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 | Interview with the complainant: On 11/7/2023, the LPA called the reporting party (RP), according to the interview, RP stated child (C1) has severe allergies. On 10/24/23, when RP was picking up C1, RP noticed C1 had a bump on the face, RP reported that the bump was golf ball size and one of C1’s eyes was shut. RP immediately asked the staff to call 911. The ambulance came and administered EpiPen. C1 was brought by the ambulance to the emergency room. RP stated the facility did not notify them that C1 had a bump on their face. RP reported that there was a written plan in place with the facility that was not followed.
Interview with staff: On 11/10/2023, LPA interviewed three (3) staff. Staff #1 (S1) confirmed that S1 is aware that C1 has severe allergies. Two (2) staff confirmed that there was an incident with C1 having a bump on the face and parent #1 (P1) had to ask them to call 911. The 2 staff confirmed that P1 and C1 went with C1 in the ambulance. S1 stated that P1 was not notified about C1’s bump because they did not notice the bump during the day. S3 also confirm that prescription medication for C1 was not administered.
Interview with Parents: On 12/14/2023, LPA called parents five (5) parents. LPA reached three (3) parents. The other parents did not respond to the Department’s request for an interview. Two parents interviewed did not disclose any information that could support the allegations. One (1) parent, Parent #2 (P2) made a comment about diaper changing and how they had issues before when their child was transitioning between diaper and potty training.
Records Review: On 11/14/2023, LPA received several documents from RP such as Patient Discharge Summary, Ambulance Report, Medical Report, and Health follow up check-up for C1.
Based on LPA’s observations, record reviews and conducted interviews, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegations alleging (1) Staff did not seek medical attention in a timely manner (2) Staff did not follow the child’s medication plan, is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. A substantiated finding means that the complaint is substantiated, and the allegation is valid because the preponderance of the evidence standard has been met.
In the areas evaluated, 1 Type A and 1 Type B deficiencies were observed of the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 12 at the time of the visit. Type A violation on section 101226 (c) Health Related Services and a type B violation on section 101226(e)(3)(A) Health Related Services are being cited on the attached LIC9099D.
Page 2 of 3
|