|
January 25, 2023 CERTIFIED MAIL David and Jeana Miller David G Miller & Jeana M Miller Adult Foster Care 2000 191st Avenue NW Oak Grove, MN 55011 License Number 1075500- AFC (Adult Foster Care) Maltreatment Investigation Report Number 202107594 Background Study Numbers: 24253836 and 24253852 DETERMINATION OF MALTREATMENT, DISQUALIFICATION AND ORDER OF LICENSE REVOCATION Dear David and Jeana Miller: The Department of Human Services (DHS) has determined that David Miller, Jeana Miller, and David G Miller & Jeana M Miller Adult Foster Care located at 2000 191st Ave NW, Oak Grove, MN, under License Number 1075500 are responsible for maltreatment by financial exploiation. David Miller is identified as SP2 and Jeana Miller is identified as SP1 in the Investigation Memorandum for Report Number 202107594. DHS has determined that David Miller and Jeana Miller are each responsible for recurring maltreatment and are each therefore disqualified from any position allowing direct contact with, or access to, persons receiving services from programs, organizations, and/or agencies that are required to have individuals complete a background study by the Department of Human Services as listed in Minnesota Statutes, section 245C.03. DHS is also revoking your license to provide Adult Foster Care at 2000 191st Ave NW, Oak Grove, MN, under License Number 1075500. This revocation is based on the determinations of maltreatment and disqualification of the license holders. Details of our findings are provided below and in the enclosed Investigation Memorandum for report 20107594. Our next steps and your options are also detailed. REASON FOR LICENSE REVOCATION 1. Determination of Maltreatment Maltreatment Report Number 202107594. DHS investigated the report as alleged maltreatment by financial exploitation. Allegation one: It was reported that between January and February 2021, a vulnerable adult (VA) gave two staff persons (SP1 and SP2) multiple checks totaling $12,179. These checks were in addition to what the VA paid for his/her monthly room and board and services. Substantiated as to financial exploitation of the VA by SP1, SP2, and the facility. Allegation two: It was reported that SP1 and SP2 withdrew $800 from the VA’s bank account, despite being told by the VA’s team not to handle the VA’s finances. Initially there were concerns that the VA did not receive the $800 but the money was later was found in the VA’s bedroom. Inconclusive as to financial exploitation. Based on the maltreatment investigation, DHS determined that David Miller, Jeana Miller, and David G Miller & Jeana M Miller Adult Foster Care were responsible for financial exploitation of the VA. See the enclosed Investigation Memorandum for more information. Statute(s) Violated: Minnesota Statutes, section 626.557, subdivision 9c Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.07, subdivision 3 (a)(4) a license holder shall forfeit $1000 for each determination of maltreatment of a vulnerable adult under section 626.557 for which the license holder is determined responsible for the maltreatment under section 626.557, subdivision 9c, paragraph (c). However, because the Commissioner is imposing a more severe licensing sanction, David G Miller & Jeana M Miller Adult Foster Care is not being fined for $1000. If the revocation is rescinded upon appeal, DHS may impose the fine at that time. 2. Disqualification of License Holder See conclusion regarding financial exploitation in Maltreatment Report Number 202107594. · The final disposition was that maltreatment is substantiated and that David Miller, Jeana Miller, and David G Miller & Jeana M Miller Adult Foster Care are each responsible for the maltreatment for report number 202107594. · David Miller and Jeana Miller have been found to be responsible for recurring maltreatment. Recurring maltreatment is a disqualification under Minnesota Statutes, section 245C.15, subdivision 4. The information used to disqualify David Miller and Jeana Miller has been reviewed in order to determine whether David Miller or Jeana Miller pose an imminent risk of harm to persons receiving services. · The Commissioner has determined that David Miller and Jeana Miller each pose an imminent risk of harm to persons served by the program where David Miller and Jeana Miller will have direct contact or access to persons served by the program and must be immediately removed. · In making the determination, the Commissioner has considered all relevant information available including all of the factors listed in Minnesota Statutes, section 245C.16, subdivision 1, and found the following factors to be determinative: o The recency of the disqualifying characteristic; o The vulnerability of the victim(s) involved in the disqualifying maltreatment; o The similarity of the victim(s) to the persons served by the program where the individual studied will have direct contact; o The repeated nature of the disqualifying characteristic. Legal Authority: Minnesota Statutes, sections 245A.04, subdivision 7; 245A.07, subdivision 3(a)(2); 626.557, subdivision 9c, paragraph (d) LICENSING VIOLATIONS DETERMINED DHS determined that your program failed to follow licensing rules and statutes, as described below. 1. Citation: Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.04, subdivision 13, paragraph (d), clauses (4) and (5). Violation: The license holder required persons served by the program to purchase items for which the license holder was eligible for reimbursement. The facility Resident Contract said that there was a $1500 move in fee which was used, in part, to ensure that items including “all hygiene items, bedding, doctor appointments, paperwork” was provided to the person served. You were required to provide these items as part of the monthly “room and board” and “service rate” payments you collected from the VA each month. 2. Citation: Minnesota Rules, part 9555.6185, subpart 2. Violation: The license holder did not ensure that staff persons received training designed to meet the needs of the residents in care, and failed to ensure that a record of training completed was maintained. For two staff persons (P1 and P2), you did not ensure that they received required training. Closure of license On June 23, 2022, you notified Anoka County of your request to close your license to provide adult foster care services. Please note that failure to reapply or closure of a license by the license holder before an investigation is complete does not preclude DHS from issuing a licensing action at the conclusion of the investigation. YOUR RIGHT TO APPEAL You have the right to appeal the Revocation Order, maltreatment determinations, and/or disqualifications. Please see options below. Please note that your reconsideration rights regarding your disqualification are separate and require independent action. Should you exercise your rights to appeal send:
1. Right to appeal the revocation, maltreatment determination, and disqualification You have the right to appeal the revocation, the maltreatment determination, and disqualification. The request must be in writing and clearly state that the license holder is requesting a contested case hearing for this matter. The request must be made before the deadlines provided below. If you do not meet this deadline, you lose the right to an administrative appeal. The timeline to appeal began when you received this order. If you are mailing your request, it must be sent by certified mail and postmarked within 30 calendar days from when you received this order. See address provided at the beginning of this section. If your request is being personally delivered, it must be received by DHS within 30 calendar days from when you received this order. See address provided at the beginning of this section. Upon DHS’ receipt of your timely appeal, your case would be scheduled for a contested case hearing in front of an Administrative Law Judge. After this hearing, the Commissioner of DHS will issue a final order. Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.08, subdivision 2a, and section 245C.28, when a licensing sanction is based on a determination of maltreatment or a disqualification for serious or recurring maltreatment, the scope of the contested case hearing shall include the maltreatment determination, disqualification, and the licensing sanction. In this case, a reconsideration and a fair hearing would not be conducted regarding the maltreatment and disqualification. 2. Request for reconsideration of the maltreatment determination and disqualification If you do not appeal the revocation, you may still request reconsideration of the maltreatment determination and disqualification. Your request must be made before the deadlines provided below. If you do not meet this deadline, you lose your right to request reconsideration. The timeline to request reconsideration began when you received this order. Your request must: · Be in writing · Clearly state that you are requesting reconsideration of the maltreatment determination · Identify what is inaccurate or incomplete about the information in the Investigation Memorandum · Supply information that is accurate or more complete · State why you believe the finding of maltreatment should be changed · Be made before the deadlines provided below. Your request must be postmarked within 30 calendar days from when you received this order. See address provided at the beginning of this section. If your request is being personally delivered, it must be received by DHS within 30 calendar days from when you received this order. See address provided at the beginning of this section. See also the enclosed “Suggested Form for Request for Reconsideration of Disqualification Due to Maltreatment.” 3. Request for reconsideration of the maltreatment determination only If you do not appeal the revocation or the disqualification, you may still request reconsideration of the maltreatment determination. Your request must be made before the deadlines provided below. If you do not meet this deadline, you lose your right to request reconsideration. The timeline to request reconsideration began when you received this order. Your request must: · Be in writing · Clearly state that you are requesting reconsideration of the maltreatment determination · Identify what is inaccurate or incomplete about the information in the Investigation Memorandum · Supply information that is accurate or more complete · State why you believe the finding of maltreatment should be changed · Be made before the deadlines provided below. Your request must be postmarked within 15 calendar days from when you received this order. See address provided at the beginning of this section. If your request is being personally delivered, it must be received by DHS within 15 calendar days from when you received this order. See address provided at the beginning of this section. A response to your reconsideration request will be mailed within 15 working days after DHS receives your request. You have the right to request a fair hearing if a response is not mailed within 15 working days. 4. Right to appeal revocation only You have the right to appeal only the revocation. Your request must be in writing and clearly state that you are requesting a contested case hearing for this matter. Your request must be made before the deadlines provided below. If you do not meet this deadline, you lose your right to an administrative appeal. The timeline to appeal began when you received this order. If you are mailing your request, it must be sent by certified mail and postmarked within 10 calendar days from when you received this order. See address provided at the beginning of his section. If your request is being personally delivered, it must be received by DHS within 10 calendar days from when you received this order. See address at the beginning of this section. Upon DHS’ receipt of your timely appeal, your case would be scheduled for a contested case hearing in front of an Administrative Law Judge. Following this hearing, the Commissioner of DHS will issue a final order. If you do not appeal or if the order is affirmed by the Commissioner following a hearing, DHS is prohibited from issuing you and the controlling individuals a license for five years. In addition, any additional licenses held by you or the controlling individuals shall also be revoked. Legal representation at the contested case hearing: You do not need a lawyer to appeal. However, a lawyer can help you with your appeal. The state or county will not get you a lawyer and will not pay for a lawyer. If you cannot afford a lawyer, you may be able to get free legal advice or help with your appeal. To find out if free help is available, contact: Volunteer Lawyers Network at 612-752-6677; Central Minnesota Legal Services at 612-332-8151; Southern Minnesota Legal Services at 651-222-4731; or go to www.lawhelpmn.org to find a local legal services program that may be able to help you. You can also find information on contested cases from the Office of Administrative Hearings website at https://mn.gov/oah/self-help. Click on Administrative Law Overview, then click on Administrative Law Contested Case Hearing Guide for a list of frequently asked questions. Operating the program pending the outcome of the appeal: As described above, your adult foster care license was closed at your request on June 23, 2022. If you file an appeal within the timeframes described above, you may not operate an adult foster care program pending the outcome of your appeal because your license has been closed. Legal authority for this licensing action · This action is taken under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.07, subdivision 3, which describes under which conditions DHS may revoke a license. · The timeline to appeal a revocation order is provided in Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.07, subdivision 3(b). · “Controlling individual” is defined under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.02, subdivision 5a. · Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.07, subdivision 3, paragraph (a), clause (1), the Commissioner may revoke a license if the license holder fails to comply fully with applicable laws or rules. · Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.07, subdivision 3, paragraph (a), clause (2), the Commissioner may revoke a license if a license holder or controlling individual has a disqualification which has not been set aside under section 245C.22. · When a revocation of a license is based on a disqualification for which reconsideration was timely requested and which was not set aside, the scope of the contested case hearing for the revocation shall also include the disqualification and revocation under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.08, subdivision 2a, paragraph (a). · When a revocation of a license is based on a determination of maltreatment under section 626.557 or chapter 260E, or a disqualification for serious or recurring maltreatment that was not set aside, the scope of the contested case hearing shall include that maltreatment determination, the disqualification and revocation under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.08, subdivision 2a, paragraph (a). · Minnesota Statutes, section 245C.29, subdivision 2 states that a disqualification is final if the commissioner or court has issued a final decision, the individual did not request reconsideration on the basis the disqualification was incorrect, or the individual did not timely request a hearing after being given the right to do so. · Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.07, subdivision 3, paragraph (c), clause (4) states that license holders shall pay a $1000 fine for each determination of maltreatment under section 626.557. · License holders have a right to appeal licensing actions and request a contested case hearing, under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 14 and Minnesota Rules, parts 1400.8505 to 1400.8612. · Minnesota Statutes, sections 626.557, subdivision 9c, paragraph (d) and 260E.30, subdivision 4 (c), when substantiated maltreatment is determined to have been committed by an individual who is also the facility license holder, both the individual and the facility must be determined responsible for the maltreatment, and both the background study disqualification standards under section 245C.15, subdivision 4, and the licensing actions under section 245A.06 or 245A.07 apply. · Minnesota Statutes, section 13.46, subdivision 4, paragraph (b), clause (1), if a licensing sanction under section 245A.07 is based on a determination that the license holder is responsible for maltreatment, the identity of the license holder as the individual responsible for maltreatment is public data at the time of the issuance of the licensing sanction. · Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.04, subdivision 7, paragraph (d), clause (1), the commissioner shall not issue or reissue a license if the license holder or controlling individual has been disqualified and the disqualification has not been set aside and no variance has been granted. · Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.04, subdivision 7, paragraph (d), clause (3), the commissioner shall not issue or reissue a license if the applicant, license holder, or controlling individual has had a license issued under this chapter revoked within the past five years. · Under Minnesota Statutes, section 245A.04, subdivision 7, paragraph (d), clause (5), when a license issued under this chapter is revoked under clause (1) or (3), the license holder and controlling individual may not hold any license under chapter 245A for five years following the revocation, and other licenses held by the applicant, license holder, or controlling individual shall also be revoked. · Minnesota Statutes, section 245C.02, subdivision 16 defines recurring as more than one incident of maltreatment for which there is a preponderance of evidence that the maltreatment occurred and that the subject was responsible for the maltreatment. · Minnesota Statutes, section 245C.16, if the commissioner determines that the individual studied has a disqualifying characteristic, the commissioner shall review the information immediately available and make a determination as to the subject's immediate risk of harm to persons served by the program where the individual studied will have direct contact with, or access to, people receiving services. · Minnesota Statutes, section 245C.15, subdivision 4, an individual is disqualified if less than seven years have passed since a determination of substantiated serious or recurring maltreatment of a vulnerable adult under section 626.557 or minor under chapter 260E.
Questions If you have any further questions regarding this matter, you may contact Melanie Daniel, Supervisor, at 651-431-6559. Sincerely,
Alyssa Dotson, Deputy Inspector General Licensing Division Office of Inspector General
|
