Appeal from Circuit Court of Sangamon County No. 99MR423 Honorable Thomas R. Appleton, Judge Presiding.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Justice Turner.
Plaintiff, Aries Healthcare of Illinois, Inc., d/b/a Riveredge Hospital (Riveredge), sought judicial review of the decision by the Department of Public Aid (Department) to deny Riveredge's application for disproportionate-share-hospital (DSH) status. The circuit court affirmed the Department's decision. Riveredge appeals, arguing the Department erred in refusing to consider additional information filed after an application deadline, in its review procedure, to correct Riveredge's accounting error in its initial application. We affirm.
Riveredge is a licensed psychiatric hospital participating in Medicaid. Riveredge also receives reimbursement funds from Cook County and the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS). Payments from these sources, plus inpatient charges for charity care, are used in determining DSH qualification based on low-income utilization. See 89 Ill. Adm. Code §148.120(a)(2) (Conway Greene CD-ROM September 1999). The Department makes adjustment payments to hospitals qualifying for DSH status. See 89 Ill. Adm. Code §148.120(a) (Conway Greene CD-ROM September 1999).
In April 1999, the Department notified Riveredge of a July 1, 1999, deadline for postmarking information required for DSH determination. See 89 Ill. Adm. Code §148.120(f)(1) (Conway Greene CD-ROM September 1999). This information must reflect (1) total hospital net revenue for all patient services, (2) total payments received directly from State and local governments for all patient services, (3) total gross inpatient hospital charges for charity care, and (4) total gross inpatient hospital charges. See 89 Ill. Adm. Code §§148.120(d)(1) through (d)(4) (Conway Greene CD-ROM September 1999).
In May 1999, Riveredge applied for DSH status for rate-year 2000 by submitting a form, cash-posting summaries, monthly operating statements, a trial balance, and audited financial statements. The form stated Riveredge had (1) direct payments from state and local governments of $3,209,832, (2) total hospital net revenue of $14,881,174, (3) total gross inpatient hospital charges for charity care of $731,245, and (4) total hospital gross charges of $31,942,729. Riveredge derived the first amount from the cash-posting summaries, identifying payments from Medicaid, DCFS, and Cook County.
Based on this information, the Department calculated Riveredge's low-income utilization rate as 23.86%, adding the first amount as a percentage of the second amount to the third amount as a percentage of the fourth amount. In August 1999, the Department informed Riveredge it failed to qualify for DSH status because its low-income utilization rate did not exceed 25%.
Riveredge sent the Department a letter, postmarked September 18, 1999, to appeal the DSH determination. See 89 Ill. Adm. Code §148.310(b) (Conway Greene CD-ROM September 1999). Riveredge attached a "revised" form, stating it received $4,110,183 in direct payments from state and local governments. Riveredge also attached four checks from DCFS, totaling $900,351.33. Riveredge's letter indicated these payments were incorrectly posted to an "unapplied cash" account instead of a DCFS account. Riveredge attached a copy of the cash-posting summaries with asterisks marking the increase in "unapplied cash" from $13,867 in June 1996 to $1,112,331 in June 1997.
In October 1999, the Department responded to Riveredge's appeal letter, stating the Department is prohibited by rule from including the corrections in its DSH determination because Riveredge did not submit them by July 1, 1999. In November 1999, Riveredge filed its complaint for administrative review in the circuit court. In November 2000, the circuit court awarded judgment to the Department. This appeal followed.
Riveredge contends the Department should have granted it a substantive appeal and should have considered the information Riveredge submitted after the July 1, 1999, deadline. Riveredge argues the Department's refusal to grant DSH status was based on an erroneous interpretation of its regulations.
We conduct a de novo review because the facts are undisputed and we are presented solely with issues of law. Morse v. Department of Professional Regulation, 316 Ill. App. 3d 664, 667, 737 N.E.2d 678, 680 (2000). An agency's interpretation of its own regulations is subject to some deference on review. Dimensions Medical Center, Ltd. v. Elmhurst ...