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 reviewed the 10/18/2024 Progress Notes (PN). Per PN, while S1 and S2 were preparing dinner, they overheard C2 ask C1 if they were ok. S1 checked C1's room and "noted [a] few drops of red fluid on the bedroom floor." S1 found C1 in the bathroom washing their face. S1 observed "a small amount of blood coming out of [C1's] nose." S1 and AD asked C1 if they wanted to go to the hospital and C1 refused.
LPA conducted interviews with AD, 2 staff and 3 clients. AD, S1 and S2 corroborated the 10/18/2024 progress notes. S1 and S2 stated they don't know how much blood was on C1's face before C1 washed it. S1 and S2 stated the "red fluid" in C1's room was blood. AD,S1 and S2 stated they don't know what caused the bleeding. C2 and C3 stated they don't know what caused the bleeding.
On 11/19/2024, LPA reviewed C1's Individualized Program Plan (IPP). The IPP is dated 1/29/2024. In the "Additional Information" section, the IPP mentions C1's history of being found on the floor with no recollection of how they got there. The IPP states this may occur due to C1 not taking blood pressure medication. The IPP reads "[Service Coordinator] discussed the need to address whatever is going on with these incidents and it was noted that it is unclear if [C1] had a seizure or if [they] passed out due to [their] blood pressure and as such [they] would be taken with... PCP [Primary Care Physician]". The IPP makes mention that C1 voiced their willingness to follow the instructions of their Primary Care Physician.
On 11/6/20204, while at the facility, LPA reviewed the Department's Special Incident Report Log. LPA noted that the facility had not reported the incident. LPA noted 11/6/2024 marked 25 days since the incident.
Based on interviews conducted and records reviewed, LPA determined the facility did not ensure that C1 receive needed medical services. C1's most recent IPP indicates a concern regarding past incidents in which the cause is unclear. Per the IPP, there is a need to communicate with C1's PCP incidents like this occur. Per the IPP, C1 is willing to follow instructions from their PCP, however, according to three out of three interviews with staff, the facility did not know the cause of the incident and they did not contact C1's PCP.
Based on records reviewed, the facility did not report the incident to licensing in a timely manner.
The preponderance of evidence standard has been met. The allegations are determined to be SUBSTANTIATED, meaning the complaint allegations are valid and that two violations occurred. An exit interview was conducted, and this report was reviewed with facility staff. A copy of this LIC-9099, deficiency page and appeal rights were provided to the facility. |