Failure to Reasonably Accommodate Residents’ Requests for Electronic Room Monitoring
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to reasonably accommodate residents’ requests to electronically monitor their own rooms, despite state guidance that residents have the right to purchase and use an electronic monitoring device after providing notice via the Electronic Monitoring Notification Consent Form. One resident (R1), who is cognitively intact with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a cerebral infarction, anxiety, and restless leg syndrome, reported that she requested electronic monitoring of her room and signed the required consent. She stated she was repeatedly told the facility was waiting for a response from corporate and that she was given a long list of requirements, which she felt were intentionally burdensome. The Social Services Director (V16) confirmed that R1 had requested electronic monitoring and had signed the consent, and further relayed corporate’s requirements that the resident pay a professional to install the camera, not use facility Wi‑Fi, obtain her own internet service, and contract with a security company to monitor the feed. At the same time, V16 confirmed that residents are allowed to use the facility’s Wi‑Fi at no charge for phones and laptops, and that the Maintenance Director typically hangs residents’ wall decorations and pictures. A second cognitively intact resident (R3), with diagnoses including multiple sclerosis, chronic pain, and post‑traumatic stress disorder, described using Bluetooth on his phone to connect to his TV for gaming and noted that, based on his prior work experience with Google, he was technologically savvy and could potentially view his room through his TV and phone. R3 stated that after he mentioned this capability to a CNA, the Social Services Director informed him he was not allowed to monitor his room without a consent form, which he agreed to sign, but she then told him he would have to use his own internet provider even though his proposed system did not use the internet. R3 expressed that he did not believe the facility should be able to require him to incur costs to monitor his own room. V16 confirmed she told R3 he could not monitor his room via Bluetooth and that any monitoring must be done through the resident’s own internet provider with a security company monitoring it for him. These actions and requirements resulted in the facility not allowing or reasonably accommodating the residents’ requests to electronically monitor their rooms.
We Help Long-Term Care Teams Stay Survey-Ready
We process and analyze inspection reports and plan of correction using AI to extract insights and trends so providers can improve care quality and stay ahead of compliance risks.