A Critical Examination of State Agency Investigations into ...

A Critical Examination of State Agency Investigations into ... A Critical Examination of State Agency Investigations into ...

ig.state.ny.us
from ig.state.ny.us More from this publisher
12.07.2015 Views

SURVEY BY THE OMRDD CENTRAL OFFICEAs discussed in this report’s introduction, the New York State Office of MentalRetardation and Developmental Disabilities (OMRDD) is responsible for certificationand oversight of privately-owned facilities that provide services for individuals withdevelopmental disabilities. In response to the allegations of abuse of Jonathan Carey,OMRDD Central Office conducted a survey in which it examined regulatory complianceat the Anderson School. Although the survey was initiated in response to the specificallegation, it was intended to be broader than the Taconic regional office’s investigation,which was discussed in the previous section. The Central Office’s survey team reviewedthe care of other children, as well as Jonathan’s care, as part of its examination. Thefocus of the survey, according to OMRDD officials, was to assess school-widcompliance concerning issues raised by the Careys’ complaint. Violations noted in theregulatorysurvey were communicated to the Anderson School in a Statement of Deficiencies. Asrequired by OMRDD policy, the Anderson School responded to the Statement ofDeficiencies with a plan to correct each violation.In its survey, OMRDD correctly identified serious problems at the AndersonSchool, with particular focus on its use of techniques like planned ignoring in its behaviorplans and the lack of training among the staff. However, the Inspector General notessome oversights in its review methodology. In addition, the Inspector General identifiedregulatory violations involving Jonathan’s care that were not addressed in the Statementof Deficiencies. OMRDD Central Office accepted a Plan of Corrective Action from theAnderson School that made statements contradicting the findings of the survey.118

Policies and Procedures Related to OMRDD SurveysAccording to a manual provided by OMRDD to service providers to acquaintthem with the survey process, OMRDD’s Division of Quality Assurance conductssurveys to “determine if programs and services are operating in compliance with NewYork State regulations and OMRDD policy.” The manual describes the general activitiesinvolved in a survey:Surveys include some observation centered on at least one mealtimeroutine, if applicable. Interviews are conducted with consumers, and/orfamilies and advocates. Consumers, families and advocates may choosewhether they want to participate in the survey process. Record reviewsare completed for a sample of consumers. Most surveys include reviewsof the principle areas of service delivery and program operation, forexample: environmental/physical plant; medication administration;infection control; personal allowance; rights; informed consent; incidentreporting; program planning.A survey is conducted annually of each facility. However, as occurred in thiscase, the Division of Quality Assurance may make additional visits at its discretion, andmay do so upon learning of a complaint against a facility.If the survey discovers significant violations, OMRDD will issue a Statement ofDeficiencies, and the facility must respond with a Plan of Corrective Action. OMRDDmay require an immediate corrective action for a dangerous situation. The provider mustrespond within specified time periods, depending on the nature of the finding. A surveymay be conducted at any time, and is unannounced, when possible.Survey Activities of the OMRDD Central OfficeOMRDD Central Office’s three visits to the Anderson School and the interviewsit conducted were generally sufficient for the purposes of the survey. However,119

SURVEY BY THE OMRDD CENTRAL OFFICEAs discussed in this report’s introduction, the New York <strong>State</strong> Office <strong>of</strong> MentalRetardation and Developmental Disabilities (OMRDD) is responsible for certificationand oversight <strong>of</strong> privately-owned facilities that provide services for individuals withdevelopmental disabilities. In response to the allegations <strong>of</strong> abuse <strong>of</strong> Jonathan Carey,OMRDD Central Office conducted a survey in which it examined regulatory complianceat the Anderson School. Although the survey was initiated in response to the specificallegation, it was intended to be broader than the Taconic regional <strong>of</strong>fice’s investigation,which was discussed in the previous section. The Central Office’s survey team reviewedthe care <strong>of</strong> other children, as well as Jonathan’s care, as part <strong>of</strong> its examination. Thefocus <strong>of</strong> the survey, according to OMRDD <strong>of</strong>ficials, was to assess school-widcompliance concerning issues raised by the Careys’ complaint. Violations noted in theregulatorysurvey were communicated to the Anderson School in a <strong>State</strong>ment <strong>of</strong> Deficiencies. Asrequired by OMRDD policy, the Anderson School responded to the <strong>State</strong>ment <strong>of</strong>Deficiencies with a plan to correct each violation.In its survey, OMRDD correctly identified serious problems at the AndersonSchool, with particular focus on its use <strong>of</strong> techniques like planned ignoring in its behaviorplans and the lack <strong>of</strong> training among the staff. However, the Inspector General notessome oversights in its review methodology. In addition, the Inspector General identifiedregulatory violations involving Jonathan’s care that were not addressed in the <strong>State</strong>ment<strong>of</strong> Deficiencies. OMRDD Central Office accepted a Plan <strong>of</strong> Corrective Action from theAnderson School that made statements contradicting the findings <strong>of</strong> the survey.118

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!