{"Short_Answer__76":"SS_BridgesMN-HC-2020-08","Date__77":"08\/26\/2020","Multiple_Choice__78":"Scott Schifsky","Short_Answer__80":"Bridges MN","Short_Answer__81":"Kelsey Traynor (completed the BIRF)","Short_Answer__82":"kelseyt@bridgesmn.com","Short_Answer__83":"651-334-9629","Multiple_Choice__84":"Elopement","Multiple_Choice__85":"Hennepin County","Date__86":"06\/29\/2020","Free_Text__87":"On 06\/29\/2020 VA packed up his belongings at approximately 6:00 pm and left the home, stating he was going to\r\nChicago to visit his sister. VA then proceeded to walk towards the bus stop and waited. Staff followed the bus once VA got on the bus. Staff\r\ncontacted Metro Transit Police for assistance, who then intervened. The officer called the Supervisor, who then called in the Community\r\nLiving Director (CLD) as well, via phone, to discuss the situation. The CLD explained VA's situation and that he is on a commitment and\r\nprovisional discharge, and requested assistance in getting the VA back to the residence. The officer informed the CLD and supervisor that\r\ndue to VA being their own guardian and not being a danger to himself or others, they could not do anything except encourage VA to go with\r\nstaff. The CLD then met VA and staff at the Greyhound Bus Station in Minneapolis a little before 8:00 pm, just as VA was purchasing a bus\r\nticket to Chicago. Staff and CLD attempted every approach they could think of to get VA to reconsider leaving the state, but VA still planned\r\nto get on the bus. VA reported having connections in Chicago and has a plan, but would not share any further details. VA recently\r\npurchased a cell phone, but refused to give staff the phone number to the new phone. The CLD called Fairview Hospital to discuss the\r\nsituation, but they also stated \"our hands are tied\" since VA is his own guardian. Staff remained with VA at the bus station until 1:00 am on\r\n06\/30\/2020, when VA left on the greyhound bus to Chicago. The CLD filed a missing persons report with the Minneapolis Police\r\nDepartment, who stated they would pass this report along to the Chicago Police Department as well. The CLD attempted to contact VA's\r\nmother, but the mother's phone was disconnected. The CLD also attempted to call VA's grandmother, who did not answer or respond to\r\nthe CLD's voicemails.\r\nStaff followed all care plans and attempted to redirect VA into not going on the bus, but VA made the choice to leave. VA did not have any\r\nmedications packed and is due for an injection on 07\/08\/2020. VA is prescribed multiple psychotropic medications, including an injection.\r\nVA has a history of attempting to","Multiple_Choice__96":"1","Short_Answer__91":"Staff did not follow person\u2019s plan that said the person should not have alone time.","True_or_False__94":"Yes","Date__97":"10\/06\/2020","Free_Text__98":"Two night staff from Bridges were de-briefed.  They relieved two second shift staff who followed the person to the bus station and worked to help attempt to help the person return home.  \r\n\r\nThe staff worked by relieving each other in the bus station as there was not adequate parking at the bus station so they had to park on the street and one person needed to remain in the car to assure it did not get towed.   They both stated the person would not talk to them and the bus station was very busy.  The person smoked frequently outside the bus station while waiting for departure.   Staff also had one mask to share while switching spots from the car to inside the bus station next to the person.  Staff would use their shirt as a mask while switching.   The person spent most of their time listening to music and ignoring staff.   Staff attempted several times to have a conversation in an effort to persuade the person to return back to the home.   At about 1:00 AM the person departed on the bus and staff returned back to the home.   Staff were in frequent contact with the home manager for guidance. Staff were instructed to remain with the person at the bus station, however, they were instructed that he was his own guardian and could leave.","Free_Text__100":"Learning Point:  Staff were unable to redirect a person from departing on a bus to Chicago.  \r\n\r\nStaff was unable to redirect a person from departing on a bus to Chicago and this was influenced by wanting to go to Chicago to visit their sister. This matter was complicated given the person wouldn\u2019t communicate with staff present.  All efforts to redirect the person were unsuccessful while exhausting all other safe alternatives. The person was earlier hospitalized regarding mental health and aggression and the staff was hesitant at the moment and didn\u2019t want to anger the person further. Another contributing factor was that the person received a COVID stimulus check that created the means for the visit to Chicago.    \r\n\r\nStaff being unable to redirect the person was influenced by the provider ultimately determining the risk was low to take the trip without staff. After many unsuccessful attempts to redirect, the provider reviewed the person\u2019s risk management plan and it was affirmed. Contributing factors that further influenced the staffs\u2019 decision to remain at the bus station was the expectation of the lead agency and CSSP was not to follow a person to another state while eloping and assure full communication with all team members and agency staff.\r\n\r\nAnother influence to the inability to redirect was that staff were hesitant to anger the person. This was further supported by the person having a history of aggressive behavior. The person wouldn\u2019t communicate with the staff present and they were hesitant to coerce the person too much in their efforts to support him in being safe. Staff also did offer to support this trip at a future date with proper planning to assure health and safety. This moment was further complicated by contacting the hospital who stated there was nothing they or staff could do given the person was his own guardian which further limited staff in their efforts to help him return home.\r\n\r\nAn additional feature that impacted the support lent to the person was the agency\u2019s practice of person-centered efforts in trying to find balance of what was important to and for the person while making decisions at that moment. Their operating philosophy supported personal freedoms and choices based on experiences over time.  There is also an overall systemic expectation that providers support experiences, choices, and the person\u2019s rights.   \r\n\r\nStaff being unable to redirect was influenced by the provider exhausting all safe alternatives. The person is their own guardian and did have a provisional discharge from the program.  Furthermore, COVID and the Governor\u2019s stay at home order also influenced the person\u2019s decision to leave as his routine was limited to low activity. This elopement influenced the agency, team, and staff present to honor the person\u2019s civil rights which connected directly to their philosophy of protecting his rights which put him in charge of making the decision to leave on the bus.","Multiple_Choice__101":"0","Multiple_Choice__103":"0","Multiple_Choice__105":"0","Multiple_Choice__107":"0","Multiple_Choice__109":"0","Multiple_Choice__111":"0","Multiple_Choice__113":"0","Multiple_Choice__115":"3","Free_Text__116":"Staff was unable to redirect a person from departing on a bus to Chicago and this was influenced by wanting to go to Chicago to visit their sister. This matter was complicated given the person wouldn\u2019t communicate with staff present.  All efforts to redirect the person were unsuccessful while exhausting all other safe alternatives. The person was earlier hospitalized regarding mental health and aggression and the staff was hesitant at the moment and didn\u2019t want to anger the person further. Another contributing factor was that the person received a COVID stimulus check that created the means for the visit to Chicago.    \r\n\r\nStaff being unable to redirect the person was influenced by the provider ultimately determining the risk was low to take the trip without staff. After many unsuccessful attempts to redirect, the provider reviewed the person\u2019s risk management plan and it was affirmed. Contributing factors that further influenced the staffs\u2019 decision to remain at the bus station was the expectation of the lead agency and CSSP was not to follow a person to another state while eloping and assure full communication with all team members and agency staff.\r\n\r\nAnother influence to the inability to redirect was that staff were hesitant to anger the person. This was further supported by the person having a history of aggressive behavior. The person wouldn\u2019t communicate with the staff present and they were hesitant to coerce the person too much in their efforts to support him in being safe. Staff also did offer to support this trip at a future date with proper planning to assure health and safety. This moment was further complicated by contacting the hospital who stated there was nothing they or staff could do given the person was his own guardian which further limited staff in their efforts to help him return home.\r\n\r\nAn additional feature that impacted the support lent to the person was the agency\u2019s practice of person-centered efforts in trying to find balance of what was important to and for the person while making decisions at that moment. Their operating philosophy supported personal freedoms and choices based on experiences over time.  There is also an overall systemic expectation that providers support experiences, choices, and the person\u2019s rights.   \r\n\r\nStaff being unable to redirect was influenced by the provider exhausting all safe alternatives. The person is their own guardian and did have a provisional discharge from the program.  Furthermore, COVID and the Governor\u2019s stay at home order also influenced the person\u2019s decision to leave as his routine was limited to low activity. This elopement influenced the agency, team, and staff present to honor the person\u2019s civil rights which connected directly to their philosophy of protecting his rights which put him in charge of making the decision to leave on the bus.","Multiple_Choice__117":"0","Multiple_Choice__119":"0","Multiple_Choice__121":"0","Multiple_Choice__123":"0","Multiple_Choice__125":"0","Yes_or_No__432":"Yes"}