News from CCL website

This is January 2011 update on the new direction of CCLD. Click on ccld website link to read about key inspection protocol pilot test.

Department of Social Services Mission Statement

“The mission of the California Department of Social Services is to serve, aid and protect needy and vulnerable children and adults in ways that strengthen and preserve families, encourage personal responsibility and foster independence.

CCLD continues to work with stakeholders on the New Directions of CCLD as we move toward furthering CCLD’s goal of strengthening health and safety protections for persons in care.  CCLD met with stakeholders on December 2, 2010 to review the results of the Key Indicator Tool (KIT) test.  This initial test occurred from July through September of 2010.  For more information on this test please refer to the Stakeholder Handout 12/2/10 available on the CCLD website at .

CCLD will continue testing the KITs beginning January 18, 2011.  This test will be used to further refine the Key Indicator Tool Inspection protocol and develop additional tools for all facility types.  The long term goal is to have multiple KITs for every facility type eligible for a Key Indicator Tool Inspection.

Facilities receiving an inspection using the KIT will be triggered to a comprehensive inspection if either of the following occurs:

  • One zero tolerance violation (fire clearance violations; absence of supervision; accessible bodies of water; accessible firearms, ammunition, or both; refused entry to a facility or any part of a facility; and the presence of an excluded person on the premises).
  • Any two type A (immediate risk) violations regardless of if they are listed on the KIT or not.

All inspections are still subject to all laws and regulations regardless of the type of inspection.  For example, if during a KIT Inspection, CCLD observes a violation that is not listed on the KIT CCLD will address that violation.

For additional information visit website.

This entry was posted in News. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to News from CCL website

  1. admin says:

    Assemblyman Logue Don has introduced AB 259 in response to “don’t CPR incident” that occurred on February 26th, 2013 in Bakersfield. Elderly woman who died when nurse refused to give CPR, due to facility policy prohibiting facility employees from rendering CPR. It is not known where nurse came from, independent or skilled nursing. The 911 operator told caller that she would not be sued if anything went wrong, but operator was told that it is against policy to do CPR even though she is professional CPR class holder. After the incident facility licensee is reversing its position claiming “policy was misinterpreted”, administrator said that policy was followed correctly that states in case of emergency immediately call 911. Bill proposed may force nurses with CPR certification to do CPR no matter where they are. In the nursing practice act, it states that a licensed person who acts in good faith while rendering CPR care at the scene of an emergency which occurs outside both the place and the CPR course of that person’s employment is not liable for any civil damages as a result of acts or omissions while rendering emergency care. Right now nurse or physician cannot be compelled to reveal their license status and engage into emergency situation. Proposed bill would make refusal to administer CPR in an emergency-unprofessional conduct. It also prevents some facilities from establishing a policy that prohibits licensed professional nurses employed by such facilities from performing CPR. California Supreme Court ruled that in non medical situations; any person who provides care is not immune from civil liability, the Good Samaritan act is only valid in an emergency and when performed by trained CPR professionals and the court has ruled this only covers licensed professionals.
    Legislature from 1980, declares that no person who acts in good faith and not for compensation, renders CPR emergency care at the scene shall not be liable for any civil damages resulting from any act of omission. Lawmakers only intended to shield “ those persons who in good faith render emergency medical care at the scene”, however in the court’s minority opinion, the aim of legislation was clear to encourage people not to pass by those in need of help but to show compassion and render necessary first aid .

Leave a Reply