The issue presented in this cause is whether the failure by the Respondent to correct the deficiency identified by the Department' s inspectors in their annual inspection constitutes a violation of the cited rules and statutes.Inspection revealed sagging soffits. Decided to close home and not fix. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (DHRS) didn't show soffits impacted health or safety. No fine.
Whether respondent should be required to repay $16,808 in CETA funds allegedly expended for unallowable purposes.Respondent should reimburse Petitioner for moving client from one Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) program to another for which she was not qualified.
