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 | Regarding allegation "Authorized representative was not provided a refund": LPA Colvin reviewed R1's file at the facility as well as interviewed the Licensee and R1's POA. LPA Colvin learned that after R1 left the facility after being there only two months, the Licensee did not provide a refund of the Pre-Admission Fee, which contradicts both Title 22 Regulations and the facility's signed Admissions Agreement. Licensee Matt admitted to not providing R1's POA with any refund except for $100 of "petty cash" left of the $200 given to the facility at the beginning of R1's stay. Therefore, based on record review and interviews, the allegation "Authorized representative was not provided a refund" is SUBSTANTIATED.
Regarding allegation "Staff did not follow physicians orders for medication": LPA Colvin conducted interviews with staff and reviewed R1's file at the facility. LPA Colvin was unable to review the Medication Administration Log (MAR) that the facility utilizes, as the facility had not maintained a copy in R1's archived file, and the copy maintained by the pharmacy was not available for LPA Colvin during today's inspection. It is worth noting that the facility does keep a physical MARs log for residents, but afterwards scans the log to the pharmacy. LPA Colvin observed that while a file for R1 was archived at the facility, this record for R1 was not. LPA Colvin was provided with a blank print out with no signatures or notes for administration of R1's medication. LPA Colvin asked Administrator Chris Peck if the facility does any other notation for "as needed" (PRN) medications on the MARs log, and Chris confirmed that it would be written on the back the time of the administration and the effect it had on the resident. These notes were not available to LPA Colvin during today's inspection, so LPA Colvin cannot verify that staff administered the medications correctly. Therefore, based on interviews and lack of records, the allegation "Staff did not follow physicians orders for medication" is SUBSTANTIATED.
A finding that the complaint is SUBSTANTIATED means that the allegation(s) is valid because the preponderance of the evidence standard has been met.
An exit interview was conducted where this report and appeal rights were discussed. A copy of this report, LIC9099Ds, and appeal rights was provided to Administrator Chris Peck during the exit interview. |