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 | Page 2.
Witness #1 at 2:25pm and Resident #1 at 3:29pm and collected documents for Resident #1 at 4:45pm. Based on the information received on that visit, it was determined that further investigation is needed to make a determination of the investigation. Exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided.
After the visit conducted on August 19, 2025, attempts were made to locate and interview Witness #2 and the attempts were unsuccessful. On February 18, 2026, a second interview was conducted via telephone with the Administrator at 12:30pm to obtain clarification on the information that was received. Another interview was conducted on today's visit at 11:18am to verify information received.
Per information received from the investigation regarding the allegation that the Licensee did not safeguard resident's personal possessions, Witness#2 is Resident #1’s assigned one to one staff provided by Resident #1’s behavioral services agency. Witness#2 is responsible for ensuring that the resident is monitored and involved with daily activities. One of the activities suggested was to clean out Resident #1’s closet and donate clothing that no longer fit Resident #1. Resident #1 likes to hoard things, and a family member was also going to bring more of Resident #1’s clothing from home. Resident #1 agreed with Witness #2 and they both worked together on sorting out clothing for donation. Per the Administrator, he was not included in the initial discussion between Resident #1 and Witness #2 regarding the clothing donation. However, Resident #1 would inform him of the cleaning that was being performed. Per the Administrator, Resident #1 helped Witness #2 sort out the clothing and donated the clothes as they had discussed. Resident #1 has the right to donate their clothing. About 7-10 days later Resident #1 changed their mind and indicated that they had not agreed to the donation. Per the Administrator, Resident #1 agrees to something and then changes their story daily. Resident #1’s therapist is aware of this behavior. Based on the investigation, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation that the Licensee did not safeguard resident’s personal possessions, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated at this time.
Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur.
Exit interview was conducted and a copy of the report was provided.. |