Jones Harrison Assisted Living

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “(a) Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and: (1) for dwellings or sleeping units, as defined in the State Fire Code: (i) provide smoke alarms in each room used for sleeping purposes; (ii) [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “(5) a description of the facility's policies related to medical assistance waivers under chapter 256S and section 256B.49 and the housing support program under chapter 256I, including: (i) whether the facility is enrolled with the commissioner of human [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “(a) Before or at the time of execution of an assisted living contract, an assisted living facility must offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing in the contract and must provide the following verbatim notice on a [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “(a) A facility may remove a resident from the facility in an emergency if necessary due to a resident's urgent medical needs or an imminent risk the resident poses to the health or safety of another facility resident or facility staff member. [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “(a) Employees, contractors, and regularly scheduled volunteers of the facility are subject to the background study required by section 144.057 and may be disqualified under chapter 245C. [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “All staff providing and supervising direct services must complete an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing assisted living services to residents. [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “There must be a current written or electronically recorded prescription as defined in section 151.01, subdivision 16a, for all prescribed medications that the assisted living facility is managing for the resident.”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “An assisted living facility must store all prescription medications in securely locked and substantially constructed compartments according to the manufacturer's directions and permit only authorized personnel to have access.”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “There must be an up-to-date written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber for all treatments and therapies. [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care that has a secured dementia care unit must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk must be performed on and around [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “(a) In addition to the policies and procedures required in the licensing of all facilities, the assisted living facility with dementia care licensee must develop and implement policies and procedures that address the: (1) philosophy of how services are [...]”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medical or nursing standards for five of eight residents (R3, R4, R6, R10, R11) who utilized consumer bed rails.

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medical or nursing standards for five of eight residents (R3, R4, R6, R10, R11) who utilized consumer bed rails. This resulted in reissuance of the correction order previously issued on April 24, 2023, at approximately 5:15 p.m. [...]”

Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”

MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”

Rule cited: “(a) A mandated reporter who has reason to believe that a vulnerable adult is being or has been maltreated, or who has knowledge that a vulnerable adult has sustained a physical injury which is not reasonably explained shall immediately report the information [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review the licensee failed to have completed an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) with identified vulnerabilities and interventions for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, R4). [...]”

Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms in all sleeping rooms and failed to provide smoke alarms outside and in the immediate vicinity of all sleeping.

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms in all sleeping rooms and failed to provide smoke alarms outside and in the immediate vicinity of all sleeping. This deficient condition had the ability to affect all staff and residents. [...]”

Rule cited: “(a) Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and: (1) for dwellings or sleeping units, as defined in the State Fire Code: (i) provide smoke alarms in each room used for sleeping purposes; (ii) [...]”

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and maintain a fire safety and evacuation plan that shows the number and location of resident rooms, failed to develop a fire protection procedure necessary for residents and procedures necessary for resident movement, evacuation, or relocation during a fire or similar emergency with identification of unique or unusual resident needs for the movement or evacuation. [...]”

Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to execute a written assisted living contract with all required content for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, R4).

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to execute a written assisted living contract with all required content for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, R4). [...]”

Rule cited: “(5) a description of the facility's policies related to medical assistance waivers under chapter 256S and section 256B.49 and the housing support program under chapter 256I, including: (i) whether the facility is enrolled with the commissioner of human [...]”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to execute a written assisted living contract with all required content for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, R4).

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to execute a written assisted living contract with all required content for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, R4). [...]”

Rule cited: “(a) Before or at the time of execution of an assisted living contract, an assisted living facility must offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing in the contract and must provide the following verbatim notice on a [...]”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living contract did not include language waiving the licensee's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident.

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living contract did not include language waiving the licensee's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident. This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”

Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation to the resident, legal representative, or designated representative and failed to provide the notification to the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care of the emergency relocation greater than four days for one of one resident (R7).

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation to the resident, legal representative, or designated representative and failed to provide the notification to the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care of the emergency relocation greater than four days for one of one resident (R7). [...]”

Rule cited: “(a) A facility may remove a resident from the facility in an emergency if necessary due to a resident's urgent medical needs or an imminent risk the resident poses to the health or safety of another facility resident or facility staff member. [...]”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a background study was submitted and cleared in affiliation with the licensee's HFID number (facility identification number) for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B, registered nurse (RN)-F).

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a background study was submitted and cleared in affiliation with the licensee's HFID number (facility identification number) for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B, registered nurse (RN)-F). [...]”

Rule cited: “(a) Employees, contractors, and regularly scheduled volunteers of the facility are subject to the background study required by section 144.057 and may be disqualified under chapter 245C. [...]”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure staff providing services completed an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations prior to providing services for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C, registered nurse (RN)-F).

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure staff providing services completed an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations prior to providing services for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C, registered nurse (RN)-F). [...]”

Rule cited: “All staff providing and supervising direct services must complete an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing assisted living services to residents. [...]”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted assessments within 14-days following a residents admission date and ongoing nursing assessments not to exceed every 90-days thereafter for three of four residents (R1, R3, R4).

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted assessments within 14-days following a residents admission date and ongoing nursing assessments not to exceed every 90-days thereafter for three of four residents (R1, R3, R4). [...]”

Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for one of four residents (R1).

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for one of four residents (R1). This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and was issued at an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are affected [...]”

Rule cited: “There must be a current written or electronically recorded prescription as defined in section 151.01, subdivision 16a, for all prescribed medications that the assisted living facility is managing for the resident.”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure prescription medications were securely locked in a substantially constructed compartment and permitted only authorized personnel to have access for one of seven memory care residents.

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure prescription medications were securely locked in a substantially constructed compartment and permitted only authorized personnel to have access for one of seven memory care residents. [...]”

Rule cited: “An assisted living facility must store all prescription medications in securely locked and substantially constructed compartments according to the manufacturer's directions and permit only authorized personnel to have access.”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure up-to-date written or electronically recorded treatment orders were maintained for one of two residents (R1).

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure up-to-date written or electronically recorded treatment orders were maintained for one of two residents (R1). [...]”

Rule cited: “There must be an up-to-date written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber for all treatments and therapies. [...]”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk assessment of the physical environment on and around the property for the facility.

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to provide hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk assessment of the physical environment on and around the property for the facility. This deficient practice had the ability to affect all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”

Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care that has a secured dementia care unit must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk must be performed on and around [...]”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure policies and procedures for assisted living with dementia care (ALFDC) were provided to residents and the residents' legal and designated representatives at the time of move in for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, R4).

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure policies and procedures for assisted living with dementia care (ALFDC) were provided to residents and the residents' legal and designated representatives at the time of move in for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, R4). [...]”

Rule cited: “(a) In addition to the policies and procedures required in the licensing of all facilities, the assisted living facility with dementia care licensee must develop and implement policies and procedures that address the: (1) philosophy of how services are [...]”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care,

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medical or nursing standards for two of two residents (R3, R4) who utilized consumer bed rails. This resulted in issuance of an immediate correction order on April 24, 2023, at approximately 5:15 p.m. [...]”

Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”

Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to immediately report an incident of suspected maltreatment to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) for one of five residents (R7).

MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to immediately report an incident of suspected maltreatment to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) for one of five residents (R7). [...]”

Rule cited: “(a) A mandated reporter who has reason to believe that a vulnerable adult is being or has been maltreated, or who has knowledge that a vulnerable adult has sustained a physical injury which is not reasonably explained shall immediately report the information [...]”