Monday, December 16, 2019

ADT and Senior Helpers Team Up to Provide Aging in Place Support

Security Systems News reports that ADT, a leading security, automation and smart home solutions provider serving residential and business customers, has partnered with Senior Helpers, a provider of in-home senior care, and will introduce its medical alert systems to Senior Helpers clients.  The new partnership will provide seniors with additional safety and support, particularly when a Senior Helpers caregiver is not present.

“Our partnership with Senior Helpers will help provide additional safety and support for its clients who require a caregiver but who also want the freedom and independence to live in their own home, maintain and enjoy their current lifestyle and stick to a budget with no long-term contract commitments,” ADT’s Sr. Vice President of Emerging Markets, Jay Darfler, said in the announcement.

ADT’s medical alert systems also send notifications to Senior Helpers caregivers and designated family and friends in the event of a medical emergency and throughout the initial term of treatment until the customer is discharged.

“Providing peace of mind for our clients is very important, and we believe that this service from ADT is one that many of our clients will find attractive,” Senior Helpers CEO & Co-Founder Peter Ross said in the announcement.

Under the new partnership, Senior Helpers clients will receive preferred pricing for ADT Medical Alert Systems, including ADT Medical Alert Plus and ADT On-The-Go units.

ADT Medical Alert Plus provides a full in-home monitoring service that offers fall detection and home temperature monitoring, along with a wide monitoring range (600 feet from the base). ADT On-The-Go is a mobile option, and the systems also provide families and caregivers with options to monitor their aging loved ones remotely. The device has fall detection and GPS capabilities, and landlines are not required for either service.

For more information on ADT Health and Senior Helpers, visit www.adt.com/health and www.seniorhelpers.com.

Tuesday, December 10, 2019

Asset May Be Available Resource for Medicaid Even if the Resource Cannot Be Sold (Converted to Cash)

An Ohio appeals court has ruled that a Medicaid applicant's real property may be counted as excess resources even though the applicant was unable to sell the  property. Communicare v. Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (Ohio Ct. App., 8th Dist., No. 106874, Sept. 19, 2019).
Mohsen Fanous owned three pieces of real property that were collectively valued at around Sixteen thousand dollars ($16,000.00). He was, apparently, unable to find anyone willing to pay anything for the properties. When he applied for Medicaid benefits, the state denied his application, finding that the properties put him over the Medicaid resource limit and that it could not verify his other resources.
Mr. Fanous appealed, arguing that the properties should not have been considered as countable resources because he was not able to sell them. Because Ohio law defines resources to includes property that the applicant has an ownership interest in and has the legal ability to convert to cash, the trial court dismissed the appeal, and Mr. Fanous appealed again.
The Ohio Court of Appeals, Eighth District, affirmed, holding that the state properly denied Mr. Fanous's application due to excess resources. According to the court, "whether [Mr.] Fanous was able to find a purchaser is a wholly different consideration from what the regulation contemplated, namely whether [Mr.] Fanous had the legal authority to sell the properties in the first place."  Because Mr. Fanous had the legal authority to sell the properties, the value of the properties were considered an available resource, notwithstanding that he could not convert the property to cash.  



This case represents why Medicaid often puts applicants and their families between a "rock and a hard place."  The applicant is unable to liquidate the assets for cash necessary to pay for long-term care, and the applicant is otherwise unable to pay for long-term care.  Often. the reality is that family members, such as children or grandchildren, are "forced" to pay for the applicant's long-term care.    

Monday, December 9, 2019

Nearly $1M Jury Award Against Grandparents Seeking Custody of Their Grandchild

This Blog generally does not include cases regarding domestic relations, excepting, of course the occasional predatory marriage case.  Nonetheless, a case involving grandparents going to extremes to attain custody of a grandchild is worthy of consideration, perhaps as an object lesson that "the ends don't justify the means." 

A U.S. Court of Appeals recently upheld a jury award of $970,000 to a woman in damages against her parents after they, among other things, conspired with law enforcement to gain custody of her daughter. Green v. Howser (7th Cir., No. 18-2757, Nov. 7, 2019).
Jack and Angela Howser were unhappy with how their daughter, Jade Green, was raising her child, E.W. They first attempted to blackmail her with nude photos to prevent her from moving away from them. When that didn't work, they met with local police, the sheriff's office, the county prosecutor, and a private investigator to come up with a plan to arrest Ms. Green while her husband was not at home and gain custody of E.W. Ms. Howser intentionally cashed a check of Ms. Green’s that she knew would bounce in order to have her arrested. While the police arrested Ms. Green, Mr. Howser entered Ms. Green's house and took E.W. away. The Howsers filed for guardianship of E.W., but eventually the court awarded Ms. Green custody of E.W.
Ms. Green sued the Howsers for conspiring with state officials to violate her due process right to make decisions about the care and custody of her child. A jury awarded Jade $470,000 in compensatory damages and $500,000 in punitive damages. The Howsers appealed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, affirmed, holding that there was sufficient evidence of a conspiracy and the damages award was not excessive. According to the court, the evidence showed that the "Howsers engaged in reprehensible conduct" and "their conspiracy with law enforcement officers to forcibly take E.W. was intentional, manipulative, and deceitful."

Thursday, December 5, 2019

Irrevocable Trust Fails to Protect Assets from Availability for Medicaid

"Comfort clauses" in an irrevocable trust are dangerous, and can undermine the objectives of the trust.  A New York appeals court provides another object lesson in the dangers of such planning, ruling that a Medicaid applicant's irrevocable trust is an available asset because the trust instrument gave the trustee too much discretion in the distribution of the trust principal after the trustee had used a home equity line secured by a trust asset to pay for the applicant's expenses. In the Matter of Pugliese v. Zucker (N.Y. Sup. Ct., App. Div., 4th Dept., No. 784 TP 19-00440, Oct. 4, 2019).
Anthony Pugliese was the beneficiary of a trust for which his son was the trustee. His son used a home equity line secured by a trust asset to pay Mr. Pugliese's living and caregiving expenses, which depleted much of the trust's value. Mr. Pugliese applied for Medicaid, but the state found that the trust was an available asset and denied him benefits.
Mr. Pugliese appealed, arguing that his son no longer wished to use his discretion as trustee to make distributions to Mr. Pugliese. The state affirmed the decision, and Mr. Pugliese appealed to court.
The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, affirmed, holding that the trust was an available asset because "the trust instrument gave the trustees broad discretion in the distribution of the trust principal, including for [Mr. Pugliese's] benefit."
An irrevocable trust for the purpose of Medicaid planning MUST provide all of the following in order to ensure that its assets are, subject to the applicable look-back, unavailable for determining Medicaid eligibility:
  • You cannot own the assets;
  • You cannot control the assets;
  • The assets may not be used for your needs, and in particularly, your health needs. 
These trusts can be fashioned as "income-only trusts," where you have no ownership, control, or privilege to the principal of the trust, but the income from the principal is distributed to you.  This way, the funds in the trust are protected and you can use the income for your living expenses. For Medicaid purposes, the principal in such trusts is not counted as a resource, provided the trustee cannot pay it to you or your spouse for either of your benefits. If you do move to a nursing home, however, the trust income is countable, and will have to go to the nursing home.

Even if the trust is crafted properly, the conduct of the parties may undermine the trust.  This may, in fact, have been part of the problem in the Zucker case.   Even a wholly discretionary trust, like that in Zucker,  can be subject to a determination that you have a right  the conduct of the parties show the beneficiary has been able to freely access trust funds by simply asking.  In the Massachusetts case of Caruso v. Caruso which considered a trust for the purpose of property division in a divorce, the court found the beneficiary’s accountant, acting as trustee, amounted to a “yes man” for the beneficiary and was, therefore, in too close a relationship to exercise independent judgment. The court held that even though a trust is purely discretionary, when the beneficiary appears to hold de facto control of the trust, its property becomes subject to invasion. 

You should also be aware of the drawbacks to such an arrangement. An irrevocable trust cannot be changed, at least by you.  Changes in circumstances and changes to the law may impact your plan so adversely that you may regret the plan.

These trusts are also very rigid, so you cannot gain access to the trust funds even if you need them for some other purpose. For this reason, you should always leave an ample cushion of ready funds outside the trust.

These trusts may also increase the risk of institutional care.  When your Medicare hospital benefit runs out (often within a few days of your hospitalization, and very frequently before you are able to medically return home), you are left only the option of institutional care paid for by Medicaid.  This is, after all, the purpose of such planning, to make you eligible for Medicaid earlier.  If you want to age in place, you need to consider whether an irrevocable trust wholly frustrates your plan.  You may not direct payments from the trust for alternatives to institutional care, such as private nurses, home health care aids, or, in most cases, out -patient rehabilitation.  

Monday, December 2, 2019

The Myth of Rehab for Hospitalized Seniors: Forty Percent Never Return Home

Most seniors and senior caregivers believe that discharge from a hospital into a skilled nursing facility (SNF) is just  another natural and obvious step on the road to rehabilitation and recovery, with the hope of heading home on the eventual horizon.  The health care industry actively and intentionally supports this belief in the  information provided to caregivers and patients at the time of discharge.  Even the name of the SNF's sells this hope; a large number of these facilities have the word “rehabilitation” in their name.  A review of a New York’s statewide directory for example, lists 622 facilities, with over half of them having “rehabilitation” in the title. The Ohio Care Planning Council lists 802 facilities, with forty percent (40%) of them having "rehabilitation" in the title. The very name of these  facilities perpetuates a mistaken belief that a hospitalized senior whose Medicare benefit has "run out," will soon return home.

Readers of this blog know, however, that adverse health outcomes inherent to institutional skilled nursing care, and adverse health outcomes endemic, but not inherent, in these facilities, often cause short term rehabilitation to become permanent perpetual skilled care. A significant number of patients entering these facilities experience adverse outcomes, and never make it back home.  A study by the Inspector General of Health and Human Services (HHS), which incidentally only considered patients institutionalized for thirty-five (35) days or less, found that approximately one-third were injured or killed by the very nursing homes that were intended to complete the care necessary to allow them to return home.  Most of these adverse outcomes were preventable.

A 2016 study published in the journal Annals of Surgery paints a bleak picture; forty-one (41%) of patients discharged to a SNF never return home. The study examined the outcomes of patients admitted to SNFs in five states, California, Florida, New York, Texas and Washington. Worse, the researchers found an elevated risk of death with institutional care:
"It is often communicated to patients and families that discharge to an SNF is a step in the process of recovery, and because clinicians have very limited evidence about the natural history of patients discharged to SNFs, patients may be given an unreasonable expectation of return to home. This study demonstrates that a significant proportion (41%) never returns to home, and the 1- and 3-year risk of death is much greater than that in the general population."
The study concluded that "[a]mong all patients discharged to SNFs, 7.8% eventually died in an SNF and overall 1-year mortality was 26.1%." 

Previous studies suggest that health outcomes on discharge to a nursing home do not differ greatly based on the rating, or performance evaluations, of the nursing homes.  In other words, selecting a highly rated facility does not greatly improve your chance of returning home.  The choice between profit and nonprofit facilities is actually more likely to impact health outcomes with for-profit institutions lagging behind the nonprofits. 
   
Families for Better Care ("FBC"), publishes a state-by-state nursing home report card. The following are the grades, rankings, and details for the states included in the study for the  year 2019:

California:  

  • California was given an overall garde of "C."
  • California’s nursing home ranking plunged to No. 22 overall, that’s down ten spots from its previous report card high.
  • The percentage of California nursing homes with one or more deficiencies ticked nearly 3 percent points higher since the last report card, dropping the measure to a failing grade for the first time.
  • California’s percentage of nursing homes with severe deficiencies increased a whopping 64 percent since our initial reports, nearly 1 in 5 nursing homes were cited for actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
  • While California’s direct care staffing hours remained relatively high at 2 hours and 41 minutes of care per resident daily, the percentage of facilities actually providing above average staffing levels told a very different story; the number of facilities with high levels dropped nearly 40 percent since the last report card.
  • A falling percentage of verified ombudsman complaints for the third consecutive report card netted the Golden State its first “A” grade in this quality measure.
  • California nursing home care ranked last in nursing home quality for the Pacific Region.
  • Florida received an overall grade of "B."
  • Florida dropped seven spots in its national nursing home ranking to No. 13 overall—marking the lowest overall rank for the Sunshine State in report card history.
  • Florida ranks among the best states in three critical nursing home quality indicators: direct staffing hours (No. 7), the percentage of facilities with severe deficiencies (No. 8), and the percentage of verified ombudsman complaints (No. 1).
  • While Florida moderately increased direct care staffing hours offered to residents daily, the percentage of nursing homes achieving those higher staffing standards declined considerably, down more than 30 percent since the last reporting period—dropping the state to its lowest level in any report card.
  • Inspectors issued one or more deficiencies to nearly every Florida nursing home.
  • Fewer Florida nursing homes are scoring above average inspections than ever before.
  • Nearly in 1 in 5 Florida nursing homes are on the state’s watch list for dangerous nursing home conditions.
  • Florida nursing home care ranks first out of the Southeast Region’s eight states.
  • New York garnered an overall grade of "C."
  • New York surged higher in overall nursing home care, up 20 spots from its dreadfully low No. 45 ranking in the past two report cards.
  • New York scored “A” grades in every enforcement measure for the first time.
  • Despite New York’s strong showing, the state failed two critical measures: the percentage of facilities with above average professional nursing hours and the percentage of facilities with above average direct care staffing levels, ranking No. 44 and No. 45 respectively.
  • New York’s nursing home staffing hours remained woefully stagnant for the third consecutive reporting period, clocking just 2 hours and 20 minutes of direct care per resident daily.
  • 4 in 5 New York nursing homes had middling to below direct care nursing staff levels.
  • Despite New York achieving its best ombudsman record to date, the advocacy group still verified 3 of 4 ombudsman complaints, indicating widespread concern from residents about their overall quality of care.
  • New York nursing home care ranks fourth in the Northeast Region.

Texas:

  • Texas recieved a failing "F" grade. Texas is America’s worst nursing home state for the third consecutive report card.
  • Texas nursing home care is miserably substandard as the state failed to score even one above average grade in any quality measure—in fact, flunking 5 of 8 statistical categories.
  • Despite Texas’s abysmal showing in overall ranking (No. 51) when compared to other states, there was some good news for residents; nursing home direct care staffing hours nominally improved to 2 hours and 16 minutes of care per day, that’s four minutes more care every day since the previous reporting period.
  • Although fewer than 30 percent of Texas nursing homes received an above average health inspection rating, that’s still 5 percent better than what was reported in the last report card.
  • 1 in 5 Texas nursing homes was cited one or more severe deficiencies. Texas regulators cited 93 percent of the state’s nursing homes for violations of federal or state laws.
  • Texas ombudsmen verified nearly every registered complaint for the third consecutive report card, indicating wide-ranging problems being reported by residents and their families about grossly inadequate quality.
  • Texas nursing homes struggled to employ enough licensed nursing staff to care for residents; fewer than 10 percent of the state’s nursing homes scored an above average rating in professional nurse staffing, this ranks among the lowest nationwide—only Georgia and Louisiana ranked lower than Texas in this critical safety category.
  • Texas nursing homes must do a much better job safeguarding the rights and health of those elderly and disabled adults needing nursing home care—if more money is required for reimbursement to pay for increased costs, then lawmakers must find a way to allocate these needed funds.

Washington:

  • Washington continued its nursing home rankings slide, dropping back seven spots to fall to No. 34 overall, plunging the state into below average territory for the first time.
  • Washington’s nursing home grades show that care is either good or dangerously bad; the state scored above average grades in half of the the quality measures while scoring failing grades in the remaining categories.
  • Despite above average grades in every staffing measure, Washington managed to score failing grades in every regulatory and advocacy measure.
  • With 65 percent of Washington nursing homes being cited a severe deficiency—the highest percentage nationally—that means more Washington nursing homes had citations for dangerous conditions than did not.
  • Less than 3 percent of Washington nursing homes had a deficiency free inspection—one of the nation’s worst rates.
  • Washington’s nursing home care ranks last in the Pacific Alaska Region.
  • Washington received a near-failing grade of "D."
For more, consider the following:



















    Personal finance news - CNNMoney.com

    Finance: Estate Plan Trusts Articles from EzineArticles.com

    Home, life, car, and health insurance advice and news - CNNMoney.com

    IRS help, tax breaks and loopholes - CNNMoney.com