89 Ill. Adm. Code 1040.104.221
Issues at Hearings
Section 104
TITLE 89: SOCIAL SERVICES
CHAPTER I: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE AND FAMILY SERVICES
SUBCHAPTER a: GENERAL PROVISIONS
PART 104 PRACTICE IN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
SECTION 104.221 ISSUES AT HEARINGS
Section 104.221 Issues at
Hearings
a) The sole issue at a hearing in which the basis for denial of
an application pursuant to 89 Ill. Adm. Code 140.14(d) is that the vendor does
not have a necessary license, certificate or authorization shall be whether the
vendor has such a license, certificate or authorization.
b) The sole issue at a hearing in which the basis of the denial
of an application is as set forth in 89 Ill. Adm. Code 140.14(b) shall be
whether the vendor has demonstrated, according to the factors listed in that
Section, in light of the prior activities, that he or she should be admitted to
the Medical Assistance Program.
c) Effective
July 1, 2012, the only issues at a hearing in which the basis of the denial of
an application is as set forth in:
1) 89
Ill. Adm. Code 140.14(e)(1) shall be whether the applicant or any person with
management responsibility for the applicant, an officer or member of the board
of directors of the applicant, an entity owning (directly or indirectly) 5% or
more of the shares of stock or other evidences of ownership in a corporate
vendor applicant, an owner of a sole proprietorship applicant, a partner in a
partnership applicant, or a technical or other advisor to the applicant has a
debt owed to the Department and/or whether payment arrangements acceptable to
the Department have been made by the applicant.
2) 89
Ill. Adm. Code 140.14(e)(2) shall be whether the applicant or any person with
management responsibility for the applicant, an officer or member of the board
of directors of the applicant, an entity owning (directly or indirectly) 5% or
more of the shares of stock or other evidences of ownership in a corporate
vendor applicant, an owner of a sole proprietorship applicant, a partner in a
partnership vendor applicant, or a technical or other advisor to the applicant
was a person with management responsibility, an officer or member of the board of
directors of an applicant, an entity owning (directly or indirectly) 5% or more
of the shares of stock or other evidences of ownership in a corporate vendor,
an owner of a sole proprietorship, a partner in a partnership vendor, or a
technical or other advisor to a vendor during the period of time when the
conduct of that vendor resulted in a debt owed to the Department and/or whether
payment arrangements acceptable to the Department have been made by that
vendor.
3) 89
Ill. Adm. Code 140.14(e)(3) shall be whether the allegation of the use,
transfer or lease of assets of any kind to the applicant from a current or
prior vendor who has a debt owed to the Department is credible, whether payment
arrangements acceptable to the Department have been made by that vendor or the
vendor's alternate payee, and/or whether the applicant knows or should have
known of the debt.
4) 89
Ill. Adm. Code 140.14(e)(4) shall be whether the allegation of a transfer of management
responsibilities, or direct or indirect ownership, to an applicant from a
current or prior vendor who has a debt owed to the Department is credible,
whether payment arrangements acceptable to the Department have been made by
that vendor or the vendor's alternate payee, and/or whether the applicant knows
or should have known of the debt.
5) 89
Ill. Adm. Code 140.14(e)(5) shall be whether the allegation of the use,
transfer or lease of assets of any kind to an applicant who is a spouse, child,
brother, sister, parent, grandparent, grandchild, uncle, aunt, niece, nephew,
cousin, relative by marriage, or relative of a current or prior vendor who has
a debt owed to the Department is credible and/or whether payment arrangements
acceptable to the Department have been made.
6) 89
Ill. Adm. Code 140.14(e)(6) shall be whether the allegation that the applicant's
previous affiliations with a provider of medical services that has an
uncollected debt, a provider that has been or is subject to a payment suspension
under a federal health care program, or a provider that has been previously
excluded from participation in the Medical Assistance Program poses a risk of
fraud, waste or abuse to the Department is credible.
d) The sole issue at a hearing in which the basis for termination
is as set forth in 89 Ill. Adm. Code 140.16(a)(2) shall be whether the
appropriate licensing, certifying or authorizing agency has determined that the
vendor does not have a necessary license, certification or authorization.
e) The sole issue at a hearing requested by a previously
suspended vendor that is being terminated pursuant to 89 Ill. Adm. Code
140.19(b) shall be whether the vendor has corrected the deficiencies on which
the suspension was based.
f) At a hearing conducted pursuant to Subpart D of this Part, the
sole relevant time with respect to the existence of the violations of the
Department's requirements alleged in the notice shall be the date or dates in
the notice.
g) The only issue at a hearing initiated pursuant to 89 Ill. Adm.
Code 140.16(c) is whether the vendor is not in compliance with State income tax
requirements, child support requirements of Article X of the Public Aid Code,
or educational loans guaranteed by the Illinois Student Assistance Commission.
h) Effective
July 1, 2012, the sole issue at a hearing requested by a person or entity with
a debt due the State pursuant to Section 12-4.25(F-15)(3) of the Public Aid
Code shall be whether the person or entity has failed to comply with judgment
on which the debt is based.
i) The only issue at a hearing initiated pursuant to Section 104.205
and 89 Ill. Adm. Code 140.491(j) is whether the Department was in error when it
denied a request for approval for payment of non-emergency transportation by
means of ground ambulance service or granted a request for approval of
non-emergency transportation by means of ground ambulance service at a level of
service that entitles the Ground Ambulance Service Provider to a lower level of
compensation than the Ground Ambulance Service Provider would have received as
compensation for the level of service requested.