May 20, 2022

Volume XII, Number 140

Advertisement
Advertisement

May 19, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

May 18, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

May 17, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis
Advertisement

CMS Promises Future Guidance on Elder Justice Act Requirement for SNF Owners and Employees to Report Crimes

In a March 11, 2011 letter, a key official from CMS has announced CMS’s plans to issue future guidance on Section 1150B of Title VI, Subtitle H of the Elder Justice Act. That provision requires that certain employees and owners of SNFs that receive federal funding (including Medicare and Medicaid) report to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and to local law enforcement any "reasonable suspicion" of a crime occurring in the facility.

The law’s breadth has left most long term care providers and government officials wondering how it can be implemented and precisely what is required. Many of the terms in the statute are undefined, but the penalty for failing to report reasonable suspicion of a crime occurring in a long term care facility includes enormous civil money fines that attach to the individual failing to report suspicion of a crime. A number of providers and provider organizations around the country have inquired of their State Survey Agency and various CMS Regional Offices about the law, whether implementation has been delayed, to what crimes the law will apply and to whom these "reasonable suspicions" should be reported.

CMS has stopped short of saying that enforcement of the law has been delayed. However, in his March 11, 2011, letter, Thomas Hamilton, Director of CMS’s Survey and Certification Group, stated that "at the present time we are formulating the necessary procedures and communications" to implement the law. He also stated that "we plan to issue guidance in the near future."

We are hoping that CMS will issue guidance that narrows the potentially enormous scope of this law and answers some of the lingering questions for which, frankly, there are currently no answers. We will continue to monitor developments regarding this part of the Elder Justice Act and report to Shorts readers as further guidance becomes available.

 
© 2022 Poyner Spruill LLP. All rights reserved.National Law Review, Volume I, Number 117
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Kenneth L. Burgess, Health Care Litigation Attorney, Poyner Spruill Law firm
Partner

Ken is a health care attorney with more than 28 years of experience advising clients on a wide range of regulatory, reimbursement, litigation, compliance and operations issues.  His practice has focused heavily, but not exclusively, on issues affecting long term care providers.  He has advised them on a wide variety of legal planning issues arising in the skilled nursing facility setting, assisted living setting, hospice, home health and other spheres of long term care. He also frequently represents ancillary service providers (pharmacy, DME, therapy and similar...

919-783-2917
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement