Page 185

Page 15 of 40 § 10:71-4.10 Transfer of assets assets was $ 24,000. D.T. v. Camden Cnty. Bd. of Social Servs., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 02254-17, 2017 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 770, Initial Decision (October 4, 2017). In the absence of any back-up documentation in the form of receipts, bills, invoices and/or cancelled checks, spreadsheets prepared by a son showing the claimed use, by the son, of funds belonging to an elderly parent who had applied for Medicaid, were insufficient to prove that the funds at issue in fact were used by the son to provide for the parent's care. That being so, a 231-day transfer penalty was properly imposed on the parent's Medicaid eligibility. A.P. v. Morris Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs., Office of Temporary Assistance, OAL DKT. NO. HMA 11114- 17, 2017 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 738, Initial Decision (September 28, 2017). Medicaid applicant failed to carry his burden to rebut the presumption that a transfer for less than FMV during the look-back period was presumed to have been made to establish Medicaid eligibility. Moreover, the care and services provided by the applicant's adult children for free in the past were presumed to have been intended to be delivered without compensation. Because the applicant did not prove the existence of a written agreement to pay for such services at their FMV, the assets that were transferred to the children was not compensation for services rendered. E.W. v. DMAHS, OAL DKT. NO. HMA 07779-17, 2017 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1327, Final Agency Determination (September 26, 2017). DMAHS director approved of an Initial Decision entered following a remand to develop the record on the issue of whether a Medicaid applicant needed a nursing home level of care during a stated period and thus was entitled to invoke the "caregiver exemption," thereby avoiding a penalty on eligibility based on an uncompensated transfer. As the applicant failed to prove, on remand, the existence of physical or mental deficiencies requiring that level of care during the critical two-year period, the Initial Decision rejecting the claim of a caretaker exemption was approved and adopted. F.G. v. DMAHS et al., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 3876-2017 (On remand HMA 15346-2016), 2017 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1048, Final Agency Determination (September 25, 2017). ALJ rejected an agency determination denying an applicant's request that the applicant's daughter be granted a caregiver's exemption because the undisputed evidence was that the applicant remained in her home and received care from her daughter for the relevant two year period and that the daughter assisted her in all ADLs; took care of all of the shopping, laundry, doctor's appointments and other domestic matters, and arranged for friends and family to care for her mother when she was absent. Because the daughter was providing "nursing home level care," the caregiver's exemption was properly granted. A.K. v. Camden Cnty. Bd. of Social Servs., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 03433-17 (ON REMAND HMA 11760-16), 2017 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 704, Initial Decision (September 11, 2017). In reviewing an application for Medicaid benefits filed by a 50-year old quadriplegic, a county social services board could not determine the propriety of distributions from a special needs trust account without the testimony of the trustee or some other person knowledgeable about the uses of the funds held therein. In the absence of such information, which could only be obtained from the applicant or his representative, the application was appropriately denied. E.M. v. DMAHS et al., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 14679-15, 2017 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 670, Initial Decision (September 6, 2017). Institutionalized spouse who failed to cause her attorney-in-fact to elect against the estate of her deceased husband within the statutory 6-month period was properly found to have transferred those assets into the inter vivos trust of the deceased spouse for less than FMV and such amounts were properly considered in determining and imposing a transfer penalty on the Medicaid eligibility of the institutionalized spouse. R.L. v. DMAHS et al., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 09762-14, 2017 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 669, Initial Decision (August 30, 2017). ALJ agreed with a county social services board that a transfer penalty was properly imposed on the Medicaid eligibility of an applicant who had resided with his adult children during the five years prior to the date on which he entered a nursing home. While the applicant insisted that the fund transfers on which the penalty was based were made to fund his living expenses such as medical care, personal care items and food, the applicant only provided general testimony about those expenses and did not submit receipts or other documentary proof other than photographs of the garden that the applicant claimed to have created using his own funds. The applicant therefore