Posts Tagged ‘GAO’

Government Report Highlights Problems With Older Drivers

APRIL 30, 2007  VOLUME 14, NUMBER 44

Several times over the past few years (most recently in Safety for the Older Driver: Is Skills Training the Answer?) we have reported on an issue of great concern to seniors—the effect of aging on the ability to drive. Now Congress has gotten interested in the topic, if a recent report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) (“Older Driver Safety: Knowledge Sharing Should Help States Prepare for Increase in Older Driver Population“) is any indication.

Senators Herb Kohl (D-WI) and Gordon Smith (R-OR), the Chairman and ranking minority member, respectively, of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, requested a review of state laws governing older drivers. The report details some of the reasons for concern, including:

  • Older drivers are less likely than their younger counterparts to be involved in fatal automobile accidents. However, if the results are recalculated based on number of miles driven older drivers perform much more poorly. Those aged 75 or older have a fatal accident rate higher than the next-highest category, drivers aged 16-24. Those two groups both suffer considerably more than double the fatal accident rate of any other age group.
  • The number of older drivers on the road is, of course, increasing more quickly than other age groups. With the aging of our population, problems associated with age and driving are expected to increase steadily.
  • Older drivers experience a particularly higher accident rate in intersections. More than half of all fatal accidents involving drivers over age 85 occur in intersections. While 37% of all fatal accidents involving drivers over age 65 occur at intersections, for drivers aged 26 to 64 the comparable figure is only 18%.

“Navigating through intersections,” notes the report, “requires the ability to make rapid decisions, react quickly, and accurately judge speed and distance.” What can be done to reduce intersection risk for older drivers? The report details a number of design ideas which might be implemented, including signage well in advance of intersections, larger street name and stop signs, black signal backplates (to make traffic signals more visible to older drivers), and offset turn lanes (to make it easier to see oncoming traffic).

The report also details regulatory steps taken by a handful of states to help ease drivers off the roads when they are impaired as part of their aging. Sixteen states require older drivers to renew their licenses more frequently. Arizona driver’s licenses, for instance, do not require renewal at all until age 65, and then require renewal every five years. Ten states (including Arizona) require older drivers to pass vision tests. Five states require older drivers to renew their licenses in person, rather than by mail (Arizona is one of those states, as well, requiring in-person renewals after age 70).

GAO Report Criticizes Lax Oversight of Nursing Homes

APRIL 23, 2007  VOLUME 14, NUMBER 43

Individuals with disabilities, confused and vulnerable seniors and patients recovering from medical procedures often end up staying in nursing homes for weeks, months or years. Quality of care in those facilities is obviously important, and yet difficult to monitor. The good news: since most nursing homes accept Medicare and/or Medicaid dollars, they are subject to close scrutiny and, when they fall below basic levels of care, to penalties that can force them to improve. The bad news: the government agency charged with conducting that scrutiny does an inadequate job.

You won’t have to take our word for it. The Government Accountability Office (formerly the General Accounting Office, but better known as the GAO) is Congress’ investigative arm, and is famous for its non-partisan reviews of government programs. In a report finalized last month and issued to the public today, the GAO takes the government to task for its failure to impose meaningful sanctions on nursing homes that repeatedly harm residents.

The federal agency charged with monitoring nursing home compliance has a spotty track record of enforcement. The GAO report found that sanctions were too often delayed, and often voided altogether when the offending home submitted a plan for compliance. That practice did not change, notes the GAO, even for homes with multiple offenses.

The 63 homes (in four states) surveyed by the GAO, for example, had a total of 444 citations for deficiencies that actually harmed residents. It is important to note that those citations were not complaints—presumably there were many more complaints filed—but actual findings of deficiencies, and that those deficiencies resulted in actual harm to patients. So how many of those resulted in immediate sanctions? Just 69, or a little more than 15%.

Although given authority to impose fines as high as $3,000 per day against offending nursing homes, CMS (The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) imposed fines of $350 to $500 per day, and those fines were not collected until the expiration of an appeal process that might take years in a given case. More than half the time CMS chose sanctions that gave the nursing homes another three months to correct deficiencies rather than the fifteen-day option available to the agency. In almost a quarter of cases meriting immediate sanctions, there was no evidence of any action being taken at all.

What did CMS say in response to the criticism? The agency “is taking additional steps to improve nursing home enforcement … but it is not clear whether or when these initiatives will address the enforcement weaknesses GAO found.”

The entire report, “Nursing Homes: Efforts to Strengthen Federal Enforcement Have Not Deterred Some Homes from Repeatedly Harming Residents,” is available online. An abstract highlights the report’s major findings.

©2020 Fleming & Curti, PLC