On Dec. 12, 2017, applicant Jose Mendez, 49, a construction worker, fell in an open trench and struck the ground below. Mendez claimed to his head, neck, back and jaw. Mendez filed a workers’ compensation claim against TM Construction & Development, which was insured by State Compensation Insurance Fund. He brought a claim in an attempt to collect workers’ compensation benefits., Mendez claimed that he sustained a traumatic brain injury and lost consciousness. He also claimed that he sustained other polytrauma, including an acute closed head injury, an acute concussive injury, an acute neck strain, an acute scalp laceration, and acute thoracic and lumbar strains and contusions. Mendez was emergently transported to the nearest hospital, where he remained for seven days. While undergoing emergency care, Mendez regained consciousness. He was eventually discharged home with instructions to follow up with different specialists and take medication as prescribed. Due to Mendez’s alleged persistent post-concussive symptoms, blurred vision and inability to perform his activities of daily living, he was admitted to an inpatient rehabilitative program, where he underwent a four-month period of cognitive and physical rehabilitation. Thereafter, Mendez was admitted to a neuro-rehabilitation facility, where he underwent comprehensive interdisciplinary neuro-rehabilitation treatment, which included occupational therapy, speech therapy, physical therapy and neuropsychological counseling. Upon admission, Mendez was diagnosed with a traumatic brain injury, post-concussive syndrome, neurobehavioral changes related to a traumatic brain injury, personality changes related to a traumatic brain injury, a cognitive disorder, vestibular dysfunction, post-traumatic vision syndrome, hearing loss in his left ear, left temporomandibular joint dysfunction, post-traumatic headaches, hyperglycemia and an exacerbation of pre-existing lower back pain. Mendez’s counsel asserted that, based on the medical findings, Mendez should be considered 100 percent totally and permanently disabled. Counsel also asserted that Mendez requires long-term residential care in a brain-injury program with treatment in multiple specialties for the foreseeable future. The respondent’s counsel disputed the nature and extent of Mendez’s alleged and asserted that Mendez did not require long-term residential care in a brain injury program for the foreseeable future.