STATE OF FLORIDA maha 2 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 99 yoy | PM 3:29 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DIVISION CF ADMINISTRATIVE PETITIONER, HEARINGS vs CASE NUMBER 1999-58613 EMILIA BALTODANO, D.D:S. RESPONDENT. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Petitioner, Department of Health, hereinafter referred to as “Petitioner”, files this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Dentistry, against hereinafter referred to as “Respondent”, and alleges: 1. Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of dentistry pursuant to Section 20.43, Florida Statutes and Chapter 456, Florida Statutes, (formerly Chapter 455, Part II; see Chapter 2000-160, Laws of Florida), and Chapter 466, Florida Statutes. Pursuant to Section 20.43 (3)(g), Florida Statutes, the Department has contracted with the Agency for Health Care Administration to provide consumer complaint, investigative and prosecutorial services required by the Division of Medical Quality Assurance, councils or boards, as appropriate. . 2. Respondent is, and has been at all times material hereto, a licensed dentist in the state of Florida, having been issued license number DN 0012123. Respondent’s last known address is 12921 Southwest 17" Terrace, Miami, Florida 33175. 3. ~ At all times pertinent hereto, Respondent provided dental services and billed therefor as an employee of BABY TOOTH DENTAL CORP., a Florida corporation, 18801 North West 12% Street, Pembroke Pines, Florida, 33029. The director and owner of BABY TOOTH DENTAL CORP. is Jesus Carreno who is not licensed to practice dentistry in the state of Florida. The corporation’s address is a private residence owned by Jesus Carreno. 4. Dental services were provided. by the Respondent and unknown agents pursuant to flyers that advertise BABY TOOTH DENTAL CORP. as being limited to baby tooth care, an unauthorized, unrecognized and unapproved specialty without the mandated statement set forth in Section 466.0182(2)(3), Florida Statutes. 5. From on or about January 1, 1998, through July 28, 1999, Respondent collected $169,806.00 from Medicaid for dental services allegedly provided to patients. In or about August 1999, the Agency for Health Care Administration Office of Medicaid Integrity (hereinafter referred to as “AHCA”) conducted an investigation of Respondent to determine if she was billing for services not actually rendered to patients. The investigation was prompted by the volume and amount of Respondent’s collections from Medicaid. The AHCA unit contacted 12 families representing 23 minor Medicaid recipients in August 1999. Sixty percent (60%) of those contacted did not receive the claimed services and the remainder only had cleanings. None of the 12 families contacted had ever seen or met the Respondent. 6. Guardians, IM, MI, J.A, BM, T.D., GM, MB., J.C., and A.V. provided swom affidavits that neither they nor their children, the alleged “patients”, received the - dental services for which Respondent had billed Medicaid and was paid. 7. ~ By letter dated January 11, 2000, Respondent’s attorney informed an AHCA investigator that Respondent left the country on or about May 16, 1999. Upon demand by AHCA for Respondent’s dental patient records for the period January 1, 1998 through October 1, 1999, Respondent’s attorney. advised that the records are unavailable, that their whereabouts are unknown, and that the records have been destroyed by Jesus Carreno, who was acknowledged to be active in the conduct of the business of the dental “office” in that Jesus Carreno owned the building and dental equipment, hired office staff and controlled the patient records. 8. Respondent delegated full responsibility of the care, control and custody of patient dental records to Jesus Carreno prior and subsequent to leaving the country. 9. Respondent failed to properly maintain, control and supervise the records of dental services provided by herself and her agents, histories of the patients, and the billing of Medicaid for services under the utilization of her license. 10. __ Based on the foregoing, the Respondent’s license to practice dentistry in the State of Florida is subject to discipline pursuant to Section 466.028(1)(m), Florida Statutes, by failing to keep written dental records and medical history records justifying the course of treatment of the patient including, but not limited to, patient histories, "examination results, test results, and X rays, if taken, | 11. Based on the foregoing, the Respondent’s license to practice dentistry in the State of Florida is subject to discipline pursuant to Section 466.028(1)(ff), Florida Statutes, by operating or causing to be operated a dental office in such a manner as to result in dental treatment that is below minimum acceptable standards of performance for the community. This includes, but is not limited to, the use of substandard materials or equipment, the imposition of time limitations within which dental procedures are to be performed, or the failure to maintain patient records as required by this chapter. 12. Based on the foregoing, the Respondent’s license to practice dentistry in the State of Florida is subject to discipline pursuant to Section 466.028(1)(h), Florida Statutes, by being employed by any corporation, organization, group, or person other than a dentist or a professional corporation or limited liability company composed of dentists to practice dentistry. 13. Based on the foregoing, the Respondents license to practice dentistry in the State of Florida is subject to discipline pursuant to Section 466.028(1)(j), Florida Statutes, by advertising specialty services in violation of Section 466.0282, Florida Statutes. 14. _ Based on the foregoing, the Respondent’s license to practice dentistry in the State of Florida is subject to discipline pursuant to Section 466.028(1)(I), Florida Statutes, for making deceptive, untrue or fraudulent representations in or related to the practice of dentistry. 15. Based on the foregoing, the Respondent’s license to practice dentistry in the State of Florida is subject to discipline pursuant to Section 466.028(1)(t), Florida Statutes, for engaging in fraud, deceit, or misconduct in the practice of dentistry or dental hygiene. 16. "Based on the foregoing, the Respondent’s license to practice dentistry in the State of Florida is subject to discipline pursuant to Section 466.028(1)G), Florida Statutes, for making or filing a report which the licensee knows to be false, failing to file a report required by state or federal law, and knowingly impeding or obstructing such filing or inducing another person to do so. 17. Based on the foregoing, the Respondent's license to practice dentistry in the State of Florida is subject to discipline pursuant to Section 466.018(1)(z), Florida Statutes, for delegating professional responsibilities to a person who is not qualified by training, experience, or licensure to perform them. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Board of Dentistry to enter an order imposing one or more of the following penalties: revocation or suspension of the Respondent’s license, restriction of the Respondent’s practice, imposition of an administrative fine and costs, issuance of a reprimand, placement of the Respondent on probation, and/or any other relief that the Board deems appropriate. Signed this 23 tay of (Luma , 2000. DEPARTMENT OF H DEPUTY CLERK ™ CLERK Uehi R. Keno DATE g/ 30/2006 "Chief Attorney Agency for Health Care Administration Office of General Counsel COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER: Dennis G. King Senior Attorney Agency for Health Care Administration Office of the General Counsel P.O. Box 14229, Mailstop #39 Tallahassee, Florida 32317-4229 (850) 487-9670 PCP: Garcia, Robinson, Fisher DATE: 7/31/00

Docket for Case No: 00-004686PL