STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND )

REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 95-4614

)

ALGERIA GRACE, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, Claude B. Arrington, held a formal hearing in the above-styled case on April 11, 1996, in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Lysa Friedlieb, Esquire

Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services

201 West Broward Boulevard, Suite 511 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301

For Respondent: Algeria Grace, pro se

3540 Northwest 8th Street

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33311 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES

Whether Petitioner had grounds to terminate Respondent's participation in its training program for prospective foster parents.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

Respondent was interested in becoming a foster parent and enrolled in Petitioner's training program known as "Group Preparation and Selection, Model Approach to Partnerships in Parenting". Petitioner required the successful completion of this training program as a condition for licensure as a foster parent. Petitioner terminated Respondent's participation in this program, asserting that she failed to provide requisite financial information regarding her income. Respondent timely challenged this action, the matter was referred to the Division of Administrative Hearings, and this proceeding followed.

At the formal hearing Petitioner presented the testimony of Elliott Maddox, Margaret Andrews, and Marie Brown. Each of these witnesses was, at the times pertinent to this proceeding, employed by the Petitioner and associated with the training program. Petitioner presented five exhibits, each of which was

accepted into evidence. The Respondent testified on her own behalf, but she presented no other testimony and no exhibits.

A transcript of the proceedings has been filed. The proposed findings of fact submitted by the Petitioner are adopted in material part by the Recommended Order. The Respondent did not file a post-hearing submittal.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Because she was interested in becoming licensed as a foster parent, Respondent entered the Petitioner's "Group Preparation and Selection, Model Approach to Partnerships in Parenting" (GPS/MAPP) training program in February 1995.

   
   

2. GPS/MAPP is a mutual selection process whereby a prospective foster parent becomes informed as to the duties and responsibilities of being a foster parent and the agency is afforded the opportunity to evaluate whether the prospect would make a suitable foster parent.

   
   

3. Petitioner requires that each prospective foster parent provide it with verified financial information as to his or her income and expenses. The type information the prospect may submit to verify income includes W-2 forms, tax returns, canceled checks and bank statements.

   
   

4. Petitioner considers it necessary that each prospective foster parent have income that exceeds expenses because the needs of the foster child may exceed the monies paid by Petitioner to foster parents and the provision for those needs should not solely depend on the payments the foster parent receives from Petitioner.

   
   

5. If a participant in the GPS/MAPP program does not verify his or her income, the prospect's participation in the program is terminated by Petitioner. Petitioner considers a prospect to have been "selected out" when his or her participation in the program is terminated.

   
   

6. Respondent was asked to provide the requisite financial information.

   
   

7. The financial statement she provided reflected expenses that exceeded her verified income by $1,220.00 per month.

   
   

8. Respondent was told as a member of the class that she would be required to verify all her income. After she provided the financial statement that did not verify all of her claimed income, Respondent was specifically advised by Elliott Maddox that such verification would be necessary for her to remain a member of the class. Mr. Maddox also advised Respondent of the type information that would be required.

   
   

9. After her discussion with Mr. Maddox, Respondent provided Petitioner with a notarized statement from Eddie Grace, her ex-husband. Although the statement is notarized, the notary is only attesting to the signature of Mr. Grace. Consequently, the statement was not in affidavit form. This statement stated the following:

   
   

   I, Eddie Grace, give my ex-wife, Algeria Grace, 1,200 (sic) and will continue to do so every

   month as long as I live. I also own a busin- ess and she is part owner of Grace Family Lawn Services.

   
   

10. The final judgment dissolving the marriage between Mr. and Mrs. Grace did not require Mr. Grace to pay any money to Mrs. Grace on a monthly basis.

    
    

11. The statement from Mr. Grace was all the information provided by Respondent to verify her income of $1,200 per month. There was no financial information from Grace Family Lawn Services that verified she received $1,200 per month from that business.

    
    

12. Petitioner advised Mrs. Grace that the information she had provided was insufficient to verify her income and told her that she would be selected out of the program if she did not promptly provide additional verification. Respondent failed to provide additional verification of her income.

    
    

13. Because she did not verify her income, Respondent was selected out of the training program.

    
    

    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

    
    

14. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction of the parties to and the subject matter of this proceeding. Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

    
    

15. Petitioner established that it has a rational basis for requiring verified financial information from all prospective foster parents as a condition to remaining a member of the class. Respondent was told of this requirement on several occasions and was advised as to the type information that would be required. Respondent was given multiple opportunities to provide acceptable documentation as to her income. After she was specifically advised that the statement from her ex-husband was insufficient to verify her claimed income, she did not provide acceptable documentation. Respondent also did not submit acceptable verification of her income at the formal hearing. Petitioner established that it had adequate grounds to "select out" Respondent from the GPS/MAPP class.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that Petitioner enter a final order that sustains the

termination of Respondent's participation in its Group Preparation and

Selection, Model Approach to Partnerships in Parenting training program.

DONE AND ENTERED this 7th day of June, 1996, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

CLAUDE B. ARRINGTON, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550

(904) 488-9675

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 7th day of June, 1996.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Lisa Friedlieb, Esquire Department of Health and

Rehabilitative Services

201 West Broward Boulevard, Suite 201 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301

Ms. Algeria Grace

3540 Northwest 8th Street

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33311

Gregory D. Venz, Agency Clerk Department of Health and

Rehabilitative Services 1323 Winewood Boulevard

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700

Richard Doran, General Counsel Department of Health and

Rehabilitative Services 1323 Winewood Boulevard

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right to submit written exceptions to this recommended order. All agencies allow each party at least ten days in which to submit written exceptions. Some agencies allow a larger period within which to submit written exceptions. You should contact the agency that will issue the final order in this case concerning agency rules on the deadline for filing exceptions to this recommended order. Any exceptions to this recommended order should be filed with the agency that will issue the final order in this case.

Docket for Case No: 95-004614

Orders for Case No: 95-004614