Am. Sub. H.B. 66*
126th General Assembly
(As Passed by the General Assembly)
Reps. Calvert, Flowers, Martin, McGregor, Peterson, Schlichter, Webster, Aslanides, Blasdel, Coley, Collier, Combs, DeWine, Dolan, C. Evans, D. Evans, Hagan, Kearns, Kilbane, Law, T. Patton, Seaver, Setzer, Wagoner, White, Widowfield, Husted
Sens. Amstutz, Goodman, Clancy, Carey, Jacobson, Harris
Effective date: June 30, 2005; certain provisions effective September 29, 2005; certain provisions effective on other dates; certain items vetoed
This final analysis is arranged by state agency, beginning with the Adjutant General and continuing in alphabetical order. Items that do not directly involve an agency are located under the agency that has regulatory authority over the item or that otherwise deals with the subject matter of the item. The analysis includes a Local Government category and a Retirement Systems category. It concludes with a Miscellaneous category.
Within each category, a summary of the items appears first (in the form of dot points), followed by a discussion of their content and operation.
The act requires the Adjutant General to reimburse an active duty member (see below) of the Ohio National Guard in an amount equal to the monthly life insurance premium paid for each month or part of a month by the member while being an active duty member--if the member chooses to purchase life insurance from the federal Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance program. "Active duty member" generally is defined as a member of the Ohio National Guard on active duty pursuant to an executive order of the President of the United States, the federal Homeland Defense Activity Law, another act of Congress, or a proclamation of the Governor, but does not include a member performing full-time Ohio National Guard duty or performing special work active duty under specified federal law.
If the Adjutant General does not have sufficient available unencumbered funds to so reimburse active duty Ohio National Guard members, the Adjutant General may request additional money from the Controlling Board. The act also gives the Adjutant General power to prescribe and enforce regulations to implement these life insurance premium provisions, which regulations need not be adopted as rules in accordance with R.C. 111.15 or the Administrative Procedure Act.
Under former law, the Adjutant General had to pay a $20,000 death benefit from appropriations for operating expenses to an Ohio National Guard member's designated beneficiary or beneficiaries if the member died while performing state active duty under orders issued by the Adjutant General on behalf of the Governor. Under the act, the Adjutant General instead must pay a $100,000 death benefit from the appropriations made for this purpose to the designated beneficiary or beneficiaries of any "active duty member" of the Ohio National Guard who dies while performing active duty. The act defines "active duty member" in the same manner as described under the preceding topic.
(R.C. 5920.01; Section 560.03)
The Ohio Military Reserve (OHMR) is organized as a reserve military force to defend the state when the Ohio National Guard is employed so as to leave the state without adequate defense. The Governor is its commander-in-chief and is responsible for prescribing rules under which the OHMR operates. The OHMR cannot be called into the military service of the United States, but it may become a component of the Ohio National Guard and subject to the Secretary of Defense's regulations thereby. Enlistment in the OHMR does not exempt a person from military service under any law of the United States.
The act requires the OHMR's commander to annually prepare, and deliver to the General Assembly within three months of the end of the state fiscal year, a written report of all OHMR expenditures and of the use of all OHMR funds (R.C. 5920.01(B)).
The act creates the Ohio Military Reserve Homeland Security Study Commission to evaluate the OHMR's role and effectiveness. The Commission consists of seven members: the Chair of the House Commerce and Labor Committee, who will serve as the study commission's chairperson, two members of the House of Representatives appointed by the House Speaker, two members of the Senate appointed by the Senate President, the Adjutant General or the Adjutant General's designee, and the Director of Public Safety or the Director's designee. The act directs the study commission to report its findings to the General Assembly before January 1, 2006. (Section 560.03.)
Under the Civil Service Law, one of the continuing reasons for which an appointing authority may lay off an employee is as a result of the abolishment of the employee's position (see grounds in next paragraph). Formerly, the abolishment had to be due to the lack of continued need for that position--the abolishment was a permanent deletion of the position from the appointing authority's organization or structure. The appointing authority had to indicate in its determination to abolish the position this "lack of continued need" for it.
Under continuing law, an abolishment of a position and, therefore, a consequent lay off of the employee holding the position may be (1) as the result of a reorganization for the efficient operation of the appointing authority, (2) for reasons of economy, or (3) for lack of work.
The act redefines the term "abolishment" as the deletion of a position (as contrasted with former law's "permanent" deletion of a position) from the organization or structure of an appointing authority. The act also removes from the definition the condition that the abolishment "be due to the lack of continued need" for the position and repeals the corresponding requirement that the appointing authority's determination to abolish the position indicate this lack of continued need. However, the act still provides that an abolishment may be for any one or any combination of the following: as the result of a reorganization for the efficient operation of the appointing authority, for reasons of economy (see below), or for lack of work.
The act essentially defines for appointing authorities the second basis--"reasons of economy"--that may result in the abolishment of a position and the lay off of the employee holding it. Specifically, the act provides that "reasons of economy" must be determined at the time the appointing authority proposes to abolish the position. Additionally, "reasons of economy" generally must be based on the appointing authority's estimated amount of savings with respect to salary, benefits, and other matters associated with the abolishment of the position. However, the act allows "reasons of economy" to be based on savings with respect to salary and benefits only if both of the following apply:
· Either the appointing authority's operating appropriation has been reduced by an executive or legislative action, or the appointing authority has a current or projected deficiency in funding to maintain current or projected levels of staffing and operations.
· It files a notice of the position's abolishment with the Director of Administrative Services within one year of the appointing authority's operating appropriation being reduced by an executive or legislative action or the appointing authority having a current or projected deficiency in funding as described above.
If an appointing authority is authorized to abolish a position and lay off an employee based on the appointing authority's estimated amount of savings with respect to salary and benefits only, as outlined above, each of the following applies:
· The position's abolishment must be done in good faith and not as a subterfuge for discipline.
· If a circumstance affects a specific program only, the appointing authority only may abolish a position within that program.
· If a circumstance does not affect a specific program only, the appointing authority may identify a position that it considers appropriate for abolishment based on the reasons of economy.
Continuing law allows a classified employee to appeal the employee's layoff by an appointing authority to the State Personnel Board of Review (SPBR). And, under former law, only the employee could appeal the SPBR's decision to the appropriate court of common pleas under the Administrative Procedure Act.
The act also allows an appointing authority to so appeal a SPBR decision.
(R.C. 123.152(B)(2) and (14))
Under continuing law, state agencies are encouraged to contract with "EDGE business enterprises," which are businesses certified by the Director of Administrative Services as participants in the Encouraging Diversity, Growth, and Equity (EDGE) Program. The Director must establish procurement goals for state agencies, including state universities and the Ohio School Facilities Commission, to contract with EDGE business enterprises generally for services, goods, and public improvements. The act requires the Director to establish guidelines, rather than procurement goals, for state universities and the Ohio School Facilities Commission to allow the universities and Commission to establish their own procurement goals for contracting with EGE business enterprises.
Under continuing law, the Director is required to establish agency procurement goals for contracting with EDGE business enterprises based on the availability of eligible program participants by region or geographic area. Formerly, the procurement goals also had to be established by standard industrial code, but the act allows the Director to use "equivalent code classification" as an alternative to using standard industrial code.
Under former law, the Director was required to establish a point system to evaluate bid proposals to encourage EDGE business enterprises to participate in the procurement of professional design and information technology services. The act allows the Director to establish a "comparable system" as an alternative to a point system.
The act exempts from the Public Records Law business and personal financial information and trade secrets submitted by EDGE Program applicants to the Director unless the Director presents the financial information or trade secrets at a public hearing or public proceeding concerning the applicant's eligibility to participate in the Program.
(R.C. 125.25 and 153.02)
The act authorizes the Director of Administrative Services to debar vendors and contractors from consideration for contract awards based on specified factors. It also establishes procedures governing the debarment, including notice and hearing requirements. As described below, the specified factors differ between the vendors and contractors.
Under the act, the Director of Administrative Services may debar a vendor from consideration for contract awards (apparently for supplies or services) upon a finding, based upon a reasonable belief, that the vendor has done any of the following:
(1) Abused the selection process by repeatedly withdrawing bids or proposals before purchase orders or contracts are issued or failing to accept orders based upon firm bids;
(2) Failed to substantially perform a contract (according to its terms, conditions, and specifications) within specified time limits;
(3) Failed to cooperate in monitoring contract performance by refusing to provide information or documents required in a contract, failed to respond to complaints to the vendor, or accumulated repeated justified complaints regarding performance of a contract;
(4) Attempted to influence a public employee to breach ethical conduct standards or to influence a contract award;
(5) Colluded to restrain competition by any means;
(6) Been convicted of a criminal offense related to the application for or performance of any public or private contract, including embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, receiving stolen property, or any other offense that directly reflects on the vendor's business integrity;
(7) Been convicted under state or federal antitrust laws;
(8) Deliberately or willfully submitted false or misleading information in connection with the application for or performance of a public contract;
(9) Violated any other responsible business practice or performed in an unsatisfactory manner as determined by the Director;
(10) Through the default of a contract or through other means had a determination of unresolved finding for recovery by the Auditor of State;
(11) Acted in such a manner as to be debarred from participating in a contract with any governmental agency.
When the Director reasonably believes that grounds for debarment exist, the Director must send the vendor a notice of proposed debarment indicating the grounds for the proposed debarment and the procedure for requesting a hearing. The hearing must be conducted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act. If the vendor does not request a hearing in the specified manner, the Director must issue the debarment decision without a hearing and must notify the vendor of the decision by certified mail, return receipt requested.
The Director must determine the length of a debarment period and may rescind a debarment at any time upon notification to the vendor. During a debarment period, a vendor is not eligible to participate in any state contract, but after the debarment period expires, the vendor is eligible to be awarded a state contract (apparently for supplies or services).
Through the Office of Information Technology (see the next portion of this analysis) and the Office of Procurement Services, the Director is required to maintain a list of all vendors currently debarred from participating in state contracts (apparently for supplies or services).
The Director also may debar under the act a contractor from contract awards for certain public improvements upon proof that the contractor has done any of the following:
(1) Defaulted on a contract requiring the execution of a takeover agreement;
(2) Knowingly failed during the course of a contract to maintain the coverage required by the Bureau of Workers' Compensation;
(3) Knowingly failed during the course of a contract to maintain the contractor's drug-free workplace program as required by the contract;
(4) Knowingly failed during the course of a contract to maintain insurance required by the contract or otherwise by law, resulting in a substantial loss to the owner;
(5) Misrepresented the firm's qualifications in the selection process set forth in the Professional Design Services Law;
(6) Been convicted of a criminal offense related to the application for or performance of any public or private contract, including embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, receiving stolen property, or any other offense that directly reflects on the contractor's business integrity;
(7) Been convicted of a criminal offense under state or federal antitrust laws;
(8) Deliberately or willfully submitted false or misleading information in connection with the application for or performance of a public contract;
(9) Been debarred from bidding on or participating in a contract with any state or federal agency.
When the Director reasonably believes that grounds for debarment exist, the Director must send the contractor a notice of proposed debarment indicating the grounds for the proposed debarment and the procedure for requesting a hearing. The hearing must be conducted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act. If the contractor does not request a hearing in the specified manner, the Director must issue the debarment decision without a hearing and must notify the contractor of the decision by certified mail, return receipt requested.
The Director must determine the length of a debarment period and may rescind a debarment at any time upon notification to the contractor. During a debarment period, a contractor is not eligible to bid for or participate in any contract for a public improvement, but after the debarment period expires, the contractor is eligible to bid for and participate in contracts for public improvements.
Through the Office of the State Architect, the Director is required to maintain a list of all contractors currently debarred under these provisions. Any governmental entity awarding a contract for construction of a public improvement may use a contractor's presence on the debarment list to determine whether a contractor is responsible or best as may be required in the award of a contract.
(R.C. 125.041 and 125.18)
The act establishes the Office of Information Technology that is to be housed within the Department of Administrative Services (DAS). The Office is to be under the supervision of a chief information officer (CIO) who must serve as the director of the Office. The CIO must be appointed by the Governor and is subject to removal at the pleasure of the Governor.
The CIO is required to advise the Governor regarding the superintendence and implementation of statewide information technology policy. The CIO also must lead, oversee, and direct state agency activities related to information technology development and use. In that regard, the CIO must do all of the following:
· Coordinate and superintend statewide efforts to promote common use and development of technology by state agencies. The Office must establish policies and standards that govern and direct state agency participation in statewide programs and initiatives.
· Establish policies and standards for the acquisition and use of information technology by state agencies, including, but not limited to, hardware, software, technology services, and security, with which state agencies must comply.
· Establish criteria and review processes to identify state agency information technology projects that require alignment or oversight. As appropriate, the Office must provide the Governor and the Director of Budget and Management with notice and advice regarding the appropriate allocation of resources for those projects. The CIO may require state agencies to provide, and may prescribe the form and manner by which they must provide, information to fulfill the CIO's alignment and oversight role.
The Office is permitted to make contracts for, operate, and superintend technology supplies and services for state agencies, and the act confers on the Office the same authority DAS has, under specified purchasing of supplies and services statutes, for the purchase of information technology supplies and services for state agencies. The Office also may establish cooperative agreements with federal and local government agencies and state agencies that are not under the authority of the Governor for the provision of technology services and the development of technology projects.
(R.C. 125.831 and 125.832)
Continuing law requires the Director of Administrative Services to establish and operate a fleet management program for purposes including, but not limited to, cost-effective acquisition, maintenance, management, analysis, and disposal of all motor vehicles owned or leased by the state. It also grants the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) exclusive authority over the acquisition and management of all motor vehicles used by state agencies.
Formerly, a "motor vehicle" for purposes of the Fleet Management Law generally was defined as any automobile, car minivan, passenger van, sport utility vehicle, or pickup truck with a gross vehicle weight under 12,000 pounds. The act continues to so define a "motor vehicle" but also includes a cargo van within the definition for purposes of the Fleet Management Law.
Continuing law excludes from that definition of "motor vehicle" any vehicle mentioned above that is used by a law enforcement officer and law enforcement agency. Former law relatedly defined "law enforcement officer" as an officer, agent, or employee of a state agency upon whom, by statute, a duty to conserve the peace or to enforce all or certain laws is imposed and the authority to arrest violators is conferred, within the limits of that statutory duty and authority. The act modifies the definition of "law enforcement officer" by specifying that it does not include an officer, agent, or employee as described above if the officer's, agent's, or employee's duty and authority is location specific. Thus, a vehicle used by such an officer, agent, or employee is no longer excluded from the definition of a "motor vehicle" covered by the Fleet Management Law because it is not a vehicle used by a "law enforcement officer" and law enforcement agency.
The Fleet Management Law formerly defined "state agency" to mean every organized body, office, or agency established by the laws of Ohio for the exercise of any function of state government, other than (1) a state-supported institution of higher education, (2) the offices of the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Auditor of State, Treasurer of State, Secretary of State, or Attorney General, (3) the General Assembly or any legislative agency, or (4) the courts or any judicial agency. The act modifies this definition to mean every organized body, office, board, authority, commission, or agency established by the laws of Ohio for the exercise of any governmental or quasi-governmental function of state government regardless of the funding source for that entity, other than continuing law's four categories of exempt entities mentioned above and, as added by the act, any state retirement system or retirement program established by or referenced in the Revised Code. Thus, this definitional change at the same time adds to, and removes from, the state agencies subject to the Fleet Management Law. The term "state-supported institution of higher education" also becomes "state institution of higher education" under the act (see more detail below).
Under continuing law, DAS' exclusive authority over the acquisition and management of all motor vehicles used by state agencies includes approving the purchase or lease of each motor vehicle for use by a state agency and determining whether a motor vehicle will be leased or purchased for that use. The act generally requires that, on and after July 1, 2005, each state agency acquire all passenger motor vehicles under DAS' master leasing program. If DAS determines, however, that acquisition under this program is not the most economical method and if DAS and the state agency can provide economic justification for doing so, DAS may approve the purchase, rather than the lease, of a passenger motor vehicle for the acquiring state agency.
The act requires the Director to adopt rules that prohibit the reimbursement of state employees who use their own motor vehicles for any mileage they incur above an amount that DAS must determine annually, unless reimbursement for the excess mileage is approved by DAS in accordance with standards for that approval the Director must establish in those rules.
Under the act, not later than each September 15, each state institution of higher education must report to DAS on all of the following topics relating to motor vehicles that it acquires and manages: (1) the methods it uses to track the motor vehicles, (2) whether or not it uses a fuel card program to purchase fuel for, or to pay for the maintenance of, the motor vehicles, and (3) whether or not it makes bulk purchases of fuel for the motor vehicles. Assuming that it does not use the fleet management tracking, fuel card program, and bulk fuel purchases tools and services that DAS provides, the report also must include (a) an analysis of the amount the institution would save, if any, if it were to use the fleet management tracking, fuel card program, and bulk fuel purchases tools and services that DAS provides instead of the fleet management system the institution regularly uses and (b) a rationale for either continuing with the fleet management system that the institution regularly uses or changing to the use of those tools and services that DAS provides.
Within 90 days after receipt of all annual reports from state institutions of higher education, DAS must prepare and certify a list of those institutions that it determines would save amounts if they were to use the fleet management tracking, fuel card program, and bulk fuel purchases tools and services that DAS provides. The institutions so certified then must use those tools and services until DAS next certifies state institutions of higher education as required by the act.
The act defines "state institution of higher education" for purposes of the Fleet Management Law to mean each of the four-year state universities, the Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine, the Medical University of Ohio at Toledo, and each community college, state community college, university branch, or technical college.
Former law required that the proceeds derived from the disposition of any motor vehicles under the Fleet Management Law be paid (1) to the fund that originally provided money for the purchase or lease of the motor vehicles or (2) if the motor vehicles were originally purchased with money derived from the General Revenue Fund (GRF), to the credit of the Fleet Management Fund created under continuing law. The act maintains requirement (1) above but instead requires that, if motor vehicles were originally purchased with money derived from the GRF, the proceeds be deposited, in the discretion of the Director, to the credit of either the Fleet Management Fund or the Investment Recovery Fund created by continuing law. The Investment Recovery Fund receives proceeds from the transfer, sale, or lease of excess and surplus supplies no longer needed by state agencies (R.C. 125.14(A)--not in the act).
Continuing law requires the Director to establish and maintain a fleet reporting system and correspondingly to require state agencies (see definition above) to submit to DAS information relative to state motor vehicles, to be used in operating the fleet management program. The act requires state agencies to submit information not only with respect to state "motor vehicles" covered by the Fleet Management Law (see definition above) but also relative to state motor vehicles excluded from the definition of those covered "motor vehicles," namely (1) motor vehicles used by law enforcement officers and law enforcement agencies and (2) motor vehicles that are equipped with specialized equipment that is not normally found in a vehicle and that is used to carry out a state agency's specific and specialized duties and responsibilities.
(R.C. 4115.31 to 4115.35)
Temporarily continuing law (see below "transfer" and "termination" discussion) provides for the creation of a state committee for the purchase of products and services provided by persons with severe disabilities (commonly referred to as the "State Use Committee"). The State Use Committee must adopt rules under the Administrative Procedure Act that require the Committee to take various actions that have the goal of promoting the purchase by specified governmental entities of products and services of persons with severe disabilities. Among those actions are determining products and services that are suitable for procurement by specified governmental entities, putting those products and services on a procurement list the Committee must establish, maintain, and publish, and verifying the fair market price for the products and services.
Temporarily continuing law generally requires any state agency, instrumentality of the state, or political subdivision that intends to purchase any product or service to examine the procurement list and, if the product or service it intends to purchase is on the list and available, to procure it from an agency for persons with severe disabilities. Purchases made in this manner are not subject to competitive bidding requirements.
Former law provided that a subordinate named by the Director of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities (MRDD) was to be the Committee's executive director and that the Director of MRDD had to furnish other staff and clerical assistance, office space, and supplies required by the Committee.
(R.C. 4115.32 and Sections 203.12, 203.12.01, and 209.09.06)
In general. The act provides that, effective July 1, 2005, or the earliest date after that date permitted by law, the State Use Committee becomes part of the Department of Administrative Services (DAS). The Committee's functions, assets, and liabilities, including its records, are to be transferred to DAS, and then (1) DAS is to become the successor to, assume the obligations of, and otherwise constitute the continuation of the Committee and (2) the duties of the Committee's executive director are transferred to DAS. The DAS Director must designate a subordinate to act as the Committee's executive director.
On-going business, rights, and rules. The act provides that any business commenced but not completed by the Committee on June 30, 2005, must be completed by DAS in the same manner and with the same effect as if completed by the Committee. No validation, cure, right, privilege, remedy, obligation, or liability is lost or impaired by reason of the transfer.
All of the Committee's rules, orders, and determinations will continue in effect as rules, orders, and determinations of DAS, until modified or rescinded by DAS. If necessary to ensure the integrity of the Ohio Administrative Code, the Director of the Legislative Service Commission must renumber the Committee's rules to reflect the transfer.
Employees. Department of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities employees designated as staff for the Committee will be transferred to DAS. The transferred employees will retain their positions and all benefits, subject to the statutory law governing layoffs and provisions of union contracts between the state and all bargaining units affected.
Pending proceedings and actions. The transfer does not affect judicial or administrative actions or proceedings pending on July 1, 2005, to which the Committee is a party. Those actions or proceedings instead must be prosecuted or defended in the DAS Director's name. On application to the court or other tribunal, the DAS Director must be substituted as a party for the Director of MRDD.
(R.C. 125.11, 125.60 to 125.6012, 127.16, 307.86, 731.14, 731.141, 4115.32, 4115.34, and 4115.36)
Overview. After the transfer to DAS of the functions of the State Use Committee--in particular, its program for the purchase of products and services of persons with severe disabilities, the act provides for the termination of the Committee and that program and their replacement with the Office of Procurement from Community Rehabilitation Programs and a program to promote the procurement of supplies and services of persons with work-limited disabilities.
Creation of the Office; termination of the State Use Committee. The act provides that, not later than July 1, 2007, the DAS Director must establish the Office of Procurement from Community Rehabilitation Programs (OPCRP) within DAS. The Director also must designate a DAS employee as administrator of the OPCRP.
The act correspondingly provides that not later than July 1, 2007, the Director must abolish the State Use Committee and its program for the purchase of products and services of persons with severe disabilities. Abolition of the Committee will make all the laws governing the Committee no longer effective.
Key definitions. The OPCRP purchase program provides for the purchase by government ordering offices of supplies or services provided by persons with a work-limiting disability who are employed by a community rehabilitation program. The act defines a "government ordering office" as any of the following: (1) any state agency, including the General Assembly, the Ohio Supreme Court, and the office of a state elected official, or any state authority, board, bureau, commission, institution, or instrumentality that is funded in total or in part by state money, or (2) a county, township, or village. "Person with a work-limiting disability" is defined by the act as an individual who has a disability as described in the federal Americans with Disabilities Act and who (1) because of that disability is substantially limited in the type or quantity of work the individual can perform or is prevented from working regularly, and (2) meets the criteria established by OPCRP. Finally, the act defines a "community rehabilitation program" as an agency that (1) is organized under federal or Ohio law such that no part of its net income inures to the benefit of any shareholder or other individual, (2) is certified as a sheltered workshop, if applicable, by the Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor, (3) is registered and in good standing with the Ohio Secretary of State as a domestic nonprofit corporation, (4) complies with applicable occupational health and safety standards required by federal or Ohio law, (5) operates in the interest of persons with work-limiting disabilities, provides vocational or other employment-related training to persons with work-limiting disabilities, and employs persons with work-limiting disabilities in the manufacture of products or the provision of services, and (6) is a nonprofit corporation for federal tax purposes.
Purchases from the procurement list. The act requires the OPCRP to establish, maintain, and periodically update a procurement list of approved supplies and services available from qualified nonprofit agencies or their agents (see below). Government ordering offices, before purchasing any supply or service, must determine whether the supply or service is on the procurement list. And, if the supply or service is on the list at a fair market price established by the OPCRP (see below), the government ordering office must purchase it from the qualified nonprofit agency or an approved agent offering it for sale at that price. If the supply or service is on the procurement list but a fair market price has not been established, the government ordering office must attempt to negotiate an agreement with one or more of the listed qualified nonprofit agencies or approved agents.
Fair market price. The act provides that, prior to purchases by government ordering offices under its provisions, the OPCRP must attempt to establish for each item (i.e., supply or service) on the procurement list a fair market price that is representative of the range of prices that a government ordering office would expect to pay to purchase the item in the marketplace. When establishing a fair market price for an item, the OPCRP must consider the cost of doing business with respect to that item, including sales, marketing, and research and development costs and agent fees. If the OPCRP cannot establish a fair market price as described above, it must put the item on the list and let a government ordering office and qualified nonprofit agency negotiate the price. If the negotiations produce an agreement, the OPCRP may accept the agreed upon price as the fair market price. If an agreement is not successfully negotiated in such a case, the OPCRP may establish a fair market price or release the government ordering office from the act's requirements (see further "release" discussion below).
Qualified nonprofit agencies and approved agents. The act permits a community rehabilitation program to apply to the OPCRP to be certified as qualified to provide its supplies and services for procurement by government ordering offices. The OPCRP must prescribe the form of the application, and, if it is satisfied that an applicant program is qualified, it must certify the program as a qualified nonprofit agency for the purposes of the purchasing program outlined in the act. The act also gives DAS the authority to structure or regulate competition among qualified nonprofit agencies for the overall benefit of the OPCRP purchase program.
Under the act, the OPCRP may certify any entity to serve as an approved agent of a qualified nonprofit agency for purposes of the OPCRP purchase program. The OPCRP must prescribe procedures under which an entity can apply and be considered for that certification. An approved agent can do any of the following: (1) contract with the OPCRP to provide centralized business facilitation or other assistance to qualified nonprofit agencies (however, the OPCRP must consult with qualified nonprofit agencies before agreeing to such a contract), (2) act as a distributor of supplies and services registered on the procurement list, and (3) provide marketing, administrative, and other services related to sales.
DAS fee for purchases. The act provides that all government ordering offices purchasing supplies and services from qualified nonprofit agencies or their approved agents must reimburse DAS a reasonable sum to cover its costs in administering the OPCRP purchase program. DAS is permitted to bill administrative costs to government ordering offices directly, or allow qualified nonprofit agencies or their approved agents to collect and remit the fees. Any fee collected and remitted by qualified nonprofit agencies or their approved agents will be considered allowable expenses in addition to the fair market price. All fees collected under these provisions must be deposited in the state treasury to the credit of DAS' General Services Fund.
Release from compliance with OPCRP purchase program. The act provides that when a government ordering office and a qualified nonprofit agency or approved agent are negotiating a price and they cannot come to an agreement, instead of setting a fair market price, the OPCRP may release the government ordering office from compliance with the OPCRP purchase program.
It also provides that the OPCRP, on its own or pursuant to a request from a government ordering office, may release a government ordering office from compliance with the OPCRP purchase program. If the OPCRP determines that compliance is not possible or not advantageous, or if conditions prescribed in rules adopted by the OPCRP for granting a release are met, it may grant such a release. That release must be written, specify the supplies or services to which it applies, state how long it will be effective, and state the reason for which it is granted.
Nonapplicability of OPCRP purchase program. The act provides that the OPCRP purchase program does not apply to the purchase of a product or service available from a state agency, state instrumentality, or political subdivision under any law in effect on July 1, 2005. It also specifies that the program does not prohibit the purchase of a supply or service from a qualified nonprofit agency by a political subdivision that is not a government ordering office.
Competitive selection nonapplicability. The act makes it clear that purchases under the OPCRP purchase program by a government ordering office are not subject to any competitive selection requirements. It also specifies that purchases made by any of the following political subdivisions that are not government ordering offices from a qualified nonprofit agency or its approved agent are exempt from any competitive selection procedures otherwise required by law: municipal corporations, school districts, conservancy districts, township park districts, metropolitan park districts, regional transit authorities, regional airport authorities, regional water and sewer districts, port authorities, and any other political subdivision approved by DAS to participate in DAS "pooled" supply or service purchase contracts. Finally, a political subdivision of the type listed in the previous sentence is prohibited from purchasing supplies or services from another party or political subdivision instead of through the OPCRP purchase program if the supplies or services are on the procurement list, even if it can get the supplies or services at a lower price.
Other OPCRP duties and powers. The act provides that the OPCRP, in addition to its previously described functions, must or may do all of the following:
· Must monitor the procurement practices of government ordering offices to ensure compliance with the OPCRP purchase program;
· Must develop and recommend to the DAS Director, in cooperation with qualified nonprofit agencies, government ordering offices, the Department of MRDD, the Department of Mental Health, the Department of Job and Family Services, and the Rehabilitation Services Commission, rules the Director must adopt in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act for the effective and efficient administration of the OPCRP purchase program;
· Must prepare a report of its activities by the last day of December of each year and post it on the OPCRP web site;
· May enter into contractual agreements and establish pilot programs to further the objectives of the OPCRP purchase program.
Provision of information to OPCRP. The act requires a government ordering office and qualified nonprofit agency to provide the necessary information and documentation requested by the OPCRP to enable it to effectively administer the purchase program.
Cooperation with other governmental agencies. The act provides that the Department of MRDD, Department of Mental Health, Department of Job and Family Services, Rehabilitation Services Commission, and any other state or governmental agency or community rehabilitation program responsible for the provision of rehabilitation and vocational educational services to persons with work-limiting disabilities may cooperate, through written agreement, in providing resources to DAS for the operation of the OPCRP. The resources may include leadership and assistance in dealing with the societal aspects of meeting the needs of persons with work-limiting disabilities.
The act also permits the OPCRP and all governmental entities that administer socioeconomic programs to enter into contractual agreements, cooperative working relationships, or other arrangements that are necessary for the effective coordination and realization of the objectives of these entities.
Under continuing codified law, whenever an employee is assigned to work in a higher-level position for a continuous period of more than two weeks but not more than two years because of a vacancy, the employee may be paid at a rate approximately 4% higher than the employee's current base pay rate. The Director of Administrative Services must approve the temporary position change. (R.C. 124.181(J)--not in the act.)
Under the act, notwithstanding that codified law, in cases where a vacancy does not exist, an appointing authority, with the written consent of an exempt employee (see below), may assign duties of a higher classification for not more than two years to the exempt employee. The exempt employee must receive compensation commensurate with the duties of the higher classification. The act utilizes continuing law's definitions of (1) "appointing authority"--an officer, commission, board, or body having the power of appointment to, or removal from, positions in any office, department, commission, board, or institution, and (2) "exempt employee"--a permanent full-time or permanent part-time employee paid directly by warrant of the Auditor of State whose position is included in the job classification plan of the Department of Administrative Services but who is not considered a public employee for the purposes of the Collective Bargaining Law.
The act also permits employees who are exempt from the Collective Bargaining Law and who are assigned to duties within their agency to maintain operations during the Ohio Administrative Knowledge System implementation, to agree to a temporary assignment for more than two years if necessary--notwithstanding the codified law referred to above.
The act would have required the Department of Administrative Services to do both of the following: (1) begin, within 30 days after the provisions' effective date, developing recommendations for a state government reorganization plan focused on increased efficiencies in the operation of state government and a reduced number of state agencies and (2) present its recommendations to the House Speaker, Senate President, and House and Senate Minority Leaders by not later than January 1, 2007. (VETOED.)
Continuing law, unaltered by the act, requires a nursing home, residential care facility, adult care facility, adult foster home, or other specified long-term care facility to annually pay to the Ohio Department of Aging (ODA) a fee of $6 for each bed the facility maintained for use by a resident during any part of the previous year. The funds are used to pay the costs of operating regional long-term care ombudsperson programs. The act requires ODA to assess a penalty on long-term care facilities that fail to pay the bed fee not later than 90 days after the deadline established by ODA rules. The penalty is an amount equal to a facility's total annual bed fee.
(R.C. 173.99(C); R.C. 173.19 (not in the act))
The Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsperson Program, through the State Long-Term Care Ombudsperson and the Regional Long-Term Care Ombudsperson Programs, must receive, investigate, and attempt to resolve complaints made by long-term care facility residents, recipients, sponsors, providers of long-term care, or any person acting on behalf of a resident or recipient relating to health, safety, civil rights, or residents' rights issues. Each complaint is assigned to a representative of the Office who is responsible for investigating and working with the parties to resolve the complaint. To carry out these responsibilities, a representative has the right to access long-term care facilities and community-based long-term care sites unescorted as reasonably necessary to investigate a complaint. The act permits ODA to assess a penalty, not to exceed $500 for each violation, against a long-term care provider, other entity, or person employed by the provider or entity that denies a representative of the Program access to a long-term care facility or community-based long-term care site.
(R.C. 173.39 to 173.393)
The act requires ODA to certify providers of community-based long-term care services under programs ODA administers and, subject to certain exceptions, prohibits ODA from paying a person or government entity for providing community-based long-term care services under such a program unless the provider is certified to provide the services and provides the services. ODA may, however, pay a non-certified person or government entity for providing community-based long-term care services if the provider meets the terms of a contract that includes conditions of participation and service standards and the contract is not for Medicaid-funded services, other than services provided under the Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE).
ODA is required to adopt rules in accordance with Ohio's Administrative Procedure Act (R.C. Chapter 119.) establishing certification requirements. The rules must establish procedures for ensuring that PASSPORT agencies comply with criminal background check requirements under the law governing the PASSPORT Program and evaluating the services provided by persons and government entities seeking or holding a certificate to ensure they are provided in a quality manner advantageous to the individual receiving the services.
The act requires that ODA consider the following during the evaluation of a provider:
(1) Provider's experience and financial responsibility;
(2) Provider's ability to comply with standards of the community-based long-term care services program;
(3) Provider's ability to meet the needs of individuals served;
(4) Any other factor ODA considers relevant.
The act provides that, in general, records of an evaluation are public records and must be made available on the request of any person. The act, however, prohibits the release of a part of a record of an evaluation as a public record if the release of the part would violate federal or state law.
The act authorizes ODA to take disciplinary action against a provider. ODA must adopt rules setting standards for determining which type of disciplinary action to take. The act requires the rules to specify the reasons for taking disciplinary action, including disciplinary actions based on good cause, and for misfeasance, malfeasance, nonfeasance, confirmed abuse or neglect, financial irresponsibility, or other conduct of the provider ODA determines is injurious to the health or safety of individuals being served.
ODA is authorized to take the following types of disciplinary actions:
(1) Issue a written warning;
(2) Require submission of a plan of correction;
(3) Suspend referrals;
(4) Remove clients;
(5) Impose a fiscal sanction, such as a civil monetary penalty or an order that unearned funds be repaid;
(6) Revoke the provider's certificate;
(7) Impose another sanction.
The act requires ODA to hold hearings when there is a dispute between ODA or its designee and a provider concerning actions ODA or its designee takes or does not take regarding certification or disciplinary proceedings. This does not apply, however, if the disciplinary action is issuing a written warning or requiring the submission of a plan of correction.
ODA is required by the act to adopt rules concerning contracts between ODA, or ODA's designee, and persons and government entities regarding community-based long-term care services provided under a program ODA administers. ODA must also adopt rules concerning ODA's payments for such services.
The Revised Code provides for several different types of assessments of persons applying or intending to apply for admission to a nursing facility. The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (ODJFS), or an agency designated by ODJFS, is authorized to assess any person who is not an applicant for or recipient of Medicaid who applies or intends to apply to a nursing facility to determine whether the person is in need of nursing facility services and whether an alternative source of long-term care is more appropriate for the person in meeting the person's physical, mental, and psychosocial needs than admission to the facility to which the person has applied (R.C. 5101.75 and 5101.751). In addition, ODJFS may require an applicant for or recipient of Medicaid who applies or intends to apply for admission to a nursing facility to undergo an assessment to determine whether the person needs the level of care provided by a nursing facility (R.C. 5101.754, 5111.204, and 5111.205).
In general, the act transfers from ODJFS to ODA, the authority to provide assessments of non-Medicaid recipients, modifies the nature of those assessments by including a "long-term care consultation," and expands the population that must be given the assessments (R.C. 173.42 and 173.43 and repeal of R.C. 5101.751 and 5101.753). It also revises the law governing assessments of Medicaid recipients by ODJFS (R.C. 5111.204 and repeal of R.C. 5101.754 and 5111.205).
(R.C. 173.42(B) and (C) and 5101.75(B))
Under prior law, ODJFS was permitted to assess a person applying or intending to apply for admission to a nursing facility who was not an applicant for or recipient of Medicaid to determine whether the person was in need of nursing facility services and whether an alternative source of long-term care was more appropriate for the person in meeting the person's physical, mental, and psychosocial needs than admission to the facility to which the person has applied. Each assessment was to be performed by ODJFS or an agency designated by ODJFS.
The act requires ODA to develop a long-term care consultation program whereby individuals or their representatives are provided with information through professional consultations about options available to meet long-term care needs and about factors to consider in making long-term care decisions. ODA may enter into a contract with an area agency on aging or other entity under which the long-term care consultation program for a particular area is administered by the area agency on aging or other entity pursuant to the contract; otherwise, the program is to be administered by ODA.
(R.C. 173.42(E), (F), and (J))
Under the act, the information provided through a long-term care consultation must be appropriate to the individual's needs and situation. The information must address the following:
(1) The availability of any long-term care options open to the individual;
(2) Sources and methods of both public and private payment for long-term care services;
(3) Factors to consider when choosing among the available programs, services, and benefits;
(4) Opportunities and methods for maximizing independence and self-reliance, including support services provided by the individual's family, friends, and community.
An individual's long-term care consultation may include an assessment of the individual's functional capabilities. It also may incorporate portions of determinations required to be made by the Department of Mental Health or the Department of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities and may be provided concurrently with the assessment required to be made by ODJFS (see "Level-of-care assessments to receive Medicaid nursing facility services," below).
At the conclusion of a consultation, ODA or the program administrator under contract with ODA must provide the individual or the individual's representative with a written summary of options and resources available to meet the individual's needs. And even though the summary may specify that a source of long-term care other than care in a nursing facility is appropriate and available, the individual is not required to seek an alternative source and may be admitted to or continue to reside in a nursing facility.
(R.C. 173.42(G) and (I))
Under the act a long-term care consultation may be provided for nursing facility residents who have not applied and have not indicated an intention to apply for Medicaid. The purpose of these consultations is to determine continued need for nursing facility services, to provide information on alternative services, and to make referrals to alternative services.
But, the act requires long-term care consultations to be provided to the following:
(1) Individuals who apply or indicate an intention to apply for admission to a nursing facility, regardless of the source of payment to be used for such care;
(2) Residents of nursing facilities who apply or indicate an intention to apply for Medicaid;
(3) Residents who are likely to "spend down" their resources within six months after admission to a level that qualifies them financially for Medicaid;
(4) Any individual who requests a long-term care consultation.
The act exempts certain individuals from the long-term care consultation requirement. The exemptions largely parallel exemptions in prior law, but differ in the following ways:
(1) The act exempts an individual from the requirement if the individual or the individual's representative chooses to forego participation in the consultation pursuant to criteria specified in rules adopted under the act.
(2) The act eliminates the exemption regarding a person placed in the nursing facility in order to provide temporary relief to the person's primary caregiver.
(3) The act additionally exempts an individual who is seeking admission to a facility that is not a nursing facility with a provider agreement under the Medicaid Law.
(4) The act exempts any individual who is to be transferred from another nursing facility.
(5) The act exempts any individual who is to be readmitted to a nursing facility following a period of hospitalization.
(6) The act eliminates the exemption based on the failure of a timely assessment.
When a long-term care consultation is required, the act requires it to be provided as follows:
(1) If the individual for whom the consultation is being provided has applied for Medicaid and the consultation is being provided concurrently with the assessment required to be made by ODJFS (see "Level-of-care assessments to receive Medicaid nursing facility services," below), the consultation must be completed in accordance with the applicable time frames specified in the Medicaid law for providing a level of care determination based on the assessment.
(2) In all other cases, the consultation must be provided not later than five calendar days after ODA, or the program administrator under contract with ODA, receives notice that (a) the individual has applied or has indicated an intention to apply for admission to a nursing facility or (b) if the individual is a resident of a nursing facility, the individual has applied or has indicated an intention to apply for Medicaid.
An individual or the individual's representative may request that a long-term care consultation be provided on a date that is later than that required under (1) or (2), above. Also, if a consultation cannot be completed within the required time frames, ODA or the program administrator may (a) exempt the individual from the consultation pursuant to rules adopted under the act, (b) in the case of an applicant for admission to a nursing facility, provide the consultation after the individual is admitted to the facility, or (c) in the case of a resident of a nursing facility, provide the consultation as soon as practicable.
(R.C. 173.42(D), 173.43, 5101.75(B), and 5101.752 and 5101.751 (repealed))
The act requires the long-term care consultations to be provided by individuals certified by ODA. The Director of ODA is required to adopt rules in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act (R.C. Chapter 119.) governing the certification process and requirements. The rules must specify the education, experience, or training in long-term care a person is to have to qualify for certification. The act repeals the authority of ODJFS to designate another agency to provide the assessments, and ODA is given no analogous designation authority.
(R.C. 173.42(K) and (M) and 5111.62)
The act, in a manner similar to prior law, prohibits any nursing facility for which an operator has a provider agreement under the Medicaid law from admitting or retaining any individual as a resident, unless the nursing facility has received evidence that a long-term care consultation has been completed for the individual or that the individual is exempt from the long-term care consultation requirement. The act transfers from the Director of ODJFS to the Director of ODA the authority to fine a nursing facility an amount determined by rule if the facility violates this prohibition. All fines collected are to be deposited into the state treasury to the credit of the Residents Protection Fund.
Under the act, the Director of ODA is authorized to adopt any rules the Director considers necessary for the implementation and administration of the act's long-term care consultation provisions. The rules must be adopted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act and may specify all of the following:
(1) Procedures for performing long-term care consultations;
(2) Information to be provided through long-term care consultations regarding long-term care services that are available;
(3) Criteria for identifying nursing facility residents who would benefit from the provision of a long-term care consultation;
(4) Criteria under which an individual or the individual's representative may choose to forego participation in a long-term care consultation;
(5) Criteria for exempting individuals from the long-term care consultation requirement;
(6) Circumstances under which it may be appropriate to provide an individual's consultation after the individual's admission to a nursing facility.
(R.C. 5101.573 (repealed))
The act repeals a provision under which ODJFS or an agency designated by ODJFS could develop a plan for provision of home and community-based services to a person if the recommendation resulting from the assessment is that home and community-based services are appropriate for the person.
Continuing law authorizes ODJFS to require an applicant for or recipient of Medicaid who applies or intends to apply for admission to a nursing facility to undergo an assessment to determine whether the applicant or recipient needs the level of care provided by a nursing facility.
The act expands this provision to also apply to an applicant for or recipient of Medicaid who resides in a nursing facility. In addition, the act specifies that the assessment may be performed concurrently with a long-term care consultation performed by ODA.
(R.C. 5101.754 and 5111.204(B) and (G))
Prior law permitted ODJFS to designate another agency to conduct assessments. Under the act, ODJFS may instead enter into contracts in the form of interagency agreements with one or more other state agencies to perform the assessments. The interagency agreements must be in accordance with Medicaid law provisions governing interagency agreements to administer one or more components of the Medicaid program. The interagency agreements must specify the responsibilities of each agency in the performance of the assessments.
(R.C. 5111.204 (C) and (D))
The act adds an additional category of assessment: a level of care determination. Under the act, ODJFS or the contracting agency must provide a level of care determination based on the assessment as follows:
(1) In the case of a person applying or intending to apply for admission to a nursing facility while hospitalized, not later than (a) one working day after the person or the person's representative submits the application or notifies ODJFS of the person's intention to apply and submits all information required for providing the level of care determination or (b) a later date requested by the person or the person's representative.
(2) In the case of a person applying or intending to apply for admission to a nursing facility who is not hospitalized, not later than (a) five calendar days after the person submits an application for Medicaid or notifies ODJFS of the person's intention to apply and submits all information required for providing the level of care determination or (b) a later date requested by the person or the person's representative.
(3) In the case of a person who resides in a nursing facility, not later than (a) five calendar days after the person or the person's representative submits an application for medical assistance and submits all information required for providing the level of care determination, or (b) a later date requested by the person or the person's representative.
(4) In the case of an emergency, within the number of days specified by ODJFS rules.
The act also removes a provision that provided for partial assessments to be conducted (existing R.C. 5111.204(C), (D), (E), and (H)).
The act retains a law that permits a person assessed or the person's representative to appeal the conclusions reached by ODJFS or the contracting agency on the basis of the assessment, but rephrases the provision to refer to requesting "a state hearing to dispute the conclusions" rather than referring to an "appeal." The act requires that the state be represented in any requested state hearing by ODJFS or the contracting agency, whichever performed the assessment.
The act revises law authorizing the Director of ODJFS to adopt rules to implement and administer the assessment provision as follows:
(1) It eliminates partial assessments.
(2) It requires that the rules set forth circumstances that constitute an "emergency" and the number of days within which a level of care determination must be provided in the case of an emergency.
(3) It eliminates specific criteria that must be included in rules establishing criteria and procedures to be used in determining whether admission to a nursing facility or continued stay in a nursing facility is appropriate for the person being assessed.
(4) It makes conforming changes to reflect the other changes in the act.
(R.C. 5111.205 (repealed))
The act repeals a provision under which ODJFS or the designated agency, whichever performed the assessment, could develop a plan for provision of home and community-based services to that person if the recommendation resulting from the assessment was that home and community-based services were appropriate for the person assessed.
(R.C. 173.44 and 173.99(D))
The act authorizes ODA to conduct an annual survey of nursing homes and residential care facilities. The survey is to include questions about capacity, occupancy, and private pay charges related to the facilities. ODA may work with an outside entity to conduct the survey and analyze the results. The results and analysis of the survey are to be made available to the General Assembly, other state agencies, nursing home and residential care facility providers, and the public.
A nursing home or residential care facility that recklessly fails to complete the survey is subject to a $100 fine.
(former R.C. 173.45 to 173.59 and R.C. 173.02; O.A.C. Chapter 173-45)
Am. Sub. H.B. 95 of the 125th General Assembly, the biennial operating budget for fiscal years 2004 and 2005, repealed provisions that required ODA to publish the Ohio Long-Term Care Consumer Guide, a guide to Ohio nursing homes. Prior law required the Guide to be made available on the Internet and updated periodically. Every two years, ODA was required to publish an Executive Summary of the Guide, which had to be available in electronic and printed media. In addition, prior law specified that, to the extent possible, annual customer satisfaction surveys had to be conducted for use in the Guide. ODA was permitted to charge the nursing home a fee of up to $400 for each annual survey. The Guide has continued to be published pursuant to ODA rules, but the statutory provisions were eliminated.
(R.C. 173.45 to 173.49)
The act enacts new statutory provisions governing publication of an Ohio Long-Term Care Consumer Guide, conduct of customer satisfaction surveys, and the fee relating to the surveys.
Authorization to publish and content of Guide. The act requires ODA to develop and publish a guide to long-term care facilities for use by individuals considering long-term care facility admission and their families, friends, and advisors. This Ohio Long-Term Care Consumer Guide may be published in printed form or in electronic form for distribution over the Internet. The Guide may be developed as a continuation or modification of the rule-authorized Guide currently published by ODA.
The Guide must include information on each long-term care facility in Ohio. For each facility, the Guide must include the following information, as applicable to the facility:
(1) Information regarding the facility's compliance with Ohio statutes and rules and federal statutes and regulations;
(2) Information generated by the United States Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services from the quality measures developed as part of its nursing home quality initiative;
(3) Results of customer satisfaction surveys;
(4) Any other information ODA specifies by rule.
Customer satisfaction surveys. For purposes of publishing the Guide, ODA must conduct or provide for the conduct of an annual customer satisfaction survey of each long-term care facility. The act specifies that each long-term care facility must cooperate in the conduct of the survey (but does not specify a penalty for non-compliance). The results of the surveys may include information obtained from long-term care facility residents, their families, or both.
Fees and the Long-Term Care Consumer Guide Fund. ODA may charge fees for the conduct of annual customer satisfaction surveys. ODA may contract with any person or government entity to collect the fees on its behalf. The fees may not exceed the following amounts:
(1) $400 for the customer satisfaction survey of a long-term care facility that is a nursing home;
(2) $300 for the customer satisfaction survey pertaining to a long-term care facility that is a residential care facility.
Fees paid by a long-term care facility that is a "nursing facility" must be reimbursed through the Medicaid Program.
The act creates in the state treasury the Long-Term Care Consumer Guide Fund. Money collected from the fees charged for the conduct of customer satisfaction surveys must be deposited in the state treasury and credited to the Fund. ODA must use money in the Fund for costs associated with publishing the Guide, including, but not limited to, costs incurred in conducting or providing for the conduct of customer satisfaction surveys.
Rules. The act authorizes ODA to adopt rules under the Administrative Procedure Act (R.C. Chapter 119.) to implement and administer the provisions relating to the annual surveys and the publication of the Long-Term Care Consumer Guide.
(R.C. 173.50; Section 490.03)
The Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) is a Medicaid component based on a managed care model through which certain sites provide frail, older adults with all of their needed health care and ancillary services in acute, subacute, institutional, and community settings. Enrollment is voluntary, and once enrolled, PACE becomes the sole source of all Medicare and Medicaid covered services and other items or medical, social, or rehabilitation services the PACE interdisciplinary team determines an enrollee needs. If a participant requires placement in a nursing home, PACE is responsible and accountable for the care and services provided and must regularly evaluate the participant’s condition.