Manatee FL Administrative law, Family and General practice L -- eLawyers

02-000669 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs WESTMINSTER COMMUNITY CARE SERVICES, INC., D/B/A WESTMINSTER CARE OF ORLANDO (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 15, 2002

The issue in these cases is whether Respondent failed to provide appropriate emergency care for a nursing home resident in respiratory distress in violation of 42 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) Section 483.25 and Florida Administrative Code Rule 59A-4.1288. (All references to rules are to rules promulgated in the Florida Administrative Code in effect as of the date of this Recommended Order.)Facility did not fail to provide respiratory care to patient who pulled out trach tube when facility nurse restored airway but did not provide CPR before EMT arrived on scene.

02-001638 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs WESTMINSTER COMMUNITY CARE SERVICES, INC., D/B/A WESTMINSTER CARE OF ORLANDO (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 24, 2002

The issue in these cases is whether Respondent failed to provide appropriate emergency care for a nursing home resident in respiratory distress in violation of 42 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) Section 483.25 and Florida Administrative Code Rule 59A-4.1288. (All references to rules are to rules promulgated in the Florida Administrative Code in effect as of the date of this Recommended Order.)Facility did not fail to provide respiratory care to patient who pulled out trach tube when facility nurse restored airway but did not provide CPR before EMT arrived on scene.

02-001659 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs CASA FEBE RTMT HOME, INC., D/B/A HOME IS WHERE THE HEART IS (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 29, 2002

The issues for determination are whether Respondent failed to make reasonable efforts to ensure that a prescription for a resident was refilled in a timely manner in violation of Florida Administrative Code Rule 58A-5.0185(7)(f); and, if so, whether Respondent should reclassify Respondent's license from standard to conditional, impose an administrative fine of $2,000, and impose a survey fee of $500 pursuant to Sections 400.419(1)(b) and 400.419(9), Florida Statutes (2001). (All references to chapters and statutes are to Florida Statutes (2001) unless otherwise stated. Unless otherwise stated, all references to rules are to rules promulgated in the Florida Administrative Code in effect on the date of this Recommended Order.)Facility that failed to remind physician to write prescription did not violate rule requiring facility to ensure that existing prescriptions are refilled. Agency cannot amend term "refill" to mean "fill."

01-003072 HEALTH CARE AND RETIREMENT CORPORATION, D/B/A JACARANDA MANOR vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 02, 2001

DOAH Case No. 01-3072: Whether Respondent's licensure status should be reduced from standard to conditional. DOAH Case No. 01-3616: Whether Respondent committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint dated August 23, 2001, and, if so, the penalty that should be imposed.Agency established facts sufficient to justify issuance of conditional license, but failed to establish facts under separate case seeking imposition of civil penalty.

01-003616 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs HEALTH CARE AND RETIREMENT CORPORATION, D/B/A JACARANDA MANOR (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 12, 2001

DOAH Case No. 01-3072: Whether Respondent's licensure status should be reduced from standard to conditional. DOAH Case No. 01-3616: Whether Respondent committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint dated August 23, 2001, and, if so, the penalty that should be imposed.Agency established facts sufficient to justify issuance of conditional license, but failed to establish facts under separate case seeking imposition of civil penalty.

01-004491 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs CASSELBERRY ALF, INC., D/B/A EASTBROOKE GARDENS (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 19, 2001

Whether Respondent, Casselberry ALF, Inc., d/b/a Eastbrooke Gardens, violated Section 400.28(1)(a), Florida Statutes, and Rule 58A-5.0182, Florida Administrative Code, as cited in the four AHCA Administrative Complaints, based on four consecutive AHCA surveys of Respondent's assisted living facility (ALF), alleging failure to provide care and services appropriate to the needs of its residents. Whether the facts alleged constitute Class I or Class II deficiencies. Whether, if found guilty, a civil penalty in any amount or the imposition of a moratorium is warranted pursuant to the cited statutes.Based on four consecutive surveys, Petitioner failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent`s assisted living facility for memory impaired residents failed to provide appropriate care and services.

01-004492 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs CASSELBERRY ALF, INC., D/B/A EASTBROOK GARDENS (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 19, 2001

Whether Respondent, Casselberry ALF, Inc., d/b/a Eastbrooke Gardens, violated Section 400.28(1)(a), Florida Statutes, and Rule 58A-5.0182, Florida Administrative Code, as cited in the four AHCA Administrative Complaints, based on four consecutive AHCA surveys of Respondent's assisted living facility (ALF), alleging failure to provide care and services appropriate to the needs of its residents. Whether the facts alleged constitute Class I or Class II deficiencies. Whether, if found guilty, a civil penalty in any amount or the imposition of a moratorium is warranted pursuant to the cited statutes.Based on four consecutive surveys, Petitioner failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent`s assisted living facility for memory impaired residents failed to provide appropriate care and services.

01-004648 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs CASSELBERRY ALF, INC., D/B/A EASTBROOK GARDENS (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 05, 2001

Whether Respondent, Casselberry ALF, Inc., d/b/a Eastbrooke Gardens, violated Section 400.28(1)(a), Florida Statutes, and Rule 58A-5.0182, Florida Administrative Code, as cited in the four AHCA Administrative Complaints, based on four consecutive AHCA surveys of Respondent's assisted living facility (ALF), alleging failure to provide care and services appropriate to the needs of its residents. Whether the facts alleged constitute Class I or Class II deficiencies. Whether, if found guilty, a civil penalty in any amount or the imposition of a moratorium is warranted pursuant to the cited statutes.Based on four consecutive surveys, Petitioner failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent`s assisted living facility for memory impaired residents failed to provide appropriate care and services.

01-004658 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs CASSELBERRY ALF, INC., D/B/A EASTBROOK GARDENS (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 05, 2001

Whether Respondent, Casselberry ALF, Inc., d/b/a Eastbrooke Gardens, violated Section 400.28(1)(a), Florida Statutes, and Rule 58A-5.0182, Florida Administrative Code, as cited in the four AHCA Administrative Complaints, based on four consecutive AHCA surveys of Respondent's assisted living facility (ALF), alleging failure to provide care and services appropriate to the needs of its residents. Whether the facts alleged constitute Class I or Class II deficiencies. Whether, if found guilty, a civil penalty in any amount or the imposition of a moratorium is warranted pursuant to the cited statutes.Based on four consecutive surveys, Petitioner failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent`s assisted living facility for memory impaired residents failed to provide appropriate care and services.

02-001420 INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICES OF PORT CHARLOTTE vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 10, 2002

Whether Petitioner's licensure status should be reduced from standard to conditional.Class II deficiency proven by agency, where excess protein in tube feeding was the likely cause of elevated blood urea nitrogen (BUN) level, and facility failed to monitor BUN level despite resident`s history of azotemia.

Michael Pasquale Sasso