Essential Foundation Inc

Several agency staff provided inaccurate information during the course of the investigation.

The agency did not have all board members listed as controlling person.

A foster home was verified prior to receiving notification from CBCU that a foster parent's status was eligible. Children are in placement. 1 caregiver's status is provisional.

A child with a history of self-harm and suicidal ideations was not provided a safety contact at placement or with the initial service plan.

This standard was found deficient as part of a DFPS Investigation.

A house hold member did not have background check on file.

The home screen did not assess the assets that were mentioned.

A frequent visitor to the home did not have a background check on file at the time of the inspection.

The reviewed supervisory visits did not include the stress levels in the home, nor the challenging behaviors or methods for responding to them.

The home screen does not address the previous or current relationships of the caregiver.

The agency admitted a child and placed them in a foster home who's has a diagnosis and requires treatment services the agency is not permitted for.

The home screening did not include a reference from a family member living outside the home.

A caregiver's paramour brandished a gun while the caregiver and children in care were in the vehicle. The foster parent did not ensure that the paramour was safe to be around children prior to allowing access.

During HHSC review, it was noted that caregiver vehicle was Infinity QX60 during the time of the incident with the pictures in one case, Per Manufacture instruction, the vehicle can only seat 7 individuals. During the time of the incident according to the police report there were eight individuals in the home.

A foster parent's paramour was frequently present at the operational home without a background check.

A caregiver admitted to being married for 1 month. The home screening from May 2024 and the home's verification were not updated.

3 child files from November through January did not document why psychotropic medications were stopped or skipped.

A medication to decrease depression and anxiety is being given to a child in care. For certain days it is unknown who provided the medication.

One service plan did not document input from the caregiver's interactions with the child.

2 out of 11 medication logs reviewed included information that was not accurately presented. This included errors in regard to documentation of the medication given

1 of 2 case files did not record that a sleep aid supplement was provided to a child in care.

1 child's service plan did not document an education plan.

A medical assessment recommended specific mental health, substance use, and psychiatric evaluations. The specific plan was not documented.

A child's placement documentation indicates destruction of property is a high-risk factor. Mitigating that risk was not addressed on the service plan.

2 of 9 child files reviewed did not support that the CANS assessment requirement for MH Case Management, Skills Training, and Drug and Alcohol assessments were obtained.

The benefit of giving medication to manage mood disorders and allergies was not documented in 1 child's file.

Initial service plans are not signed or noted of why not signed by child

1 case record lists a person as an employee. The background check is run as a volunteer.

2 of 2 case files reviewed did not contain information to support how the employees met the education and the work experience requirements.

1 of 2 home screenings reviewed did not document an evaluation of how the determination was made to place children with the family.

The foster home file reviewed did not have a fire drill completed. There were tornado drills completed but no fire drill.

The CPA did not have a pre-screening drug test for an employee with the date of hire 1/3/2024. The deficiency was corrected at inspection the facility provided a copy of the prescreening drug test dated 1/8/2024.

Both home files reviewed did not have pictures of the outside of the home. One file did not have any outside pictures and the other file only had pictures of the front yard.

One of the two foster home screening reviewed did not document the law enforcement calls with the foster parent.

One of the two home files reviewed had a permit that did not match the verification in CLASS. The permit in the file stated ages 0-13 and CLASS verification has 0-17

A child in care receiving services for emotional disorder did not have two professional signatures on the initial service plans.

One of the two home files reviewed listed Pervasive Development Disability as a treatment service provided but the operation's permit does not include PDD as a treatment service provided by the agency.

One of the two homes reviewed did not have the documents from 4 of the 5 previous agencies.

The foster home budget did not address the child support income and the itemized expense provided by the foster parent did not match the home study income/bills listed.

One of the home files reviewed did not have the mental health history for the biological son.

A child recieving treatment services for Emotional disorders did not have a 90 day service review.

The employee file reviewed did not have the affidavit for application, report suspected abuse, or statement of operation policies in the file. The employee's date of hire is listed as January 18, 2023

The child file reviewed indicates that the child has high risk behaviors including suicidal ideation and self-harm.

The serious incident report did not have the resolution listed on the file