1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | LPA observed signal system application on each caregiver mobile phone. The caregiver was able to reset call alert only when the caregiver was physically in the room and press the same call button where the alert was activated. Executive Director Kumar explained that all managers have access to mobile signal system alerts and if a caregiver does not respond in a timely manner, the managers will contact the caregiver directly to respond to the signal system call even after business hours. Based upon the investigation, client and staff interviews, and LPA observations, there was insufficient evidence to corroborate the allegation.
Regarding allegations: Staff are not answering the facility phone. It is alleged that the facility is not answering the facility phone. The investigation revealed the following: During business hours, the facility has a receptionist at the front desk answering incoming phone calls. Staff stated that managers will answer phones if the receptionist steps away from the front desk. For after-hour shifts, the main phone line is transferred to night shift MedTech who is responsible for answering the phone. Executive Director Kumar explained that if the main phone line is busy, residents’ families or responsible party may call the facility’s nurse phone line that is available 24x7. In addition, the facility has provided families and/or residents responsible parties with phone numbers of all managers. R1’s trustee confirmed that the trustee had the managers’ phone numbers. Residents interviewed revealed that four (4) out of six (6) residents do not receive phone calls since they don’t have anyone that would call residents. Two (2) out of six (6) residents stated that family prefers to visit them. Staff interviews revealed that six (6) out of six (6) staff denied not answering phone calls. MedTech confirmed that phone calls are transferred to MedTech mobile phone. Staff stated that phone calls may not be answered if the line is busy with another call. However, staff stated that it is unusual to receive telephone calls at night. During the visit, LPA observed that telephone calls were being answered by receptionist. Based upon the investigation, client and staff interviews, and LPA observations, there was insufficient evidence to corroborate the allegation.
Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated.
Exit interview was held with Executive Director Subashsani Kumar. A copy of the report was provided. |