1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | Continued LIC9099C.
returned to C1’s responsible party.
On the allegation facility did not allow visitors, during interview with the reporting party it was stated that visitation wasn’t allowed at all, including window visits, Zoom, and/or FaceTime. S2, S3, and S4 stated they were working at the facility during the time C1 was at the facility. All staff stated the facility would conduct visit via telephone, FaceTime, Zoom, iPad, or window visits. S3 stated, C1 would receive phone calls and would listen for a little while but would soon walk away. S3 stated a few times C1 had a visit at the window but she could not recall the exact date. S2 stated she recalled C1 receiving telephone calls and a Zoom call once or twice, but never recall anyone coming to visit through the window. S4 recalled during the interview that C1 received telephone calls here and there but did not recall any Zoom or FaceTime calls. LPA observed during record review a letter dated 3/16/2020 where the facility sent health and safety updates to the responsible party’s’ of the clients’ informing that visitors will be screened and visitation will be restricted in the facility, but the facility would allow alternative methods of visiting during the time. LPA also reviewed a memorandum sent to Cypress employees dated 9/30/2020 that the visitor policy had not changed, and no visitors were allowed inside, but window visits were allowed.
Based upon the information obtained and record review during the investigation. The above allegations are unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is UNSUBSTANTIATED means that although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violations occurred. |