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 also conducted one staff interview. The staff member stated they had no knowledge regarding the allegation. LPA attempted to interview the two clients who were present at the facility; however, LPA was unable to obtain reliable statements due to the clients’ cognitive abilities.
Based on interviews and record review, the Licensee made changes related to C1’s prescription without documentation showing approval from C1 or C1’s current treating physician. Although the Licensee is also a Medical Doctor, the Licensee was acting in the capacity of the facility Licensee at the time C1 was receiving care and supervision from the facility. As the Licensee, the responsibility was to ensure that medications were administered as prescribed and to seek proper clarification or direction from C1’s current treating physician when a medication concern arose. The Licensee exceeded the appropriate scope of facility authority by independently making changes related to C1’s prescription rather than following the existing physician’s order or obtaining documented authorization from C1’s treating physician. The Licensee’s action interfered with C1’s right to participate in decisions regarding their care.
Based on the preponderance of evidence gathered through interviews and record review, the allegation that “Staff did not administer medication as prescribed by the client’s physician” has been met. Therefore, the allegation is deemed SUBSTANTIATED.
The facility is being cited under Title 22, Division 6, California Code of Regulations, Section 80072(a)(1), Personal Rights.
An exit interview was conducted with DSP Elizabeth Jones. A copy of this report, Appeal Rights, and LIC 811, Confidential Names List, were provided at exit. |