The Importance Of Annual Review

Section 504 stipulates rather broadly that a person with a disability is “one who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life functions, a person who has a history or record of such an impairment, or a person who is perceived by others as having such an impairment” (US Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division Disability Rights Section). Because impairments are not specifically named, these laws are open to interpretation and qualify anyone in need of

Having a physical disability may effect a persons ability to work and therefore they would need income support and “out

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, there are 49 million Americans without healthcare insurance and more than 10 million are non-U.S. citizens (http://www.census.gov). Because many people are uninsured and those that do have insurance pay high deductibles, Americans often dismiss the need for doctor’s visits for minor problems or annual physicals. As a result, health problems that can be detected at an early stage or prevented altogether become major illnesses. Individuals with disabilities hold one of the biggest weaknesses in the healthcare system because they cannot often obtain affordable health coverage.

Per the Health Care Safety Net Increased Eligibility Amendment Act of 2005, its first manifest goal proposes that individuals 18 years of age or younger whose total gross income is more than 200% but less than 250% of the federal poverty guideline will be afforded reasonably priced healthcare and medical services. In addition, the act’s second goal proposes that the Mayor will create a thorough plan within 180 days of its enactment that outlines specific eligibility criterion for the aforementioned individuals whose gross income is more than 200% but less than 250% of the federal poverty guideline (Health Care Safety Net Increased Eligibility Amendment Act of, 2005). The individual’s total gross income will represent all money received, including but not limited to cash.

Because of a 75 year old section of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, companies that use sheltered workshops to train workers with disabilities, such as Goodwill Industries, can legally pay their employees just pennies an hour. The section of the Fair Labor Standards Act that legalizes this behavior needs to be repealed in order to ensure fair pay and treatment of every employee in today’s workforce. To begin, I will explain the use of sheltered workshops and the timed tests used to determine subminimum wages for employees with disabilities. I will then go on to discuss the history of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and how companies use a section of the legislation to get away with paying their employees with disabilities so

Both rulings bring about interesting points involving how healthcare is paid for, purchased, and how it is determining who is eligible for it. Health care alone is a unique market that combines many variables with few realistic purchasing alternatives and affordable options for care treatments. Those treatments are very expensive and traditionally difficult to pay out of pocket for Most people except for their yearly check-ups and immunizations do not plan for the random costs and unintentional illnesses and injury that are exclusive to the healthcare market. The costs associated with ER visits, which tend to be relatively expensive, and the healthcare provided to those whether they are uninsured or insured incurs a significant cost that is

Mr. Williams submitted his application for Medicaid benefits on August 5, 2015. The Gulfport Regional Office (RO) forwarded a Disability and Blindness Report to Disability Determination Services (DDS), who has the responsibility of making disability decisions for the Division of Medicaid (DOM), on August 13, 2015. DDS notified the RO on October 16, 2015, that Mr. Williams was not disabled for Medicaid purposes. The RO issued a Notice of Adverse Action on October 23, 2015.

On October 1, 2015, Ms. Booth was approved for Medicaid coverage through the BCC program. It was determined by the Mississippi State Department of Health that Ms. Heigle was eligible to receive Medicaid coverage for two (2) years or during the course of her treatment for breast cancer. The Office of Eligibility issued a Notice of Adverse Action on September 5, 2017, informing Ms. Booth that her eligibility would terminate on September 30, 2017, because her two (2) year treatment period was ending.

As you know, this case is established for the low back with an average weekly wage of $578.90. The claimant has been classified with a permanent partial disability and payments are continuing to him at the marked rate of $289.45. By Notice of Decision filed on 01/10/2007, Section 15(8)(d) was established in this case.

He stopped working on March 1, 2013, the day of his injury. He has been working at his brother’s lawn mower repair shop. He basically comes and goes as he is able and is always paid $320 a week, regardless of how much time he spends at work. He has collected 26 weeks of Unemployment Insurance Benefits and was approved for Medicaid Disability with a $5,000 deductible every six months. He did not get Worker’s Compensation and has been denied Long Term Disability by his private insurer.

The carrier has denied coverage of continued occupational therapy from 07/29/2015 - forward as not medically necessary. There is a letter from the carrier to the member, dated 03/29/2016, which states in part:

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prevents the discrimination based off disability in programs run by the government agencies. This includes any programs that receive federal financial assistance, are in federal employment, are in the employment of federal contractors. The standards for deciding if employment discrimination exists under this act are the same standards used in Title One of the Americans with Disabilities Act. There are multiple sections in the Rehab Act. Section 501 stops federal employers from preventing a qualified individual with a disability from working. It pushes them to actually hire people with disabilities to give them a chance. Section 503 is like 501, except it pushes employers to advance employees with disabilities

Samantha is a 47-year-old female who suffers from RR multiple sclerosis (G35), along with a history of pelvic fracture, neoplasm of pituitary gland and craniopharyngeal duct, vitamin D deficiency, and chronic fatigue. Samantha has tried and failed various treatments including betaseron, copaxone, tecfidera, and rebif, all have provided her with minimal remission from her symptoms. The denial states Aubagio is not on the plan’s formulary. We are requesting an exception for the Aubagio to be covered or added to the plan’s formulary. Samantha is currently stable on Aubagio with no ill side effect, therefore it would be ill advised to deny Samantha coverage for a treatment that is currently controlling her symptoms. Forcing her to change to a medication

Working tax credits was introduced in 2003 along with disability element to help people stay in work or to return to work (Mitra, 2009). Then the 2005 Disability Discrimination Act came into force (Haralambos & Holborn, 2009). (Burchardt, 2000) cited that according to the European Commission (1998), people with disabilities have low levels of participation in society and the employment rate for people with disabilities is 20-30% lower than people without disabilities (Huang, 2009). From 2013 Disability Living Allowance for disabled people aged 16 to 64 will be replaced by a new Personal Independence Payment programme (Directgov). This is a non-means tested, tax free benefit. The DWP is to run a pilot scheme to help assist and reintroduce claimants back into the job market (Mitra, 2009), this will lead to employers paying short term benefits rather than the state.

At the facility where I work they have implemented peer review as part of the evaluation process for the nurses. It used to be anonymous, but now they want your name on the review. Personally, found that being anonymous one is more candid. There is a generalized form that one must answer along comments, if necessary. Have found that no one answers these correctly, which defeats the process of having them done. Anonymity is advantageous because it allows one to be factual in one’s observation. Peer reviews need a tool to give direction or facilitate the process. “Challenges with this tool are that staff believe that they are less able to assess the patient care questions because they do not frequently observe the peer’s care processes.