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 needs and service plan dated 7-8-22 indicated the change in condition for R1. Upon further review, it was determined that R1’s responsible party’s signature was not included on the needs and service plan dated 7-8-22. Medication log sheets and physician orders reviewed revealed medication Seroquel prescribed on 5-2-22 at 25mg twice per day, then increased to 50mg twice per day on 5-5-22. due to a change in condition for R1. Furthermore, based on interview and record review, there is no indication of a reappraisal with a meeting arranged to discuss significant changes in condition. Upon further record review and interview, there is no additional form of communication to indicate R1’s responsible party was notified of a change in condition leading to this medication change. Based on interviews and records reviewed, there is a preponderance of evidence to conclude R1’s responsible party was not properly notified of R1’s change of condition, therefore this allegation is SUBSTANTIATED.
Allegation #2: Licensee increased resident rate without a 60-day notice. LPA interviewed Administrator and assistant business office manager. LPA also reviewed Admission agreement for R1, annual rate increase notice for R1, needs and service plan for R1, medication log sheets for R1, and care notes for R1. Allegation noted above addresses an annual rate increase for residency. Based on review of admission agreement under “Notice of Rate Changes”, there is no documented language stating R1’s rate will increase annually. Based on interviews and record reviews, it was determined that R1 began experiencing a change of condition after initial admission date on 5-19-21. New medication orders for Seroquel were received by facility on 5-2-22 and 5-5-22 due to R1’s change of condition. Rate change notices reviewed indicate a rate increase to begin on 7-1-21 with an acknowledgement from R1’s responsible party on 7-6-21.Furthermore, this notice did not indicate a general description of the additional costs and the reason for the increase. Based on interviews and record reviews, there is a preponderance of evidence to conclude R1’s responsible party did not receive a proper 60-day notice of increased rate per regulatory requirements. Therefore, this allegation is SUBSTANTIATED.
As a result of this investigation, citations are issued under Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8 and Health and Safety Codes. An exit interview was conducted with Rosa Marrero and a copy of this report was left with Rosa. Appeal rights explained and to be provided.
|