STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

STATE BOARD OF INDEPENDENT POST- ) SECONDARY VOCATIONAL, TECHNICAL, ) TRADE AND BUSINESS SCHOOLS, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 77-1981

) FLORIDA MEDICAL ENTERPRISES, INC ) d/b/a ST. PETERSBURG MEDICAL ) TRAINING SCHOOL, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, K. N. Ayers, held a public hearing in the above styled case on January 25, 1978 at Clearwater, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Gene T. Sellers, Esquire

Office of General Counsel Department of Education Knott Building

Tallahassee, Florida 32304

For Respondent: Daniel J. Grieco II, Esquire

700 Central Avenue, Suite 502 St. Petersburg, Florida 33701

By Amended Administrative Complaint dated December 15, 1977 the State Board of Independent Post-Secondary Vocational, Technical, Trade and Business Schools (Petitioner or Board) seeks to deny renewal of license application to Florida Medical Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a St. Petersburg Medical Training School (Respondent or School). As grounds therefor it is alleged that Respondent has violated 246.201-231, Florida Statutes, has violated various rules in Chapter

6F-5.01 Florida Administrative Code, and has been guilty of deceptive, fraudulent or substandard educational practices. Specifically it is alleged that respondent, by and through its authorized representatives, falsely stated school was to be accredited on August 1, 1977; stated Largo School was a branch of the St. Petersburg School; failed to provide a catalog to students upon enrollment; failed to provide students with a published and bound catalog; falsely advised prospective students that the instructor was a doctor; failed to provide certificate of completion to students satisfactorily completing the course; failed to publish in the catalog policies and regulations relative to awarding diplomas; falsely conveyed impression to an enrollee that the medical assistant's program could lead to medical technologist's license; submitted to the Board false statement that graduates were employed in medical field; falsely

advertised in catalog that externships are arranged by school; failed to respond to Board's request for information; falsely advertised in the St. Petersburg Times that instruction was provided by licensed Florida physician; falsely advertised over station WQXM-FM St. Petersburg that instruction at school provided by licensed Florida physicians; and falsely advertised over station WQXM-FM that the name of the School was Florida Medical School.

The amended complaint further alleged that the owner of the school operated other similar schools in Florida in violation of various rules and that license revocation procedures were instituted against these schools.

Motions to Strike the allegations relating to other schools operated by Respondent were denied; however, these allegations and the evidence in support of these allegations was limited to show that Respondent was, or should have been, familiar with the rules, regulations, and statutes relevant to such schools.

Six witnesses were called by Petitioner, four witnesses were called by Respondent, and 21 exhibits were offered into evidence. Objections to the admission of Exhibit 4 on grounds of hearsay, to Exhibit 15 on grounds of relevancy, to Exhibit 16 on grounds not final order, and to Exhibits 17 and 21 on grounds of hearsay were sustained. During the course of the hearing Petitioner withdrew the allegations in Paragraph 14 of the amended Administrative Complaint.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. St. Petersburg Medical Training School, Largo, Florida was originally licensed August 18, 1976 for one year.

   
   

2. This school is owned by Florida Medical Enterprises, Inc. who previously owned similar schools in Ft. Myers, Ft. Lauderdale, Hollywood, and Miami. The latter school was moved from the Hollywood campus but was never licensed.

   
   

3. The School offered courses for medical assistants, laboratory assistants, phlebotomist technicians and nursing assistant/hospital orderly.

   
   

4. In its ads placed in the St. Petersburg Times October 25, 26, 27, 28,

   29 and November 1, 1976 Respondent included statements that students must be willing to complete externship training and that instruction was provided by licensed Florida physicians. At the time no externship program was available and the instructor at the school was a chiropractic physician.

   
   

5. A radio ad carried on WOXM-FM St. Petersburg wrongly indicated the name of the school as Florida Medical School. This was due to a misunderstanding between Respondent and the ad sales person at the radio station. The misnomer was corrected shortly after the ad was aired. This ad, as did the newspaper ad, stated that instruction was provided by licensed Florida physicians when only a chiropractic physician was on the staff.

   
   

6. School administrators included the externship program in the catalog following the suggestion of the Board's Executive Director, although the program was never provided.

   
   

7. Physicians, without further designation, are generally understood to apply only to doctors of medicine and doctors of osteopathy.

8. Section 458.14 Florida Statutes requires signs of all practitioners of the healing arts, whenever holding themselves out as so practicing, to clearly designate the branch of the art in which licensed to practice.

   
   

9. Upon signing up for courses at the school, neither Mary Jones nor Annette Burridge were provided with catalogs. Initial catalogs provided by the school were not printed and bound.

   
   

10. The Director of Admissions of the school told Mrs. Burridqe and her daughter Annette that the school would soon be accredited and the tuition costs could be paid by Social Security Administration. At the time this statement was made and induced Burridge to enroll, the school was not accredited, no application for accreditation had been made, and the school would not even have been eligible for accreditation if otherwise qualified, for more than a year from the time Burridge enrolled. At the time the statement was made the Director of Admissions was aware that Burridge was unable to finance the tuition without funds from Social Security.

    
    

11. The Director of Admissions' testimony that he understood, through information he received from the Social Security office, that Social Security would approve tuition payments for eligible beneficiaries so long as the school was licensed, is not supported by the Burridges' experience in failing to obtain such funds and is not credible.

    
    

12. In its application for renewal of license, Respondent listed two graduates of the school and thereunder indicated that both were employed in the medical field in which trained. At the time the application was submitted Barbara Wesceat had completed the course and was working at Broeske Enterprises, an engineering firm installing pool heaters, wells, etc. She had not been employed in, nor had she attempted to obtain employment in, the medical field since her completion of the course. Ms. Wescoat did not receive a certificate of completion from the school after she success fully completed her final exam, although Respondent's witness testified one was nailed to her.

    
    

13. The catalog stated one of the objectives of the school was to "train qualified students to become medical assistants and/or medical technologists capable of meeting the needs of the medical profession." No programs to train medical technologists were available at the school nor was the school ever equipped to provide such training. The Director of Admissions considered all medical training offered at the school to be some form of medical technology and advised applicants that they could become medical technologists after completion of training at the school. He acknowledged making such statements to induce prospective students to enroll, yet he also testified he was unfamiliar with the requirements to become a medical technologist.

    
    

14. The president of the school, Robert N. Gilbert, was aware of the requirements for licensure for school of this nature and had experienced several run-ins with the regulators of such schools while operating other schools in South Florida.

    
    

15. By letter dated November 4, 1976 (Exhibit 7) Petitioner requested Respondent provide names and addresses of nursing homes, hospitals, doctors, etc. with whom externship arrangements had been made. Although this letter was responded to on November 11, 1976 (Exhibit 8) the requested information was not provided. By letter dated November 17, 1976 (Exhibit 9) Petitioner renewed request in Exhibit 7 and requested additional information regarding students and

    equipment. By letter dated December 22, 1976 (Exhibit 10) the Board again requested the information desired in Exhibits 7 and 9. No response to these requests for information was received by the Board.

    
    

    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

    
    

16. Rules pertaining to schools similar to Respondent are contained in Chapter 6F-5 Florida Administrative Code. Subsection 6F-5.01(1)(g) provides in pertinent part:

    
    

    1. Prior to obtaining board approval, the private schools shall prepare a draft copy of an official school bulletin which, after approval by the state board, will be published and bound to convey

       an accurate and dignified impression of the school. It shall avoid false, misleading or exaggerated statements.

       Illustrations and copy shall pertain directly to the school and sources of illustrations shall be clearly identified. A copy shall be given to each student prior to or upon enrollment.

       
       

17. Other rules pertaining to post-secondary schools in 6F-5 and 6F-7 relate to the curricula, providing information to prospective students, procedures for issuing diplomas or certificates, advertising, accreditation, and duties of agents to provide information to the board.

    
    

18. The more credible evidence was that Respondent failed to provide all students with catalogs; that it (through its agents) made false representation to prospective students; submitted misleading advertisements to the effect that licensed physicians were on the instructional staff; that it failed to provide requested information to the Board; that it failed to provide programs listed in its catalog; and that it failed to provide a certificate to at least one graduate.

    
    

19. Advertising that instruction would be provided by licensed Florida physicians, knowing full well that the instructor was a chiropractic physician was intended to deceive the prospective students into believing a medical or osteopathic practitioner would provide their training. Such half truths and misleading information characterized the frontal appearance those operating the school intended to present and casts serious reflection on what may otherwise have been competent training.

    
    

20. From all the evidence presented it is clear that the St. Petersburg Medical Training School is not providing training consonant with the purposes of Sections 246.201-231 Florida Statutes and that granting its application for renewal of its license would not be in the public interest.

    
    

21. The owners of the school are fully aware of the statutory and regulatory requirements imposed upon schools of this nature, but nevertheless, proceeded to disregard many of those provisions. Greater emphasis appears directed toward attracting students than in training them.

22. From the foregoing it is concluded that the application for renewal of the license of the St. Petersburg Medical Training School should be denied. It is therefore,

RECOMMENDED that the application `of St. Petersburg Medical Training School for renewal of its license for the year 1977-78 be denied.

DONE and ENTERED this 15th day of March, 1978, in Tallahassee, Florida.

K. N. AYERS, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304

(904) 488-9675

COPIES FURNISHED:

Gene T. Sellers, Esquire Office of General Counsel Department of Education Knott Building

Tallahassee, Florida 32304

Daniel J. Grieco II, Esquire 700 Central Avenue

Suite 502

St. Petersburg, Florida 33701

Docket for Case No: 77-001981

Orders for Case No: 77-001981