cms_WV: 5974
Data source: Big Local News · About: big-local-datasette
| rowid | facility_name | facility_id | address | city | state | zip | inspection_date | deficiency_tag | scope_severity | complaint | standard | eventid | inspection_text | filedate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5974 | TAYLOR HEALTH CARE CENTER | 515057 | 2 HOSPITAL PLAZA | GRAFTON | WV | 26354 | 2014-10-15 | 225 | F | 0 | 1 | GZSS11 | Based on personnel file review, facility abuse/neglect policy and procedure review, medical record review, review of the requirements for criminal background checks in West Virginia, review of the Bureau for Medical Services manual and memorandum (memo), and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure it did not employ individuals who had been found guilty of abusing, neglecting, or mistreating residents by a court of law. This was true for five (5) of ten (10) employees whose files were reviewed. In addition, the facility failed to report and investigate an allegation of misappropriation of resident property. A nursing assistant (NA) removed Resident #15's personal beverage cup from the resident's room, even though the resident asked the NA not to take the cup. Employee identifiers: Employee #8, #9, #29, #45 and #11. Resident identifier: #15. This practice had the potential to affect all residents. Facility census: 59. Findings include: a) Criminal Background Checks for Employee #8, #9, #29, #45 and #11 On 10/08/14 at 10:00 a.m., a review of ten (10) personnel files revealed five (5) of ten (10) employees, who were employed by the facility between 06/10/08 and 04/03/12, had no fingerprints or criminal background checks based on fingerprinting in their files. On 10/08/14 at 3:20 p.m., the Human Resource Director stated employee criminal background checks had not been conducted for Employees #8, #9, #29, #45 or #11. The employees with no evidence of the requisite fingerprinting, as required for a statewide criminal background check in West Virginia were: - Employee #8, nursing assistant (NA) hired on 04/28/10; - Employee #9, NA hired on 06/22/10; - Employee #29, licensed practical nurse (LPN) hired on 06/10/08; - Employee #45, LPN hired on 06/20/11, and. - Employee #11, NA rehired on 04/03/12. In a discussion with the administrator (NHA), on 10/06/14 at 4:00 p.m., the NHA denied knowledge of any regulations requiring criminal background checks on all facility employees. She denied any knowledge of the memo issued to all Medicaid participating facilities on February 15, 2013. She stated this may have been received by the previous NHA, but she had no knowledge of the memo. To ensure the facility had not employed an individual who had been found guilty of abusing, neglecting, or mistreating residents by a court of law, West Virginia requires submission of fingerprints to the agency contracted by the West Virginia State Police. The Bureau for Medical Services manual includes: 514.4.1 Employment Restrictions Criminal Investigation Background Check (CIB) results which may place a member at risk of personal health and safety or have evidence of a history of Medicaid fraud or abuse must be considered by the nursing facility before placing an individual in a position to provide services to the member. At a minimum, fingerprint-based State level criminal investigation background check must be conducted initially the employer prior to hire and every three years thereafter throughout the remainder of the employment. If the prospective employee has lived out of state within the last five years, the agency must also conduct a federal background check utilizing fingerprints through the national crime information database (NICD). A policy clarification memo was issued to all Medicaid participating facilities on February 15, 2013. The memo included .at a minimum, a fingerprint-based state level criminal investigation background check must be conducted initially by the employer prior to hire and every 3 years thereafter throughout the remainder of employment. This policy pertains to new hires and current employees. Due to the magnitude of current employees in nursing facilities throughout the State of West Virginia, the Bureau of Medical Services will allow the nursing facility until March 1, 2014, to have all current employees up to date with criminal investigation background checks. For any new hires in the nursing facility, the policy is effective for those individuals as of January 1, 2013. b) Resident #15 Interview with Resident #15, on 10/07/14 at 2:43 p.m., revealed a nursing assistant (NA), Employee #25, came into her room and the resident caught the NA going through her dresser drawers. Resident #15 said she had a red cup, part of a set that was a gift from her son. The resident said the NA started to take the red cup. The resident said she told the NA not to take the cup. Resident #15 said a few days later the cup showed up missing. She said the next time she saw the NA, she asked her (the NA) if she got the cup. The resident said at first, the NA denied getting the cup, but then admitted she had taken it because she did not have anything to drink out of that day. The resident said she was very upset and told the NA to go get the director of nursing (DON). The resident said she got her cup back after that. Review of a 09/24/14 nursing note, on 10/14/14 at 2:30 p.m., revealed a Late entry: on 9/23/14 this resident (#15) asked to speak to the DON (director of nursing) and the nurse manager. Resident extremely upset with CNA (certified nursing assistant) . Interview with the DON, on 10/14/2014 at 2:06 p.m., revealed she did not investigate the situation to rule out a potential misappropriation of property, even though the aide, Employee #25, informed the DON she had borrowed a resident's personal cup. When asked if staff were allowed to borrow items from residents, the DON replied No, absolutely not. They know better. The DON was asked if she was concerned about the fact the aide borrowed the resident's cup, when she should have known better. The DON shook her head in affirmative motion and stated, If I had known more about it then, I would have investigated it. The DON agreed if it had been investigated, she would have known more about it. The NA was not available to interview because she was off from work due to a death in her family. | 2018-05-01 |