Hire a Lawyer. An unrepresented nursing home resident applied for Medicaid on December 21, 2007. A 981 was issued after an intake interview on December 27, 2007. However, the 981 erroneously omitted a request for documentation regarding retirement income and social security benefits. The caseworker realized her error on  February 5, 2008 (3 days after expiration of the standard of promptness) and requested the documents. They were provided the next day and it was shown that the resident’s income exceeded the income cap, requiring a qualified income trust. A QIT was established and funded in February. The case was approved for February ongoing, but denied for prior dates. On appeal, the decision was affirmed. You cannot back-date a QIT. Although the caseworker was required to tell the applicant of the need for the QIT within the standard of promptness, the information was communicated in February and the QIT was established in February. Since compliance with the SOP would have the same result, denial of eligibility for December and January was affirmed. This decision cited Doe v. Chiles, 136 F.3d 709, 718 (1998) for the proposition that the SOP carries the force of legal authority and compliance with the standard of promptness is mandatory rather than precatory.

OSAH-Elbert-Miller-6-2008.pdf January 17, 2008).

Published by
David McGuffey

Recent Posts

Getting a recorded statement introduced in evidence

Elder law attorneys sometimes find themselves in various types of litigation ranging from guardianship cases,…

1 week ago

2027 Social Security COLA

Today the Social Security Administration announced the Cost of Living Adjustment for next year, posting…

2 weeks ago

Good Lawyers Solve Problems, They Don’t Create Them

Years ago I had the pleasure of knowing Arvin Reingold, a Chattanooga lawyer. He was…

4 weeks ago

Stock Research

When you're looking at investing, there is no substitute for qualified competent advice. Having said…

1 month ago

My Views on Investing

My thoughts on investing may or may not help you. I don't claim to be…

2 months ago

Amount of compensation; multiple conservators; forfeiture; renunciation; O.C.G.A. § 29-5-50

Compensation of the Conservator is generally addressed at O.C.G.A. § 29-5-50. There, the Code provides:…

4 months ago