Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 245C.21 (2026)

Requesting Reconsideration Of Disqualification

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subdivision 1.Who may request reconsideration.

An individual who is the subject of a disqualification may request a reconsideration of the disqualification pursuant to this section. The individual must submit the request for reconsideration to the commissioner in writing.

Subd. 1a.Submission of reconsideration request.

(a) For disqualifications related to studies conducted by county agencies for family child care, and for disqualifications related to studies conducted by the commissioner for child foster care, adult foster care, and family adult day services when the applicant or license holder resides in the home where services are provided, the individual shall submit the request for reconsideration to the county agency that initiated the background study.

(b) For disqualifications related to studies conducted by the commissioner for child foster care providers monitored by private licensing agencies under section 245A.16, the individual shall submit the request for reconsideration to the private agency that initiated the background study.

(c) A reconsideration request shall be submitted within 30 days of the individual's receipt of the disqualification notice.

(d) The county or private agency shall forward the individual's request for reconsideration and provide the commissioner with a recommendation whether to set aside the individual's disqualification.

Subd. 2.Time frame for requesting reconsideration.

(a) When the commissioner sends an individual a notice of disqualification based on a finding under section 245C.16, subdivision 2, paragraph (a), clause (1) or (2), the disqualified individual must submit the request for a reconsideration within 30 calendar days of the individual's receipt of the notice of disqualification. If mailed, the request for reconsideration must be postmarked and sent to the commissioner within 30 calendar days of the individual's receipt of the notice of disqualification. If a request for reconsideration is made by personal service, it must be received by the commissioner within 30 calendar days after the individual's receipt of the notice of disqualification. Upon showing that the information under subdivision 3 cannot be obtained within 30 days, the disqualified individual may request additional time, not to exceed 30 days, to obtain the information.

(b) When the commissioner sends an individual a notice of disqualification based on a finding under section 245C.16, subdivision 2, paragraph (a), clause (3), the disqualified individual must submit the request for reconsideration within 30 calendar days of the individual's receipt of the notice of disqualification. If mailed, the request for reconsideration must be postmarked and sent to the commissioner within 30 calendar days of the individual's receipt of the notice of disqualification. If a request for reconsideration is made by personal service, it must be received by the commissioner within 30 calendar days after the individual's receipt of the notice of disqualification.

(c) An individual who was determined to have maltreated a child under chapter 260E or a vulnerable adult under section 626.557, and who is disqualified on the basis of serious or recurring maltreatment, may request a reconsideration of both the maltreatment and the disqualification determinations. The request must be submitted within 30 calendar days of the individual's receipt of the notice of disqualification. If mailed, the request for reconsideration must be postmarked and sent to the commissioner within 30 calendar days of the individual's receipt of the notice of disqualification. If a request for reconsideration is made by personal service, it must be received by the commissioner within 30 calendar days after the individual's receipt of the notice of disqualification.

(d) Except for family child care and child foster care, reconsideration of a maltreatment determination under sections 260E.33 and 626.557, subdivision 9d, and reconsideration of a disqualification under section 245C.22, shall not be conducted when:

(1) a denial of a license under section 245A.05, or a licensing sanction under section 245A.07, is based on a determination that the license holder is responsible for maltreatment or the disqualification of a license holder based on serious or recurring maltreatment;

(2) the denial of a license or licensing sanction is issued at the same time as the maltreatment determination or disqualification; and

(3) the license holder appeals the maltreatment determination, disqualification, and denial of a license or licensing sanction. In such cases, a fair hearing under section 256.045 must not be conducted under sections 245C.27, 260E.33, and 626.557, subdivision 9d. Under section 245A.08, subdivision 2a, the scope of the consolidated contested case hearing must include the maltreatment determination, disqualification, and denial of a license or licensing sanction.

Notwithstanding clauses (1) to (3), if the license holder appeals the maltreatment determination or disqualification, but does not appeal the denial of a license or a licensing sanction, reconsideration of the maltreatment determination shall be conducted under sections 260E.33 and 626.557, subdivision 9d, and reconsideration of the disqualification shall be conducted under section 245C.22. In such cases, a fair hearing shall also be conducted as provided under sections 245C.27, 260E.33, and 626.557, subdivision 9d.

Subd. 3.Disqualified individuals; information for reconsideration.

(a) The disqualified individual requesting reconsideration must submit information showing that:

(1) the information the commissioner relied upon in determining the underlying conduct that gave rise to the disqualification is incorrect;

(2) for maltreatment, the information the commissioner relied upon in determining that maltreatment was serious or recurring is incorrect; or

(3) the subject of the study does not pose a risk of harm to any person served by the applicant, license holder, or other entities as provided in this chapter, by addressing the information required under section 245C.22, subdivision 4.

(b) In order to determine the individual's risk of harm, the commissioner may require additional information from the disqualified individual as part of the reconsideration process. If the individual fails to provide the required information, the commissioner may deny the individual's request.

Subd. 4.Notice of request for reconsideration.

Upon request, the commissioner may inform the applicant, license holder, or other entities as provided in this chapter who received a notice of the individual's disqualification under section 245C.17, subdivision 3, or has the consent of the disqualified individual, whether the disqualified individual has requested reconsideration.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2004–2026 · leading case: Jason Daniel Gustafson, Relator v. Comm'r of Human Servs., 884 N.W.2d 674 (Minn. Ct. App. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Jason Daniel Gustafson, Relator v. Comm'r of Human Servs., 884 N.W.2d 674 (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “See Minn.Stat, § 245C.21. He argued that the *678 victims of his criminal offense were not seriously injured, that the offense took place 12 years earlier, that he no longer drinks alcoholic beverages and has completed a treatment program, and that he would not have any…”

Sweet v. Comm'r of Human Servs., 702 N.W.2d 314 (Minn. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “Under Minn.Stat. § 245C.21, subd. 1 (2004), relator had the right to seek reconsideration of the disqualification.”

Anderson v. Comm'r of Health, 811 N.W.2d 162 (Minn. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “15, the individual has a right to request reconsideration on the risk of harm under section 245C.21.” Minn.Stat. § 245C.29, subd.”

Hickman v. Comm'r of Human Servs., 682 N.W.2d 697 (Minn. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 6× “, See Minn.Stat. § 245C.21, subd. 2 (Supp.2003).”

Thompson v. Comm'r of Health, 778 N.W.2d 401 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 6× “Noting “that DHS relied solely on decade old police reports when it concluded [relator] committed a felony crime,” relator sought “written verification that MDH reconsidered its finding pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 245C.21, that there exists a preponderance of evidence that…”

Smith v. Minnesota Dep't of Human Servs., 764 N.W.2d 388 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 245C.21, subd. 2. Under certain circumstances, the department may set aside a disqualification, but this does not apply to those permanently disqualified from direct contact.”

John Fasan Atambo, Relator v. Comm'r of Health (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 6× “Minn. Stat. § 245C.21, subds. 1, 1a(c) (2014).”

State of Minnesota v. A. K. N. (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “2-3 (2014); see also Minn. Stat. § 245C.21 (2014) (procedure for requesting a reconsideration).”

Shawnnise Watkins, Relator v. Minnesota Dep't of Human Servs. (Minn. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 2× “]” Minn. Stat. § 245C.21, subds. 1, 2(a), 3(a)(1), (3) (2024).”

State of Minnesota v. A. Y. G., a/k/a A. Y. L. (Minn. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 3× “Minn. Stat. § 245C.21, subd. 2 (2012).3 If reconsideration is denied, a person who has been permanently disqualified based on a preponderance of the evidence, rather than a conviction, has the right to a fair hearing.”

Angie Rachel Ford, Relator v. Comm'r of Human Servs. (Minn. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “Minn. Stat. § 245C.21, subd. 1 (2012). “The commissioner may set aside the disqualification if the commissioner finds that the individual has submitted sufficient information to demonstrate that the individual does not pose a risk of harm to 3 any person served by the applicant .”

George Marita Obara, Relator v. Comm'r of Human Servs. (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “Minn. Stat. § 245C.21, subds. 1, 1a(c) (2014).”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.