This is the preview version of the Wisconsin State Legislature site.
Please see http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov for the production version.
PROPOSED ORDER OF
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
TO ADOPT PERMANENT RULES
The Wisconsin Department of Health Services (the Department) proposes an order to repeal DHS 1.065 (1) (c) (Note); to amend DHS 1.065 (3) (d) (Note); and to repeal and recreate ch. DHS 1 (Title), DHS 1.01 to DHS 1.07, relating to uniform fee system.
RULE SUMMARY
Statutes interpreted
Sections 46.03 (18) (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e), and 46.10 (3), (4) (a), (5), (7), (8) (c) to (e), (10), (11), (14) (a) and (16), Stats.
Statutory authority
Sections 227.10 (1) and (2m), and 227.11 (2) (a) and (b), Stats.
Explanation of agency authority
The Legislature directed the Department to establish a uniform system of fees for certain services provided or purchased by the Department or certain county departments. The Department is also directed to make collections, determine ability to pay, enforce or compromise liability and to delegate some of these responsibilities to counties. The proposed rules are necessary to effectuate the purposes of the statutes listed in the “interpreted statutes” section. In addition, the proposed rules are necessary to comply with s. 227.10 (1) and (2m), Stats.
Related statute or rule
None.
Plain language analysis
Chapter DHS 1 is outdated. The rule has not been substantively revised since 1978. The Department proposes to restate its provisions more clearly and to minimize confusion and inconsistency of interpretation.
Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulations
The Department was unable to locate federal regulations that were sufficiently analogous to the proposed rules. However, 42 CFR 51c.303 and 42 CFR 56.303, for example, discuss similar fee, billing, ability to pay and collection requirements to be used by certain federal health centers. Specific program requirements are further contained in compliance manuals (see, for example, Chapter 16, https://bphc.hrsa.gov/programrequirements/compliancemanual/chapter-16.html).
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Provisions relating to similar subjects of the proposed rule are contained in various sections of code from adjacent states. See, for example, Illinois Admin. Code. tit. 59 §106 (Services Charges), tit. 89 § 103 (Support Responsibility of Relatives), tit. § 545 (Ratemaking), tit. § 560 (Customer Financial Participation), IAC Rules 441.11 (Collection of Public Assistance Debts), IAC Rules 441.36 (Facility Assessments), IAC Rules 445.95 (Collections), Michigan Admin. Code r. 330.8005-330.8284 (Financial Liability for Mental Health Services), Minnesota Rules ch. 9550 Part 9550.6240 (Collections), ch. 9515 Part 9515.2200 (Sources of Income Considered), ch. 9515 Part 9515.2600 (Responsible Relative’s Ability to Pay).
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
The Department established an advisory committee comprised of representatives from Jackson, Portage, Marathon, Walworth, Green and Outagamie counties, as well as a representative from the Department of Children and Families. The advisory committee held nine open meetings in 2016 and 2017. The Department also reviewed policies and procedure materials from the Western Region of Integrated Care Consortia (Jackson, Monroe and La Crosse counties), Portage, Walworth, Green, Lafayette, Outagamie, and Marathon County collection procedures. In addition, the department solicited comments about the proposed rulemaking through its website and throughout the entire rule promulgation process.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business
The Department collected public comments in regards to economic impact from August 6, 2018 to August 20, 2018. The Department also established an advisory committee comprised of representatives from Jackson, Portage, Marathon, Walworth, Green and Outagamie counties, as well as a representative from the Department of Children and Families. The advisory committee held nine open meetings in 2016 and 2017. The Department also reviewed policies and procedure materials from the Western Region of Integrated Care Consortia (Jackson, Monroe and La Crosse counties), Portage, Walworth, Green, Lafayette, Outagamie, and Marathon County.
Effect on small business
The proposed rule does not affect small business.
Agency contacts
Mary P. Jablonski
Section Chief
Bureau of Fiscal Services – Revenue & Cash Management
(608) 261-5984
Barry Kasten
Administrative Rule Coordinator
Division of Enterprise Services
(608) 266-0314
Loading...
Loading...
Links to Admin. Code and Statutes in this Register are to current versions, which may not be the version that was referred to in the original published document.