Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Complaint Evaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board discusses adopting North Carolina complaint-evaluation tool and 'just culture' approach
Summary
The investigative committee reviewed a complaint-evaluation tool shared by the North Carolina Board of Nursing and discussed adapting its "just culture" algorithm to Kansas law to help staff triage complaints, identify facility-level patterns and improve education before formal disciplinary action.
The investigative committee of the Board of Nursing reviewed a complaint-evaluation tool shared by the North Carolina Board of Nursing and discussed adapting it to Kansas law to improve internal complaint triage and education for facilities.
Linda Davies, a member of the board staff, told the committee that North Carolina ‘‘is willing to allow KSPN to adopt and adapt it based off of our state law and our nurse practice set,’’ adding that North Carolina staff asked only that they be credited for the original tool. Davies said the North Carolina model uses traveling nurse consultants and an algorithm to help distinguish between system issues and individual behavior.
Committee members said the tool could help identify repeat problems at particular facilities and help staff decide when to open formal cases. One board member urged tracking facility type and patterns: ‘‘If there's three complaints in a year or five complaints in two years about the same facility...there's a trigger,’’ the member said, urging a mechanism to report systemic facility concerns to the appropriate regulator.
Speakers emphasized limitations: the tool would not replace statutory reporting responsibilities or be used for certain complaints that by law go directly to the board (for example, boundary/misconduct complaints), and any adaptation must conform to Kansas statutes and federal requirements the board must follow, including the nurse licensure compact and CMS rules.
Staff said the immediate use would likely be internal triage and reporting, with possible longer-term adoption dependent on legal review and policy decisions. The committee encouraged staff to draft an adapted version and to work with assistant attorneys general and stakeholders before returning with a formal recommendation.
The committee did not take a formal vote to adopt the tool during the meeting; members asked staff to prepare draft language and examples for future consideration.
