After much hard work by lawmakers and even this newspaper, the Georgia Legislature in 2020 enacted a law that promised substantial steps toward better protecting residents of assisted living and large personal care homes.
So it’s surprising and of considerable concern, frankly, that the Georgia General Assembly is now considering a bill that would loosen some key staffing requirements at these senior facilities.
The revision bill to the landmark care law, HB 1531, was approved last Thursday by the House Human Relations and Aging Committee.
It’s only fair to note that most provisions of the 2020 law remain unchanged.
Yet, the changes that would be enabled by the bill are significant enough that senior care advocates here are worried. A reading of the four-page bill shows their concerns are warranted.
Reporting last week by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution outlined the changes this way, “The bill would allow the homes to meet monthly minimum requirements for nurse staffing, instead of the current weekly requirement for nursing hours. The total nursing hours wouldn’t change, but they could be provided in one or two weeks of the month, for example, instead of having a nurse present every week.”
The new math here seems at first read to amount to only a permitted shift in hours – and not a substantive change. But having nurses on hand in some portion of each calendar week seems a commonsense requirement.
Another change in HB1531 would drop the current requirement for at least two staff members to be present at all times. The proposed change would permit only one staffer in memory care units if there are fewer than 12 residents during the day and 15 residents at night. In non-memory care units, one staffer would be allowed during the day if there are fewer than 15 residents during the day or fewer than 20 residents at night.
Anyone who’s ever spent time in a care facility, particularly one devoted to memory care, knows that crisis situations can develop quickly and unpredictably. At such times, even two staffers on hand may well be put to a hard test – and only one worker in-house could be overwhelmed to the point that care suffers.
This easing of important provisions of current law seems in direct conflict with the sentiments that led to the passage of the 2020 landmark care law. It came after The Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s “Unprotected” reporting project brought to light too-numerous instances of care that fell far below norms a decent society should require.
This newspaper’s reporting showed that 1 in 5 assisted living or large personal care homes in Georgia had a history of violations indicating serious shortcomings. As we noted at the time, our reporting “identified 600 allegations involving neglect and 90 allegations of abuse … . The numbers include 20 deaths and more than 100 injuries in instances where facilities appear to have failed to provide adequate care.”
Worse yet, the AJC reported that, “given incompleteness or other inadequacies of records in Georgia, it’s very likely that the number of those harmed is even higher.”
It was against that backdrop that Georgia lawmakers passed HB 987, which significantly enhanced care standards at these facilities. One of the key drivers of that law was Rep. John LaHood, R-Valdosta, whose family operates senior care homes.
LaHood is sponsoring the new revision bill too. He said last week that the changes were needed to provide flexibility for senior care operators and keep costs down at a time when hiring staff is challenging due to workforce shortages.
We don’t doubt that it’s tough to find and keep workers, especially given what a global pandemic and related economic upheavals have wrought in the care business.
Georgia’s vulnerable citizens in care facilities shouldn’t have to shoulder potentially greater risk because of that. The state would better serve their interests and those of a humane society that values life by exploring other solutions.
For example, lawmakers could focus quickly on ways to help better retain care workers during this time known as the “Great Resignation” when many workers in many industries are moving on, or calling it quits.
The state can certainly afford to consider its options at this point, given flush budgets that have seen raises for many state employees and a proposal to reduce the state’s income tax rate and provide refunds to taxpayers.
Lawmakers should consider whether some of this current surplus could be used to somehow help keep needed care facility workers on the job.
As the human travail of the COVID-19 pandemic that battered Georgia’s care facilities showed, care employees are among the most essential of all workers.
They deserve our support.
The Editorial Board.
