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 | The second allegation is that client funds were not safeguarded. It was reported that a client reported having $6.96 missing and, subsequently, reported that $10.00 of funds were missing. It was also reported that the facility’s program director kept a Ziploc bag in which any lost-and-found money was stored, and the program director instructed staff to use funds from the lost and found money to replace missing client funds. The investigation yielded that, at the time, the program director solely managed client Personal & Incidental funds and distributed any funds for client use to the staff who would be responsible for safeguarding those funds while on client outings. The investigation also yielded that staff were responsible for providing receipts for expenditures incurred, along with any remaining funds, upon return. The investigation did not yield evidence to conclude that client funds were missing, not properly accounted for, or not safeguarded.
The third allegation is that facility staff falsified facility records. It was reported that client medication was not administered because it was accidentally left at the facility when the client was transported to the hospital on May 2, 2020. It was also reported that once the program director was made aware that the medication was left at the facility, the program director disposed of the medication and instructed staff to record that the medication had been administered to the client. A review of records maintained by the facility reflected that the medication count of dosages distributed and entrusted to staff were verified, signed, and accounted for upon release for departure, and the number of dosages/medications returned to the facility following the hospital visit were verified and accounted for as well. The investigation did not yield evidence to corroborate the allegation that staff falsified records to reflect that medications were administered when they were not.
Based upon the foregoing which reflects a lack of evidence to corroborate the allegations, the allegations are unsubstantiated. This finding means that although the allegations may have happened or may be valid, the investigation did not produce a preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violations occurred.
An exit interview was conducted with Morgan Davis, and copies of this report and Licensee Rights were provided to Morgan at the conclusion of the visit. Her signature on this report acknowledges receipt of copies of the report and the rights. |