Hearing officer says Masonicare discharge notice omits required elements; facility will resubmit

Hearing Officer Stacy Shulman presiding over a June 24 administrative hearing said Masonicare’s June 4, 2025, notice of discharge for a resident at 22 Masonic Avenue in Wallingford, Connecticut, omitted statutory requirements and must be corrected before the agency can proceed.

Shulman, reading the applicable statute into the record, said the notice failed to include the 10‑day deadline to request a hearing under subsection D and did not contain a discharge plan required by subsection C. “So 1 of the thing that is missing from here,” Shulman said, pointing to conflicting timeframes in the document that listed 60 days, 20 days and also a 10‑day appeal deadline.

The omission matters because, Shulman said, absent fulfillment of the statute’s requirements she would have to uphold an appeal and issue a decision against the notice of discharge. “I would write a decision that would uphold the appeal,” she said, explaining that rescinding and reissuing a correct notice would be the clean way to proceed.

The hearing record includes a termination notice dated June 4, 2025 (entered as Record Exhibit 1), an appeal dated June 13, 2025 (Record Exhibit 2), and a notice of hearing dated June 18, 2025 (Record Exhibit 3). Shulman told facility representatives they must ensure the notice states the reason for discharge, the effective date, the resident’s right to appeal and the specific deadlines set out in the statute, and that the notice “shall include the name, mailing address, and telephone number of the State Long Term Care Ombudsman” and be sent to that office.

Ms. Larabee, the State Long Term Care Ombudsperson’s representative who assisted the resident in filing the appeal, and other ombudsman staff told the hearing they had provided guidance to the facility about the required wording. “I actually sent Matthew a very detailed email about the 19 rule, and and and told him what he needed,” Ms. Larabee said, noting the facility’s second notice in the record added the ombudsman’s name inappropriately and still did not correct the statutory omissions.

Donna Roussom of Masonicare’s finance department asked how the facility should document a resident’s individual needs if the resident is independent. Shulman answered that the discharge plan should state what services the facility provides and whether the resident is independent or requires a higher level of care, and that the plan must outline any known medical or mobility needs. “You should also identify, like, the level of care that she would need,” Shulman said.

Shulman urged the facility to provide, before any future hearing, documentation of nonpayment or an accounting of amounts owed—examples include invoices or the contract that established the resident’s monthly payment amount. She explained that the discharge plan must be provided to the resident within seven days of the notice and must also be submitted to the hearing office on or before the hearing date.

The resident participating in the call, identified in the record as Ms. Mark, said she wants to arrange a payment plan and told the hearing she had paid about $10,400 in recent months and wanted to catch up. “I really wanna mention that I wanted to work out a payment plan ... I wanna catch up,” Ms. Mark said. Shulman and staff told Ms. Mark that evidentiary statements about payment plans are appropriate for a full hearing on the merits, not the procedural call.

Facility representatives agreed on the call to resend a corrected notice. “At this time, yes. We will resubmit,” a facility representative said, acknowledging they would address the hearing officer’s instructions before proceeding. Shulman noted that if the facility reissues the notice and it is appealed, the hearing office does not have jurisdiction until it receives the appeal and then has a scheduling timeframe tied to receipt of that appeal.

Next steps: the facility will resend a corrected discharge notice that addresses subsections B, C and D of the statute and include a discharge plan and accounting exhibits for any future hearing. The hearing officer said she expects another notice may be filed but emphasized that the notice must comply with the statutory form requirements to proceed.