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 | No further steps were made to seek medical treatment for R1 until several days later, on February 28, 2020 when R1’s POA went to the facility to check on R1 and observed the large rash on R1’s chest. With the assistance of R1’s POA, 911 was called and R1 was successfully transported to the hospital where R1 was treated for the infected rash.
During the investigation it was revealed that prior to R1’s hospitalization, R1 had not been seen by a doctor nor had an updated assessment since 2015. Additionally, interviews revealed that the Administrator was aware that R1’s needs were greater than what was reflected in the facility’s written record of care, yet the facility had not taken any measures to update their assessment of the resident. Interviews also revealed that R1 was observed to have a recent decline in condition in the last two months and was refusing staff assistance with showering and toileting. Facility staff documented R1’s refusals and their attempts to contact R1’s Power of Attorney, but no further action was taken.
The facility failed to provide adequate observation and care of R1, which resulted in R1 being admitted to the hospital for an infected rash. Therefore, based on interviews and record reviews, the above allegation 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.
Due to observations made by LPA Colvin, the facility was cited and deficiency noted on LIC 9099 D. An exit interview was conducted where this report and appeal rights were discussed. A copy of all reports, forms, and appeal rights were provided to Marketing Director Janet Oliver during the exit interview. |