Noncompliant Discharge Notice Lacking Required Destination and Ombudsman Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to issue a compliant 30‑day discharge notice to a cognitively intact male resident with multiple diagnoses including type 2 diabetes, major depressive disorder, heart disease, end‑stage renal disease, and dependence on renal dialysis. Record review showed the undated 30‑day discharge notice listed the reason for discharge as the facility’s inability to provide appropriate care for his specific needs and included an effective discharge date and a brief statement about appeal rights directing the resident to contact the ADM. However, the notice did not specify the location to which the resident would be discharged and did not include the name, mailing and email address, or telephone number of the State Long‑Term Care Ombudsman. The facility’s own Transfer and Discharge Notice policy required that the written notice include the location of transfer or discharge and the Ombudsman’s contact information. Interviews confirmed these omissions and the staff’s lack of understanding of the required notice content. The Ombudsman reported receiving the 30‑day discharge notice by email and stated that the notice given to the resident did not contain Ombudsman information, even though regulations require it so residents can appeal. The resident reported receiving the 30‑day notice from the ADM and DON, understood the stated reason for discharge, disagreed with it, and had contacted the Ombudsman to appeal; he was not injured or in distress. The ADM acknowledged he did not know the notice should indicate the discharge location, was unsure whether the Ombudsman’s information was included, and stated he followed a template provided by the DON. The DON stated she was unsure what information the notice was supposed to contain and had obtained a template via a web search, rather than from facility policy, leading to a notice that did not meet the facility’s policy requirements.
