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 | On 8/20/20 Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Chris Hopkins made a case management tele-visit regarding a rate change due to level of care discussed during previous complaint investigation (complaint # 14-AS-20200504152650). LPA met with Executive Director Freddie Fullon and explained the nature of the tele-visit.
The facility denied that there has been a change in the resident’s level of care, and states that the resident is at level 6, the highest level of care provided by the facility. The facility denies asking or requiring a rate increase based on level of care, but rather suggested that the resident’s responsible party could get additional supervision by hiring a caregiver from a third party.
The facility has indicated that the resident’s responsible party followed the recommendation and opted to hire a private caregiver to provide additional care. It was acknowledged that the facility suggested later that the resident needed more hours of private care, and the resident’s responsible party opted to follow the recommendation and increased the time of the private caregiver. However, the facility is not billing the resident for additional care, and the resident remains under the same level of care upon admission.
The resident’s responsible party indicated that the facility assessed that the resident is a two-person lift/assists, needs physical therapy and is not able to feed themselves. The facility suggested that the responsible party needed to hire a licensed caretaker to watch over the resident and the responsible party agreed to this. The resident’s responsible party disagrees with this assessment and wants to reduce the number of hours of the private caregiver and would like a refund from the extra hours charged for care that the resident did not need. The resident’s responsible party acknowledged that the extra care is being provided by a private caregiver, hired and paid by the resident’s responsible party.
Report Continued on LIC809-C |