Certificate Of Need granted for Intensive Rehabilitation and Treatment Program (ITRP) because sufficient manpower is available, no need for new construction, and there is a need for a second IRTP in the area.

Whether the Department should issue certificate of need number 4502 to construct and operate a fifty-bed long-term psychiatric hospital in Leon County, Florida, to HCAC?Petitioner failed to prove need for long-term psychiatric facility in Leon County.

Where rule method properly applied results in showing of need, competingapps should get award based on merit and compliance with statute and rule criteria.

Whether HRS should grant Heartland's application for a certificate of need to build a 120-bed nursing home in Dade County?Certificate Of Need applicant cannot switch batches on day of hearing. ""Approved"" beds should be counted as part of inventory despite pendency of Ch 120 proceeding

Petitioner filed Certificate of Need for nursing home beds. Health and Rehabilitative Services' comparative review process was inappropriate because there were no other applicants. Petitioner entitled to Certificate of Need.

These two rule challenges were consolidated with DOAH case number 83-3627, which is a section 120.57(1), Fla. Stat., proceeding concerning the denial to the Petitioner, South Miami Hospital, of certificate of need 2682 for radiation therapy services. The final hearing was bifurcated, with the hearing in case number 83-3627 held in Miami, Florida on November 15 and 16, 1984, and the hearing on the two rule challenge cases held on July 8, 1985, in Miami, Florida and on July 9, 1985, in Tallahassee, Florida. The consolidation was granted so that the record in the section 120.57(1) case would be available in the rule challenge cases. See order dated October 31, 1984. Case number 84-0769RX is a section 120.56, Fla. Stat., challenge to existing rule 10-5.11(17), Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), and case number 85-1792RP is a challenge pursuant to section 120.54(4), Fla. Stat. to proposed rule 10-5.11(1)(u), F.A.C. These cases were consolidated for final hearing by order dated June 12, 1985.Rules are deemed invalid exercise of delegated authority because they preclude balanced consideration of all mandated statutory criteria.

The Petitioner, Health Care and Retirement Corporation of America, d/b/a Heartland of Manatee (hereinafter referred to as "HCR"), filed an application for a certificate of need to construct a 120 bed nursing home in Manatee County, Florida. By letter dated July 30, 1984, the Respondent, the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (hereinafter referred to as the "Department"), gave notice of its intent to deny the application. HCR timely filed a request for a formal administrative hearing. HCR's request was forwarded to the Division of Administrative Hearings where it was assigned case number 84-3336. The parties have entered into a prehearing stipulation. In pertinent part, the parties agreed to the following: HRS stipulates for the purposes of this hearing that HCR meets all applicable statutory and rule criteria except need. Long-term financial feasibility is an issue only to the extent there is no need for the facility in Manatee county, and thus the facility is not financially feasible. The parties agree that HCR shall not be required to produce witnesses or documentary evidence to demonstrate compliance with other applicable criteria such as quality of care, construction costs, financial feasibility, etc., and the issue shall be limited to demonstrating need for the HCR proposal. At the final hearing, HCR presented the testimony of Joyce Kessler, Russell Kitching, Bernice Brasnell, Jerrold W. Schwarz and Jay Cushman. Mr. Cushman was accepted as an expert in health planning related to nursing home assessment of need and financial feasibility relating to need studies. Mr. Kitching was accepted as an expert in service need assessment for aging persons in Manatee County. HRC offered Petitioner's Exhibits 1-11. All were accepted into evidence except Petitioner's Exhibit 3 and Petitioner's Exhibit 9. Petitioner's Exhibit 3 was withdrawn by HCR. A ruling on Petitioner's Exhibit 9 was reserved. Petitioner's Exhibit 9 is hereby accepted into evidence. The Department presented the testimony of Joanne Hager and Elizabeth Dudek. Ms. Dudek was accepted as an expert in certificate of need review and health planning. The Department offered DHRS's Exhibits 1-8. All were accepted into evidence. The parties submitted proposed findings of fact pursuant to Section 120.57(1)(b)4, Florida Statutes (1984 Supp.). A ruling on each proposed finding of fact has been made either directly or indirectly in this Recommended Order, except where a proposed finding of fact has been rejected as subordinate, cumulative, immaterial or unnecessary.Petitioner failed to prove need for nursing home beds in Manatee County. Numeric need not proved.

Evidence fails to show need for psychiatric and short term substance abuse hospital to justify Certificate of Need (CON).

Applications for Certificates of Need (CON) for community nursing home beds granted due to existence of exceptional circumstances shown by department's data.

This case involves the issue of whether the certificate of need law applies to Whitehall Boca's intended conversion of 100 beds in an adult congregate living facility to skilled nursing beds. The second issue is, in the event that it is determined that the certificate of need law does apply, whether Whitehall Boca is entitled to convert a limited number of its adult congregate living facility beds to skilled nursing beds without the need for obtaining a certificate of need in accordance with Section 381.494(1)(d), Florida Statutes. At the final hearing Petitioner called Carol J. Wortham, Steve Mulder, and Jeffrey W. Smith. The Respondent called as its only witness Gene Nelson. The Petitioner offered and had admitted into evidence seventeen exhibits. The Respondent offered and had admitted into four exhibits. Subsequent to the final hearing, the parties submitted proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law for consideration by the Hearing Officer. To the extent that those proposed findings and conclusions of law are inconsistent with this Recommended Order, they were rejected by the Hearing Officer as unsupported by the evidence or as unnecessary to the resolution of this cause.Exemption to convert Adult Congegate Living Facility (ACLF) beds to skilled nursing home beds denyed where Petitioner must first obtain a Certificate of Need (CON).