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 from LIC9099.
(BPD) officer interviewed C1 and C1 did not disclose any information, nor did she say who the female staff person was. During C1’s forensic interview at the Child Interview Center in San Pablo on June 20, 2023, C1 provided a name of a male staff which was S1. C1 did not disclose any other name during the interview as it was initially reported to her mother. C1 became agitated during the interview and would state “time to go.” According to S1, S2 was the only staff that worked the NOC shift during the time of the allegation.
Interviews with staff and witnesses indicated that C1 likes to hug and kiss people including strangers; however, staff tries to set boundaries with C1. S1, S2, and S3 denied any inappropriate behavior with clients. Review of C1’s individual program plan (IPP) dated January 31, 2022, indicates that C1 can conduct her own activities of daily living (ADL’s) with prompts but needs assistance with bathing. Review of the physician’s report dated April 10, 2023, indicates that C1 can conduct all ADL’s. In interview of S2, S2 stated they did not work the NOC shift when this incident allegedly occurred and S3 was the one working. C1 no longer resides at the facility as of July 2023.
Based on the investigations conducted the above allegation is unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is UNSUBSTANTIATED means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred.
Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report provided.
|