Ensuring a Safe Environment for Community Residential Care Residents, 69909-69915 [2015-28749]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 218 / Thursday, November 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
food, or does one evaluate the process
done to the formulated finished food
product (or both)?
• The current policy regarding use of
the term ‘‘natural’’ hinges in part on the
presence or absence of synthetic
ingredients. For example, under the
current policy synthetic forms of
Vitamin D would not be used in a food
claiming to be ‘‘natural,’’ whereas
naturally sourced Vitamin D (e.g., from
salmon or egg yolks) could be. Should
the manner in which an ingredient is
produced or sourced affect whether a
food containing that ingredient may be
labeled as ‘‘natural?’’ Please explain
your reasoning.
• What can be done to ensure that
consumers have a consistent and
accurate understanding of the term
‘‘natural’’ in food labeling to ensure that
it is not misleading?
• What are the public health benefits,
if any, of defining the term ‘‘natural’’ in
food labeling? Please provide
supporting data and other information
to support your comment.
• Should ‘‘natural’’ have some
nutritional benefit associated with it? If
so, what should be the benefit? What
nutrients should be considered? What
data are available to support the
association between ‘‘natural’’ and a
given nutritional benefit, and/or
between ‘‘natural’’ and certain
nutrients?
• How might we determine whether
foods labeled ‘‘natural’’ comply with
any criteria for bearing the claim?
Dated: November 6, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015–28779 Filed 11–10–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900–AP06
Ensuring a Safe Environment for
Community Residential Care Residents
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This document proposes to
amend the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) regulations governing the
approval of a community residential
care facility (CRC). We would prohibit
a CRC from employing an individual
who has been convicted in a court of
law of certain listed crimes against a
person or property, or has had a finding
entered into an applicable state registry
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:34 Nov 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
or with the applicable licensing
authority concerning abuse, neglect,
mistreatment of individuals or
misappropriation of property. VA also
proposes to require CRCs to develop and
implement written policies and
procedures that prohibit mistreatment,
neglect, and abuse of residents and
misappropriation of resident property.
The proposed rule would also require
CRCs to report and investigate any
allegations of abuse or mistreatment. In
addition, the proposed rule would
require the CRC to screen and monitor
individuals who are not CRC residents,
but have direct access to a veteran living
in a CRC. The revisions would improve
the safety and help prevent the neglect
or abuse of veteran residents in CRCs. In
addition, we propose to amend the rule
regarding the maximum number of beds
allowed in a resident’s bedroom.
DATES: Comment Date: Comments must
be received by VA on or before January
11, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be
submitted through www.regulations.gov;
by mail or hand-delivery to the Director,
Regulation Policy and Management
(02REG), Department of Veterans
Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave. NW., Room
1068, Washington, DC 20420; or by fax
to (202) 273–9026. Comments should
indicate that they are submitted in
response to ‘‘RIN 2900–AP06—Ensuring
a Safe Environment for Community
Residential Care Residents.’’ Copies of
comments received will be available for
public inspection in the Office of
Regulation Policy and Management,
Room 1068, between the hours of 8:00
a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday (except holidays). Please call
(202) 461–4902 for an appointment.
(This is not a toll-free number.) In
addition, during the comment period,
comments may be viewed online
through the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) at https://
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Richard Allman, Chief Consultant,
Geriatrics and Extended Care Services
(10P4G), Veterans Health
Administration, Department of Veterans
Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461–6750.
(This is not a toll-free number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VA is
authorized under 38 U.S.C. 1730 to
assist veterans by referring them for
placement, and aiding veterans in
obtaining placement, in CRCs. A CRC is
a form of enriched housing that
provides health care supervision to
eligible veterans not in need of hospital
or nursing home care, but who, because
of medical, psychiatric and/or
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69909
psychosocial limitations as determined
through a statement of needed care, are
not able to live independently and have
no suitable family or significant others
to provide the needed supervision and
supportive care. Examples of CRC’s
enriched housing may include, but are
not limited to: Medical Foster Homes,
Assisted Living Homes, Group Living
Homes, Family Care Homes, and
psychiatric CRC Homes. CRC care
consists of room, board, assistance with
activities of daily living (ADL), and
supervision as required on an
individual basis. The size of a CRC can
vary from one bed to several hundred.
VA maintains a list of approved CRCs.
The cost of community residential care
is financed by the veteran’s own
resources. A veteran may elect to reside
in any CRC he or she wants; however,
VA will only recommend CRCs that
apply for approval and meet VA’s
standards. Once approved, the CRC is
placed on VA’s referral list and VA
refers veterans for whom CRC care is an
option to the VA-approved CRCs when
those veterans are determining where
they would like to live. VA may provide
care to a veteran at the CRC when it is
medically appropriate to provide such
home-based care. The provision of such
home-based care is not contingent upon
VA approval of a CRC; a veteran’s right
to such care exists independent of the
veteran’s residence in a CRC. Employees
of the CRC are not VA employees, and
no employment relationship exists
between employees of the CRC and VA.
To become approved, a CRC must
meet the specified criteria in 38 CFR
17.63, which sets forth standards
relating to the physical integrity of the
facility, the health care provided at the
CRC, the standard of living therein,
costs charged directly to veteran
residents of the CRC, and other criteria
for approval.
VA has authority under 38 U.S.C.
1730(b)(2) to establish criteria for
approval of a CRC that will ensure the
health, safety and welfare of veterans
residing in that facility. Current
§ 17.63(j) requires CRCs to maintain
sufficient, qualified staff on duty who
are available to care for residents and
ensure the health and safety of each
resident. The CRC provider and staff
must have adequate education, training,
or experience to maintain the facility.
However, VA believes that other issues
are also important in determining
whether a veteran residing in a CRC is
receiving an appropriate standard of
care. A veteran residing in a CRC is
unable to live independently and has no
suitable family or significant others to
provide the needed supervision and
supportive care, and the CRC serves as
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
69910
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 218 / Thursday, November 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
that veteran’s primary place of
residence. VA believes that the CRC
should be an environment in which the
veteran is physically safe and where the
veteran is not at risk of damage, theft,
or loss of personal property. To ensure
the safety and welfare of veterans
residing in CRCs, VA proposes to
establish standards that will require
CRCs to investigate individuals in CRCs
who have direct access to veteran
residents and/or veteran resident
property.
VA considered several approaches to
address the issue of the background and
behavior of individuals in CRCs. For
example, on the national level, the
Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act, Public Law 111–148, established a
state grant program for conducting
federal and state criminal background
checks on direct patient access
employees of long-term care facilities
and providers that accept Medicare and
Medicaid patients (42 U.S.C. 1320a–7l).
However, not all states participate and
it is applicable to only long-term care
facilities. A survey of approved CRCs
reflects that only a small percentage of
those facilities are approved to accept
Medicare or Medicaid patients. Another
Medicare statute, 42 U.S.C. 1320a–7,
excludes an individual from
participating in any federal health care
program if that individual has been
convicted of certain listed crimes.
However, a person working in a CRC, or
an individual with direct resident
access, would not be considered a
participant in a federal health care
program.
Employees, contractors and
volunteers working in VA-operated
facilities, such as community living
centers or nursing homes, must undergo
a background screening as required by
Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
regulations at 5 CFR parts 731 and 736.
If the employee or contractor has access
to federally maintained records or
databases, the level of scrutiny is
greater. CRC staff and others with direct
resident access are not federal
employees, contractors or volunteers,
and do not have access to VA records
or databases. Therefore, OPM’s federal
background screening requirements are
inapplicable.
We reviewed state requirements for
licensing residential care facilities as
well as state screening requirements for
employment to work with the elderly or
disabled. The states vary in how these
issues are addressed. Some require
licensing only for facilities that have a
minimum number of beds (i.e., five or
more beds). Many of the VA-approved
CRCs have one to three resident beds.
Some state laws and regulations do not
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:34 Nov 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
use the term ‘‘residential care facility’’
and it is unclear whether a VAapproved CRC would be covered.
Several state licensing laws or
regulations do not address hiring
requirements. Some do not have any
general screening requirements for
individuals assigned to duties caring for
the elderly or disabled. In those states
that do have screening requirements, the
level of screening varies from criminal
history checks at the county or state
level only, to both state and federallevel checks.
While state laws vary on the
requirement for background screenings
on individuals working with the elderly
or disabled, all states maintain a longterm care ombudsman program charged
with investigating reports of elder
abuse. In addition, all states maintain
registries for licensed health care
professionals such as nurses and nurse
aides to track reports of patient abuse or
neglect. However, many individuals
employed in a VA approved CRC are not
licensed health care professionals and
states do not maintain any type of
registry that would capture information
pertaining to all the types of CRC
employees.
Due to these variations, we do not
believe we can rely on state law to
ensure that veterans can trust and rely
on VA-recommended CRCs to provide a
certain, uniform minimum level of
safety and care. VA believes that all
veterans residing in a CRC should have
the same level of assurance that a CRC
staff member or other covered
individual does not have a criminal
history, regardless of where that facility
is located.
In considering possible national
standards, we reviewed existing
regulations governing other VA
programs. State Veterans Homes are
owned, operated, and managed by state
governments and provide nursing home,
domiciliary, or adult day care to eligible
veterans. Regulations governing State
Veterans Homes are found at 38 CFR
parts 51 through 59. We believe that the
State Veterans Home program is
meaningfully similar to the community
residential care program because it
serves a similar veteran population and
provides similar services; however,
there are two important differences. A
State Veterans Homes is owned,
operated and managed by the state
government while a CRC is a privately
owned entity. States exercise a layer of
control over State Veterans Homes that
is not present in CRCs. In addition,
persons living in some CRCs who are
not obtaining services from that facility
regularly interact with CRC residents
and sometimes provide services to
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
residents. State Veterans Homes provide
resident services through employees of
the state home, many of which are
professionals licensed by the state.
Nonetheless, VA believes it is
appropriate to look to how resident
safety and welfare is addressed in the
State Veterans Homes program as a
guide on how to proceed in the CRC
program.
We propose to amend § 17.63 by
adding a new paragraph (j)(3) which
would require the CRC to develop and
implement written policies and
procedures that prohibit mistreatment,
neglect, and abuse of residents and
misappropriation of resident property.
This would ensure that each facility has
a policy in place to address these issues.
In addition, it would serve to inform
both employees and CRC residents of
the prohibited practices and inform CRC
residents about procedures for reporting
alleged mistreatment, neglect, and abuse
of residents and misappropriation of
resident property.
Proposed paragraph (j)(3)(i)(A)(1)
would prohibit the CRC from employing
an individual who has been convicted
by a court of law of abusing, neglecting,
or mistreating individuals. VA
published a similar rule at § 51.90(c) for
State Veterans Homes. That rule has
been in place since February 7, 2000,
and we believe it has been effective in
ensuring the safety of veterans residing
in those facilities. We believe a similar
standard should be applied to
employment in CRCs. The terms
‘‘abuse’’ and ‘‘neglect’’ are defined in
§ 51.90(b), and would have the same
meaning here.
Proposed paragraph (j)(3)(i)(A)(2)
would prohibit the CRC from employing
individuals who have had a finding
entered into an applicable State registry
or with the applicable licensing
authority concerning abuse, neglect,
mistreatment of individuals or
misappropriation of property. Examples
of applicable state registries include, but
are not limited to, state sex offender
registries and registries of criminal
offenders which are maintained by some
states. Typical licensing authorities
include, but are not limited to, state
boards or agencies that license or certify
Registered Nurses (RN), Licensed
Practical Nurses (LPN), Certified
Nursing Assistants (CNA), nursing aides
or medication aides. State laws and
regulations typically require employers
to report abuse, neglect, mistreatment of
individuals or misappropriation of
property alleged to have been
committed by certain licensed health
care professionals. These reports are
made part of the relevant State registry,
and the registry may contain
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 218 / Thursday, November 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
information on incidents that were not
forwarded to law enforcement for
prosecution. VA believes that such
information would be relevant to the
issue of whether a particular individual
should have direct access to a veteran
residing in a CRC.
The CRC would be required by
proposed paragraph (j)(3)(i)(B) to
immediately, meaning no more than 24
hours after the provider becomes aware
of the alleged violation, report all
alleged violations involving
mistreatment, neglect, or abuse,
including injuries of unknown source,
and misappropriation of resident
property to the approving official. In
proposed paragraph (j)(3)(i)(B)(1)–(6),
we would set out the minimum
information that must be contained in a
report of an alleged violation. The intent
of the proposed rule is to place the
approving official on notice of any
alleged violation so that appropriate
follow-up measures can be initiated.
Follow-up measures may include
contacting veteran residents, ensuring
any affected veteran resident receives a
medical evaluation from a VA health
care provider, or conduct necessary
interim monitoring as provided for in
§ 17.65(a). Proposed paragraph
(j)(3)(i)(C) would require the CRC to
have evidence that all alleged violations
are documented and thoroughly
investigated. The facility would be
required to prevent further potential
abuse while the investigation is in
progress. The proposed rule would
require that the results of all
investigations be reported to the
approving official within 5 working
days of the incident, and to other
officials in accordance with State law,
and that appropriate corrective action be
taken if the alleged violation is verified.
The proposed requirements in
paragraphs (j)(3)(i)(B) and (C) are
consistent with those already in effect
for State Veterans Homes under
§ 51.90(c).
VA currently receives reports of
alleged mistreatment, neglect, or abuse,
including injuries of unknown source,
and misappropriation of resident
property on an ad hoc basis. The
proposed rule would formalize a
reporting requirement and would ensure
that VA is notified of any such
allegation so that appropriate steps can
be taken to ensure the safety and health
of veterans residing in the CRC. The
requirement that the investigation be
completed within 5 working days and
reported to both VA and other officials
in accordance with State law would
ensure that the investigation is
completed in a timely manner, and that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:34 Nov 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
corrective action is taken to prevent
further violations.
We propose in paragraph (j)(3)(i)(D)
that employees accused of alleged
violations involving mistreatment,
neglect, or abuse or misappropriation of
resident property, must be removed
from all duties requiring direct veteran
resident contact during the pendency of
the facility’s investigation. VA believes
that removing such employee from
duties involving direct resident contact
until the facility completes its
investigation is a prudent step to ensure
veteran resident safety and to provide
assurance to veteran residents that the
accused employee would not be allowed
direct access to them until the alleged
incident is investigated and any
necessary corrective steps are taken, if
needed.
Proposed paragraph (j)(4) would
define the three classes of individuals
considered to be employees of the CRC
for purposes of this proposed rule.
Proposed paragraph (j)(4)(i) would
establish that non-VA health care
providers at CRCs would be considered
employees. Non-VA health care
providers may have frequent contact
with veteran residents, and are not
subject to direct VA control or
management. In addition, proposed
paragraph (j)(4)(ii) would establish that
the term ‘‘employee’’ would include
CRC staff who are not health care
providers. CRCs employ a variety of
personnel that may include, for
example, contractors or janitorial staff.
These individuals have access to
veteran residents, and some may be in
a unique position to take advantage of
veterans.
Proposed paragraph (j)(4)(iii) would
include persons with direct resident
access in the definition of ‘‘employee.’’
The term ‘‘person with direct resident
access’’ would mean an individual
living in the facility who is not
receiving services from the facility, who
may have access to the resident or the
resident’s property, or may have one-onone contact with the resident. This
could include relatives of live-in staff
members. These individuals with direct
resident access are most commonly
found in medical foster homes, which
are typically small CRCs located in a
family home, with no more than three
consumer residents that are run by
certain members of a family, while other
family members are not employed by
the CRC but continue to live in the
home. They do not provide care or
services to veteran residents, but may
have regular contact with, or access to,
veteran residents and their property. We
do not include fellow residents who are
receiving services from the CRC in the
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69911
definition of ‘‘person with direct
resident access’’ because we believe that
it is inappropriate to consider the
background of patients.
In proposed paragraph (j)(5), we
would define the term ‘‘convicted’’ for
purposes of this proposed rule. An
employee would be considered
‘‘convicted’’ of a criminal offense when
a judgment of conviction has been
entered against the individual by a
Federal, State, or local court, regardless
of whether there is an appeal pending
or whether the judgment of conviction
or other record relating to criminal
conduct has been expunged. It would
also include a finding of guilt against
the individual by a Federal, State, or
local court. The term ‘‘convicted’’
would also include a plea of guilty or
nolo contendere by the individual has
been accepted by a Federal, State, or
local court. Finally, the term would also
encompass participation in a first
offender, deferred adjudication, or other
arrangement or program where
judgment of conviction has been
withheld. The proposed definition
covers the spectrum of outcomes
possible when a court of competent
jurisdiction finds that a defendant has
committed a criminal act. It recognizes
that the act that resulted in the
conviction, as well as the conviction
itself, is relevant to the issue of safety
and health of veterans residing in CRCs.
Proposed paragraph (j)(6) would
provide that, for purposes of proposed
paragraph (j)(3), the terms ‘‘abuse’’ and
‘‘neglect’’ would have the same meaning
set forth in 38 CFR 51.90(b). That
paragraph describes residents’ right to
be free from mental, physical, sexual,
and verbal abuse or neglect, corporal
punishment, and involuntary seclusion.
Mental abuse, physical abuse, and
sexual abuse are also further defined.
The proposed rule would be enforced
through the normal VA inspection and
approval process established in § 17.65.
This section states that VA may approve
a CRC meeting all of the standards in
§ 17.63 based on the report of a VA
inspection and any findings of
necessary interim monitoring of the
facility. CRCs are inspected by VA at
least every 12 months, and an approval
is valid for a 12-month period. A CRC
may gain provisional approval if that
facility does not meet one or more of the
standards in § 17.63, provided the
deficiencies do not jeopardize the health
or safety of residents, and the facility
and VA agree to a plan for correcting the
deficiencies in a specified amount of
time.
If the approving official determines
that a CRC does not comply with all of
the standards in § 17.63, the facility is
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
69912
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 218 / Thursday, November 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
provided notice of the discrepancy and
an opportunity for a hearing. Approval
of a CRC may be revoked following a
hearing as provided for in § 17.71. When
revocation occurs, VA ceases referring
veterans to the CRC and notifies any
veteran residing in that facility of the
revocation. Although this proposed rule
would not change the process of
inspection, approval, or revocation of
approval of CRCs established in current
38 CFR 17.61 through 17.72, we have
provided the above discussion to show
as a practical matter how CRCs would
be affected by this proposed rule. The
public is invited to comment on
whether the proposed new standards in
paragraphs (e) and (j) should be
enforced in the same manner as every
other standard in § 17.63.
The proposed changes to paragraph (j)
require a CRC to maintain certain
records, develop and implement written
policies and procedures prohibiting
mistreatment, neglect, abuse of
residents, and misappropriation of
resident property. The approving VA
official may request these records and
policies to ensure compliance with VA
standards. Current paragraph (i)
addresses records that must be
maintained by the CRC. We propose to
amend paragraph (i) to include the new
recordkeeping requirement. We would
also reorganize this paragraph to
consolidate all resident-related record
requirements into a single
subparagraph.
Proposed paragraph (i)(1) would state
that the CRC must maintain records on
each resident in a secure place. Resident
records must include a copy of all
signed agreements with the resident.
Resident records may be disclosed only
with the permission of the resident, or
when required by law. This mirrors
current paragraph (i)(1), (i)(2)(ii), and
(i)(3).
In paragraph (i)(2), we would state
that the CRC must maintain and make
available, upon request of the approving
official, records establishing compliance
with paragraphs (j)(1) through (3) of this
section; written policies and procedures
required under paragraph (j)(3) of this
section; and, emergency notification
procedures. A CRC is required to hire
qualified and properly trained staff, per
current paragraphs (j)(1) and (2). VA
verifies compliance with this standard
during routine facility inspections. The
proposed rule would prohibit a CRC
from employing certain individuals and
would require a CRC to develop and
implement certain policies and to
investigate and document certain
allegations of abuse or neglect. The
proposed change to paragraph (i) would
address the need to maintain records
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:34 Nov 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
reflecting compliance with these
standards, and would ensure that the
approving official may access these
records upon request. Current paragraph
(i)(2)(i) already requires a CRC to
maintain records regarding emergency
notification procedures. This proposal
would consolidate this with other
recordkeeping requirements that are not
resident-specific.
In addition, we propose to amend
§ 17.63(e)(1), regarding the maximum
number of beds allowed in a resident’s
bedroom. Current standards provide
that resident bedrooms must contain no
more than four beds, and multiresident
rooms must provide each resident at
least 80 square feet of living space. We
propose to limit the number of resident
beds in newly established bedrooms in
approved facilities and facilities seeking
approval. Limiting the number of beds
to up to two per bedroom would ensure
that veterans receive an appropriate
amount of privacy and would
appropriately minimize the impact of
visits from guests, care providers, etc.,
on the veteran’s quality of life. Under
the proposed rule, facilities approved
before the effective date of the rule that
already have bedrooms with more than
two beds would be able to retain that
configuration, but could not establish
any new bedrooms with more than two
beds in a room. Bedrooms in facilities
approved after the effective date of the
final rule, or newly established
bedrooms in facilities approved before
the effective date of the final rule,
would not be permitted to provide more
than two beds. We would allow
currently approved configurations
because we do not want to negatively
impact veteran residents placed in those
CRCs who are satisfied with their
arrangement.
Effect of Rulemaking
The Code of Federal Regulations, as
proposed to be revised by this proposed
rulemaking, would represent the
exclusive legal authority on this subject.
No contrary rules or procedures would
be authorized. All VA guidance would
be read to conform with this proposed
rulemaking if possible or, if not
possible, such guidance would be
superseded by this rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule includes
provisions constituting a collection of
information under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3521) that require approval by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB).
Accordingly, under 44 U.S.C. 3507(d),
VA has submitted a copy of this
rulemaking to OMB for review. OMB
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
assigns a control number for each
collection of information it approves.
VA may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. Proposed § 17.63(i) and (j)
would require a collection of
information under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995. If OMB does not
approve the collection of information as
requested, VA will immediately remove
the provisions containing a collection of
information or take such other action as
is directed by OMB.
Comments on the collection of
information contained in this proposed
rule should be submitted to the Office
of Management and Budget, Attention:
Desk Officer for the Department of
Veterans Affairs, Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC
20503, with copies sent by mail or
hand-delivery to: Director, Office of
Regulation Policy and Management
(02REG), Department of Veterans
Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW.,
Room 1068, Washington, DC 20420; or
fax to (202) 273–9026; or submitted
through https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments should indicate that they are
submitted in response to ‘‘RIN 2900–
AP06—Ensuring a Safe Environment for
Community Residential Care
Residents.’’
OMB is required to make a decision
concerning the collection of information
contained in this proposed rule between
30 and 60 days after publication of this
document in the Federal Register.
Therefore, a comment to OMB is best
assured of having its full effect if OMB
receives it within 30 days of
publication. This does not affect the
deadline for the public to comment on
the proposed rule.
VA considers comments by the public
on proposed collections of information
in—
• Evaluating whether the proposed
collections of information are necessary
for the proper performance of VA
functions, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
• Evaluating the accuracy of VA’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collections of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
• Enhancing the quality, usefulness,
and clarity of the information to be
collected; and
• Minimizing the burden of the
collections of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 218 / Thursday, November 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
The collection of information
contained in 38 CFR 17.63(i) and (j) is
described immediately following this
paragraph.
Title: Ensuring a Safe Environment for
Community Residential Care Residents.
Summary of collection of information:
Current § 17.63(i) addresses
recordkeeping requirements for a CRC.
Information collection under this
paragraph was approved by OMB under
OMB control number 2900–0491;
however that approval has expired. We
propose amending paragraph (i) to
address not only the recordkeeping
requirements currently in that
paragraph, but also recordkeeping
requirements under paragraphs (j)(1)
through (3).
Paragraph (i)(1) would require the
CRC to maintain records on each
resident, to include a copy of all signed
agreements with the resident. We
estimate the annual burden related to
this information collection to be one
hour per year.
Paragraph (i)(2) would state that the
CRC must maintain and make available
upon request of the approving official,
records establishing compliance with
paragraphs (j)(1) and (2). These
paragraphs relate to CRC staff
requirements, and provide that the CRC
must have sufficient, qualified staff
must be on duty and available to care
for the resident and ensure the health
and safety of each resident. The CRC
provider and staff must have adequate
education, training, or experience to
maintain the facility. We estimate that
the annual burden related to
information collection required to
establish that the CRC has sufficient,
qualified staff, and that the CRC
provider and staff have adequate
training and education, would be two
hours.
Paragraph (i)(2) would also require
the CRC to maintain records related to
proposed paragraph (j)(3). Proposed
§ 17.63(j)(3) would require CRCs to
immediately, meaning no more than 24
hours after the provider becomes aware
of the alleged violation, report all
alleged violations involving
mistreatment, neglect, or abuse,
including injuries of unknown source,
and misappropriation of resident
property to the approving official. We
would require that the report, at a
minimum, must include the facility
name, address, telephone number, and
owner; the date and time of the alleged
violation; a summary of the alleged
violation; the name of any public or
private officials or VHA program offices
that have been notified of the alleged
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:34 Nov 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
violations, if any; whether additional
investigation is necessary to provide
VHA with more information about the
alleged violation; and contact
information for a person who can
provide additional details at the
community residential care provider,
including a name, position, location,
and phone number.
We would require the CRCs to
document and thoroughly investigate
evidence of an alleged violation. The
results of all investigations must be
reported to the approving official within
5 working days of the incident and to
other officials in accordance with State
law. It would also require facilities to
develop and implement written policies
and procedures to prohibit the
mistreatment, neglect, and abuse of
residents and misappropriation of
resident property. The approving VA
official may request the facility to
produce such written policies and
procedures.
The most current data available to VA
(Q4 FY2012) reflects that we have 1,293
approved CRCs, 493 of which are
Medical Foster Homes at the 1 to 3 bed
size. The total number of staff working
in these facilities is 5,614. This
aggregate number of CRC staff is
distributed in CRCs as follows: 2.5 staff
for a 1 to 3 bed facility, 4 staff for a 4
to 15 bed facility, 5 staff for a 15 to 26
bed facility and 11 staff for a 26 to 100+
bed facility.
CRCs would be required to report
information under this proposed rule
when the facility: (1) Has an alleged
violation involving mistreatment,
neglect, or abuse, including injuries of
unknown source, and misappropriation
of resident property; or, (2) is reporting
the results of an investigation into that
alleged violation. The CRCs would also
be required to document and investigate
evidence of any alleged violation. We
view the reporting, documenting, and
investigating of an alleged incident and
the subsequent report of the results of
the investigation to be one collection of
information, as it focuses on one set of
alleged facts and the facility’s
investigation of those facts.
VA does not currently require CRCs to
report to the approving official
allegations of resident abuse or neglect.
VA surveyed CRC coordinators at the
VA medical facilities that approve CRC
sponsors. Based on information from
CRC coordinators, we believe that VA
currently receives fewer than one report
of alleged mistreatment, neglect, or
abuse, including injuries of unknown
source, or misappropriation of resident
property from CRCs in any given year.
This proposed rule would formalize the
reporting and investigation requirement
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69913
and we believe this would more likely
than not result in an increase in the
number of reports of alleged abuse
mistreatment, neglect, or abuse,
including injuries of unknown source,
or misappropriation of resident property
per year. However, for purposes of this
estimate, we will assume that a CRC
will have one incident per year related
to an alleged violation involving
mistreatment, neglect, or abuse,
including injuries of unknown source,
and misappropriation of resident
property; or, reporting the results of an
investigation into that alleged violation.
The estimated average burden for an
alleged violation response is three
hours.
All approved CRCs would be required
to develop and implement written
policies and procedures to prohibit the
mistreatment, neglect, and abuse of
residents and misappropriation of
resident property. On inspection of a
CRC, VA would require the facility to
produce such written policies and
procedures. The written policies would
have to be developed once, although it
is possible that a promulgated policy
could require revision in the future. VA
intends to develop sample policies and
boilerplate that could be adapted by a
CRC to meet the facility’s individual
requirements. This would decrease the
burden of this proposed information
collection. VA estimates that the
information collection burden on a CRC
utilizing a sample policy or boilerplate
developed by VA would be two hours.
Finally, paragraph (i)(2) would
require the CRC to maintain a record of
emergency notification procedures. This
is consistent with current
§ 17.63(i)(2)(i). Once emergency
notification procedures are in place,
there may be instances in which the
CRC may periodically review and
modify the existing procedures. We
estimate the annual burden of this
information collection to be 0.5 hours.
Description of need for information
and proposed use of information: VA
needs this information to ensure the
health and safety of veterans placed in
these facilities. In CRCs, where VA
involvement is less intensive and to
which VA does not provide any
payments or services, we believe that
information obtained under the
proposed rule would provide necessary
protection for veteran residents.
Description of Likely Respondents:
Operators of CRCs currently listed or
that request future listing on VA’s
approved CRCs referral list.
Estimated Number of Respondents
per Year: 1,293 operators of CRCs.
Estimated Frequency of Responses:
Once in a 12-month period.
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
69914
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 218 / Thursday, November 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Estimated Average Burden per
Response: 8.5 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Reporting
and Recordkeeping Burden: 10,990.5
hours.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that
this proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities as
they are defined in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612). This
proposed rule would be small business
neutral as it applies only to those CRCs
seeking inclusion on VA’s list of
approved CRCs. The costs associated
with this proposed rule are minimal,
consisting of the administrative
requirement to develop and implement
written policies and procedures that
prohibit mistreatment, neglect, and
abuse of residents and misappropriation
of resident property; ensure that no
employees are employed in
contravention to the proposed rule;
report to VA any alleged violation
involving mistreatment, neglect, or
abuse, including injuries of unknown
source, and misappropriation of
resident property; and investigate
alleged resident abuse, take steps to
prevent further harm, and implement
appropriate corrective measures.
A CRC may elect to order background
checks on employees from commercial
sources or local law enforcement
agencies. The cost of an individual
background check varies dependent on
the vendor, but VA believes the average
cost is $50. VA believes that 75 percent
of CRCs are required to, or could obtain,
criminal background checks on
employees through one or more existing
federal or state programs. This includes:
(1) The state grant program
administered by the Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)
for conducting federal and state
criminal background checks on direct
patient access employees of long-term
care facilities and providers (42 U.S.C.
1320a–7l); (2) the CMS requirement
applicable to facilities receiving
Medicare and Medicaid funds; and (3)
various state laws or regulations
mandating criminal background
screening for employment to work with
the elderly or disabled. In addition,
many CRCs that are currently servicing
veterans already, voluntarily, have
policies and procedures in place to
review the backgrounds of their
employees and make employment
decisions consistent with this
rulemaking as one way to ensure
resident safety.
The remaining 25 percent of CRCs
(324) would more likely than not opt to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:34 Nov 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
obtain criminal background checks on
CRC staff in order to be approved by
VA. The median number of staff in
CRCs currently approved by VA is five.
We estimate the cost that would be
incurred for obtaining criminal
background checks on CRC staff is $250
per CRC.
On this basis, the Secretary certifies
that the adoption of this proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities as they are defined in the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. Therefore,
under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this rulemaking
is exempt from the initial and final
regulatory flexibility analysis
requirements of sections 603 and 604.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, and other advantages;
distributive impacts; and equity).
Executive Order 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review)
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits,
reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and
promoting flexibility. Executive Order
12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review) defines a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ requiring review by
OMB, unless OMB waives such review,
as ‘‘any regulatory action that is likely
to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an
annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more or adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities; (2) Create
a serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or
planned by another agency; (3)
Materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
the principles set forth in this Executive
Order.’’
The economic, interagency,
budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this proposed rule have
been examined, and it has been
determined not to be a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866. VA’s impact analysis can be
found as a supporting document at
https://www.regulations.gov, usually
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
within 48 hours after the rulemaking
document is published. Additionally, a
copy of the rulemaking and its impact
analysis are available on VA’s Web site
at https://www.va.gov/orpm/, by
following the link for VA Regulations
Published From FY 2004 to FYTD.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that
agencies prepare an assessment of
anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule that may result in
expenditures by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any
one year. This proposed rule would
have no such effect on State, local, and
tribal governments, or on the private
sector.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance program numbers and titles
affected by this document are 64.009,
Veterans Medical Care Benefits; 64.010,
Veterans Nursing Home Care; and
64.018, Sharing Specialized Medical
Resources.
Signing Authority
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or
designee, approved this document and
authorized the undersigned to sign and
submit the document to the Office of the
Federal Register for publication
electronically as an official document of
the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Robert L. Nabors II, Chief of Staff,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
approved this document on November
5, 2015, for publication
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17
Administrative practice and
procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism,
Claims, Day care, Dental health, Drug
abuse, Government contracts, Grant
programs-health, Government programsveterans, Health care, Health facilities,
Health professions, Health records,
Homeless, Mental health programs,
Nursing homes, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Veterans.
Dated: November 6, 2015.
Jeffrey M. Martin,
Office Program Manager, Regulation Policy
and Management, Office of the General
Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, Department of Veterans
Affairs proposes to amend 38 CFR part
17 as follows:
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 218 / Thursday, November 12, 2015 / Proposed Rules
PART 17—MEDICAL
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in
specific sections.
2. Amend § 17.63 by revising
paragraph (e)(1) and paragraph (i) and
adding paragraphs (j)(3) through (6) to
read as follows:
■
§ 17.63 Approval of community residential
care facilities.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(1) Contain no more than four beds:
(i) Facilities approved before [DATE
30 DAYS AFTER DATE OF
PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE] may
not establish any new resident
bedrooms with more than two beds per
room;
(ii) Facilities approved on or after
[DATE 30 DAYS AFTER DATE OF
PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE] may
not provide resident bedrooms
containing more than two beds per
room.
*
*
*
*
*
(i) Records. (1) The facility must
maintain records on each resident in a
secure place. Resident records must
include a copy of all signed agreements
with the resident. Resident records may
be disclosed only with the permission of
the resident, or when required by law.
(2) The facility must maintain and
make available, upon request of the
approving VA official, records
establishing compliance with
paragraphs (j)(1) through (3) of this
section; written policies and procedures
required under paragraph (j)(3) of this
section; and, emergency notification
procedures. (Approved by the Office of
Management and Budget under control
number 2900–XXXX.)
(j) * * *
(3) The community residential care
provider must develop and implement
written policies and procedures that
prohibit mistreatment, neglect, and
abuse of residents and misappropriation
of resident property.
(i) The community residential care
provider must do all of the following:
(A) Not employ individuals who—
(1) Have been convicted by a court of
law of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment of
individuals; or
(2) Have had a finding entered into an
applicable State registry or with the
applicable licensing authority
concerning abuse, neglect, mistreatment
of individuals or misappropriation of
property.
(B) Ensure that all alleged violations
involving mistreatment, neglect, or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:34 Nov 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
abuse, including injuries of unknown
source, and misappropriation of
resident property are reported to the
approving official immediately, which
means no more than 24 hours after the
provider becomes aware of the alleged
violation. The report, at a minimum,
must include—
(1) The facility name, address,
telephone number, and owner;
(2) The date and time of the alleged
violation;
(3) A summary of the alleged
violation;
(4) The name of any public or private
officials or VHA program offices that
have been notified of the alleged
violations, if any;
(5) Whether additional investigation
is necessary to provide VHA with more
information about the alleged violation;
and
(6) Contact information for a person
who can provide additional details at
the community residential care
provider, including a name, position,
location, and phone number.
(C) Have evidence that all alleged
violations of this paragraph (j) are
documented and thoroughly
investigated, and must prevent further
abuse while the investigation is in
progress. The results of all
investigations must be reported to the
approving official within 5 working
days of the incident and to other
officials in accordance with State law,
and appropriate corrective action must
be taken if the alleged violation is
verified.
(D) Remove all duties requiring direct
resident contact with veteran residents
from any employee alleged to have
violated this paragraph (j) during the
investigation of such employee.
(4) For purposes of paragraph (j)(3) of
this section, the term ‘‘employee’’
includes a:
(i) Non-VA health care provider at the
community residential care facility;
(ii) Staff member of the community
residential care facility who is not a
health care provider, including a
contractor; and
(iii) Person with direct resident
access. The term ‘‘person with direct
resident access’’ means an individual
living in the facility who is not
receiving services from the facility, who
may have access to a resident or a
resident’s property, or may have one-onone contact with a resident.
(5) For purposes of paragraph (j)(3) of
this section, an employee is considered
‘‘convicted’’ of a criminal offense—
(i) When a judgment of conviction has
been entered against the individual by
a Federal, State, or local court,
regardless of whether there is an appeal
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69915
pending or whether the judgment of
conviction or other record relating to
criminal conduct has been expunged;
(ii) When there has been a finding of
guilt against the individual by a Federal,
State, or local court;
(iii) When a plea of guilty or nolo
contendere by the individual has been
accepted by a Federal, State, or local
court; or
(iv) When the individual has entered
into participation in a first offender,
deferred adjudication, or other
arrangement or program where
judgment of conviction has been
withheld.
(6) For purposes of paragraph (j)(3) of
this section, the terms ‘‘abuse’’ and
‘‘neglect’’ have the same meaning set
forth in 38 CFR 51.90(b).
*
*
*
*
*
(The Office of Management and Budget has
approved the information collection
provisions in this section under control
number 2900–XXXX.)
[FR Doc. 2015–28749 Filed 11–10–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0622; FRL–9936–84–
Region 9]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; California;
California Mobile Source Regulations
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
revision to the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP) consisting of
state regulations establishing standards
and other requirements relating to the
control of emissions from new on-road
and new and in-use off-road vehicles
and engines. The EPA is proposing to
approve these regulations because they
meet the applicable requirements of the
Clean Air Act and are relied upon by
various California plans intended to
provide for the attainment or
maintenance of the national ambient air
quality standards.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
December 14, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number [EPA–R09–
OAR–2015–0622], by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 218 (Thursday, November 12, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69909-69915]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28749]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900-AP06
Ensuring a Safe Environment for Community Residential Care
Residents
AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes to amend the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) regulations governing the approval of a community
residential care facility (CRC). We would prohibit a CRC from employing
an individual who has been convicted in a court of law of certain
listed crimes against a person or property, or has had a finding
entered into an applicable state registry or with the applicable
licensing authority concerning abuse, neglect, mistreatment of
individuals or misappropriation of property. VA also proposes to
require CRCs to develop and implement written policies and procedures
that prohibit mistreatment, neglect, and abuse of residents and
misappropriation of resident property. The proposed rule would also
require CRCs to report and investigate any allegations of abuse or
mistreatment. In addition, the proposed rule would require the CRC to
screen and monitor individuals who are not CRC residents, but have
direct access to a veteran living in a CRC. The revisions would improve
the safety and help prevent the neglect or abuse of veteran residents
in CRCs. In addition, we propose to amend the rule regarding the
maximum number of beds allowed in a resident's bedroom.
DATES: Comment Date: Comments must be received by VA on or before
January 11, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted through
www.regulations.gov; by mail or hand-delivery to the Director,
Regulation Policy and Management (02REG), Department of Veterans
Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave. NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC 20420; or by
fax to (202) 273-9026. Comments should indicate that they are submitted
in response to ``RIN 2900-AP06--Ensuring a Safe Environment for
Community Residential Care Residents.'' Copies of comments received
will be available for public inspection in the Office of Regulation
Policy and Management, Room 1068, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except holidays). Please call (202)
461-4902 for an appointment. (This is not a toll-free number.) In
addition, during the comment period, comments may be viewed online
through the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Richard Allman, Chief Consultant,
Geriatrics and Extended Care Services (10P4G), Veterans Health
Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-6750. (This is not a toll-free number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VA is authorized under 38 U.S.C. 1730 to
assist veterans by referring them for placement, and aiding veterans in
obtaining placement, in CRCs. A CRC is a form of enriched housing that
provides health care supervision to eligible veterans not in need of
hospital or nursing home care, but who, because of medical, psychiatric
and/or psychosocial limitations as determined through a statement of
needed care, are not able to live independently and have no suitable
family or significant others to provide the needed supervision and
supportive care. Examples of CRC's enriched housing may include, but
are not limited to: Medical Foster Homes, Assisted Living Homes, Group
Living Homes, Family Care Homes, and psychiatric CRC Homes. CRC care
consists of room, board, assistance with activities of daily living
(ADL), and supervision as required on an individual basis. The size of
a CRC can vary from one bed to several hundred. VA maintains a list of
approved CRCs. The cost of community residential care is financed by
the veteran's own resources. A veteran may elect to reside in any CRC
he or she wants; however, VA will only recommend CRCs that apply for
approval and meet VA's standards. Once approved, the CRC is placed on
VA's referral list and VA refers veterans for whom CRC care is an
option to the VA-approved CRCs when those veterans are determining
where they would like to live. VA may provide care to a veteran at the
CRC when it is medically appropriate to provide such home-based care.
The provision of such home-based care is not contingent upon VA
approval of a CRC; a veteran's right to such care exists independent of
the veteran's residence in a CRC. Employees of the CRC are not VA
employees, and no employment relationship exists between employees of
the CRC and VA.
To become approved, a CRC must meet the specified criteria in 38
CFR 17.63, which sets forth standards relating to the physical
integrity of the facility, the health care provided at the CRC, the
standard of living therein, costs charged directly to veteran residents
of the CRC, and other criteria for approval.
VA has authority under 38 U.S.C. 1730(b)(2) to establish criteria
for approval of a CRC that will ensure the health, safety and welfare
of veterans residing in that facility. Current Sec. 17.63(j) requires
CRCs to maintain sufficient, qualified staff on duty who are available
to care for residents and ensure the health and safety of each
resident. The CRC provider and staff must have adequate education,
training, or experience to maintain the facility. However, VA believes
that other issues are also important in determining whether a veteran
residing in a CRC is receiving an appropriate standard of care. A
veteran residing in a CRC is unable to live independently and has no
suitable family or significant others to provide the needed supervision
and supportive care, and the CRC serves as
[[Page 69910]]
that veteran's primary place of residence. VA believes that the CRC
should be an environment in which the veteran is physically safe and
where the veteran is not at risk of damage, theft, or loss of personal
property. To ensure the safety and welfare of veterans residing in
CRCs, VA proposes to establish standards that will require CRCs to
investigate individuals in CRCs who have direct access to veteran
residents and/or veteran resident property.
VA considered several approaches to address the issue of the
background and behavior of individuals in CRCs. For example, on the
national level, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public
Law 111-148, established a state grant program for conducting federal
and state criminal background checks on direct patient access employees
of long-term care facilities and providers that accept Medicare and
Medicaid patients (42 U.S.C. 1320a-7l). However, not all states
participate and it is applicable to only long-term care facilities. A
survey of approved CRCs reflects that only a small percentage of those
facilities are approved to accept Medicare or Medicaid patients.
Another Medicare statute, 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7, excludes an individual
from participating in any federal health care program if that
individual has been convicted of certain listed crimes. However, a
person working in a CRC, or an individual with direct resident access,
would not be considered a participant in a federal health care program.
Employees, contractors and volunteers working in VA-operated
facilities, such as community living centers or nursing homes, must
undergo a background screening as required by Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) regulations at 5 CFR parts 731 and 736. If the
employee or contractor has access to federally maintained records or
databases, the level of scrutiny is greater. CRC staff and others with
direct resident access are not federal employees, contractors or
volunteers, and do not have access to VA records or databases.
Therefore, OPM's federal background screening requirements are
inapplicable.
We reviewed state requirements for licensing residential care
facilities as well as state screening requirements for employment to
work with the elderly or disabled. The states vary in how these issues
are addressed. Some require licensing only for facilities that have a
minimum number of beds (i.e., five or more beds). Many of the VA-
approved CRCs have one to three resident beds. Some state laws and
regulations do not use the term ``residential care facility'' and it is
unclear whether a VA-approved CRC would be covered. Several state
licensing laws or regulations do not address hiring requirements. Some
do not have any general screening requirements for individuals assigned
to duties caring for the elderly or disabled. In those states that do
have screening requirements, the level of screening varies from
criminal history checks at the county or state level only, to both
state and federal-level checks.
While state laws vary on the requirement for background screenings
on individuals working with the elderly or disabled, all states
maintain a long-term care ombudsman program charged with investigating
reports of elder abuse. In addition, all states maintain registries for
licensed health care professionals such as nurses and nurse aides to
track reports of patient abuse or neglect. However, many individuals
employed in a VA approved CRC are not licensed health care
professionals and states do not maintain any type of registry that
would capture information pertaining to all the types of CRC employees.
Due to these variations, we do not believe we can rely on state law
to ensure that veterans can trust and rely on VA-recommended CRCs to
provide a certain, uniform minimum level of safety and care. VA
believes that all veterans residing in a CRC should have the same level
of assurance that a CRC staff member or other covered individual does
not have a criminal history, regardless of where that facility is
located.
In considering possible national standards, we reviewed existing
regulations governing other VA programs. State Veterans Homes are
owned, operated, and managed by state governments and provide nursing
home, domiciliary, or adult day care to eligible veterans. Regulations
governing State Veterans Homes are found at 38 CFR parts 51 through 59.
We believe that the State Veterans Home program is meaningfully similar
to the community residential care program because it serves a similar
veteran population and provides similar services; however, there are
two important differences. A State Veterans Homes is owned, operated
and managed by the state government while a CRC is a privately owned
entity. States exercise a layer of control over State Veterans Homes
that is not present in CRCs. In addition, persons living in some CRCs
who are not obtaining services from that facility regularly interact
with CRC residents and sometimes provide services to residents. State
Veterans Homes provide resident services through employees of the state
home, many of which are professionals licensed by the state.
Nonetheless, VA believes it is appropriate to look to how resident
safety and welfare is addressed in the State Veterans Homes program as
a guide on how to proceed in the CRC program.
We propose to amend Sec. 17.63 by adding a new paragraph (j)(3)
which would require the CRC to develop and implement written policies
and procedures that prohibit mistreatment, neglect, and abuse of
residents and misappropriation of resident property. This would ensure
that each facility has a policy in place to address these issues. In
addition, it would serve to inform both employees and CRC residents of
the prohibited practices and inform CRC residents about procedures for
reporting alleged mistreatment, neglect, and abuse of residents and
misappropriation of resident property.
Proposed paragraph (j)(3)(i)(A)(1) would prohibit the CRC from
employing an individual who has been convicted by a court of law of
abusing, neglecting, or mistreating individuals. VA published a similar
rule at Sec. 51.90(c) for State Veterans Homes. That rule has been in
place since February 7, 2000, and we believe it has been effective in
ensuring the safety of veterans residing in those facilities. We
believe a similar standard should be applied to employment in CRCs. The
terms ``abuse'' and ``neglect'' are defined in Sec. 51.90(b), and
would have the same meaning here.
Proposed paragraph (j)(3)(i)(A)(2) would prohibit the CRC from
employing individuals who have had a finding entered into an applicable
State registry or with the applicable licensing authority concerning
abuse, neglect, mistreatment of individuals or misappropriation of
property. Examples of applicable state registries include, but are not
limited to, state sex offender registries and registries of criminal
offenders which are maintained by some states. Typical licensing
authorities include, but are not limited to, state boards or agencies
that license or certify Registered Nurses (RN), Licensed Practical
Nurses (LPN), Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA), nursing aides or
medication aides. State laws and regulations typically require
employers to report abuse, neglect, mistreatment of individuals or
misappropriation of property alleged to have been committed by certain
licensed health care professionals. These reports are made part of the
relevant State registry, and the registry may contain
[[Page 69911]]
information on incidents that were not forwarded to law enforcement for
prosecution. VA believes that such information would be relevant to the
issue of whether a particular individual should have direct access to a
veteran residing in a CRC.
The CRC would be required by proposed paragraph (j)(3)(i)(B) to
immediately, meaning no more than 24 hours after the provider becomes
aware of the alleged violation, report all alleged violations involving
mistreatment, neglect, or abuse, including injuries of unknown source,
and misappropriation of resident property to the approving official. In
proposed paragraph (j)(3)(i)(B)(1)-(6), we would set out the minimum
information that must be contained in a report of an alleged violation.
The intent of the proposed rule is to place the approving official on
notice of any alleged violation so that appropriate follow-up measures
can be initiated. Follow-up measures may include contacting veteran
residents, ensuring any affected veteran resident receives a medical
evaluation from a VA health care provider, or conduct necessary interim
monitoring as provided for in Sec. 17.65(a). Proposed paragraph
(j)(3)(i)(C) would require the CRC to have evidence that all alleged
violations are documented and thoroughly investigated. The facility
would be required to prevent further potential abuse while the
investigation is in progress. The proposed rule would require that the
results of all investigations be reported to the approving official
within 5 working days of the incident, and to other officials in
accordance with State law, and that appropriate corrective action be
taken if the alleged violation is verified. The proposed requirements
in paragraphs (j)(3)(i)(B) and (C) are consistent with those already in
effect for State Veterans Homes under Sec. 51.90(c).
VA currently receives reports of alleged mistreatment, neglect, or
abuse, including injuries of unknown source, and misappropriation of
resident property on an ad hoc basis. The proposed rule would formalize
a reporting requirement and would ensure that VA is notified of any
such allegation so that appropriate steps can be taken to ensure the
safety and health of veterans residing in the CRC. The requirement that
the investigation be completed within 5 working days and reported to
both VA and other officials in accordance with State law would ensure
that the investigation is completed in a timely manner, and that
corrective action is taken to prevent further violations.
We propose in paragraph (j)(3)(i)(D) that employees accused of
alleged violations involving mistreatment, neglect, or abuse or
misappropriation of resident property, must be removed from all duties
requiring direct veteran resident contact during the pendency of the
facility's investigation. VA believes that removing such employee from
duties involving direct resident contact until the facility completes
its investigation is a prudent step to ensure veteran resident safety
and to provide assurance to veteran residents that the accused employee
would not be allowed direct access to them until the alleged incident
is investigated and any necessary corrective steps are taken, if
needed.
Proposed paragraph (j)(4) would define the three classes of
individuals considered to be employees of the CRC for purposes of this
proposed rule. Proposed paragraph (j)(4)(i) would establish that non-VA
health care providers at CRCs would be considered employees. Non-VA
health care providers may have frequent contact with veteran residents,
and are not subject to direct VA control or management. In addition,
proposed paragraph (j)(4)(ii) would establish that the term
``employee'' would include CRC staff who are not health care providers.
CRCs employ a variety of personnel that may include, for example,
contractors or janitorial staff. These individuals have access to
veteran residents, and some may be in a unique position to take
advantage of veterans.
Proposed paragraph (j)(4)(iii) would include persons with direct
resident access in the definition of ``employee.'' The term ``person
with direct resident access'' would mean an individual living in the
facility who is not receiving services from the facility, who may have
access to the resident or the resident's property, or may have one-on-
one contact with the resident. This could include relatives of live-in
staff members. These individuals with direct resident access are most
commonly found in medical foster homes, which are typically small CRCs
located in a family home, with no more than three consumer residents
that are run by certain members of a family, while other family members
are not employed by the CRC but continue to live in the home. They do
not provide care or services to veteran residents, but may have regular
contact with, or access to, veteran residents and their property. We do
not include fellow residents who are receiving services from the CRC in
the definition of ``person with direct resident access'' because we
believe that it is inappropriate to consider the background of
patients.
In proposed paragraph (j)(5), we would define the term
``convicted'' for purposes of this proposed rule. An employee would be
considered ``convicted'' of a criminal offense when a judgment of
conviction has been entered against the individual by a Federal, State,
or local court, regardless of whether there is an appeal pending or
whether the judgment of conviction or other record relating to criminal
conduct has been expunged. It would also include a finding of guilt
against the individual by a Federal, State, or local court. The term
``convicted'' would also include a plea of guilty or nolo contendere by
the individual has been accepted by a Federal, State, or local court.
Finally, the term would also encompass participation in a first
offender, deferred adjudication, or other arrangement or program where
judgment of conviction has been withheld. The proposed definition
covers the spectrum of outcomes possible when a court of competent
jurisdiction finds that a defendant has committed a criminal act. It
recognizes that the act that resulted in the conviction, as well as the
conviction itself, is relevant to the issue of safety and health of
veterans residing in CRCs.
Proposed paragraph (j)(6) would provide that, for purposes of
proposed paragraph (j)(3), the terms ``abuse'' and ``neglect'' would
have the same meaning set forth in 38 CFR 51.90(b). That paragraph
describes residents' right to be free from mental, physical, sexual,
and verbal abuse or neglect, corporal punishment, and involuntary
seclusion. Mental abuse, physical abuse, and sexual abuse are also
further defined.
The proposed rule would be enforced through the normal VA
inspection and approval process established in Sec. 17.65. This
section states that VA may approve a CRC meeting all of the standards
in Sec. 17.63 based on the report of a VA inspection and any findings
of necessary interim monitoring of the facility. CRCs are inspected by
VA at least every 12 months, and an approval is valid for a 12-month
period. A CRC may gain provisional approval if that facility does not
meet one or more of the standards in Sec. 17.63, provided the
deficiencies do not jeopardize the health or safety of residents, and
the facility and VA agree to a plan for correcting the deficiencies in
a specified amount of time.
If the approving official determines that a CRC does not comply
with all of the standards in Sec. 17.63, the facility is
[[Page 69912]]
provided notice of the discrepancy and an opportunity for a hearing.
Approval of a CRC may be revoked following a hearing as provided for in
Sec. 17.71. When revocation occurs, VA ceases referring veterans to
the CRC and notifies any veteran residing in that facility of the
revocation. Although this proposed rule would not change the process of
inspection, approval, or revocation of approval of CRCs established in
current 38 CFR 17.61 through 17.72, we have provided the above
discussion to show as a practical matter how CRCs would be affected by
this proposed rule. The public is invited to comment on whether the
proposed new standards in paragraphs (e) and (j) should be enforced in
the same manner as every other standard in Sec. 17.63.
The proposed changes to paragraph (j) require a CRC to maintain
certain records, develop and implement written policies and procedures
prohibiting mistreatment, neglect, abuse of residents, and
misappropriation of resident property. The approving VA official may
request these records and policies to ensure compliance with VA
standards. Current paragraph (i) addresses records that must be
maintained by the CRC. We propose to amend paragraph (i) to include the
new recordkeeping requirement. We would also reorganize this paragraph
to consolidate all resident-related record requirements into a single
subparagraph.
Proposed paragraph (i)(1) would state that the CRC must maintain
records on each resident in a secure place. Resident records must
include a copy of all signed agreements with the resident. Resident
records may be disclosed only with the permission of the resident, or
when required by law. This mirrors current paragraph (i)(1),
(i)(2)(ii), and (i)(3).
In paragraph (i)(2), we would state that the CRC must maintain and
make available, upon request of the approving official, records
establishing compliance with paragraphs (j)(1) through (3) of this
section; written policies and procedures required under paragraph
(j)(3) of this section; and, emergency notification procedures. A CRC
is required to hire qualified and properly trained staff, per current
paragraphs (j)(1) and (2). VA verifies compliance with this standard
during routine facility inspections. The proposed rule would prohibit a
CRC from employing certain individuals and would require a CRC to
develop and implement certain policies and to investigate and document
certain allegations of abuse or neglect. The proposed change to
paragraph (i) would address the need to maintain records reflecting
compliance with these standards, and would ensure that the approving
official may access these records upon request. Current paragraph
(i)(2)(i) already requires a CRC to maintain records regarding
emergency notification procedures. This proposal would consolidate this
with other recordkeeping requirements that are not resident-specific.
In addition, we propose to amend Sec. 17.63(e)(1), regarding the
maximum number of beds allowed in a resident's bedroom. Current
standards provide that resident bedrooms must contain no more than four
beds, and multiresident rooms must provide each resident at least 80
square feet of living space. We propose to limit the number of resident
beds in newly established bedrooms in approved facilities and
facilities seeking approval. Limiting the number of beds to up to two
per bedroom would ensure that veterans receive an appropriate amount of
privacy and would appropriately minimize the impact of visits from
guests, care providers, etc., on the veteran's quality of life. Under
the proposed rule, facilities approved before the effective date of the
rule that already have bedrooms with more than two beds would be able
to retain that configuration, but could not establish any new bedrooms
with more than two beds in a room. Bedrooms in facilities approved
after the effective date of the final rule, or newly established
bedrooms in facilities approved before the effective date of the final
rule, would not be permitted to provide more than two beds. We would
allow currently approved configurations because we do not want to
negatively impact veteran residents placed in those CRCs who are
satisfied with their arrangement.
Effect of Rulemaking
The Code of Federal Regulations, as proposed to be revised by this
proposed rulemaking, would represent the exclusive legal authority on
this subject. No contrary rules or procedures would be authorized. All
VA guidance would be read to conform with this proposed rulemaking if
possible or, if not possible, such guidance would be superseded by this
rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule includes provisions constituting a collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3521) that require approval by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). Accordingly, under 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), VA has submitted a copy of
this rulemaking to OMB for review. OMB assigns a control number for
each collection of information it approves. VA may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
Proposed Sec. 17.63(i) and (j) would require a collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. If OMB does not
approve the collection of information as requested, VA will immediately
remove the provisions containing a collection of information or take
such other action as is directed by OMB.
Comments on the collection of information contained in this
proposed rule should be submitted to the Office of Management and
Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the Department of Veterans Affairs,
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503,
with copies sent by mail or hand-delivery to: Director, Office of
Regulation Policy and Management (02REG), Department of Veterans
Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC 20420; or
fax to (202) 273-9026; or submitted through https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response to ``RIN
2900-AP06--Ensuring a Safe Environment for Community Residential Care
Residents.''
OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of
information contained in this proposed rule between 30 and 60 days
after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore,
a comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB
receives it within 30 days of publication. This does not affect the
deadline for the public to comment on the proposed rule.
VA considers comments by the public on proposed collections of
information in--
Evaluating whether the proposed collections of information
are necessary for the proper performance of VA functions, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
Evaluating the accuracy of VA's estimate of the burden of
the proposed collections of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
Enhancing the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
Minimizing the burden of the collections of information on
those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information technology,
[[Page 69913]]
e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
The collection of information contained in 38 CFR 17.63(i) and (j)
is described immediately following this paragraph.
Title: Ensuring a Safe Environment for Community Residential Care
Residents.
Summary of collection of information: Current Sec. 17.63(i)
addresses recordkeeping requirements for a CRC. Information collection
under this paragraph was approved by OMB under OMB control number 2900-
0491; however that approval has expired. We propose amending paragraph
(i) to address not only the recordkeeping requirements currently in
that paragraph, but also recordkeeping requirements under paragraphs
(j)(1) through (3).
Paragraph (i)(1) would require the CRC to maintain records on each
resident, to include a copy of all signed agreements with the resident.
We estimate the annual burden related to this information collection to
be one hour per year.
Paragraph (i)(2) would state that the CRC must maintain and make
available upon request of the approving official, records establishing
compliance with paragraphs (j)(1) and (2). These paragraphs relate to
CRC staff requirements, and provide that the CRC must have sufficient,
qualified staff must be on duty and available to care for the resident
and ensure the health and safety of each resident. The CRC provider and
staff must have adequate education, training, or experience to maintain
the facility. We estimate that the annual burden related to information
collection required to establish that the CRC has sufficient, qualified
staff, and that the CRC provider and staff have adequate training and
education, would be two hours.
Paragraph (i)(2) would also require the CRC to maintain records
related to proposed paragraph (j)(3). Proposed Sec. 17.63(j)(3) would
require CRCs to immediately, meaning no more than 24 hours after the
provider becomes aware of the alleged violation, report all alleged
violations involving mistreatment, neglect, or abuse, including
injuries of unknown source, and misappropriation of resident property
to the approving official. We would require that the report, at a
minimum, must include the facility name, address, telephone number, and
owner; the date and time of the alleged violation; a summary of the
alleged violation; the name of any public or private officials or VHA
program offices that have been notified of the alleged violations, if
any; whether additional investigation is necessary to provide VHA with
more information about the alleged violation; and contact information
for a person who can provide additional details at the community
residential care provider, including a name, position, location, and
phone number.
We would require the CRCs to document and thoroughly investigate
evidence of an alleged violation. The results of all investigations
must be reported to the approving official within 5 working days of the
incident and to other officials in accordance with State law. It would
also require facilities to develop and implement written policies and
procedures to prohibit the mistreatment, neglect, and abuse of
residents and misappropriation of resident property. The approving VA
official may request the facility to produce such written policies and
procedures.
The most current data available to VA (Q4 FY2012) reflects that we
have 1,293 approved CRCs, 493 of which are Medical Foster Homes at the
1 to 3 bed size. The total number of staff working in these facilities
is 5,614. This aggregate number of CRC staff is distributed in CRCs as
follows: 2.5 staff for a 1 to 3 bed facility, 4 staff for a 4 to 15 bed
facility, 5 staff for a 15 to 26 bed facility and 11 staff for a 26 to
100+ bed facility.
CRCs would be required to report information under this proposed
rule when the facility: (1) Has an alleged violation involving
mistreatment, neglect, or abuse, including injuries of unknown source,
and misappropriation of resident property; or, (2) is reporting the
results of an investigation into that alleged violation. The CRCs would
also be required to document and investigate evidence of any alleged
violation. We view the reporting, documenting, and investigating of an
alleged incident and the subsequent report of the results of the
investigation to be one collection of information, as it focuses on one
set of alleged facts and the facility's investigation of those facts.
VA does not currently require CRCs to report to the approving
official allegations of resident abuse or neglect. VA surveyed CRC
coordinators at the VA medical facilities that approve CRC sponsors.
Based on information from CRC coordinators, we believe that VA
currently receives fewer than one report of alleged mistreatment,
neglect, or abuse, including injuries of unknown source, or
misappropriation of resident property from CRCs in any given year. This
proposed rule would formalize the reporting and investigation
requirement and we believe this would more likely than not result in an
increase in the number of reports of alleged abuse mistreatment,
neglect, or abuse, including injuries of unknown source, or
misappropriation of resident property per year. However, for purposes
of this estimate, we will assume that a CRC will have one incident per
year related to an alleged violation involving mistreatment, neglect,
or abuse, including injuries of unknown source, and misappropriation of
resident property; or, reporting the results of an investigation into
that alleged violation. The estimated average burden for an alleged
violation response is three hours.
All approved CRCs would be required to develop and implement
written policies and procedures to prohibit the mistreatment, neglect,
and abuse of residents and misappropriation of resident property. On
inspection of a CRC, VA would require the facility to produce such
written policies and procedures. The written policies would have to be
developed once, although it is possible that a promulgated policy could
require revision in the future. VA intends to develop sample policies
and boilerplate that could be adapted by a CRC to meet the facility's
individual requirements. This would decrease the burden of this
proposed information collection. VA estimates that the information
collection burden on a CRC utilizing a sample policy or boilerplate
developed by VA would be two hours.
Finally, paragraph (i)(2) would require the CRC to maintain a
record of emergency notification procedures. This is consistent with
current Sec. 17.63(i)(2)(i). Once emergency notification procedures
are in place, there may be instances in which the CRC may periodically
review and modify the existing procedures. We estimate the annual
burden of this information collection to be 0.5 hours.
Description of need for information and proposed use of
information: VA needs this information to ensure the health and safety
of veterans placed in these facilities. In CRCs, where VA involvement
is less intensive and to which VA does not provide any payments or
services, we believe that information obtained under the proposed rule
would provide necessary protection for veteran residents.
Description of Likely Respondents: Operators of CRCs currently
listed or that request future listing on VA's approved CRCs referral
list.
Estimated Number of Respondents per Year: 1,293 operators of CRCs.
Estimated Frequency of Responses: Once in a 12-month period.
[[Page 69914]]
Estimated Average Burden per Response: 8.5 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden: 10,990.5
hours.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that this proposed rule would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601-612). This proposed rule would be small business neutral as
it applies only to those CRCs seeking inclusion on VA's list of
approved CRCs. The costs associated with this proposed rule are
minimal, consisting of the administrative requirement to develop and
implement written policies and procedures that prohibit mistreatment,
neglect, and abuse of residents and misappropriation of resident
property; ensure that no employees are employed in contravention to the
proposed rule; report to VA any alleged violation involving
mistreatment, neglect, or abuse, including injuries of unknown source,
and misappropriation of resident property; and investigate alleged
resident abuse, take steps to prevent further harm, and implement
appropriate corrective measures.
A CRC may elect to order background checks on employees from
commercial sources or local law enforcement agencies. The cost of an
individual background check varies dependent on the vendor, but VA
believes the average cost is $50. VA believes that 75 percent of CRCs
are required to, or could obtain, criminal background checks on
employees through one or more existing federal or state programs. This
includes: (1) The state grant program administered by the Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for conducting federal and state
criminal background checks on direct patient access employees of long-
term care facilities and providers (42 U.S.C. 1320a-7l); (2) the CMS
requirement applicable to facilities receiving Medicare and Medicaid
funds; and (3) various state laws or regulations mandating criminal
background screening for employment to work with the elderly or
disabled. In addition, many CRCs that are currently servicing veterans
already, voluntarily, have policies and procedures in place to review
the backgrounds of their employees and make employment decisions
consistent with this rulemaking as one way to ensure resident safety.
The remaining 25 percent of CRCs (324) would more likely than not
opt to obtain criminal background checks on CRC staff in order to be
approved by VA. The median number of staff in CRCs currently approved
by VA is five. We estimate the cost that would be incurred for
obtaining criminal background checks on CRC staff is $250 per CRC.
On this basis, the Secretary certifies that the adoption of this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities as they are defined in the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. Therefore, under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this
rulemaking is exempt from the initial and final regulatory flexibility
analysis requirements of sections 603 and 604.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, and other advantages; distributive impacts;
and equity). Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review) emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility.
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) defines a
``significant regulatory action'' requiring review by OMB, unless OMB
waives such review, as ``any regulatory action that is likely to result
in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a
sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user
fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
this Executive Order.''
The economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this proposed rule have been examined, and it has been
determined not to be a significant regulatory action under Executive
Order 12866. VA's impact analysis can be found as a supporting document
at https://www.regulations.gov, usually within 48 hours after the
rulemaking document is published. Additionally, a copy of the
rulemaking and its impact analysis are available on VA's Web site at
https://www.va.gov/orpm/, by following the link for VA Regulations
Published From FY 2004 to FYTD.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C.
1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and
benefits before issuing any rule that may result in expenditures by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year. This proposed rule would have no such
effect on State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private
sector.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance program numbers and
titles affected by this document are 64.009, Veterans Medical Care
Benefits; 64.010, Veterans Nursing Home Care; and 64.018, Sharing
Specialized Medical Resources.
Signing Authority
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or designee, approved this
document and authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document
to the Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as
an official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Robert L.
Nabors II, Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs, approved
this document on November 5, 2015, for publication
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17
Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism,
Claims, Day care, Dental health, Drug abuse, Government contracts,
Grant programs-health, Government programs-veterans, Health care,
Health facilities, Health professions, Health records, Homeless, Mental
health programs, Nursing homes, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Veterans.
Dated: November 6, 2015.
Jeffrey M. Martin,
Office Program Manager, Regulation Policy and Management, Office of the
General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, Department of Veterans
Affairs proposes to amend 38 CFR part 17 as follows:
[[Page 69915]]
PART 17--MEDICAL
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in specific sections.
0
2. Amend Sec. 17.63 by revising paragraph (e)(1) and paragraph (i) and
adding paragraphs (j)(3) through (6) to read as follows:
Sec. 17.63 Approval of community residential care facilities.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) Contain no more than four beds:
(i) Facilities approved before [DATE 30 DAYS AFTER DATE OF
PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE] may not establish any new resident bedrooms
with more than two beds per room;
(ii) Facilities approved on or after [DATE 30 DAYS AFTER DATE OF
PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE] may not provide resident bedrooms containing
more than two beds per room.
* * * * *
(i) Records. (1) The facility must maintain records on each
resident in a secure place. Resident records must include a copy of all
signed agreements with the resident. Resident records may be disclosed
only with the permission of the resident, or when required by law.
(2) The facility must maintain and make available, upon request of
the approving VA official, records establishing compliance with
paragraphs (j)(1) through (3) of this section; written policies and
procedures required under paragraph (j)(3) of this section; and,
emergency notification procedures. (Approved by the Office of
Management and Budget under control number 2900-XXXX.)
(j) * * *
(3) The community residential care provider must develop and
implement written policies and procedures that prohibit mistreatment,
neglect, and abuse of residents and misappropriation of resident
property.
(i) The community residential care provider must do all of the
following:
(A) Not employ individuals who--
(1) Have been convicted by a court of law of abuse, neglect, or
mistreatment of individuals; or
(2) Have had a finding entered into an applicable State registry or
with the applicable licensing authority concerning abuse, neglect,
mistreatment of individuals or misappropriation of property.
(B) Ensure that all alleged violations involving mistreatment,
neglect, or abuse, including injuries of unknown source, and
misappropriation of resident property are reported to the approving
official immediately, which means no more than 24 hours after the
provider becomes aware of the alleged violation. The report, at a
minimum, must include--
(1) The facility name, address, telephone number, and owner;
(2) The date and time of the alleged violation;
(3) A summary of the alleged violation;
(4) The name of any public or private officials or VHA program
offices that have been notified of the alleged violations, if any;
(5) Whether additional investigation is necessary to provide VHA
with more information about the alleged violation; and
(6) Contact information for a person who can provide additional
details at the community residential care provider, including a name,
position, location, and phone number.
(C) Have evidence that all alleged violations of this paragraph (j)
are documented and thoroughly investigated, and must prevent further
abuse while the investigation is in progress. The results of all
investigations must be reported to the approving official within 5
working days of the incident and to other officials in accordance with
State law, and appropriate corrective action must be taken if the
alleged violation is verified.
(D) Remove all duties requiring direct resident contact with
veteran residents from any employee alleged to have violated this
paragraph (j) during the investigation of such employee.
(4) For purposes of paragraph (j)(3) of this section, the term
``employee'' includes a:
(i) Non-VA health care provider at the community residential care
facility;
(ii) Staff member of the community residential care facility who is
not a health care provider, including a contractor; and
(iii) Person with direct resident access. The term ``person with
direct resident access'' means an individual living in the facility who
is not receiving services from the facility, who may have access to a
resident or a resident's property, or may have one-on-one contact with
a resident.
(5) For purposes of paragraph (j)(3) of this section, an employee
is considered ``convicted'' of a criminal offense--
(i) When a judgment of conviction has been entered against the
individual by a Federal, State, or local court, regardless of whether
there is an appeal pending or whether the judgment of conviction or
other record relating to criminal conduct has been expunged;
(ii) When there has been a finding of guilt against the individual
by a Federal, State, or local court;
(iii) When a plea of guilty or nolo contendere by the individual
has been accepted by a Federal, State, or local court; or
(iv) When the individual has entered into participation in a first
offender, deferred adjudication, or other arrangement or program where
judgment of conviction has been withheld.
(6) For purposes of paragraph (j)(3) of this section, the terms
``abuse'' and ``neglect'' have the same meaning set forth in 38 CFR
51.90(b).
* * * * *
(The Office of Management and Budget has approved the information
collection provisions in this section under control number 2900-
XXXX.)
[FR Doc. 2015-28749 Filed 11-10-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P