Understanding TJC 2009 Life Safety Code Chapter

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Elements of an Effective Safety and Health Program
Advertisements

ILSMs Eugene A. Cable, P.E. Life Safety Consultants NEHES NFPA Liaison
Life Safety and You. Life Safety is comprised of: Codes Standards Regulations Documentation LIFE-SAFETY-Refers to the joint consideration of both the.
NFPA-101, LIFE SAFETY CODE, 2003 EDITION Chapter 15 Existing Schools
Biggest Pitfalls and Best Practices: Life Safety
EOC: Semi-Annual Review of DOH Survey Citations, The Top 10!
When A Drill Is Not A Drill: Fire Drills That Keep Your Fire Marshal Happy Randy Benson, Executive Director Rural Healthcare Quality Network.
Annual Evaluation of the Environment of Care (EOC) Program
Courtemanche & Associates Healthcare Synergists
“TI” Ohhhh….. (TIO) (No TIO is not a person!) What is it all about?
Notes From ASHE Conference and CMS LSC Waiver Summaries
Interim Life Safety Measures Eleven Administration Actions of Interim Life Safety Measures ÷Ensure free and unobstructed exits. Personnel receive additional.
CODE REVIEW: DOH Article 28 Compliance Establishing a Feasibility process that is focused on compliance with New York State Department of Health rules.
Protecting Your School Assets Through Loss Control.
January 16, 2014 Brad Keyes, CHSP Changes to the 2014 Acute Care & Critical Access Hospital Manuals on Life Safety Compliance.
DOH Survey Citation Update; What’s New, What’s Hot, What’s Not!
© Copyright, The Joint Commission Quality Tools Available for Critical Access Hospitals December 16, :00-3:00pm CST.
State of Michigan Department of Community Health
Safety and Health Programs
Effective Workplace Safety Inspections OFFICE OF RISK MANAGEMENT LOSS PREVENTION UNIT.
Hospital Patient Safety Initiatives: Discharge Planning
March 2011 The Joint Commission Survey Process Overview
Safety and Health Programs
FALAR Part 3 – Post Construction  Compilation of  Maintenance records of fire protection/life safety equipment  Test records of fire protection/life.
CSHE Los Angeles Chapter 2013 Annual Devin J Hugie, SASHE, CHFM, CHSP-FSM, CHEP.
SAFETY AND HEALTH PROGRAMS 1. This presentation is adapted from the OSHA Safety and Health Programs presentation available on the OSHA website. CREDITS.
2009 The Physical Environment Overview Environment of Care Emergency Management Life Safety Chapter Q & A George Mills, Sr. Engineer Standard Interpretation.
EGRESS AND FIRE PROTECTION
George Mills, Sr. Engineer Standard Interpretation Group
The ASHE advocacy highway is a two-way street of communication between ASHE and chapter advocacy liaisons The goal of the advocacy highway is to support.
1 NYP BEST PRACTICES CODE REVIEW: LIFE SAFETY Larry Borsinger, MBA Director, Facilities Operations - Regulatory Compliance Sukhjit Tom Singh, MHA, MPH.
The Second Survey Point of Vulnerability How Should I Prepare for the Facility Tour? Healthcare Engineering Consultants.

Commissioning of Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems Presented by: Charles Kilfoil Bechtel National Waste Treatment Plant Richland WA.
Unit #4 Establishing Committee Expectations – Safety & Health Programs 1.
The Post-Survey Process George Mason University College of Nursing and Health Science Regulatory Requirements for Health Systems Summer 2004 Used with.
The Preliminary Planning Session
2009 The Physical Environment
Safety and Health Programs 1. Benefits of Effective Safety and Health Programs Reduce work related injuries and illnesses Improve morale and productivity.
OSHAX.org - The Unofficial Guide To the OSHA1. Benefits of Effective Safety and Health Programs Reduce work related injuries and illnesses Improve morale.
JCAHO Accreditation/Survey Process for Ambulatory Surgical Center (ASC) By F O HSCI 547 Fourth Assignment.
C A & Courtemanche & Associates HEALTHCARE SYNERGISTS.
FIRE DRILLS David McMahon, RS, MPH Phoenix Area Indian Health Service.
What’s New for 2008? Healthcare Engineering Consultants Does the Joint Commission Manual Have Major Changes for 2008?
Changes and Challenges for “EC” in 2009 Presented by: Gary D. Slack, PE, CCE Healthcare Engineering Consultants Joint Commission.
SPS policy – Information Presentation Presentation to ROS June 16, 2004.
BIM Bridge Inspection and Maintenance Technical Standards Branch Class B Bridge Inspection Course Inspection Policies and Procedures INSPECTION POLICIES.
The Survey Process in 2011 Healthcare Engineering Consultants Typical Survey Activities in 2011 will Include:  Communication to hospital by JC liaison.
Part 2: Meeting the Challenges of the Four Survey “EC Vulnerabilities” Healthcare Engineering Consultants Preparing for the Unscheduled Survey.
2 IMPACT - THE FIRE PERMIT = Hot Work Permit 3 Welcome ! This course is linked to the use of IMPACT, so it is assumed that: You know how to use IMPACT.
Tennessee Department of Health Bureau of Health Licensure and Regulations Division of Health Care Facilities.
Dispensary and Administration Site Information Presentation.
Maine State Fire Marshals Office1 Laws and Codes Relating to Existing Apartment occupancies in the State of Maine Mark Stevens CFI-II, CFPS, CFPE Inspections.
Certificate of Need Process NYP Best Practices for Architects & Engineers May 2, 2016 Angela Gonzalez-Perez Director, Regulatory Planning.
1 Existing Conditions Survey/Field Verification For Article 28 Space Best Practices May 2016.
NYP BEST PRACTICES CODE REVIEW: LIFE SAFETY Larry Borsinger, MBA
The Joint Commission’s 2011 National Patient Safety Goals
Existing Conditions Survey/Field Verification For Article 28 Space
NIEP Evaluation PO&A “How-to” Guide and Issue Classification
Training Appendix Revised January 2018.
Training Appendix for Adult Protective Services and Employment Supports June 2018.
Fire Door Inspections Qualified Training
General Requirements of NFPA 101
Quality Tools Available for Critical Access Hospitals
Pre Construction Risk Analysis
Emergency Preparedness Requirements
Elements of an Effective Safety and Health Program
Elements of an Effective Safety and Health Program
Presentation transcript:

Understanding TJC 2009 Life Safety Code Chapter Presentation prepared for the Healthcare Facilities Managers of Delaware Valley 1-13-09 Leon Dender and Dan Campbell

Life Safety Code Chapter Breakdown Based on the NFPA 2000 edition Life Safety Code 101 Hospitals have 192 elements of performance. Scoring is effective as January 01, 2009

Life Safety Code Chapter Breakdown New Chapter has three main components. Physical statement of conditions (SOC) deficiency survey for LSC compliance Building maintenance program (BMP) Has no scoring advantage Maintaining the practice of inspections greatly helps with SOC. ILSM’s Huge emphasis on documentation requirements.

Life Safety Code Chapter Breakdown Scoring Supplemental findings eliminated There are only “A” and “C” requirements “A” requirements are yes or no “C” requirements are three or more findings in the same category. Requirement for Improvement (RFI) Evidence of Compliance. (ESC) Required to be submitted for all standards that are found to be out of compliance regardless of criticality.

Life Safety Code Chapter Breakdown Scoring is broken down into four levels Immediate threat to life Situational decision rules Direct impact requirements Indirect impact requirements

Life Safety Code Chapter Breakdown Level one Immediate threat to life CON-04 or PDA possible Three examples cited in physical environment Inoperable fire alarm Failure to provide appropriate exits during construction. The absence of master alarms for medical gas systems Other Immediate threats to life are mentioned in the Utility and Fire Safety Chapter

Life Safety Code Chapter Breakdown Level 2 Situational Decision Rules Conditional Accreditation (CON-O4) or Preliminary Denial of Accreditation Symbol 2 with a Triangle

Life Safety Code Chapter Breakdown (slide one of two) Deficiencies that can lead to a Conditional Accreditation • CON 04 Failure to make sufficient progress toward the corrective actions described in a statement of conditions Part 4, Plan for Improvement which was previously accepted by the Joint Commission LS.01.01.01 EP 3 “When the hospital plans to resolve a deficiency through a Plan for Improvement (PFI), the hospital meets the time frames identified in the PFI accepted by The Joint Commission. “

Life Safety Code Chapter Breakdown (Slide Two of Two) or Has failed to implement or enforce applicable Interim Life Safety measures LS.01.02.01 EP 3 “The hospital has a written interim life safety measure (ILSM) policy that covers situations when Life Safety Code deficiencies cannot be immediately corrected or during periods of construction. The policy includes criteria for evaluating when and to what extent the hospital follows special measures to compensate for increased life safety risk.”

Life Safety Code Chapter Breakdown Level 3 Direct Impact Requirements Findings of non-compliance accumulate” toward CON • 45 days to correct with evidence of standard compliance (ESC) Indicated by Triangle with a number 3

Life Safety Code Chapter Breakdown Protecting occupants during periods when the Life Safety Code is not met or during periods of construction. ILSM procedures. Perform a risk assessment (see handout) Conduct daily surveys and issue hot work permits as needed. Educate the workers and in-house staff in the area for exiting pattern changes. Educate staff in surrounding areas of code deficiencies and protective measures implemented.

Managing Risk, Evaluating Construction, Non-Construction, and Potential ILSM Locations Are there risks with flammable gas cylinders on the construction site? Yes No Comment: ____________________________________________ Are there any risks involving temporary partitions and fire suppression and detection systems? Yes No Comment: ____________________________________________ Are there any doors in smoke or fire partitions compromised by blocking or other means? Yes No Comment: ____________________________________________ 4. Are there any risks with hole penetration in and around the construction site? Yes No Comment: ____________________________________________ 5. Are there any unusual circumstances effecting fire, or life safety? Yes No Comment: _____________________________________________ If Yes, Explain: _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________

Managing Risk, Evaluating Construction, Non-Construction, and Potential ILSM Locations 1. General Statement: All SOC items identified as 45-day work order deficiencies following an in-house SOC survey shall not require ILSM’s. ILSM’s shall be required when a specific deficiency or deficiencies have been deemed required by the Facilities Management or the Fire Marshal. Such deficiencies shall be identified on the 45-day work issued. 2. Deficiency: ___________________________ Location: ________________________ Comment: ______________________________________________________________ 3. Deficiency: ___________________________ Location: ________________________ 4. Deficiency: ___________________________ Location: ________________________ 1. Potential ILSM Location: Items identified during Building Maintenance Program (BMP) inspections shall be evaluated for completion within 45 days. Life Safety compliance items shall be identified on an ILSM grid for BMP deficiencies that will possibly require modified ILSM’s, as determined by the Fire Marshall. 2. BMP deficiency items expected to take more than 45 days to complete shall be placed on the eSOC.

ILSM Risk Assessment Requirements (page one of two) Asterisk = Direct Impact Requirements for ILSM *LS.01.02.01 EP-1 Notify Fire Depart. And initiate fire watch when the fire alarm or sprinkler system is out of service more than 4 hours in a 24 hr. period in an occupied building. *LS.01.02.01 EP-2 Post signage identifying the location of alternate exits to everyone affected. LS.01.02.01 EP-3 Written ILSM policy that covers situations when LSC deficiencies cannot be immediately corrected or during construction. Policy includes criteria to what extent special measures to follow to compensate for increased LS risk. *LS.01.02.01 EP-4 Inspects exits on daily basis. *LS.01.02.01 EP-5 Provides temporary but equivalent fire alarm and detection system, when system is impaired. *LS.01.02.01 EP-6 Provides additional fire fighting equipment. LS.01.02.01 EP-7 Temporary partitions are smoke tight, or made of non-combustible material or made of limited combustible material and do not add to development or spread of fire.

ILSM Risk Assessment Requirements (page two of two) LS.01.02.01 EP-8 Increases surveillance of buildings, grounds, and equipment, giving special attention to construction areas and storage, excavation, and field offices. LS.01.02.01 EP-9 Enforces storage, housekeeping, and debris removal to fire load to the lowest feasible level. LS.01.02.01 EP-10 Provides additional training to those who work in the hospital on use of fire-fighting equipment. LS.01.02.01 EP-11 Conducts one additional fire drill per shift per quarter. LS.01.02.01 EP-12 Inspects and tests temporary systems monthly. The completion date of tests is documented. *LS.01.02.01 EP-13 Hospital conducts education to promote awareness of building deficiencies, construction hazards, and temporary measures implemented to maintain fire safety. *LS.01.02.01 EP-14 Hospital trains those who work in the hospital to compensate for the impaired structural or compartmental fire safety features.

Level 3 Direct Impact Requirements Review the daily ILSM inspection form topics that were provided in the handouts. Construction Site and Renovated Areas Exit Inspection Alarm Systems Fire Drills Training Comments

Level 3 Direct Impact Requirements Review the Direct Impact Requirements in handout sections. LS.02.01.10 Building fire protection features designed and maintained to minimize the effects of fire, smoke, and heat. LS.02.01.20 Maintain the integrity of the means of egress. LS.02.01.34 Hospital provides and maintains fire alarm system. LS.02.01.35 Hospital provides and maintains systems for extinguishing fires. LS.02.01.40 Hospital provides and maintains special features to protect individuals from fire and smoke.

Level Four Indirect Impact Requirements Largest group of Requirements Indirect Impact Requirements Findings do not “accumulate” toward CON normally deficiencies can take up to 60 days to correct and submit ESC. However If a Direct Impact Requirement EP is out of compliance, then any Indirect impact requirement EPs under that standard that are out of compliance must be corrected within 45 days and submit ESC. Most Indirect Impact Requirements are “C” items (total of 87) and there are ten “A” items to look out for. Three of the “C” items have measures for success, all are related to ILSM’s.

Level Four Indirect Impact Requirements Ten “A” Items of Indirect Impact Requirements are: LS.01.01.01 EP-1 Competent individual is assigned to assess LSC compliance. LS.01.01.01 EP-2 Maintains current accurate eSOC. LS.01.02.01 EP-7 Temporary partitions are smoke tight, or made of non-combustible material or made of limited combustible material and do not add to development or spread of fire. LS.01.02.01 EP-10 Provide additional training to those who work in the hospital on use of fire-fighting equipment. LS.01.02.01 EP-11 Conducts one additional drill per shift per quarter. LS.02.01.10 EP-3 Two hr. walls extend from floor below to roof slab above. LS.02.01.10 EP-4 Openings in two hr. walls are rated for 11/2 hr. LS.02.01.20 EP-14 At least two smoke compartments for every story that has more than 30 patient beds. LS.02.01.20 EP-15 At least two smoke compartments for every story with inpatient sleeping or treatment and non-sleeping stories with 50 or more people.

Recommendations • Review eSOC PFI’s Review and or revise your ILSM plan and its implementation • Be aware of EP’s that can adversely impact your accreditation. Use handouts as checklist. • Do not ignore indirect impact EPs. Especially the ten “A” items.

Questions ??????

Additional Scoring Information

2009 Scoring/Accreditation Decision Model Immediate Threat to Life Situations, identified at the time of survey, which have or may potentially have a serious adverse effect on patient health and safety (i.e., inoperable fire alarm, high rate of infections). The Joint Commission President can issue an expedited Preliminary Denial of Accreditation (PDA) decision. PDA remains until corrective action is demonstrated, via an on-site validation survey. PDA changes to Conditional Accreditation which includes a follow-up survey to assess sustained implementation of corrective action.

Immediate Threat to Life (Tier 1) Expedited decision of Preliminary Denial of Accreditation (PDA) issued by The Joint Commission president PDA remains in effect until corrective action is validated during on-site follow-up survey After corrective action is validated, organization’s accreditation status will change to Conditional Accreditation pending follow-up survey in four to six months to assess ongoing implementation of corrective action

2009 Scoring/Accreditation Decision Model Situational Decision Rules Situations in which an accreditation decision of Preliminary Denial of Accreditation or Conditional Accreditation is recommended to the Accreditation Committee (i.e., unlicensed facility, unlicensed individual who requires a license, failure to implement corrective action in response to identified Life Safety Code deficiencies). Demonstration of resolution through submission of Evidence of Standards Compliance (ESC). Onsite survey to validate implementation of corrective action.

Situational Decision Rules (Tier 2) Recommendation of Preliminary Denial of Accreditation or Conditional Accreditation based on specific situations at the time of survey Organizations must demonstrate resolution of identified issues through Evidence of Standards Compliance (ESC) submission within 45 days, and have a follow-up, on-site survey to validate implementation of corrective action Examples of Situational Decision Rule findings are: Evidence of an unlicensed facility Unlicensed individual who requires a license Failure to implement corrective action in response to identified Life Safety deficiencies

2009 Scoring/Accreditation Decision Model Direct Impact Requirements Non-compliance = more direct impact on quality of care and patient safety. “Implementation” based requirements. Evaluation via the tracer methodology. All less than fully compliant requirements must be addressed, via the ESC submission process, in a short time-frame (45 days). Accreditation decision is pending submission of ESC within established timeframe. Failure to resolve = progressively more adverse accreditation decision (e.g., Provisional, Conditional, PDA).

2009 Scoring/Accreditation Decision Model Indirect Impact Requirements Initially less immediacy of risk, but failure to resolve non-compliance increases risk. “Planning” and “Evaluation” based requirements. Evaluation via the tracer methodology. All less than fully compliant requirements must be addressed, via the ESC submission process, in a longer time-frame (60 days). Accreditation decision is pending submission of ESC within established timeframe. Failure to resolve = progressively more adverse accreditation decision (e.g., Provisional, Conditional, PDA).

2009 Thresholds 2009 thresholds, which serve as triggers for recommendations for adverse accreditation decisions for all programs, will be reviewed by the Accreditation Committee in August 2008 Fixed thresholds may be established based on the number of less than fully compliant Direct Impact requirements which, if met, results in a recommendation for Conditional Accreditation or Preliminary Denial of Accreditation Fixed thresholds may be established based on the total number of less than fully compliant standards at the time of survey which, if met, results in: An onsite survey to validate implementation of the ESC, or A recommendation for Conditional Accreditation or Preliminary Denial of Accreditation due to “egregious” noncompliance Upon approval, the 2009 thresholds will be published in Perspectives

Post Survey Process (cont’d.) Summary of Survey Findings Report will not include the potential accreditation decision Official survey report posted on organization’s extranet site post-survey will include the potential accreditation decision Typically, survey reports will be posted within 24 to 48 hours after the survey (weekends excluded) unless the report requires central office review The final accreditation decision will be made after The Joint Commission receives and approves the Evidence of Standards Compliance (ESC)

Latest Scoring News Thresholds will not trigger automatic PDA’s in 2009 Thresholds that trigger CON or PDA decisions may be established for 2010. The central office will review survey findings (screening process) in identification of RFI’s via submission of ESC, or recommendations for CON or PDA. The TJC will track the results of 2009 surveys.