HEARING - U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging
HEARING - U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging HEARING - U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging
145 MEMORANDUM RE: SIGNIFICANCE OF THE JUDGEMENT ISSUED IN FOX V. BOW- ON JANUARY 13, 1987. Jose A. Cabranes, U.S. District Court Judge for the District of Connecticut, has issued a detailed Judgement to effectuate the Memorandum of Decision and Order entered in Fox v. Bowen, (Civil Action No. H-78 541)(JAC), on April 23, 1986. In the April 23rd Memorandum, Judge Cabranes ruled that the Medicare administration's practice of arbitrarily denying Medicare skilled nursing facility coverage to Connecticut's residents requiring daily physical therapy treatments violates the Medicare statute and regulations and the due process clause of the United States Constitution. The recent Judgment, filed on January 13, 1987, provides for both retroactive and prospective relief. Every living member of the Plaintiff class, including those patients denied Medicare nursing home coverage as early as October 1978, will be notified of the Court's ruling by first-class mail, and offered the opportunity to request a good-faith, individualized redetermination of their entitlement to coverage, free from the arbitrary rules of thumb and presumptions formerly used by the federal government to deny benefits. In its Jud"ment the District Court provides for the appointment of a
146 reformed its decision-making process so that patients receive individualized assessments of their entitlement to coverage made in accordance with the Medicare statute and regulations. Implementation of the new nt in EX should have revolutionary implications for patients seeking Medicare skilled nursing facility coverage. The Health Care Financing Administration, the federal agency which administers the Medicare program, will be required to disclose the decision-making process in hundreds, or even thousands of cases. If the coverage decisions rendered are arbitrarily unfair (as they have usually been in the past) that fact will be clearly revealed to the
- Page 97 and 98: 94 Item 3 Testi~ony of GAIL SHEARER
- Page 99 and 100: 96 to Secretary Bowen's proposals c
- Page 101 and 102: 98 -4- most-states do not monitor t
- Page 103 and 104: 100 Catastrophic Protection within
- Page 105 and 106: 102 - a - participants and in part
- Page 107 and 108: 104 - 2-- Consumers Union suV orts
- Page 109 and 110: 106 29), but fails to acknowledge t
- Page 111 and 112: 108 explore all alternatives to lon
- Page 113 and 114: 110 adds to the complexity of Medic
- Page 115 and 116: 112 - 10- Consider first the propos
- Page 117 and 118: 114 - 12- insurance premiums and me
- Page 119 and 120: Consunmer Unon Pubtishcr of Consume
- Page 121 and 122: FOR RELEASE AT 9:00 P.M. H2ST) TUES
- Page 123 and 124: 120 Itema I CENTER FOR MEDICARE ALw
- Page 125 and 126: Page 3 122 aide services, however,
- Page 127 and 128: Page 5 state treasuries." 124 Judge
- Page 129 and 130: 126 462 6485 New Developments 10,05
- Page 131 and 132: 128 462 6-85 New Developments 10,05
- Page 133 and 134: 130 462 6-85 New Developments 10,05
- Page 135 and 136: 132 10,930 New Developments tI.PZ ;
- Page 137 and 138: 10,932 134 New Davelopments 492 346
- Page 139 and 140: 136 10,934 New Developments It! ;6
- Page 141 and 142: 10,936 138 New Developmenlt I. Thc
- Page 143 and 144: 140 10,938 New Development. 492 S-8
- Page 145 and 146: 10,940 142 New Developments i92 586
- Page 147: ATroR EYS -HARLES C. -ULiIN JUDITH
- Page 151 and 152: 148 : 14 2i57 New Developments 13,1
- Page 153 and 154: ~ 150 a>, rsn Cdw ~w (e d rum 0A7,.
- Page 155 and 156: 152 All Of these figures are based
- Page 157 and 158: 154 The requirements of this Act sh
- Page 159 and 160: 156 Drefting Note: Where the word "
- Page 161 and 162: 158 (b) The issuance of the group p
- Page 163 and 164: 160 (2) Contain a provision establi
- Page 165 and 166: 162 and competitive reasons. It is
- Page 167 and 168: 164 -13- E. Affordability of Long T
- Page 169 and 170: NAIC LTC ADVISORY COMMITEE EXPOSURE
- Page 171 and 172: Setinzn IS. Poicyx D~efinitieno aid
- Page 173 and 174: 170 3. The term "noncancellable' ma
- Page 175 and 176: 172 extension of benefits beyond th
- Page 177 and 178: artinM B Requirmnts for Rplnmacwt 1
- Page 179 and 180: 176 The above "Notice to Applicant"
- Page 181 and 182: (pinnal Rasting &mdsninn 178 Benefi
- Page 183 and 184: APPEMI!X B 180 OCWARISCN OF lVLCY i
- Page 185 and 186: COMPAIeSON OF LOtG TEIM CoAt PfLtCI
- Page 187 and 188: COMPABI:SZN OF LC#C TE" CAiE -OLICI
- Page 189 and 190: COWaPAISON Of LOSt TERM CARE POLICI
- Page 191 and 192: cowRiiSOi or touTE reM CasE nOuczcS
- Page 193 and 194: COGPARISON OF LONG TERM CARE POLICI
- Page 195 and 196: SOME BASIC THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW M
- Page 197 and 198: Private health insurance is availab
145<br />
MEMORANDUM RE: SIGNIFICANCE OF THE JUDGEMENT ISSUED IN FOX V.<br />
BOW- ON JANUARY 13, 1987.<br />
Jose A. Cabranes, U.S. District Court Judge for the District of<br />
C<strong>on</strong>necticut, has issued a detailed Judgement to effectuate the<br />
Memorandum of Decisi<strong>on</strong> and Order entered in Fox v. Bowen, (Civil<br />
Acti<strong>on</strong> No. H-78 541)(JAC), <strong>on</strong> April 23, 1986. In the April 23rd<br />
Memorandum, Judge Cabranes ruled that the Medicare<br />
administrati<strong>on</strong>'s practice of arbitrarily denying Medicare skilled<br />
nursing facility coverage to C<strong>on</strong>necticut's residents requiring<br />
daily physical therapy treatments violates the Medicare statute<br />
and regulati<strong>on</strong>s and the due process clause of the United States<br />
C<strong>on</strong>stituti<strong>on</strong>.<br />
The recent Judgment, filed <strong>on</strong> January 13, 1987, provides for both<br />
retroactive and prospective relief. Every living member of the<br />
Plaintiff class, including those patients denied Medicare nursing<br />
home coverage as early as October 1978, will be notified of the<br />
Court's ruling by first-class mail, and offered the opportunity<br />
to request a good-faith, individualized redeterminati<strong>on</strong> of their<br />
entitlement to coverage, free from the arbitrary rules of thumb<br />
and presumpti<strong>on</strong>s formerly used by the federal government to deny<br />
benefits.<br />
In its Jud"ment the District Court provides for the appointment<br />
of a <str<strong>on</strong>g>Special</str<strong>on</strong>g> Master to oversee Medicare's nursing home coverage<br />
determinati<strong>on</strong> process. Subsequent to the entry of the Judgement,<br />
the Court appointed yale Law School Professor Robert A. Burt to<br />
be the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Special</str<strong>on</strong>g> Master. Professor Burt will c<strong>on</strong>duct a training<br />
seminar for all C<strong>on</strong>necticut intermediary and provider pers<strong>on</strong>nel<br />
during which he will explain the rulings of the court, including<br />
the requirement that beneficiaries receive an individualized<br />
assessment of their entitlement to skilled nursing facility<br />
benefits.<br />
Following the completi<strong>on</strong> of the training seminar, Professor Burt<br />
will receive copies of all redeterminati<strong>on</strong>s issued by Medicare<br />
fiscal intermediaries for members of the Plaintiff class<br />
(C<strong>on</strong>necticut residents who received daily physical therapy<br />
treatments in skilled nursing facilities), as well as copies of<br />
all initial coverage determinati<strong>on</strong> issued by skilled nursing<br />
facilities during a six m<strong>on</strong>th trial period. In additi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
Professor Burt will undertake an in-depth analysis of randomly<br />
selected cases <strong>on</strong> a sample basis to determine whether the rulings<br />
of the Court have been properly implemented. This analysis will<br />
include examinati<strong>on</strong> of the actual medical record in the sample<br />
cases. Professor Burt is also empowered to interview patients,<br />
nursing home pers<strong>on</strong>nel, and attending physicians, c<strong>on</strong>cerning the<br />
sample cases he selects.<br />
After the six m<strong>on</strong>th trial period is completed, Professor Burt<br />
will report to the Court c<strong>on</strong>cerning whether the government has