(1) that there is
a public need for the facility or the proposed new facility;
(2)
(i) If a
nonprofit corporation, that the members of the board of directors and the
officers of the corporation are of such character, experience, competence and
standing as to give reasonable assurance of their ability to conduct the
affairs of the corporation in its best interests and in the public interest and
so as to provide proper care for the patients or residents to be served by the
facility or the proposed facility;
(ii) if a proprietary business, that the
owner, or all the partners, if a partnership, are persons of good moral
character with the experience, competence and standing as to give reasonable
assurance of their ability to operate the business so as to provide proper care
for the patients or residents to be served by the facility or the proposed
facility;
(iii) if a business
corporation, that the members of the board of directors, the officers and the
stockholders of the corporation are of such character, experience, competence
and standing as to give reasonable assurance of their ability to conduct the
affairs of the corporation so as to provide proper care for the patients or
residents to be served by the facility or the proposed facility;
(iv) if a limited liability company, that the
members, managers, and officers of the company, are of such character,
experience, competence and standing as to give reasonable assurance of their
ability to conduct the affairs of the company so as to provide proper care for
the patients or residents to be served by the facility or the proposed
facility;
(3) that there
are adequate finances to properly establish and conduct the proposed
facility;
(4) that, with respect to
an applicant who is already or within the past 10 years, been an incorporator,
director, sponsor, stockholder, member, controlling person, principal
stockholder, principal member, or operator of any facility as specified in
paragraph (b) of subdivision (3) of section
2801-a of
the Public Health Law, a substantially consistent high level of care has been
rendered in each such facility the applicant is or has been affiliated.
(i) In reaching this determination, the
Public Health and Health Planning Council shall consider findings of facility
inspections, including but not limited to the title XVIII and XIX (of the
Social Security Act) and article 28 survey findings, as such pertain to
violations of this Chapter and routine and patient abuse complaint
investigation results; and other available information.
(ii) The Public Health and Health Planning
Council's determination that a substantially consistent high level of care has
been rendered shall be made after evaluating the aforementioned information,
with the following criteria: the gravity of any violation, the manner in which
the applicant/operator exercised supervisory responsibility over the facility
operation, and the remedial action, if any, taken after the violation was
discovered.
(a) In evaluating the gravity of
the violation, the Public Health and Health Planning Council shall consider
whether the violation threatened, or resulted in direct, significant harm to
the health, safety or welfare of patients/residents.
(b) In evaluating the manner in which the
applicant/operator exercised supervisory responsibility over the facility
operation, the Public Health and Health Planning Council shall consider whether
a reasonably prudent individual of the applicant/operator should have been
aware of the conditions which resulted in the violation and was notified about
the conditions which resulted in the violation and whether the individual of
the applicant/operator was notified about the condition(s) which resulted in
the violation.
(c) In evaluating any
remedial action taken, the Public Health and Health Planning Council shall
consider whether the applicant/operator investigated the circumstances
surrounding the violation, and took steps which a reasonably prudent
applicant/operator would take to prevent the reoccurrence of the
violation.
(iii) When
violations were found which either threatened to directly affect
patient/resident health, safety or welfare, or resulted in direct, significant
harm to the health, safety or welfare of patients/residents, there shall not be
a determination of a substantially consistent high level of care if the
violations were recurrent or were not promptly corrected.
(a) A violation is recurrent if it has the
same root cause as a violation previously cited within the last ten (10)
years.
(b) A violation is not
promptly corrected if a plan of correction has not been submitted to the
Department within ten (10) calendar days of the issuance of the statement of
deficiencies, Form CMS-2567 and the facility has failed to provide an
acceptable date of compliance based on the violation(s) requiring
correction.
(5)
that, with respect to an application to incorporate or establish a nursing
home, an applicant who is already or within the past 7 years, been an
incorporator, director, sponsor, stockholder, or member, has held a controlling
interest or has been a controlling person, principal stockholder or principal
member, or operator of a nursing home as specified in paragraph (b) of
subdivision (3-b) of section
2801-a of
the Public Health Law, has demonstrated satisfactory character, competence and
standing in the community and a consistently high level of care has been
rendered in each such nursing home that the applicant is or has been
affiliated.
(i) In reaching this
determination, the Public Health and Health Planning Council shall consider, at
a minimum, the following:
(a) findings of
facility inspections, including but not limited to the title XVIII and XIX (of
the Social Security Act) and article 28 survey findings, as such pertain to
violations of this Chapter and routine and patient abuse complaint
investigation results;
(b) any
instance of a facility affiliated with the applicant/operator earning a
two-star rating or less by the federal centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services (CMS) (or a comparable rating under a successor CMS rating system);
provided that a further consideration and mitigating factor in determining
whether such star rating reflects a consistently high level of care is where an
applicant's ownership interest in the star rated facility commenced within the
prior five years;
(c) any instance
where there have been violations of the state or federal nursing home code, or
other applicable rules and regulations, that threatened to directly affect the
health, safety or welfare of any patient or resident, including but not limited
to a finding of immediate jeopardy, or actual harm, and were recurrent or were
not promptly corrected, including but not limited to repeat deficiencies for
the same or similar violations over a three year period or during the entire
duration of ownership if less than three years, or any facility which has been
in receivership;
(d) any instance
where a facility has closed or has closed as a result of a settlement agreement
from a decertification action or licensure revocation.
(e) any instance where a health care related
facility, agency, or program was the subject of a decertification action or
licensure revocation;
(f) any
involuntary termination from the Medicare or Medicaid program; and
(g) any instance of a nursing home being
designated a Special Focus Facility or Special Focus Facility Candidate.
The applicant shall be provided with the opportunity to
submit an explanation and other supporting documentation regarding any of the
aforementioned occurrences which shall be considered by the Public Health and
Health Planning Council prior to reaching a determination.
(ii) The Public Health and Health
Planning Council's determination that a consistently high level of care has
been rendered shall be made after evaluating the aforementioned information,
with the following criteria:
(i) the gravity
of any violation, the manner in which the applicant/operator exercised
supervisory responsibility over the facility operation, and the remedial
action, if any, taken after the violation was discovered and
(ii) the percentage of nursing homes in a
portfolio with a two-star or less rating.
(a)
In evaluating the gravity of the violation, the Public Health and Health
Planning Council shall consider whether the violation threatened, or resulted
in direct, significant harm to the health, safety or welfare of
patients/residents.
(b) In
evaluating the manner in which the applicant/operator exercised supervisory
responsibility over the facility operation, the Public Health and Health
Planning Council shall consider whether a reasonably prudent individual of the
applicant/operator should have been aware of the conditions which resulted in
the violation and whether the individual of the applicant/operator was notified
about the condition(s) which resulted in the violation.
(c) In evaluating any remedial action taken,
the Public Health and Health Planning Council shall consider whether the
applicant/operator investigated the circumstances surrounding the violation,
and took steps which a reasonably prudent applicant/operator would take to
prevent the reoccurrence of the violation.
(d) In evaluating instances of a facility
affiliated with the applicant/operator earning a two-star or less rating, the
Public Health and Health Planning Council shall determine the percentage of
nursing homes in the portfolio, that each individual of the applicant/operator
has held an ownership interest for forty-eight (48) months or more and has
earned a CMS star rating of two-stars or less.
(iii) When any of the following has occurred
in the prior five years, there shall not be a determination of a consistently
high level of care:
(a) Closure of a facility
or a facility has closed as a result of a settlement agreement from a
decertification action or licensure revocation.
(b) A health care related facility, agency,
or program was the subject of a decertification action or licensure
revocation.
(c) Involuntary
termination of a health care related facility, agency, or program from the
Medicare or Medicaid program.
(d)
Violations found, which either threatened to directly affect patient/resident
health, safety or welfare, or resulted in direct, significant harm to the
health, safety or welfare of patients/residents, and were recurrent or were not
promptly corrected.
(1) A violation is
recurrent if it has the same root cause as a violation previously cited within
the last seven (7) years.
(2) A
violation is not promptly corrected if a plan of correction has not been to
submitted to the Department within ten (10) calendar days of the issuance of
the statement of deficiencies, Form CMS-2567 and the facility has failed to
provide an acceptable date of compliance based on the violation(s) requiring
correction.
(iv) When any individual of the
applicant/operator has greater than 40% of the nursing homes in their portfolio
with a CMS star rating of two stars or less and has held an ownership interest
in such nursing home for forty-eight (48) months or more, there shall not be a
determination of a consistently high level of care; unless the portfolio
contains fewer than five (5) facilities, then the Public Health and Health
Planning Council shall make a determination on a case-by-case basis, using the
criteria set forth in subparagraph (ii) of this paragraph.