Page 25

Page 3 of 14 § 10:71-2.2 Responsibilities in the application process the spouse's life insurance policy did not create a necessity for an extension of time. M.D. v. Div. of Med. Assistance and Health Servs., et al., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 11056-2020, 2021 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 234, Final Agency Determination (June 29, 2021). Determination of a county welfare agency that an applicant for Medicaid was not entitled to benefits based on its finding that the applicant had not timely provided information needed to determine his eligibility was reversed and remanded for additional proceedings on the ground that where, as here, several Medicaid applications had been filed, the review of the applicant's financial history had to be based on the five year period that was prior to the first of such applications. That being so, the "look-back" period for this applicant was the five-year period prior to the first application, which was filed in 2018, rather than the most recent application, filed in October 2019. J.G. v. Morris Cnty. Dep't of Family Servs., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 04827-20, 2021 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 52, Order Reversing and Remanding Denial of Benefits (February 23, 2021). DMAHS rejected the claim of a Medicaid recipient who had been granted a January 1 eligibility date that the agency had lacked the authority to impose a transfer penalty based on the agency's post-eligibility discovery that the recipient had transferred the proceeds of sale of her residence to her daughter within the 60-month look-back period. The transfer penalty was imposed subsequent to the issuance of the notice of eligibility because the recipient had failed to disclose the transfer and there was no merit to the recipient's position that the agency should be prevented from imposing the transfer penalty on these facts. MM v. Middlesex Cnty. Bd. of Soc. Servs., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 05078-19, 2020 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 54, Final Agency Determination (January 27, 2020). Application for Medicaid was properly denied on findings that the applicant failed to comply with a request for documentation prior to the deadline set by the county board of social services inasmuch as she did not provide the board with her current monthly pension statement for a stated year, investment account statements or a plan for the liquidation of certain insurance policies. C.C. v. Burlington Cnty. Bd. of Soc. Servs., OAL DKT. NO.HMA 14778-19, 2019 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1052, Initial Decision (December 20, 2019). Applicant for Medicaid only benefits was entitled to a retroactive date of eligibility. The applicant diligently undertook to provide information requested about an annuity. If the board of social services had not made an error in reassigning her file, the documents would have been provided within the period set by law. Delays resulting from administrative error at the board were not properly permitted to affect the applicant's retroactive eligibility date. M.A. v. Monmouth Cnty. Bd. of Soc. Servs., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 07879-19, 2019 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 558, Final Agency Determination (August 27, 2019). Medicaid application was properly denied over the applicant's claim that the deadline should have been extended to allow him to provide requested items because the agency in fact had extended the deadline for receipt of the requested items from July 19 to December 13, and the applicant still failed to provide the needed documentation. M.S. v. Gloucester Cnty., Bd. of Soc. Servs., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 02481-18, 2018 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 794, Final Agency Determination (June 25, 2018). Lawyers who were conservators for an elderly man who was applying for Medicaid nursing home disabled benefits were acting in good faith to transmit all required documentation to a county social services board and their conduct also reflected cooperation and proactive efforts to comply with the board's requests. Those efforts constituted "exceptional circumstances" within the meaning of Medicaid Communication 10-09 and justified an order reversing the benefit denial and requiring a review of the application. H.P. v. Ocean Cnty. Bd. of Social Servs., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 01118-18, 2018 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 271, Initial Decision (May 11, 2018). Though no exceptions were filed, the DMAHS director modified the ALJ's determination that a board of social services had failed to assist the applicant in the Medicaid application process. While the board could have specifically requested the second page of the lawsuit, the applicant could have also inquired what was missing upon receiving the board's second request for a complete copy. This was the applicant's fourth application and his representative was familiar with the process and the requirement to provide information. A.A. v. DMAHS, et al., OAL Docket No. HMA 13178-17, 2018 N.J. AGEN. LEXIS 129, Final Agency Determination (January 29, 2018).