AG19821206 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

However, the county department may reclassify a case overdue without good cause after the applicant's delay exceeds the delay of the county. 4. Classify all certified but not authorized Medicaid cases as either pending with or witbout good cause on the 45th or 60th day. 5. Establish procedures at the Disability Determination Section to ensure timely processing of disability cases. 6. Undertake immediate corrective action in those counties which are hOC an compliance wi~h the order or previous orders. ?. Prevent delays in processzng MA applications by not treating applications lor retroactive and prospective MA coverage separately. Pay each applicant who is found eligible for AFDC or M~ a penalty payment of $50 for each week or part of ~ week an application is overdue'without good cause. 9. Dis{egard the penalty payment as income when determining eligibility and bene- fit levels. lO. Permit Legal Services to have access to case records in any ten county departments of social services. 11. Reduce the time required to hold those applications pending due to applicant's delay from twelve to six months unless there is good cause. When an applicant c~n show he has made reasonable attempts to obtain tile information, counties must hold the application for six more months. The state is studying all possible remedies in the suit- Already the state has filed motions to amend the order in three areas. They are: 1. To allow the Disability Determination Section to report on disability cases as they are decided instead of while they are pending. 2. To delete the words "public assistance" from the penalty payment provision so that penalties are only paid to AFDC and MA applicants. Since the order only covers those two prog.rams, the penalty payment should not be awarded to applicants of any other public assistance program. 3. To permit the state to continue to consider the application as one case when an applicant applies concurrently for retroactive and prosepctive MA benefits rather than two separate applications. The state acrees that favorable action on one aspect should not be delayed pending receip~ of information necessary to decide the other. However: once either retrospective or prospective eligibility is approved, the application should be removed from the pending category. The state is also examining the order to assess what i~sues can be appea~ed. We are allowed 30 days from the date of the order to file an appeal. Counties witi be notifled promptly when a final decision is made regarding an appeal. However, our legal counsel has advised us that the state is required to comply with all provisions ef the order within 90 days from November 4 rega.~'~less of the appeal process. Therefore. we must begin immediately to implement a plan for