Petitioner: AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION
Respondent: CINDI J. THOMPSON, D/B/A KENDALL PLACE
Judges: R. BRUCE MCKIBBEN
Agency: Agency for Health Care Administration
Locations: Orlando, Florida
Filed: Sep. 30, 2008
Status: Closed
Settled and/or Dismissed prior to entry of RO/FO on Monday, March 23, 2009.
Latest Update: Dec. 24, 2024
STATE OF FLORIDA
AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION
STATE OF FLORIDA, AGENCY FOR
HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, O \-
Petitioner,
vs. Case No. 2008009074
CINDI J. THOMPSON,
d/b/a KENDALL PLACE,
Respondent.
ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT
COMES NOW the Agency for Health Care Administration (“Agency”) and files this
Administrative Complaint against CINDI J. THOMPSON, d/b/a KENDALL PLACE
(“Respondent” or “Respondent Facility”), pursuant to Sections 120.569 and 120.57, Florida
Statutes (2007), and alleges:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
This is an action to revoke the Respondent’s license to operate an assisted living facility
and to impose an administrative fine in the sum of four thousand two hundred dollars
($4,200.00) based upon one (1) uncorrected State Class IV deficiency, four (4) uncorrected State
Class III deficiencies, six (6) demonstrated patterns of deficiencies and an unpaid administrative
fine. This action is taken pursuant to Sections 429.19(2)(c), 429.19(2)(d), 408.815(1)(d) and
408.831(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2007).
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. The Agency has jurisdiction pursuant to Sections 20.42, and 120.60, and Chapters
429, Part I, and 408, Part II, Florida Statutes (2007).
2. Venue lies pursuant to Florida Administrative Code R. 28-106.207.
PARTIES
3. The Agency is the regulatory authority responsible for licensure of assisted living
facilities and enforcement of all applicable regulations, state statutes and rules governing assisted
living facilities, pursuant to Chapters 408, Part II, and 429, Part I, Florida Statutes, and Chapter
58A-5, Florida Administrative Code.
4. Respondent operates a 5-bed assisted living facility located at 6506 Tebbetts
Drive, Orlando, Florida 32818, and is licensed as an assisted living facility, license number
10699.
5. At all times material to the allegations of this complaint, Respondent was a
licensed facility under the licensing authority of the Agency and was required to comply with all
applicable rules and statutes.
COUNT TI
6. The Agency re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through five (5), as if
fully set forth in this count.
7. Rule 58A-5.021(2), Florida Administrative Code, requires:
(2) ACCOUNTING PROCEDURES. The facility shall maintain written business
records using generally accepted accounting principles as defined in Rule 61H1-
20.007, F.A.C., which accurately reflect the facility’s assets and liabilities and
income and expenses. Income from residents shall be identified by resident name
in supporting documents, and income and expenses from other sources, such as
from day care or interest on facility funds, shall be separately identified.
8. Rule 58A-5.024, Florida Administrative Code, requires:
(4) RECORD INSPECTION.
(a) All records required by this rule chapter shall be available for inspection at all
times by staff of the agency, the department, the district long-term care
ombudsman council, and the advocacy center for persons with disabilities.
(d) The facility shall ensure the availability of records for inspection.
9. From March 13, 2008, through March 18, 2008, the Agency conducted a
Complaint Survey (CCR #2008002591) of the Respondent facility:
9.1. Based on facility record review and interview the facility failed to
maintain written business records that accurately reflect assets and liabilities, income and
expenses and identify income from residents by resident name and source.
9.2. The assets and liability report available for review on 3/18/08 at
approximately 11:30 AM revealed that the most recent report available was dated 4/8/06
and listed only the facility expenses; however, it did not list income from residents.
9.3. On March 18, 2008, the administrator designee told the Agency Surveyor
that no other documentation was available, that the administrator was out of town, and
that maybe the administrator had it with her.
10. The Agency determined that the above constitutes the grounds for the imposition
of a Class IV deficiency pursuant to Section 429.19(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2007) in that it does
not threaten the health, safety, or security of residents of the facility.
11. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of April 3,
2008.
12. On May 7, 2008, the Agency conducted a re-visit to the Complaint Survey (CCR
#2008002591) of the Respondent.
12.1. Based on facility records review and interview the facility failed to
maintain written business records that accurately reflect assets and liabilities, income and
expenses and identify income from residents by resident name and source.
12.2. Facility financial records review on 5/7/08 at approximately 12:30 PM
revealed that the records for 2005, 2006, and 2007 listed the facility's expenses but did
not list the income from residents.
12.3. On May 7, 2008, the administrator told the Agency surveyor that the 2008
financial records were not available yet, that she had them at home and was working on
them, and that she did not know that the income from residents had to be listed.
13. The Agency determined that the above constitutes the grounds for the imposition
of an uncorrected State Class IV deficiency in that it does not threaten the health, safety, or
security of residents of the facility.
14. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of May 21,
2008.
15. On July 14, 2008, the Agency conducted a second re-visit to the Complaint
Survey (CCR #2008002591) of the Respondent.
15.1. Based on facility records review and interview the facility failed to
maintain written business records that accurately reflected assets and liabilities, income
and expenses and identified income from residents by resident name and source.
15.2. Facility financial records review on 7/14/08 at approximately 11:30 AM
revealed records for January 2006 and February 2006 that listed the facility's expenses
but did not list the income from residents. Interview with the staff in charge on July 14,
2008, at about 11:15 AM, revealed that the staff member searched the records and could
not find current documentation that accurately reflected assets and liabilities, income and
expenses and records that identified income from residents by resident name and source.
15.3. Ina telephone interview on July 14, 2008, at about 10:45 AM, with the
administrator the administrator told the Agency surveyor that she was in Georgia waiting
on a flight to Orlando and would not make it to the facility. Further interview revealed
that the facility’s administrator spoke with the staff person and informed her of the
whereabouts of the facility records, but the records were not made available for review by
the Agency surveyor.
16. The Agency determined that the above constitutes the grounds for the imposition
of an uncorrected State Class IV deficiency in that it does not threaten the health, safety, or
security of residents of the facility.
17. | The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of July 31,
2008.
18. The violation identified on March 18, 2008, being uncorrected on the May 7,
2008, survey and again on the July 14 survey, the July 14, 2008, violation constitutes a twice
“uncorrected” deficiency as defined by law.
19, The violation identified on March 18, 2008, being uncorrected on the May 7,
2008, survey and again on the July 14 survey, the July 14, 2008, violation constitutes a
demonstrated pattern of deficient performance as defined by law.
20. By such a pattern of deficient performance in failing to make financial statements
available for review by Agency personnel, the Respondent makes it impossible for the Agency to
ascertain the Respondent’s financial ability to operate. §§ 408.810(8) and 429.14(1)(), Florida
Statutes (2007).
WHEREFORE, the Agency intends to impose an administrative fine in the amount of
$200.00, against Respondent, an assisted living facility in the State of Florida, pursuant to
Section 429.19(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2007), and intends to revoke the license of Respondent
pursuant to Section 408.815(1)(d), Florida Statutes (2007).
COUNT II
21. ~The Agency re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through five (5) and
paragraph eight (8), as if fully set forth in this count.
22. Rule 58A-5.024(1)(i), Florida Administrative Code, defines:
(1) FACILITY RECORDS. Facility records shall include:
(i) The admission package presented to new or prospective residents (less
the resident’s contract) described in Rule 58A-5.0182, F.A.C.
23. Rule 58A-5.0182(6), Florida Administrative Code, describes:
(6) RESIDENT RIGHTS AND FACILITY PROCEDURES.
(a) A copy of the Resident Bill of Rights as described in Section 429.28, F.S.,
or a summary provided by the Long-Term Care Ombudsman Council
shall be posted in full view in a freely accessible resident area, and
included in the admission package provided pursuant to Rule 58A-
5.0181, F.A.C.
(e) The facility shall have a written statement of its house rules and
procedures which shall be included in the admission package provided
pursuant to Rule 58A-5.0181, F.A.C. The rules and procedures shall
address the facility’s policies with respect to such issues, for example, as
resident responsibilities, the facility’s alcohol and tobacco policy,
medication storage, the delivery of services to residents by third party
providers, resident elopement, and other administrative and housekeeping
practices, schedules, and requirements.
24. Rule 58A-5.0181(3), Florida Administrative Code, defines:
(3) ADMISSION PACKAGE.
(a) The facility shall make available to potential residents a written
statement(s) which includes the following information listed below. A
copy of the facility resident contract or facility brochure containing all the
required information shall meet this requirement:
1. The facility’s residency criteria;
2. The daily, weekly or monthly charge to reside in the facility and the
services, supplies, and accommodations provide by the facility for that
rate;
3. Personal care services that the facility is prepared to provide to residents
and additional costs to the resident, if any;
4. Nursing services that the facility is prepared to provide to residents and
additional costs to the resident, if any;
5. Food service and the ability of the facility to accommodate special diets;
6. The availability of transportation and additional costs to the resident, if
any;
7. Any other special services that are provided by the facility and additional
cost if any;
8. Social and leisure activities generally offered by the facility;
9. Any services that the facility does not provide but will arrange for the
resident and additional cost, if any;
10. A statement of facility rules and regulations that residents must follow as
described in Rule 58A-5.0182, F.A.C.;
11. A statement of the facility policy concerning Do Not Resuscitate Orders
pursuant to Section 429.255, F.S., and Advance Directives pursuant to
Chapter 765, F.S.
12. If the facility also has an extended congregate care program, the ECC
program’s residency criteria; and a description of the additional personal,
supportive, and nursing services provided by the program; additional
costs; and any limitations, if any, on where ECC residents must reside
based on the policies and procedures described in Rule 58A-5.030,
F.A.C.;
13. If the facility advertises that it provides special care for persons with
Alzheimer’s disease and related disorders, a written description of those
special services as required under Section 429.177, F.S.; and
14. A copy of the facility’s resident elopement response policies and
procedures.
(b) Prior to or at the time of admission the resident, responsible party,
guardian, or attorney in fact, if applicable, shall be provided with the
following:
1. A copy of the resident’s contract which meets the requirements of Rule
58A-5.025, F.A.C.;
2. A copy of the facility statement described in paragraph (a) if one has not
already been provided;
3. A copy of the resident’s bill of rights as required by Rule 58A-5.0182,
F.A.C.; and
4. A Long-Term Care Ombudsman Council brochure which includes the
telephone number and address of the district council.
(c) Documents required by this subsection shall be in English. If the resident
is not able to read, or does not understand English and translated
documents are not available, the facility must explain its policies to a
family member or friend of the resident or another individual who can
communicate the information to the resident.
25. On March 6, 2007, the Agency conducted a Biennial Relicensure Survey of the
Respondent facility:
25.1. Based on interview, the facility failed to ensure that a statement of the
facility's policy concerning Do Not Resuscitate Orders was included in the admission
package given to six (6) of six (6) sampled residents.
25.2. An interview with the administrator on 3/05/07 at about 11:05 AM,
revealed that the facility did not have.a statement in the admission package concerning
the facility's policy on Do Not Resuscitate Orders.
25.3. The Agency determined that the Respondent Facility’s failure to have
available for review an admission package containing the required materials was related
to the personal care of the residents that indirectly or potentially threatened the health,
safety, or security of the residents and cited Respondent for a State Class III deficiency.
25.4. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of
March 29, 2007.
26. The March 6, 2007, deficiency was corrected at the subsequent Agency survey of
April 19, 2007.
27. From March 13, 2008, through March 18, 2008, the Agency conducted a
Complaint Survey (CCR #2008002591) of the Respondent facility:
27.1. Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure that it
maintained for review an admission package with all required components to be
presented to new or prospective residents.
27.2. The administrator designee stated on 3/18/08 at approximately 10:30 AM
that an admission packet was not available for review by the Agency surveyor.
27.3. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of failing to have
available for review an admission package containing the required materials was related
to the personal care of the residents that indirectly or potentially threatened the health,
safety, or security of the residents, and cited Respondent for a State Class III deficiency.
27.4. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of
March 28, 2008.
28. On May 7, 2008, the Agency conducted a re-visit to the Complaint Survey (CCR
#2008002591) of the Respondent.
28.1. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to maintain for
review an admission package that included the facility's Do Not Resuscitate policy to be
presented to new and prospective residents.
28.2. Review of facility records on 5/7/08 at approximately 11:00 AM revealed
that the admission packet did not include a statement of the facility's policy concerning
Do Not Resuscitate Orders pursuant to Section 429.255, F.S.
28.3. The administrator stated on said date and time that she was not aware that
the Do Not Resuscitate policy needed to be in such detail.
28.4. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of failing to have
available for review an admission package containing the required materials was related
to the personal care of the resident that indirectly or potentially threatened the health,
safety, or security of the resident and cited Respondent for an uncorrected State Class III
deficiency.
28.5. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of
May 21, 2008.
29. On July 14, 2008, the Agency conducted a second re-visit to the Complaint
Survey (CCR #2008002591) of the Respondent.
2008.
29.1. Based on record review and interview the facility failed to provide
documentation in the admission package that included the facility's procedure to
responding to Do Not Resuscitate DNR orders.
29.2. Review of the facility's records on 7/14/08 revealed information regarding
Advance Healthcare Directives. The Respondent facility’s document explained what an
Advance Healthcare Directives was and what a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order was, but
did not state the facility's procedure regarding how the staff would handle the residents’
DNR orders.
29.3. Interview with a staff member on July 14, 2008, at around 11:45 AM
revealed that she did not know what she was suppose to do if a resident had a DNR order.
29.4.. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of failing to have
available for review an admission package containing the required materials was related
“to the personal care of the resident that indirectly or potentially threatened the health,
safety, or security of the resident and cited Respondent for a twice uncorrected State
Class III deficiency.
30. | The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of July 31,
31. The violation identified on March 18, 2008, being uncorrected on the May 7,
2008, survey and again on the July 14 survey, the July 14, 2008, violation constitutes a twice
“uncorrected” deficiency as defined by law.
32. The violation identified on March 6, 2007, being the same violation as identified
on the March 18, 2008, survey, the May 7, 2008, survey and again on the July 14, 2008, survey,
these violations constitute a demonstrated pattern of deficient performance as defined by law.
10
33.
Such a demonstrated pattern of deficient performance may mean that neither
residents nor Respondent facility’s staff members know how to implement a Do Not Resuscitate
Order, thus undermining the legislative policy in authorizing such orders. See § 401.45, Florida
Statutes (2007).
WHEREFORE, the Agency intends to impose an administrative fine in the amount of
$1,000.00 against Respondent, an assisted living facility in the State of Florida, pursuant to §
429.19(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2007), and intends to revoke the license of Respondent pursuant
to Section 408.815(1)(d), Florida Statutes (2007).
34.
COUNT III
The Agency re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through five (5) and
paragraph eight (8), as if fully set forth in this count.
35.
36.
Rule 58A-5.0182(8)(b), Florida Administrative Code, requires:
(b) Facility Resident Elopement Response Policies and Procedures. The
facility shall develop detailed written policies and procedures for responding
to a resident elopement. At a minimum, the policies and procedures shall
include:
1. An immediate staff search of the facility and premises;
2. The identification of staff responsible for implementing each part of the
elopement response policies and procedures, including specific duties and
responsibilities; .
3. The identification of staff responsible for contacting law enforcement, the
resident’s family, guardian, health care surrogate, and case manager if the
resident is not located pursuant to subparagraph (8)(b)1.; and
4. The continued care of all residents within the facility in the event of an
elopement.
From March 13, 2008, through March 18, 2008, the Agency conducted a
Complaint Survey (CCR #2008002591) of the Respondent facility:
36.1. Based on interview and review of the facility's elopement response policy,
the facility failed to create detailed written policies and procedures for responding to a
11
resident elopement.
36.2. Review of the facility's elopement response policy and procedures on
3/18/08 at approximately 11:45 AM revealed that the policy did not address:
1. An immediate staff search of the facility and premises;
2. The identification of staff responsible for implementing each
part of the elopement response policies and procedures,
including specific duties and responsibilities;
3. The identification of staff responsible for contacting law
enforcement, the resident's family, guardian, health care
surrogate, and case manager if the resident is not located; and
4. The continued care of all residents within the facility in the
event of an elopement.
36.3. On March 18, 2008, the administrator designee told the Agency surveyor
that no other documentation was available, that the administrator was out of town, and
that maybe the administrator had the Respondent facility’s elopement policy with her.
36.4. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of failing to have a
complete resident elopement policy was related to the personal care of the resident that
indirectly or potentially threatened the health, safety, or security of the resident and cited
Respondent for a State Class III deficiency.
36.5. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of
March 28, 2008.
37. On May 7, 2008, the Agency conducted a re-visit to the Complaint Survey (CCR
#2008002591) of the Respondent.
37.1. Based on interview and review of the facility's elopement response policy,
the facility failed to create detailed written policies and procedures for responding to a
resident elopement.
12
37.2. Review of the facility's elopement response policy and procedures on
5/7/08 at approximately 12:45 PM revealed that the document indicated that it was an
"elopement drill" and did not address:
1. An immediate staff search of the facility and premises;
2. The identification of staff responsible for implementing each
part of the elopement response policies and procedures, including
specific duties and responsibilities;
3. The identification of staff responsible for contacting law
enforcement, the resident's family, guardian, health care surrogate,
and case manager if the resident is not located; and
4. The continued care of all residents within the facility in the
event of an elopement.
37.3. On May 7, 2008, the administrator stated she did not realize that the policy
needed to be more detailed.
37.4. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of failing to have a
complete resident elopement policy was related to the personal care of the resident that
indirectly or potentially threatened the health, safety, or security of the resident and cited
Respondent for an uncorrected State Class III deficiency.
37.5. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of
May 21, 2008.
38. On July 14, 2008, the Agency conducted a second re-visit to the Complaint
Survey (CCR #2008002591) of the Respondent.
38.1. Based on interview and review of the facility's elopement response policy,
the facility failed to create detailed written policies and procedures for responding to a
resident elopement.
38.2. Review of the facility's elopement response policy and procedures on
7/14/08 at approximately 12:15 PM revealed the following as this Respondent’s
13
elopement policy and procedure:
Attention all staff, please read the elopement policy and procedures. The
purpose of this policy is to provide a safe and secure environment
identifying all residents who are a potential elopement risk. Elopement
occurs when a cognitively impaired resident leaves the property without
the staff knowledge. The procedure, identification and prevention.
1. Evaluate all residents on admission and every six months for
risk of elopement.
2. Obtain a current photograph or resident identification as an
elopement risk.
3. The residents photograph is attached to their demographic data
sheet and placed in their files.
4. Initiate individualized interventions to address risk of
elopement. Interventions may include, but not be limited to
environment modifications to prevent undetected exits (door
alarms, utilize locked doors with key pads).
-Structure activities schedules at times of increased elopement
risk.
-Increased frequency of resident location rounds,
-Diversion tactics.
-Redirection of elopement patterns.
-Utilization of safe wandering areas.
5. Communicate individualized intervention to the care giving
staff.
6. Evaluate and document effectiveness of intervention and
modifying interventions as needed.
7. Communicate elopement risk to the care giving staff upon hire
and conduct training and drills 2 times per year regarding
policy/procedure in recognizing and preventing elopement.
38.3. The Respondent’s elopement policy and procedure did not address:
1. An immediate staff search of the facility and premises;
2. The identification of staff responsible for implementing each
part of the elopement response policies and procedures,
including specific duties and responsibilities;
3. The identification of staff responsible for contacting law
enforcement, the resident's family, guardian, health care
surrogate, and case manager if the resident is not located; and
14
4. The continued care of all residents within the facility in the
event of an elopement.
38.4. When the Agency surveyor conducted a telephone interview on July 14,
2008, at about 10:45 AM with the administrator, the administrator stated that she was in
Georgia waiting on a flight to Orlando and would not make it to the facility. Further
interview revealed that she spoke with the staff person and informed her of the
whereabouts of the facility records.
38.5. The staff member searched the facility records and could not find a policy
and procedure that addressed the above required areas.
38.6. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of failing to have a
complete resident elopement policy was related to the personal care of the resident that
indirectly or potentially threatened the health, safety, or security of the resident and cited
Respondent for a twice uncorrected State Class III deficiency.
39. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of July 31,
2008.
40. The violation identified on March 18, 2008, being uncorrected on the May 7,
2008, survey and again on the July 14 survey, the July 14, 2008, violation constitutes a twice
“uncorrected” deficiency as defined by law.
41. The violation identified on March 18, 2008, being uncorrected on the May 7,
2008, survey and again on the July 14 survey, the July 14, 2008, violation constitutes a
demonstrated pattern of deficient performance as defined by law.
42. This demonstrated pattern or deficient performance makes unlikely a proper
response to elopement by Respondent’s staff thus potentially endangering the safety and security
of the Respondent facility’s residents.
15
WHEREFORE, the Agency intends to impose an administrative fine in the amount of
$1,000.00 against Respondent, an assisted living facility in the State of Florida, pursuant to §
429.19(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2007), and intends to revoke the license of Respondent pursuant
to Section 408.815(1)(d), Florida Statutes (2007).
COUNT IV
43. | The Agency re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through five (5), as if
fully set forth in this count.
44. — Rule 58A-5.023(1)(b), Florida Administrative Code, defines:
(b) The facility’s physical structure, including the interior and exterior walls,
floors, roof and ceilings shall be structurally sound and in good repair.
Peeling paint or wallpaper, missing ceiling or floor tiles, or torn carpeting
shall be repaired or replaced. Windows, doors, plumbing, and appliances
shall be functional and in good working order. All furniture and furnishings
shall be clean, functional, free-of-odors, and in good repair. Appliances may
be disabled for safety reasons provided they are functionally available when
needed.
45. | On March 6, 2007, the Agency conducted a Biennial Relicensure Survey of the
Respondent facility:
45.1. Based on interview, the facility failed to replace stained, bleached and
dirty rugs in the residents’ rooms.
45.2. During the initial tour on 3/06/07 at around 9:15 AM, the Agency
surveyor observed that the rugs were stained, bleached and dirty throughout the residents
rooms.
45.3. Interview with the Administrator on 3/06/07 at about 10:20 AM,
confirmed that the rugs needed to be replaced.
45.4. The Agency determined that the Respondent Facility’s failing to maintain
a clean facility was related to the personal care of the residents that indirectly or
16
’
potentially threatened the health, safety, or security of the residents and cited Respondent
for a State Class III deficiency.
45.5. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of
March 29, 2007.
46. | The March 6, 2007, deficiency was corrected at the subsequent Agency survey of
April 19, 2007.
47. From March 13, 2008, through March 18, 2008, the Agency conducted a
Complaint Survey (CCR #2008002591) of the Respondent facility:
2008.
47.1. Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to ensure that all
rugs and carpets were clean.
47.2. During the facility tour on 3/13/08 at approximately 9:45 AM, the Agency
surveyor observed that the carpet in the room of Residents #3 and #7 was very soiled:
dark color spots, stains covered the rug. The carpet in the room of Residents #6 and #7
had multiple stains or spots.
47.3. The administrator designee stated to the Agency Surveyor at
approximately 11 AM that they had discussed getting the carpets cleaned.
47.4. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of failing to maintain a
clean facility was related to the personal care of the resident that indirectly or potentially
threatened the health, safety, or security of the resident and cited Respondent for a State
Class III deficiency.
48. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of March 28,
17
49. On May 7, 2008, the Agency conducted a re-visit to the Complaint Survey (CCR
#2008002591) of the Respondent.
2008.
49.1. Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to ensure that all
tugs and carpets were clean.
49.2. During the facility tour on 5/7/08 at approximately 11:45 PM, the Agency
surveyor noted that the carpet in the room of Residents #3 and #7 was still very soiled
with dark colored spots, and stains covered the rug. The carpet in the room of Residents
#6 and #7 had multiple stains or spots. The carpet in the room of Residents #6 and #7
had multiple discolored areas.
49.3. The administrator told the Agency surveyor that a staff member had tried
to clean the carpet with a broom and bleach and discolored the carpet. She added that the
carpet had been professionally cleaned but they had not done a good job. She stated that
to replace the carpet would be very costly.
49.4. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of failing to maintain a
clean facility was related to the personal care of the resident that indirectly or potentially
threatened the health, safety, or security of the resident and cited Respondent for an
uncorrected State Class III deficiency.
50. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of May 21,
51. On July 14, 2008, the Agency conducted a second re-visit to the Complaint
Survey (CCR #2008002591) of the Respondent.
51.1. Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to ensure that all
rugs and carpets in the residents’ rooms were clean.
18
51.2. Observations by the Agency surveyor during the facility tour on 7/14/08 at
approximately 11 AM revealed the carpets in rooms #1 and #2 had multiple stains and _
spots and multiple discolored areas.
51.3. Interviews with the residents revealed that the carpets have been cleaned
but the stains and the discolored areas do not come off.
51.4. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of failing to maintain a
clean facility was related to the personal care of the resident that indirectly or potentially
threatened the health, safety, or security of the resident and cited Respondent for a twice
uncorrected State Class III deficiency.
52. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of July 31,
2008.
53. The violation identified on March 18, 2008, being uncorrected on the May 7,
2008, survey and again on the July 14 survey, the July 14, 2008, violation constitutes a twice
“uncorrected” deficiency as defined by law.
54. The violation identified on March 6, 2007, being the same violation as identified
on the March 18, 2008, survey, the May 7, 2008, survey and again on the July 14, 2008, survey,
these violations constitute a demonstrated pattern of deficient performance as defined by law.
55. Such a demonstrated pattern of deficient performance means that the Respondent
facility has repeatedly failed to meet the minimum standard for residents’ physical environment,
thus indirectly or potentially threatening the health, safety, or security of the residents.
WHEREFORE, the Agency intends to impose an administrative fine in the amount of
$1,000.00 against Respondent, an assisted living facility in the State of Florida, pursuant to §
429.19(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2007) and intends to revoke the license of Respondent pursuant to
19
Section 408.815(1)(d), Florida Statutes (2007).
56.
COUNT V
The Agency re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through five (5), as if
fully set forth in this count.
57. Rule 58A-5.019(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, requires:
(a) Newly hired staff shall have 30 days to submit a statement from a health
care provider, based on a examination conducted within the last six months,
that the person does not have any signs or symptoms of a communicable
disease including tuberculosis. Freedom from tuberculosis must be
documented on an annual basis. A person with a positive tuberculosis test
must submit a health care provider’s statement that the person does not
constitute a risk of communicating tuberculosis. Newly hired staff does not
include an employee transferring from one facility to another that is under the
same management or ownership, without a break in service. If any staff
member is later found to have, or is suspected of having, a communicable
disease, he/she shall be removed from duties until the administrator
determines that such condition no longer exists.:
58. Rule 58A-5.024(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, requires:
(2) STAFF RECORDS.
(a) Personnel records for each staff member shail contain, at a minimum, a copy
of the original employment application with references furnished and verification
of freedom from communicable disease including tuberculosis.
59. Rule 58A-5.024(4)(a), Florida Administrative Code, requires:
(4) RECORD INSPECTION.
(a) All records required by this rule chapter shall be available for inspection at all
times by staff of the agency, the department, the district long-term care
ombudsman council, and the advocacy center for persons with disabilities.
60. On March 6, 2007, the Agency conducted a Biennial Relicensure Survey of the
Respondent facility:
60.1. Based on personnel record review and interview, the facility failed to
ensure that freedom from Tuberculosis (TB) was documented on an annual basis for two
20
(2) of three (3) of Respondent’s staff members whose records were reviewed by the
Agency surveyor.
60.2. Personnel record review on 3/06/07 at approximately 12:30 PM, revealed
that both staff #1 and #3 had a TB test dated 8/05.
60.3. Continued review indicated that staff members #1 and #3 had no
documentation to confirm that a TB test was performed within the 365 days prior to the
date of the Agency survey and no documentation to confirm freedom from Tuberculosis.
60.4. Interview with the Administrator (staff #1) on March 6, 2007, at around
1:05 PM, revealed that she had a TB test for 2006 and would call her physician to obtain
a copy. Further interview revealed that since she had recently moved, some of the
documentation was at her home. The administrator told that Agency surveyor that she
knew staff member #3 had a current TB test.
60.5. The Agency determined that the Respondent Facility’s failure to obtain
annual documentation of freedom from tuberculosis was related to the personal care of
the residents that indirectly or potentially threatened the health, safety, or security of the
residents and cited Respondent for a State Class III deficiency.
60.6. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of
March 29, 2007.
61. The March 6, 2007, deficiency was corrected at the subsequent Agency survey of
April 19, 2007.
62. From March 13, 2008, through March 18, 2008, the Agency conducted a
Complaint Survey (CCR #2008002591) of the Respondent facility:
21
2008.
62.1. Based on personnel record review and interview, the facility failed to
ensure that one (1) of three (3) staff whose records were reviewed, “Staff #2,” had
obtained a physician’s statement that annually documented freedom from tuberculosis
(TB).
62.2. Personnel record review on 3/18/08 at approximately 2:45 PM for Staff
#2, hired in August 2005, revealed that the staff member had no annual documentation of
freedom from TB.
62.3. The administrator designee told the Agency surveyor that no other
documentation was available, that the administrator was out of town, and that maybe the
administrator had additional documents with her.
62.4. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of failure to obtain
annual documentation of freedom from tuberculosis was related to the personal care of
the resident that indirectly or potentially threatened the health, safety, or security of the
resident and cited Respondent for a State Class III deficiency.
63. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of March 28,
64. On May 7, 2008, the Agency conducted a re-visit to the Complaint Survey (CCR
#2008002591) of the Respondent.
64.1. Based on personnel record review and interview, the facility failed to
ensure that two (2) of three (3) staff whose records were reviewed, Staff #1 and Staff #2,
obtained a healthcare provider's statement that annually documented freedom from
tuberculosis (TB).
22
2008.
64.2. Individual personnel record review on 5/7/08 at approximately 1:45 PM
revealed that:
a. Staff #1, the owner/administrator last had a TB test dated
4/10/07.
b. Staff #2, hired in August 2005, last had a freedom from
communicable diseases statement including TB dated 4/19/07.
64.3. Continued review revealed that neither Staff #1 nor Staff #2 had received
a test within one year of the date of the survey showing freedom from TB.
64.4. The administrator stated that Staff #2 and she were scheduled for a TB test
on 5/8/09.
64.5. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of failure to obtain
annual documentation of freedom from tuberculosis was related to the personal care of
the resident that indirectly or potentially threatened the health, safety, or security of the
resident and cited Respondent for an uncorrected State Class III deficiency.
65. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of May 21,
66. On July 14, 2008, the Agency conducted a second re-visit to the Complaint
Survey (CCR #2008002591) of the Respondent.
66.1. Based on personnel record review and interview, the facility failed to
ensure that two (2) of three (3) of Respondent’s staff whose records were reviewed, Staff
#2 and Staff #3, had obtained a healthcare provider's statement that documented freedom
from tuberculosis (TB) on a yearly basis, every 365 days.
66.2. Individual personnel record review on 7/14/08 at approximately 1 PM
revealed that:
23
a. Staff #2, hired in August 2005, had a freedom from
communicable diseases statement including TB dated 4/19/07.
b. Staff #3, the owner/administrator had a TB test dated 4/16/07.
66.3. Continued review revealed that neither had submitted annual
documentation of freedom from TB.
66.4. A staff member present at the time of the revisit searched the files at about
1:30 PM and could not find other paperwork to document that a TB test for 2008 was
completed on the above staff.
66.5. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of failure to obtain
annual documentation of freedom from tuberculosis was related to the personal care of
the resident that indirectly or potentially threatened the health, safety, or security of the
resident and cited Respondent for a twice uncorrected State Class III deficiency.
67. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of July 31,
2008.
68. The violation identified on March 18, 2008, being uncorrected on the May 7,
2008, survey and again on the July 14 survey, the July 14, 2008, violation constitutes a twice
“uncorrected” deficiency as defined by law.
69. The violation identified on March 6, 2007, being the same violation as identified
on the March 18, 2008, survey, the May 7, 2008, survey and again on the July 14, 2008, survey,
these violations constitute a demonstrated pattern of deficient performance as defined by law.
70. Such a demonstrated pattern of deficient performance means that the Respondent
facility has repeatedly made it impossible for Agency surveyors to determine if any staff member
has Tuberculosis, a potentially deadly disease for frail or elderly residents of Respondent facility,
thus threatening the health, safety, or security of the residents.
24
WHEREFORE, the Agency intends to impose an administrative fine in the amount of
$1,000.00 against Respondent, an assisted living facility in the State of Florida, pursuant to §
429.19(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2007) and intends to revoke the license of Respondent pursuant to
Section 408.815(1)(d), Florida Statutes (2007).
COUNT VI
71. The Agency re-alleges and incorporates the above paragraphs one (1) through five
(5), as if fully recited in this count.
72. Rule 58A-5.0191(5), Florida Administrative Code, requires:
(5) ASSISTANCE WITH SELF-ADMINISTERED MEDICATION AND
MEDICATION MANAGEMENT. Unlicensed persons who will be providing
assistance with self-administered medications as described in Rule 58A-5.0185,
F.A.C., must receive a minimum of four (4) hours of training prior to assuming
this responsibility. Courses provided in fulfillment of this requirement must meet
the following criteria:
(c) Unlicensed persons, as defined in Section 429.256(1)(b), F.S., who provide
assistance with self-administered medications and have successfully completed
the initial four (4) hour training, must obtain, annually, a minimum of two (2)
hours of continuing education training on providing assistance with self-
administered medications and safe medication practices in an assisted living
facility. The two (2) hours of continuing education training shall only be provided
by a licensed registered nurse, or a licensed pharmacist.
73. Section 429.256(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2007), defines:
(b) "Unlicensed person" means an individual not currently licensed to practice
nursing or medicine who is employed by or under contract to an assisted living
facility and who has received training with respect to assisting with the self-
administration of medication in an assisted living facility as provided under s.
429.52 prior to providing such assistance as described in this section.
74. Rule 58A-5.024(2)(a)1., Florida Administrative Code specifies a licensed
facility’s record keeping requirements:
(2) STAFF RECORDS.
(a) Personnel records for each staff member shall contain, at a
minimum, a copy of the original employment application with references
25
furnished and verification of freedom from communicable disease
including tuberculosis. In addition, records shall contain the following, as
applicable:
1. Documentation of compliance with all staff training required by
Rule 58A-5.0191, F.A.C.
75. On March 6, 2007, the Agency conducted a Biennial Relicensure Survey of the
Respondent facility:
75.1. Based on personnel record review and interview, the Agency surveyor
determined that the facility failed to ensure that any of the three sampled unlicensed staff
who provided assistance to facility residents with self-administered medications, “Staff
#1, #2, and #3,” had annually obtained a minimum of 2 hours of continuing education
training on providing assistance with self-administered medications and safe medication
practices in an assisted living facility.
75.2. Staff #1, #2, and #3 are “unlicensed persons” for purposes of §
429.256(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2007).
75.3. Personnel record review by the Agency surveyor on 3/06/07 at 12:30 PM
revealed that Staff #1, #2 and #3 were unlicensed persons who provided assistance to
Respondent Facility’s residents with self-administration of medication and had completed
the initial 4 hour of training in assisting with resident medications:
Staff #1 completed the initial training on 7/12/05.
Staff #2 completed the initial training on 2/13/06.
Staff #3 completed the initial training on 7/12/05.
75.4. However, there was no documentation in Respondent Facility’s records to
indicate that any of Staff #1, #2, or #3 had subsequently received 2 hours of required
annual continuing education on providing assistance with self-administered medications
and safe medication practices in an assisted living facility, since the date of their initial
26
2007.
training.
75.5. In an interview with the Respondent Facility’s administrator on March 6,
2007, at about 2:00 PM, the administrator confirmed to the Agency surveyor that the
three staff members had not received the required annual 2 hours of continuing education.
75.6. The Agency determined that the Respondent Facility’s failure to ensure
that unlicensed staff who provided assistance with self-administered medications
obtained annually a minimum of 2 hours of continuing education training on providing
assistance with self-administered medications was related to the personal care of the
residents that indirectly or potentially threatened the health, safety, or security of the
residents and cited Respondent for a State Class III deficiency.
76. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of March 29,
77. On April 19, 2007, the Agency conducted a re-visit to the Biennial Relicensure
Survey of the Respondent:
77.1. Based on personnel record review and interview the facility, the Agency
surveyor determined that the Respondent Facility still failed to ensure that any of the
three staff members, “Staff #1, #2 and #3,” who provided assistance to residents with
self-administered medications had obtained, annually, a minimum of 2 hours of
continuing education training on providing assistance with self-administered medications
and safe medication practices in an assisted living facility.
77.2. Personnel record review on 4/19/07 at 12 PM revealed Staff #1, #2 and #3
were the same unlicensed persons whose records were reviewed on March 6, 2007, who
provided assistance to residents with self-administration of medication, and who had
27
completed the initial 4 hour of training in assisting with resident medications.
77.3. Records provided to the Agency surveyor for review showed no
documentation to indicate that any of the three staff members had received 2 hours of
continuing education since the date of their initial training.
77.4. In an interview with the Respondent Facility’s administrator on April 19,
2007, the administrator confirmed to the Agency surveyor that the staff members had not
received the required annual 2 hours of continuing education. The administrator told the
surveyor that she did not know where she could find a person qualified to do the training.
77.5. The Agency determined that during the March 6, 2007, survey and again
during the April 19, 2007, survey the Agency had identified Respondent Facility’s
deficient practice of failure to ensure that unlicensed staff who provided assistance with
self-administered medications obtained annually, a minimum of 2 hours of continuing
education training on providing assistance with self-administered medications. Hence,
this deficient practice is an uncorrected deficiency for purposes of § 429.19(2)(c), Florida
Statutes.
77.6. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of Respondent
Facility’s failure to ensure that unlicensed staff who provided assistance with self-
administered medications obtained annually, a minimum of 2 hours of continuing
education training on providing assistance with self-administered medications was related
to the personal care of the resident that indirectly or potentially threatened the health,
safety, or security of the resident and cited Respondent for an uncorrected State Class III
deficiency.
28
78. The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of May 3,
2007.
79. On May 18, 2007, the Agency conducted a second revisit to the Biennial
Relicensure Survey of the Respondent facility:
79.1. Based on personnel record review and interview the facility failed to
ensure that any of the three sampled unlicensed staff who provided assistance to residents
with self-administered medications had successfully completed their required annual
minimum of 2 hours of continuing education training on providing assistance with self-
administered medications and safe medication practices in an assisted living facility.
79.2. During the revisit to the biennial relicensure survey, personnel record
review on 5/18/07 at 3:15 PM revealed to the Agency surveyor that the same staff |
members -- Staff #1, #2 and #3 -- were providing assistance to residents with self- |
administration of medication as had provided such assistance at the prior Agency surveys
of March 6, 2007, and April 19, 2007.
79.3. The Agency surveyor was provided by the Respondent Facility with no
documentation to indicate that any of the three staff members received the required
annual 2 hours of continuing education since the date of their initial training.
79.4. The Agency surveyor conducted a telephone interview with the
administrator, who was out of town on May 18, 2007. At that time the Respondent’s
administrator told the Agency surveyor that each of the staff members assisting residents
with self-administration had obtained the required 2 hours of continuing education, and
that she would tell the caregiver in charge of the facility where to locate the
documentation.
29
2007.
79.5. Following the conversation between the caregiver in charge of the facility
and the administrator, the caregiver in charge told the Agency surveyor that she had
searched the personnel records for the documentation and could not locate it. The
caregiver attempted to reach the administrator again and was not able to reach the
administrator.
79.6. Again, on May 18, 2007, no documentation was available for review by
the Agency surveyor to demonstrate that any of the staff members assisting residents with
self-administration had obtained the required annual 2 hours of continuing education.
79.7. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of Respondent
Facility’s failure to ensure that unlicensed staff who provided assistance with self-
administered medications obtained, annually, a minimum of 2 hours of continuing
education training on providing assistance with self-administered medications was related
to the personal care of the residents that indirectly or potentially threatened the health,
safety, or security of the residents and cited Respondent for a twice uncorrected State
Class III deficiency.
80. | The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of June 2,
81. _A final order of the Agency was entered against Respondent on June 17, 2008, in
Agency case numbers 2008003770 and 2008003634 (the “Final Order”).
82. No notice of appeal or petition for review has been filed with regard to the Final
Order, as of the date of this Administrative Complaint.
83. Asa matter of law, the Final Order finds that the allegations set forth in
paragraphs 75 through 80 of this administrative complaint are admitted, and that the Respondent
30
facility has waived its right to challenge the allegations. The allegations of paragraph 75 through
80 are the allegations found in the Administrative Complaint on which the Final Order in cases
2008003770 and 2008003634 is based. The parties are the same parties as in the instant
litigation. The violations alleged in paragraphs 75 through 80 are identical to the allegations
found in the Administrative Complaint on which the Final Order in cases 2008003770 and
2008003634 is based. |
84. | From March 13, 2008, through March 18, 2008, the Agency conducted a
Complaint Survey (CCR #2008002591) of the Respondent facility:
84.1. Based on record review and interview, the Respondent facility failed to
ensure that one (1) of three (3) unlicensed staff, Staff #3, who regularly provided
assistance with residents’ medications had successfully completed their required annual
minimum of 2 hours of continuing education training on providing assistance with self-
administered medications and safe medication practices in an assisted living facility.
84.2. Staff #3 told the Agency surveyor on 3/13/08 at approximately 2 PM
stated that s/he was not a nurse, and that s/he assisted residents with their medications.
84.3. Personnel record review on 3/18/08 at approximately 2:45 PM revealed
that Staff #3 was not a licensed healthcare professional and therefore not exempt from
annual medication training.
84.4. A certificate provided to the Agency surveyor for review indicated
attendance at a 4 hour class on providing assistance with self-administration of
medication dated 7/12/05. No evidence was available to confirm attendance at a 2 hour
class on providing assistance with self-administered medications and safe medication
practices in an ALF for the years 2006, 2007 or 2008.
31
84.5. On March 18, 2008, the administrator designee told the Agency surveyor
that no other documentation was available, that the administrator was out of town, and
that maybe the administrator had the needed documentation with him/her.
84.6. The Agency determined that this deficient practice of Respondent
Facility’s failure to ensure that unlicensed staff who provided assistance with self-
administered medications obtained, annually, a minimum of 2 hours of continuing
education training on providing assistance with self-administered medications related to
the operation and maintenance of a facility or to the personal care of residents which
directly threatened the physical or emotional health, safety, or security of the facility
residents, other than class I violations, for a State Class II deficiency.
85. | The Agency provided Respondent with a mandatory correction date of 3/19/08.
86. The violation identified on March 6, 2007, being the same violation as identified
on the April 19, 2007, survey, the May 18, 2007, survey and again on the March 18, 2008,
survey, these violations constitute a demonstrated pattern of deficient performance as defined by
law.
87. Such a demonstrated pattern of deficient performance means that the Respondent
facility has repeatedly made it impossible for Agency surveyors to determine if all caregiver staff
members been adequately trained in assistance with residents’ self-administration of medication
-- including the facility’s duty to assist the residents in obtaining medication, how to record self-
administration or refusal, and how to recognized when to notify the physician of the effects of
medication -- potentially threatening the health, safety, or security of the residents.
WHEREFORE, the Agency intends to revoke the license of Respondent pursuant to
Section 408.815(1)(d), Florida Statutes (2007).
32
COUNT VII
88. The Agency re-alleges and incorporates the above paragraphs one (1) through five
(5), as if fully recited in this count.
89. Section 408.831(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2007), states:
(1) In addition to any other remedies provided by law, the agency may deny each
application or suspend or revoke each license, registration, or certificate of
entities regulated or licensed by it:
(a) If the applicant, licensee, or a licensee subject to this part which shares a
common controlling interest with the applicant has failed to pay all outstanding
fines, liens, or overpayments assessed by final order of the agency or final order
of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, not subject to further appeal, .
90. Section 120.68, Florida Statutes (2007), states:
(1) A party who is adversely affected by final agency action is entitled to judicial
review. A preliminary, procedural, or intermediate order of the agency or of an
administrative law judge of the Division of Administrative Hearings is
immediately reviewable if review of the final agency decision would not provide
an adequate remedy.
(2)(a) Judicial review shall be sought in the appellate district where the agency
maintains its headquarters or where a party resides or as otherwise provided by
law. All proceedings shall be instituted by filing a notice of appeal or petition for
review in accordance with the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure within 30
days after the rendition of the order being appealed.
91. A final order of the Agency was entered against Respondent on June 17, 2008,
imposing a fine of three thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars ($3,750.00) in Agency case
numbers 2008003770 and 2008003634 (the “Final Order”).
92. No notice of appeal or petition for review has been filed with regard to the Final
Order, as of the date of this Administrative Complaint.
93. The fine imposed by the Final Order remains not paid and outstanding as of the
date of this Administrative Complaint, and there is no repayment plan between the Agency and
Respondent as to such fine.
33
WHEREFORE, the Agency intends to revoke the license of the Respondent to operate an
assisted living facility in the State of Florida, pursuant to § 429.831(1)(a), Florida Statutes
(2007).
Fla. Bar. No. 817775
Assistant General Counsel
Agency for Health Care Administration
525 Mirror Lake Drive, 330H
St. Petersburg, FL 33701
727-552-1435
Facsimile: 727-552-1440
Respondent is notified that it has a right to request an administrative hearing pursuant to Section
120.569, Florida Statutes. Respondent has the right to retain, and be represented by an attorney
in this matter. Specific options for administrative action are set out in the attached Election of
Rights.
All requests for hearing shall be made to the Agency for Health Care Administration, and
delivered to Agency Clerk, Agency for Health Care Administration, 2727 Mahan Drive, Bldg
4#3,MS #3, Tallahassee, FL 32308;Telephone (850) 922-5873.
RESPONDENT IS FURTHER NOTIFIED THAT THE FAILURE TO REQUEST A HEARING
WITHIN 21 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THIS COMPLAINT WILL RESULT IN AN
ADMISSION OF THE FACTS ALLEGED IN THE COMPLAINT AND THE ENTRY OF A
FINAL ORDER BY THE AGENCY.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been served by
U.S. Certified Mail, Return Receipt No. 7007 1490 0001 6908 7452 on July 22 2008 to Cindi
Thompson, Owner/Administrator, Kendall Place, 6506 Tebbetts Drive, Orlando, FL 32818, and
by regular U.S. Mail to her attorneys, John F. Gilroy, III, P.A., 1695 Metropolitan Circle, Suite
2, Tallahassee, Florida 32308-8722.
es H. Harris
sistant General Counsel
34
Copies furnished to:
Cindi Thompson
Owner/Administrator
Kendall Place
6506 Tebbetts Drive
Orlando, Florida 32818
(U.S. Certified Mail)
Doris Spivey and Joel Libby
Agency for Health Care Admin.
Hurston South Tower
400 W. Robinson St., Suite $309
Orlando, FL 32801
(U.S. Mail)
James H. Harris, Esq.
Agency for Health Care Admin.
525 Mirror Lake Drive, 330H
St. Petersburg, Florida 33701
(Interoffice)
John F. Gilroy, III, P.A.
1695 Metropolitan Circle
Suite 2
Tallahassee, Florida 32308-8722
(U.S. Mail)
35
Docket for Case No: 08-004889
Issue Date |
Proceedings |
Mar. 23, 2009 |
Order Closing Files. CASE CLOSED.
|
Mar. 23, 2009 |
Joint Motion to Relinquish Jurisdiction filed.
|
Mar. 16, 2009 |
Notice of Hearing (hearing set for May 26, 27 and 29, 2009; 9:00 a.m.; Orlando, FL).
|
Mar. 16, 2009 |
Joint Response to Order Denying Motion to Continue filed.
|
Mar. 06, 2009 |
Order Denying Motion to Continue.
|
Mar. 04, 2009 |
Agreed Motion to Continue Final Hearing filed.
|
Dec. 08, 2008 |
Order Canceling Hearing and Placing Case in Abeyance (parties to advise status by March 4, 2009).
|
Dec. 04, 2008 |
Second Request for Admissions filed.
|
Dec. 03, 2008 |
Agreed Motion to Continue Final Hearing filed.
|
Oct. 10, 2008 |
Amended Notice of Hearing (hearing set for January 14 through 16, 2009; 9:00 a.m.; Orlando, FL; amended as to addition of consolidated cases).
|
Oct. 08, 2008 |
Order of Consolidation (DOAH Case Nos. 08-4888, 08-4889 and 08-4890).
|
Oct. 07, 2008 |
Notice of Transfer.
|
Oct. 07, 2008 |
Joint Response to Initial Order filed.
|
Oct. 06, 2008 |
Motion to Consolidate filed.
|
Oct. 03, 2008 |
Request for Official Recognition, 120.569(2) (i), Fla. Stat. filed.
|
Oct. 02, 2008 |
Notice of Transfer.
|
Oct. 01, 2008 |
Initial Order.
|
Sep. 30, 2008 |
Administrative Complaint filed.
|
Sep. 30, 2008 |
Petition for Formal Administrative Hearing Proceeding filed.
|
Sep. 30, 2008 |
Amended Petition for Formal Administrative Hearing Proceeding filed.
|
Sep. 30, 2008 |
Notice (of Agency referral) filed.
|