BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    






                                  SENATE HUMAN
                               SERVICES COMMITTEE
                            Senator Carol Liu, Chair


          BILL NO:       SB 141                                       
          S
          AUTHOR:        Maldonado                                    
          B
          VERSION:       To be amended
          HEARING DATE:  April 28, 2009                               
          1
          FISCAL:        To Appropriations                            
          4
                                                                      
          1
          CONSULTANT:                                                
          Hailey
                                        

                                     SUBJECT
                                         
                In-home supportive services: provider timesheets

                                     SUMMARY  

          Requires that timesheets for in-home supportive services  
          (IHSS), which are signed by the recipient and the provider  
          of services, contain a legal certification; a person  
          knowingly providing false information would be subject to a  
          civil penalty, the minimum of which is $2,500 and the  
          maximum is $25,000.

                                     ABSTRACT  

           Current law
           1.  Establishes the in-home supportive services program  
          (IHSS) to assist qualifying aged, blind, and disabled  
          individuals to remain safely in their own homes.

          2.  Establishes the crime of perjury as a felony punishable  
          by two, three, or four years in state prison.  (Penal Code  
          Sections 118 and 126)

          3.  Requires applicants for IHSS to sign their application  
          under penalty of perjury.
                                                         Continued---



          STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 141 (Maldonado)         Page  
          2


          


          4.  Requires the State Department of Social Services (DSS)  
          to establish statewide hourly task guidelines for the  
          chores and services provided through IHSS and to provide a  
          standardized tool for consistent and accurate assessment of  
          a client's service needs.

          5.  Requires recipients and providers of IHSS to sign a  
          time sheet every fourteen days showing the number of hours  
          per day of services received.

          This bill  
          Note: this analysis reflects the author's intent to amend  
          the bill in committee per the recommendation of the Senate  
          Public Safety Committee.  That amendment is provided in  
          full in the Comments and Questions section of the analysis.

          1.  Requires that the time sheet contain a legal  
          certification to be signed by the provider and recipient.

          2.  Provides that a person who knowingly provides false  
          information be subject to a civil penalty for each  
          violation in the minimum amount of $2,500 and the maximum  
          amount of $25,000.

          3.  Provides that an action for a civil penalty may be  
          brought by any public prosecutor and the penalty imposed  
          shall be enforceable as a civil judgment.

                                    FISCAL IMPACT  

          Unknown
                            BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION  

           Need for the bill
           The author places the bill within the context of the growth  
          of the IHSS program during the past ten to 15 years -  
          doubling in size in the past decade and forecast to grow at  
          nearly 8 percent per year through 2014.  However, the  
          author believes that state and county resources for  
          oversight do not match the program's growth.

          In 2005, the Legislature added quality assurance provisions  
          to IHSS to ensure that assessment and the provision of  
          services are uniform across the state and to prevent or  




          STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 141 (Maldonado)         Page  
          3


          

          eliminate fraud within the program.  It is time, says the  
          author, to revisit and strengthen quality assurance and  
          program integrity within IHSS.  Because oversight is  
          limited, the author believes that fraud has been able to go  
          virtually undetected.

          The author believes that adding a civil penalty to the  
          knowing provision of false information on the timesheet  
          will deter some fraudulent activity and ensure the  
          program's integrity.

           Fraud in IHSS and benefit payment programs: DSS and county  
          reporting  
          Reports of suspected or possible fraud in IHSS have raised  
          concerns in counties, including Los Angeles, Fresno, and  
          Sacramento, with grand juries raising specters of  
          extensive, purposeful misuse of public funds.  Further  
          investigation of those charges has yielded somewhat less.   
          While people tend to remember the headlines when a grand  
          jury report is released, they may miss the report to a  
          board of supervisors summarizing the result of  
          investigations.

          At a recent Human Services Committee oversight hearing on  
          IHSS, representatives of DSS reported that
               state and county quality assurance staff performed  
               20,532 desk/case file reviews and 3,833 home  
               visits during 2008.  While slightly more than  
               13,000 required some case action, more than 10,000  
               of those did not result in a change of authorized  
               hours but rather involved a missing signature, an  
               expired form, or clerical errors of this nature.   
               These desk reviews not only identify routine case  
               processing discrepancies, these reviews can also  
               identify cases that warranted further review or  
               investigation, such as the provider's travel  
               distance being greater than 30 miles or the  
               provider's working in excess of 300 hours a month.

               Of the cases reviewed, 557 or 2.3 percent of cases  
               were deemed suspicious enough to refer to DHCS for  
               further investigation.  This referral rate is  
               comparable to the CalWORKs and food stamp programs  
               as indicated in the October through December 2007  
               Fraud Investigation Report, which reported 2.44  




          STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 141 (Maldonado)         Page  
          4


          

               percent and 2.03 percent rate for investigation  
               requests for the respective programs.

          Of the CalWORKs investigations completed during the period  
          reported, one-third of the 2.44 percent of cases deemed  
          suspicious (that is, 0.8 percent of all CalWORKs cases)  
          were found to have evidence sufficient to support an  
          allegation of fraud.  DSS found that $8 million in  
          fraudulent overpayments were made during that last quarter  
          of 2007 and $3.6 million was recovered.  Of the food stamp  
          investigations completed during the period reported,  
          one-third of the 2.03 percent of cases deemed suspicions  
          (that is, 0.65 percent of all food stamp cases) were found  
          to have evidence sufficient to support an allegation of  
          fraud.  DSS found that $3.75 million in fraudulent  
          over-issuances were made in that quarter, and $1.7 million  
          was recovered.

          Unrecovered fraudulent overpayments in CalWORKs for the  
          last quarter of 2007 represented 0.58 percent of benefits  
          paid ($4.4 million of $753.5 million) and the unrecovered  
          fraudulent provision of benefits in food stamps during that  
          period represent 0.28 percent of food stamp benefits  
          provided.

          According to a report released in March 2009 by the Senate  
          Office of Oversight and Outcomes, during a three month  
          period in 2008, Fresno County reviewed 639 cases of  
          suspected or alleged fraud and sent 58 to the district  
          attorney - the IHSS caseload in Fresno County is about  
          15,000.  During the same period, Sacramento County, which  
          has 16,500 IHSS cases, considered 298 IHSS fraud referrals  
          and substantiated fraud in seven; two went to the district  
          attorney.

          In Los Angeles County, fraud investigations conducted  
          between 2005 and 2008 led to a "fraud sweep," resulting in  
          20 arrests.  According to the Department of Public Social  
          Services in Los Angeles County, the referral dates from  
          DPSS to the district attorney for cases in the "sweep"  
          ranged from August 2006 through May 2008.  The arrests  
          included charges of defrauding IHSS, Medi-Cal, and SSI/SSP  
          (benefit payments for blind, aged, and disabled persons  
          with qualifying incomes).  Total money loss was $2,061,000;  
          $840,000 of that was from the IHSS program and $1.2 million  




          STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 141 (Maldonado)         Page  
          5


          

          was from Medi-Cal and SSI/SSP.

           Random sampling for home visits to detect organized fraud
           Quality assurance activities initiated in 2004 include home  
          visits made to ensure that the client is receiving services  
          - and that clients and providers are not "made up"  
          individuals that are part of a deliberate attempt to  
          defraud the program.  In 2008, DSS and counties made more  
          than 3,500 such home visits.  (In addition, DSS and  
          counties conduct desk reviews of an additional 20,000  
          cases, but these are mainly a check to see if the  
          timesheets and payroll systems are being used accurately  
          and within the law's requirements.)

          If these 3,500 cases are selected each year at random -  
          with the selection outside the control of any one  
          individual who might have reason to steer investigators  
          away from particular households, is this sample size  
          sufficient to uncover organized fraud?  According to  
          statisticians working in public policy, a sample size of  
          1000 can provide national information with a margin of  
          error of 7 or 8 percent.  A sample size of 3,500 per year  
          in California will most assuredly disclose patterns of  
          fraud that are greater than one or two person operations.   
          It may be important for the Legislature to look carefully  
          at the methodology DSS uses for its annual home visits for  
          quality assurance purposes to ensure that the sampling is  
          done properly.

           DHCS review of suspected fraud cases
           Because federal participation in the cost of IHSS services  
          comes through the Medicaid program, and because the  
          Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) is California's  
          single state agency for Medicaid, the unit charged with  
          investigating reports of suspected fraud in the IHSS  
          program is located within DHCS.  Counties are instructed to  
          refer cases of suspected fraud to DHCS for further  
          investigation.  This unit has had, until recently, two  
          investigators.  Cases awaiting investigation have been  
          piling up at the department with at least two results: some  
          counties reported to the Senate Office of Oversight and  
          Outcomes that they have stopped reporting suspected fraud  
          to DHCS and have begun their own investigations.  Second,  
          DHCS reported to the committee that they assigned 22 field  
          officers to work on the backlog of suspected fraud cases.   




          STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 141 (Maldonado)         Page  
          6


          

          That concentration of personnel began in February of this  
          year; DHCS promises to report the results of this  
          concentrated set of investigations to the committee soon.   
          As part of the budget that passed earlier in 2009, DHCS is  
          to increases its IHSS investigators from two to five.

           Other overpayment- and fraud-detection changes nearing  
          implementation
           The new payroll system (referred to as CMIPS-II) will  
          enable counties to know more quickly if an IHSS client has  
          been hospitalized or has died.  More rapid transmittal of  
          those data will reduce the opportunity to file claims for  
          services that were not provided.  

           Grand jury reports: narrow data and broad assertions
           During the same week that this committee held a hearing on  
          IHSS quality assurance activities, a Sacramento County  
          grand jury released a report "IHSS: for the needy, not the  
          greedy."  

          The grand jury begins with statistics.  From 2005-05  
          through 2006-07, Sacramento County paid $151 million to  
          IHSS providers.  Investigations found $820,000 in  
          fraudulent overpayments.  This represents 0.54 percent of  
          payments.  About 10 percent of these overpayments were  
          recovered, according to the grand jury.

          Then, the grand jury shifts away from data to sworn  
          testimony.  The report provides a list of fraudulent  
          activities that at least one witness believes has taken  
          place at least once within the county.  The list is without  
          quantification or details, and the report includes no  
          direct quotations from witnesses' statements.  Moreover,  
          the grand jury does not assert that these activities went  
          undetected, only that a witness said each activity had  
          occurred.  The grand jury concludes, offering no evidence  
          in support and offering some evidence to the contrary, that  
          fraud is "rampant and out of control."

          The grand jury chose to highlight this broad and  
          unsubstantiated claim in its executive summary and press  
          release, and the media reported on it.  When public  
          discussion of IHSS focuses on unsubstantiated conclusions,  
          some people may believe they are proven facts.
           




          STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 141 (Maldonado)         Page  
          7


          

          Related legislation
           The committee is also considering SB 142 (Maldonado), which  
          would require that IHSS time sheets indicate the specific  
          hours in the day that the client received services, and SB  
          246 (Benoit), which would require a criminal records  
          clearance for every IHSS provider.

           Arguments in opposition
           Opponents believe that claims of IHSS fraud are often  
          inflated and without foundation.  They believe that the  
          penalties contained in this bill are out of proportion to  
          the common errors and mistakes that happen when IHSS  
          timesheets are submitted.


                              COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS
          
          1.   Criminal penalty for perjury vs. civil penalty for  
          false information  
          The Senate Committee on Public Safety is concerned with  
          matching crime with punishment.  The committee notes that  
          perjury is a felony punishable by sentences of two, three,  
          and four years in the state penitentiary.  The Public  
          Safety Committee recommends an amendment substituting  
          certification that the information in the time sheet is  
          true and correct for a statement signed under penalty of  
          perjury.  Knowingly providing false information would be  
          punishable by a civil penalty ranging from $2,500 to  
          $25,000 per violation.  The author will offer this  
          amendment at the April 28 hearing.

          Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the  
          standardized provider timesheet used to track the work  
          performed by providers of services under this article shall  
          contain a legal  verification  certification to be signed by  
          the provider and recipient, verifying  under penalty of  
          perjury  that the information provided in the timesheet is  
          true and correct.  A person who knowingly provides false  
          information shall be subject to a civil penalty for each  
          violation in the minimum amount of two thousand five  
          hundred dollars ($2,500) and the maximum amount of  
          twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000). An action for a  
          civil penalty under this provision may be brought by any  
          public prosecutor in the name of the people of the State of  
          California and the penalty imposed shall be enforceable as  




          STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 141 (Maldonado)         Page  
          8


          

          a civil judgment.
          
          2.   Other occupations required to sign time sheets with  
          civil penalties for providing false information  
          Committee staff could find no instances of other  
          professions signing their timesheet under the threat of  
          civil or criminal penalties beyond those that apply to all  
          cases of fraud.  

          The committee may wish to ask the author why the job of  
          IHSS provider requires a level of potential penalty that no  
          other profession requires.




                                    POSITIONS  

          Support:       None received

          Oppose:   IHSS Coalition

                                   -- END --