III
In addition, there are two relevant Notes written by SLU students:
- Short-Stay, Under Observation. or Inpatient Admission? How CMS' Two Midnight Rule Creates More Confusion and Concern, by Rachel A. Polzin
- Disclosure for Closure? Why the Self-Referral Disclosure Protecol Process Paired with the 60-Day Overpayment Rule Creates More Headaches than Solutions, by Peter J. Eggers
April 7, 2015 in Discrimination, Ethical Issues, Federal Cases, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Health Care/Long Term Care, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, State Cases, State Statutes/Regulations, Statistics | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
Monday, April 6, 2015
According to an informational bulletin from CMS on April 1, the traditional medical assistance program (TMA) and the QI program ended. The QI program had been extended until March 31, 2015, so both programs ended effective April 1, 2015. As a result of the end of the QI program and "[i]n the absence of an extension, states will not be required to discontinue their payment of Part B premiums for QI beneficiaries, but these payments will no longer be eligible for federal reimbursement from CMS unless and until the program is reauthorized" The informational bulletin is available here.
Saturday, April 4, 2015
When it becomes impossible for a loved one to stay at home without help, one decision that families made need to face is whether to use an agency, or hire one or more individuals outright. Agencies are usually more expensive (at least on paper). But direct hires of home aides can raise other questions, including how to handle state and federal income taxes and documentation, insurance, transportation (read: more insurance questions), coverage for holidays, sick leave, overtime, and more. You start off thinking this is short term help; the reality is it can last much longer....
But there is still one more question that may not be on the family's radar screen, until it is too late.
If the informal home care arrangements eventually don't suffice, perhaps because of increasing frailty and care needs, what happens when the individual's money is gone and there is a need for Medicaid-paid care?
As explained in a recent Michigan Court of Appeals case, "informal" arrangements for home care may trigger ineligibility for Medicaid-paid care based on state rules or policies implementing federal law.
April 4, 2015 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Ethical Issues, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Health Care/Long Term Care, Medicaid, State Cases, State Statutes/Regulations | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)