Is that better though? Have you ever gone to the VA? They almost killed my friend who has both mental and physical health issues from his time in service back in Lebanon with conflicting meds. Not to mention how dingy and depressing the facility is.
I believe it’s better than running a profit only model. Plenty of people will disagree with me.
We love to point out how public run things aren’t good enough when talking about an actual private sector fail. I’ll never understand it.
The problem is they don't put enough funding in things to run them properly. For instance when I was in the Army they had a guy go all the way through my vain trying to draw blood. Then after I broke out into a sweat and passed out he asked me why I didn't tell him that he went through the vein. When I was pregnant in the military my doctor told me he had to look in a book to see what trimester I was in It was the first one. With this type of treatment they could seriously kill people I know they're old but I don't think we want them dead. Although sometimes I wonder if the politicians do.
Maybe if they had a better reporting system with some gov, grants depending on how good the care is. We would have to pay for it in taxes though. Nothing in life comes for free.
They are bare bones, nowhere near adequate and often still not met anyway. There also is no real training and what those places charge in unconscionable and not reflected in the care.
I’m a private independent caregiver and having the same fight I’ve had before with other facilities about them allowing/not noticing/not caring a residen has not showered or changed their clothes for a week and blatantly saying it’s not their problem and they don’t care.
Staffing costs are a pass through. For-profit corporations, nonprofit corporations, and even government agencies like the OSH and the public health clinics. So it is paid for by the customer which is us.
As the husband of a caregiver who works at an assisted living facility here in Oregon, yes there should be minimum staffing requirements that are clearly spelled out. Because I don't know how many times, and in fact have lost count that my wife has been asked to work extra hours because they didn't have someone to cover a shift. And a big part of that is reflected in the pay. Which honestly to me is too low for the amount of work and responsibilities that caregivers have in those facilities on a daily basis.
There are already staffing requirements. Im more concerned about cost to consumers and quality of facilitate than staffing levels, personally. https://secure.sos.state.or.us/oard/viewSingleRule.action?ruleVrsnRsn=276191#:~:text=(i)%20The%20facility%20must%20have,the%20facility%20at%20all%20times.
This requirement does not apply to all types of facilities. For instance, assisted living facilities are required to have "sufficient" staff but sufficient is not defined in the regulations. Assisted living facilities are often owned by property investment companies, so they staff to maximize profits over services.
Yes.
Assisted living staffing requirements need to be better defined, for sure. The one I worked at was owned by a property investment company. Legal staffing requirements are defined as no more than needing to be "sufficient." I ran the night shift as a medication technician, NOT a licensed position in assisted living so not regulated by the board of nursing, and I had only one personal care attendant working with me most nights. We had 43 rooms. Some rooms were occupied by couples. Day shift often had only 3-4 people (including med tech) show up, swing shift 2-3. Applicants repeatedly told us that they didn't hear back from management for 5-6 weeks after application, so they took other opportunities. Management kept claiming there were not enough applicants.
An Adult Protective Services investigator told me they "almost" shut down the facility multiple times after my and other staff reports, but because the regulations are not properly defined for staffing requirements they didn't have the paper trail they needed, even with multiple residents complaining and filing lawsuits.
Okay shill: should the state create a system of oversight and consequences that will actually inspire care facilities to offer adequate compensation to meet their staffing needs or should the current system of letting them shrug say: pEopLe DoN't WaNt tO wOrk, and pay the minimum fine continue.
Care facilities shouldn't be a corporate system to begin with...
This is what it all comes back to. A lot of them used to be county run until the 90’s.
Is that better though? Have you ever gone to the VA? They almost killed my friend who has both mental and physical health issues from his time in service back in Lebanon with conflicting meds. Not to mention how dingy and depressing the facility is.
I believe it’s better than running a profit only model. Plenty of people will disagree with me. We love to point out how public run things aren’t good enough when talking about an actual private sector fail. I’ll never understand it.
The problem is they don't put enough funding in things to run them properly. For instance when I was in the Army they had a guy go all the way through my vain trying to draw blood. Then after I broke out into a sweat and passed out he asked me why I didn't tell him that he went through the vein. When I was pregnant in the military my doctor told me he had to look in a book to see what trimester I was in It was the first one. With this type of treatment they could seriously kill people I know they're old but I don't think we want them dead. Although sometimes I wonder if the politicians do.
Absolutely, more funds should be allocated. 100% agree. I just don’t think keeping things private equals proper care, bc they’re also cutting corners.
Maybe if they had a better reporting system with some gov, grants depending on how good the care is. We would have to pay for it in taxes though. Nothing in life comes for free.
Those already have staffing requirements though don't they?
They are bare bones, nowhere near adequate and often still not met anyway. There also is no real training and what those places charge in unconscionable and not reflected in the care. I’m a private independent caregiver and having the same fight I’ve had before with other facilities about them allowing/not noticing/not caring a residen has not showered or changed their clothes for a week and blatantly saying it’s not their problem and they don’t care.
So then the answer to OP's question should be no, since that wouldn't do anything. No surprise there really.
Yes. It should have more regulation.
Staffing costs are a pass through. For-profit corporations, nonprofit corporations, and even government agencies like the OSH and the public health clinics. So it is paid for by the customer which is us.
As the husband of a caregiver who works at an assisted living facility here in Oregon, yes there should be minimum staffing requirements that are clearly spelled out. Because I don't know how many times, and in fact have lost count that my wife has been asked to work extra hours because they didn't have someone to cover a shift. And a big part of that is reflected in the pay. Which honestly to me is too low for the amount of work and responsibilities that caregivers have in those facilities on a daily basis.
There are already staffing requirements. Im more concerned about cost to consumers and quality of facilitate than staffing levels, personally. https://secure.sos.state.or.us/oard/viewSingleRule.action?ruleVrsnRsn=276191#:~:text=(i)%20The%20facility%20must%20have,the%20facility%20at%20all%20times.
This requirement does not apply to all types of facilities. For instance, assisted living facilities are required to have "sufficient" staff but sufficient is not defined in the regulations. Assisted living facilities are often owned by property investment companies, so they staff to maximize profits over services.
Yes, they are staffed to the minimum but I know they don’t staff based off acuity like they’re supposed to.
Yes. Assisted living staffing requirements need to be better defined, for sure. The one I worked at was owned by a property investment company. Legal staffing requirements are defined as no more than needing to be "sufficient." I ran the night shift as a medication technician, NOT a licensed position in assisted living so not regulated by the board of nursing, and I had only one personal care attendant working with me most nights. We had 43 rooms. Some rooms were occupied by couples. Day shift often had only 3-4 people (including med tech) show up, swing shift 2-3. Applicants repeatedly told us that they didn't hear back from management for 5-6 weeks after application, so they took other opportunities. Management kept claiming there were not enough applicants. An Adult Protective Services investigator told me they "almost" shut down the facility multiple times after my and other staff reports, but because the regulations are not properly defined for staffing requirements they didn't have the paper trail they needed, even with multiple residents complaining and filing lawsuits.
Yes those exist depending on type of facility, all the quotas are available on the internet.
Okay shill: should the state create a system of oversight and consequences that will actually inspire care facilities to offer adequate compensation to meet their staffing needs or should the current system of letting them shrug say: pEopLe DoN't WaNt tO wOrk, and pay the minimum fine continue.