Grandparents Raising Grandchildren- Legal Options and Financial Support

With the decline of the traditional nuclear family, individuals over 50 are increasingly vested with responsibility for the caretaking of young children and adolescents. Financial problems are the primary cause of seniors having to assume more “traditional” child-rearing duties. Whether due to a divorce, military service, substance abuse, mental illness or other secondary issues, some adults may be unable or simply unwilling to be good parents themselves.

After suffering ten years of domestic abuse at the hands of her husband, Jennifer finally filed for divorce and moved herself and her daughter in with her parents, Gerry and Donna Daly. Although the relocation was supposed to be temporary, Jennifer has exhausted her bank accounts, refuses to obtain employment, and has sunk into a deep depression. Gerry and Donna are proud, retired grandparents who want to ensure that their grandchild is raised with love, discipline, and opportunity. They have been expensing the household’s grocery bills and clothing for the child, as well as toting her from play-dates to extracurricular activities. The Dalys’ other children have begun to voice concern over their parents’ spending, noting that their income is supposed to sufficiently cover a two-person household and not be stretched to support a four person family. While Gerry and Donna understand their concern, they don’t believe in asking Jennifer and her daughter to leave and have the utmost confidence that Jennifer will get back on her feet. What are their legal and financial options?

Many times, the child-rearing duties that grandparents assume will cause a real strain on seniors’ budgets. Child care costs can grow exponentially dependent on the length of time a grandparent will be asked to assist in raising his or her grandchild. Given this responsibility, these seniors might consider obtaining legal authority to make decisions for that child – on important issues such as healthcare and schooling – and financial assistance from the State.

In Massachusetts alone, 67,781 children reside in grandparent-headed households. Although the Daly’s granddaughter is physically living in their home and they are raising her, Gerry and Donna do not have any legal rights or authority to make decisions on behalf of the children. Jennifer could sign a form giving her parents ‘caregiver authorization.’  This is a caretaking option provided by the Massachusetts Uniform Probate code and allows parents to authorize a designated caregiver to exercise “concurrent parental rights” on healthcare and schooling matters. Provided that the caregiver lives with the child, the authorization is valid for two years and does not require court approval. Caregiver authorization is an alternative to filing for Guardianship of a Minor, a court decree effectively suspending the rights of the parents and transferring them to a guardian entrusted with caretaking responsibility. Depending on Jennifer’s state, this may be necessary for the Dalys.

If you are on a fixed income and unable to get help from a child’s parents, the child may be eligible for payments from Massachusetts’ Transitional Aid to Families with Dependent Children and medical coverage through MassHealth. For further information on assistance through these and similar programs, consider reviewing the Massachusetts “Resource Guide for Grandparents Raising their Children.”

While it may be your desire to become legally and financially responsible for your grandchildren, you are not required to as a matter of law. It is ultimately up to the Commonwealth to assign custody to a suitable individual. However, if circumstances have placed your grandchildren in your home, it is helpful and oftentimes necessary to review your present legal options and to adapt an existing estate plan to ensure that the unique challenges of caring for grandchildren are addressed. Contact Vickstrom Law to your situation and get informed on your options.

Applying for MassHealth: Is the No-Cost Solution Really “No-Cost”?

Medicaid, or MassHealth as it is referred to in Massachusetts, is an avenue available for funding long-term nursing home care. To qualify, you must meet asset thresholds that many elders exceed. Additionally there are income requirements for MassHealth/Mediciad. Adequate understanding of MassHealth/Medicaid law and proper strategizing is a critical component of any plan for the future. With the proper planning of an elder-law attorney, you can protect your property, spouse, and assets.

After attempting to cope with his mother’s diagnosis of dementia for several months, Joe has finally decided to research local nursing homes for his mother. However, he is concerned about the cost while protecting his mother’s multiple properties, which have been in the family for generations. During a vist, Lindsay, a social worker from the facility, reached out to Joe, offering to complete a MassHealth application for his mother at no-cost. While Joe likes the concept of this free service, he can’t help but wonder if there is a catch involved.

Employed by the nursing home, social workers and other nursing home advocates focus on the rights of the nursing home and not the resident. The nursing home has a vested interest in keeping someone on “private-pay” for as long as possible because their private pay-rates are much higher than the amount received in MassHealth/Medicaid reimbursement. This means more out-of-pocket costs for residents than may be necessary.

Further, even if nursing home advocates do have the best of intentions, the MassHealth/Medicaid process is riddled with complex rules and regulations that are difficult to navigate for those not educated in the eligibility requirements and advantageous planning opportunities available under MassHealth/Medicaid. For instance, an individual encouraged to apply too soon might be ineligible for an extended time period and have to pay privately for a longer duration. Alternatively, the “advocate” may not inform the family that they can pre-pay for funeral expenses as part of a spend down, thereby reducing the burden on family members when the applicant passes.

Individuals that enlist family members to fill out their MassHealth applications or file themselves may face similar problems. Unfamiliar with eligibility requirements and liable to miss prime planning opportunities, these individuals are likely to encounter harsh penalties or confusion when faced with the application process, as well as income and asset verifications. Once they receive their denial notice in the mail, it will be much more expensive to get an Elder Law attorney involved at that point. Additionally there are strict time periods that must be adhered to in order to have any change at being sucessful in a MassHealth/Medicaid appeal.

Nursing home advocates and family members, although the cheapest solution up front, do not have the requisite knowledge, skills, or ability to compose trusts, devise appropriate estate plans, and represent you in an appeal setting if the need should arise. Rectifying the mistakes of an advocate or self-handled application may be more costly than a properly executed plan formulated a skilled elder law attorney. By hiring an elder law attorney to guide the MassHealth application process, you will ensure that your savings, your spousal support, and your family’s inheritance will not be jeopardized by lost opportunities in a last minute planning strategy.

Hiring a lawyer to handle your MassHealth application is a necessary investment. Elder law attorneys can save clients and their family members an amount greater than the cost of their legal services. If you are interested in learning more about the MassHealth application process or long-term care planning, contact Vickstrom Law today!

Can I Contest My Sister’s Will?

In the coming years we will see a  marked increase in the number of cases challenging the legality of a will on the grounds of mental incapacitation of the person making the will. Though the reason for the increase in will contests is debatable, the growing number of elders with medical issues affecting their cognition; the transfer of wealth between World War II and baby boomer generations; and the change in the traditional nuclear family certainly play a role.

Mary lived alone on a large estate for fifteen years following her wealthy second husband’s death. Her only living relative was her sister, Louise. The two have been close since childhood, but in recent times the frailty of both women has led to fewer and fewer visits. Mary passed away in January after a three-year battle with endometrial cancer. Although weakened by age and sickness, often delusional and dependent on prescription medication, Mary executed a second version of her will in 2010 (unbeknownst to Louise) with the assistance of her live-in caregiver, Kate. When the terms of Mary’s will are administered, Louise discovers that she is to receive just $1,000 while Kate is the primary benefactor of Mary’s $450,000 estate.

Many times, the relative of one who has recently passed believes that they were unjustly left out of a will. Perhaps due to the mental state of the deceased, the relative might believe that the deceased was delusional in granting a non-relative a financial windfall. In the above example, Louise would like to know whether she has any legal recourse to challenge Kate’s award. She feels that Kate knew about Mary’s delusional capabilities and possibly took advantage of Mary in receiving the majority of Mary’s estate, and finds it hard to believe that her sister would not have left her more. However, it is also reasonable to see that Mary might have felt indebted to Kate and wanted to provide her with a genuine token of appreciation for her services.

In order to create a valid will in Massachusetts a person must possess “testamentary capacity”. In most states, this means that the person creating the will understands the nature of the document, the worth of her assets, and her relationship with whomever she is transferring them to. Testamentary capacity requires freedom from delusion which is the effect of disease or weakness and which might influence the disposition of her property. The person executing the will needs only to be aware of her actions during the period of time she is making the will. The fact that he or she doesn’t remember it the day after does not invalidate a will.

Although wills contests arise frequently, proving that a person is without testamentary capacity is difficult because signing a will does not require a great deal of coherence nor consistency. Louise would have be allowed to contest Mary’s will in the probate court, but it likely would lead to a lot of costly litigation. Most often the disagreeing parties will negotiate a settlement to mitigate the litigation.

If a relative finds themselves in a similar position, they should contact an attorney experienced in Estate Administration to discuss the possibility of a legal claim. If you considering disinheriting an heir who might attempt to challenge a will’s provisions, speak to an experienced Estate Planning attorney about avoiding the probate process altogether through the use revocable or irrevocable trust planning.

Contesting a will is a procedural and difficult process. Yet, if you feel that a loved one lacked the mental capacity to transfer his or her estate, contact our office to discuss your options.

Parent-Child Role Reversal

Pet Trusts Arrive in Massachusetts

I’ve written about Pet Trusts in a previous blog. They have many benefits for pet owners concerned about what would  happen should their animal outlive them. However, until recently, Pet Trusts were not available in Massachusetts. New Massachusetts legislation took effect on April 7th, 2011, bringing this important Estate Planning tool to the Bay State.  The remainder of this week’s blog was edited from an article written by Attorney Gina Barry of Bacon Wilson, P.C. in Springfield.

The Massachusetts legislature has finally recognized the strong bond that exists between man and animal by passing legislation that allows a pet owner to establish a trust fund to provide ongoing care for any animals alive during their lifetime. The Act states simply that “[a] trust for the care of one or more animals . . . is valid.” Prior to this legislation being enacted, an animal owner had to leave funds with a human caretaker, who would then agree to provide care to any animals.

The statute provides that the trust will not terminate until the benefited animal, or the last of several animals, has passed away. This assumes that the trust contains enough funds to continue to exist for that length of time. Thus, it is not enough to merely create a trust. You must also ensure that enough assets will be placed into the trust to provide the desired care. Some people overcome the lack of present funds by purchasing a life insurance policy that will pay into the trust when they pass away. Conversely, if the trust receives an excessive amount of assets, the statute also allows for a reduction of the funds, so long as there will be no substantial impact on the animal.

When creating a pet trust, it is necessary to name a trustee, who will be responsible for managing and investing the funds, as well as making distributions for animal care. Fortunately, failure to name a trustee will not be fatal as the statute provides that the court shall name the trustee in this case. The legislation also provides safeguards by restricting distributions to the trustee, with the exception of trustee fees, costs of administration and any other distribution authorized by the trust. Further, the statute allows for court enforcement of the trust if the trust funds are being misused.

When the last of the animals passes away, or if there is a reduction as indicated above, the funds would first be distributed as directed in the trust. If there is an absence of direction, the funds would be returned to the person who created the trust, if they are still alive. If they are not alive, then the funds would pass pursuant to the residuary clause of their Will. In the absence of a Will, the funds would pass in accordance with the laws of intestacy, which distribute your assets if you pass away without a Will. The best trust would provide for distribution of the balance within its terms.

Another important decision when planning for your pet is determining who will serve as your pet’s caretaker. While the statute does not restrict the trustee from acting as the caretaker, this arrangement is not recommended as it could lead to a lack of oversight with respect to animal care, trust fund management, or both. It is also recommended that you name at least one alternate caretaker, if not several, who would provide care if the originally named caretaker was unable to do so.

To ensure that the plan is carried out as intended, you should also address the following concerns. Remember that your pet will pass through your estate as personal property; therefore, you must leave your pet to the trust in your Will or by assignment prior to your passing. In addition, your plan should clearly describe the animal to avoid “replacement” of the animal by an unscrupulous caregiver who desires to continue receiving payments from the trust. If your animal has specific care requirements, you should be sure to clearly describe those requirements and to specifically authorize any expenditures that might be considered unusual or excessive. Finally, you should be sure to include strict guidelines for euthanasia and to address the final disposition of your animal.

Planning for the ongoing care of your animals has never been easier. If you have a current plan in place for the care of your animals, you should update your plan to take advantage of this new law. If you do not have a plan in place for the care of your animals, there is no time like the present to establish one.

Joint Bank Accounts for Seniors: Yay or Nay?

Many seniors currently need assistance paying their bills and managing their finances, or may need help sometime in the future.  It’s important to have a trustworthy person authorized to manage your finances should you be unable to do so yourself.  Are joint bank accounts a good option?

Here’s a common  scenario

Florence, an 86-year-old widower, decided to have her eldest daughter, Marie, listed on all her bank accounts after her husband’s passing. She needed some help getting to the bank and figured it was easier to have Marie do it for her. Sometimes, Florence needed Marie to help her write out the monthly bills because she was also starting to have memory issues.

Marie took this responsibility very seriously and made weekly trips to the bank for her mother. A few times Marie helped herself to $200 here and there, just to get her through to her next paycheck. She always put it back… except for the last three times. She just can’t seem to get caught up. Maybe Marie would be able to take on more hours at work but she is very stressed about her 16-year-old son who just severely injured someone in a car accident. She’s thinking about filing for bankruptcy to ease the financial situation.

Be sure to properly assess potential risks

For Florence, adding Marie, or another other loved one, as co-owner on bank and brokerage accounts seemed to be an easy and convenient way of managing her assets and making sure her bills are paid on time.  However, many seniors do not take into account the risks and potential consequences of joint ownership, and the alternatives that can mitigate those risks.

First,  a joint owner has complete access to your accounts and make unlimited withdrawals without your approval. Marie has been helping herself to a little bit here and little bit there for a while now. Florence never knew about it and when she did find out she didn’t ask for it back because she felt bad for Marie. Unfortunately, these were considered disqualifying transfers or “gifts” when Florence applied for MassHealth. She was denied coverage for her nursing home stay because to qualify for MassHealth (Medicaid) you can’t give gifts (or other disqualifying transfers) for five years.

Your co-signer’s liabilities could now be your responsibility

Second, a joint owner is considered owning 100% of the assets, just as you are, regardless of who contributed them in the first place. This leaves your assets vulnerable to their debts and liabilities. If Marie is sued because of her minor son’s  accident, Florence’s bank accounts are at risk. Florence’s bank accounts could also be at risk if Marie files for bankruptcy. If your co-owner goes through a divorce, has a business failure, or gets sued for any other reason, your money could also be exposed to those claims.

Your estate plan could be undermined

Third, when you die, the assets in a jointly-owned account will automatically become the property of the surviving owner.  Florence’s Will directed her estate to be split equally amongst her three children when she died. When she died she only had a few personal effects and a few bank accounts with roughly $10,000. Since Marie was listed as joint owner on all accounts, the funds became legally hers when her mother passed. She knows she has a moral obligation to follow what the Will says, but nobody can make her do it. After all, her brother hasn’t bothered to see her mother in two years and her sister is pretty well-off; she needs the money more than they do anyways. 

Protect your assets

One simple alternative is to have a Durable Power of Attorney prepared by an Elder Law Attorney. Your agent under your Power of Attorney would be able to manage your finances on your behalf, including making withdrawals and writing checks without your permission, but the assets would be owned by you alone. 

Your agent would have a legal duty to manage your finances on your behalf and in your best interest; your assets would not be subject to your agent’s liabilities; and your assets would not automatically pass to your agent upon your death.

It’s important that you speak to an Elder Law attorney about planning for a time when you may be incapable of managing your own affairs.

How the New Massachusetss Safe Driving Law Affects You or Your Elderly Loved One

The Safe Driving Law has officially become effective in Massachusetts as of Sept. 30, 2010.  Massachusetts now joins an increasingly growing number of states that ban texting while driving.  However, a major part of this bill is also targeted at elderly drivers who are over the age of 75.

On June 2, 2009, a 93-year-old driver hurt a mother and toddler in a stroller when he drove his car into a Danvers Wal-Mart. He stepped on the gas pedal because he thought he was stepping on the brake.  The next day, a 73-year-old Middleboro driver accidentally drove her minivan into a crowd of people attending a Vietnam War Memorial in Plymouth. As a result, eight people went to the hospital. Read this blog for more information.  In an effort to reduce the number of accidents involving elderly drivers, Massachusetts legislators passed the new Safe Driving Law.

The new Safe Driving Bill is eight pages long but can be reduced to a few major points affecting elderly drivers:

• Drivers can no longer compose, send or read text messages while driving.
• If you’re 75 years old or older, you must renew your drivers license in person at the Registry of Motor Vehicles.
• If you’re 75 years old or older, you have to take a vision test every five years when you renew your license.
• A health care provider or police officer who feels an individual cannot mentally or physically operate a motor vehicle safely can request an evaluation of the person’s ability to possess a license.  Such a request, however, cannot be made solely based on a person’s age.

The law is also designed to remove problem drivers from the road and encourage people to drive more carefully by reducing the number of “surchargeable incidents” (anything that causes insurance premiums to rise, including at-fault accidents, speeding tickets, etc.).  A driver involved in three such incidents in a two year time span faces license suspension.

Estate Planning Myths Explained

Occasionally, I run across a great article written by someone else. Today is one of those days and I just had to share it with you. Clients are often confused when they come in for initial consultations and have preconceived notions about planning their estates based on things that they’ve heard from their friends, neighbors, hairdresser, etc. Most of the time the information shared is incorrect, or at least incorrectly applied to their situation. This article does a great job of debunking the most popular “myths” of estate planning.  I only added one little thought in bold below. Thank you to my colleague, Attorney Gina Barry, from Bacon & Wilson in Springfield for putting this article together…. and as far as I know unicorns are still mythical creatures.  

Certain ideas with respect to estate planning are widely accepted, yet unfortunately, inaccurate. This article will reveal and explain the most commonly stated estate planning myths. 

Myth No. 1: ‘If I have a valid will, my estate does not have to go through probate.’

Many people believe that having a will means that their estate will not have to be probated when they pass away. A will is a document that, in part, gives instructions as to the distribution of the assets in the decedent’s probate estate. The assets in the probate estate are those assets that are held in the decedent’s name alone that do not have a designated beneficiary. Thus, whether or not probate is needed is not based upon whether or not the decedent had a will; rather, it is based upon how the assets are owned by the decedent.

If the decedent left probate assets, then in order for their will to ‘speak,’ a probate estate must be opened. If all the assets held in the decedent’s name are jointly owned with a right of survivorship or have named beneficiaries, then there is no need for probate.

Myth No. 2: ‘I can give away $10,000 to as many people as I want each year, but if I give more, then I have to pay gift tax.’

This myth emanates from the gift-tax system. In 2010, the rule with respect to gift tax is that you may give up to $13,000 to as many people as you want without having to file a gift-tax return. Note that the amount that can be gifted is stated incorrectly in the myth because most people remain unaware of the ongoing increases to the allowable gift amount.

Also under the current rules, even if a gift-tax return must be filed because more than $13,000 is given to one person, the giver of the gift will not pay any gift tax until he or she has gifted more than $1 million during their lifetime. Thus, if a person has $100,000 and gives all of it away in one year to one person, they will need to file a gift tax return, but they will not owe any gift tax because the gift does not exceed the lifetime threshold.

The estate tax system is NOT to be confused with MassHealth/Medicaid planning. If nursing home care is eminent and you intend on having MassHealth/Medicaid pay for your care, gifts of any size are not allowed and can lead to MassHealth/Medicaid disqualification.

Myth No. 3: ‘I can give away assets when I enter a nursing home and still obtain Medicaid benefits.’

When faced with a nursing home bill of approximately $8,000 per month, many people wish to obtain Medicaid benefits to pay for this care. In order to obtain Medicaid benefits, an asset limit must be met; therefore, assets valued above this amount must be reduced to the asset limit before benefits will be granted. In their efforts to reduce the excess assets, many people believe that they can gift the excess assets due to the gift-tax exclusion explained in Myth No. 2. While a person can make a gift of up to $13,000 per person in 2010 without filing a gift tax return, the Medicaid program is not governed by the gift tax rules.

The Medicaid program imposes a penalty when any assets are given away within five years of the application for benefits, except in very specific circumstances. This penalty results in being unable to obtain Medicaid benefits for at least five years after such a gift is made. Thus, a gift of any amount will typically result in a penalty being imposed even if the gift does not have to be reported on a gift-tax return.

Myth No. 4 – ‘If I need nursing home care, Medicare will pay for my care.’

In part, this myth is perpetuated due to the fact that “Medicare” sounds very much like “Medicaid,” which does pay benefits for nursing home care for approved applicants. Medicare Part A will pay for medically necessary inpatient care in a skilled nursing facility, but only following a three-day hospital stay. Medicare will pay for up to 100 days of skilled nursing care or rehabilitation services. The actual length of benefits could be much shorter than 100 days if those services are no longer required.

When Medicare benefits are paid, Medicare pays 100% of the cost for the first 20 days, but only 80% of the cost of the next 80 days. Most Medicare recipients also have Medigap insurance, which will pay the balance not paid by Medicare. When Medicare benefits are exhausted, an alternative payment source is needed to pay for ongoing nursing home care.

Questions? Wondering if something you’ve heard is a ‘myth?’

 This article was originally published in Business West.

Hoarding: How to Help a Loved One Declutter

The issue of hoarding has recently gathered a great deal of attention, particularly due to news reports and popular television shows.  However, hoarding is not a new or a small problem. The problem of hoarding has been documented since the turn of the century and is thought to significantly affect nearly 15 million Americans, many of them elderly. A great article recently appeared in the Boston Hearald dealing with the clinical aspects of Hoarding.  Unfortunately, research has been lacking in this area – until now.

On July 14, 2010, a Bellingham, Massachusetts couple and their dog were found dead in their home.  The ultimate factor in their deaths: hoarding.  Authorities deduced that 75-year-old Richard Lamphere tripped on a pile of trash, fell on top of his wife, 62-year-old Susan Abraham and one of their dogs.  Lamphere died instantly from head injuries; Abraham was severely injured in the fall and died later from her wounds.  Police confirmed that the couple were hoarders.  They had trash and belongings piled everywhere inside their home.  The conditions were uninhabitable and clearly unsafe. For the full story, see this article.

When assessing the severity of a loved one’s hoarding situation, several questions are important to remember:

• Can the occupant access doors in case of an emergency?
• Does he have access to the kitchen to prepare and store food?
• Can he access the bathroom facilities? Can the bathtub/shower be utilized?
• Can the resident safely reach their bed or have they made other sleeping arrangements?
• Are the home’s mechanical systems in working order (electrical, plumbing, heating)?
• Are pets being cared for?
• What health hazards are present (mold, decaying food, bodily waste, etc.)

If the basic needs of an occupant cannot be met, then it is time to consider intervention.

The difficulty with trying to help a hoarder is that most of them do not seek or want any “help”.  In fact, hoarders typically do not comprehend that they actually have a problem.  Thus, attempts to “clean out” or assist a loved one in “tidying up” his or her home should be done with care and patience.  And, although perhaps difficult, refrain from making judgments.

Tips to aiding someone who hoards include encouraging them and helping them establish new relationships.  Gently remind them that their grandchildren will be able to come and visit if they clean their house.  Perhaps it is time to participate in a local community activity for seniors.  If they are busy with other activities or plans, then getting rid of “stuff” may seem less consequential to them.  Many local companies specialize in professional, home organziation and cleanouts. Additionally, you may look into a hiring a certified home maker a few hours a week to keep up with housework and tackle clutter habits.

As a last resort, do not be afraid to contact the authorities or professional help.  Let someone else be the “bad guy”.  The story of a local hoarder who has made progress over the years can be found here.

Finally, a temporary or limited Guardianship may be necessary, at least until improvements can be made for the individual’s overall safety.   For more information and advice contact your local Elder Services or area Agency/Council on Aging.

Affordable Care Act: More Affordable AND more Effective Health Care for Seniors

What does the new, federal health care law, the Affordable Care Act, mean for seniors? How will it affect Medicare recipients? Throughout the health care reform debate of the past few years, Medicare has been a significant issue. The Affordable Care Act (“Act”), the law passed by Congress and signed by President Obama this spring, seeks to provide better quality and more affordable care to seniors and Medicare recipients.

To make health care more affordable for seniors, the Act addresses the Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage gap, otherwise known as the “donut hole.” In 2007, over 8 million seniors fell into the “donut hole” and could not receive coverage for their prescription drugs. Under the Act, any seniors who fall into the donut hole this year will receive a $250 rebate check from the government. In 2011, the Act institutes a 50 percent discount on all prescriptions drugs in the “donut hole,” and by 2020, the Act will completely close that gap.

Starting in 2011, the Act provides for free wellness checkups as a preventive care measure. It also eliminates all deductibles, copayments, and other cost-sharing for preventive care in Medicare, in an effort to make preventive care more accessible and attractive to seniors with modest means. The Act also creates a voluntary, long-term care insurance program that will provide a cash benefit to seniors and people with disabilities seeking certain types of long-term care that will allow them to stay in their homes.

In other efforts to make health care more affordable for seniors, the Act will reduce unwarranted subsidies to insurance companies by putting Medicare Advantage payments more in line with the costs of Medicare programs. This will ultimately save Medicare more than $150 billion over the next 10 years. The Act also seeks to reduce fraud and waste within the health care system by expanding the efforts the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Justice have already made in the past few years, and giving law enforcement officers more authority to crack down on those engaging in health care fraud. In fiscal year 2009, $2.51 billion acquired through these anti-fraud efforts was deposited in the Medicare Trust Fund, a 29 percent increase over fiscal year 2008. This Act provides more tools to continue and expand the anti-fraud efforts already in place, saving Medicare recipients billions of dollars in the coming years.

The Act does not only seek to make health care more affordable; it also seeks to make health care more effective for seniors. To achieve this goal, the Act seeks to improve the quality of care seniors receive in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities. It creates a standardized form for filing complaints with the State concerning long-term care facilities, and it requires states to develop and implement resolution processes for these complaints. It also establishes a program for national and State background checks of all long-term care facilities employees that have direct access to patients.

This entry is only a brief summary of various parts of the new law. More information can be found here. Current Medicare recipients will be receiving an informational brochure in the next few weeks regarding these programs.