Comments contained in this communication are related to the draft guidance document regarding the ”Requirement for 90 Days of Operating Expenses.”

In the second paragraph of the memorandum all licensed services other than sponsored residential services are discussed.  Respectfully, clarification will likely need to be provided that further distinguishes the distinction that is attempting to be made.   Additionally, if is felt that this further clarity will need to be provided to prevent confusion related to interpretation and application of the provisions when licensing reviews are being conducted.   

No specific guidance, other than maintenance of separate accounts, reflecting funds for mortgage/rent payments, personal daily expenses and deposit accounts where payment received for residents living in the home is provided for sponsored residential homes.  If the same restrictions outlined in this memorandum contained in  paragraph four are being applied to  sponsored residential provider homes; a significant barrier to approving homes in some geographic areas will potentially have been created. The use of life insurance plans and 401-K or 403-B plans with hardship withdrawal provisions are often used to cover a portion, if not all of the 90-day resources needed to sustain a provider home in the scenario outlined by this regulation. These suggested changes could prevent or delay potential provider homes from being opened, but it will also likely create undue burden for those provider homes already in operation that will now have 60-days to comply with the interpretation when their practice for years has been acceptable. The necessity of multiple accounts to reflect cash reserves, payment of daily expenses, as well deposit accounts is confusing and burdensome as well.  Removal of the promissory note should not create such barriers and therefore I do not believe would have the same negative effects as the removal of retirement funds or life insurance payouts.

 Clarification is the biggest request. It is hard to adequately voice concerns of the changes, when we are not very clear on which changes pertain to Sponsored Residential Services. Additionally, the request to reconsider making the requirements stricter in ways that will have a big impact on new provider homes and provider agencies  being able to meet all requirements. Placement options are already lacking, which leads to more expensive options being utilized when there are simply no other options.