Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Enforcement Cmp Ij topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears examples of immediate jeopardy citations and multiday civil monetary penalties
Summary
Officials and providers described how immediate-jeopardy (IJ) findings and civil monetary penalties (CMPs) are assessed, the potential size of fines, and how penalties can be held in escrow while facilities pursue dispute processes. Providers said they sometimes self-report incidents yet still receive high-level enforcement actions.
Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services staff and nursing-home operators discussed how enforcement works when surveys identify harm or immediate-jeopardy conditions, including CMPs and the appeals timeline.
Lacey Hunter, commissioner of survey certification and credentialing for KDADS, reviewed how CMS and the state categorize deficiencies and allocate enforcement remedies. KDADS follows CMS guidance that groups enforcement into remedy categories; the most severe enforcement (including temporary management, termination or denial of payment) is required when immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety is found. A civil monetary penalty can be imposed as a per-instance or a per-day amount. Hunter said CMS imposes CMPs in practice for immediate jeopardy at high per-day rates — she cited examples where CMS used per-day amounts in the thousands to tens of thousands of dollars during immediate-jeopardy periods.
Hunter described the timeline for enforcement and appeals: KDADS issues a statement of deficiencies up to 10 days after a survey exit; a facility has 10 days after receipt to request an informal dispute resolution (IDR); if CMS issues a CMP, the facility has 10 days to request an independent informal dispute resolution (IIDR). KDADS staff noted CMPs run concurrently with IDR/IIDR processes and can be held in escrow while appeals are pending.
Operators told the committee their experience includes cases where facilities self-reported incidents and immediately worked to abate potential threats to residents, but still received IJ citations and substantial CMPs. Ricky Turley, director of health services for Lakeview Village in Lenexa, described two incidents at his not-for-profit community that were similar in nature (elopements or door/badge failures) but resulted in different enforcement outcomes in nearby states; for one Kansas incident his facility received an IJ citation despite no resident harm and rapid response. He said his later appeal (IDR) was effectively decided by KDADS staff and did not lead to a different outcome.
KDADS and providers said the CMP reinvestment fund (federal CMP monies split with the state) can be used for training and quality improvement projects; Hunter noted that some funds are held as reserves for emergency use such as receiverships. KDADS reported approximately $10 million in the CMP reinvestment fund, part of which is reserved for emergency receivership responses.
Ending: Committee members asked KDADS to provide information on the structure and timing of CMP notices and the state's use of civil monetary reinvestment funds; providers pushed for clearer, more consistent approaches to severity and scope determinations and independent appeal mechanisms.
