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 | In regards to the allegation: “Staff did not prevent a client from choking another client while in care.” It is alleged that in April 2023, C1 claimed that someone at the facility was choking her, causing her to pass out. (4) of (4) staff interviewed remembered an incident involving a former client who used to live in the facility, who was aggressive and tried to choke C1. The incident, however, happened on the transportation bus on the way to the Program. LPA reviewed an incident report (SIR) submitted to CCL on 04/10/2023, which stated that C1 was on the bus on her way to the day program when C2 choked her from behind. C1 did not suffer any injuries and medical treatment was not needed. Some staff interviewed indicated that there was never a choking incident at the facility during their shifts. Due to a lack of response, LPA was unable to speak with the Service Coordinator at the Regional Center. LPA also attempted to interview (4) clients who lived with C1, but unsuccessful due to their cognitive abilities. Therefore, there was insufficient evidence to corroborate with this allegation.
In regards to the allegation: “Staff hit a client while in care.” It is alleged that a staff member has hit C1. No other details provided. All (4) staff interviewed denied the allegation. S1 stated that she never smacked C1. S1-S2 stated that all staff were advised to clock out (with pay) if they were feeling stressed. Staff interviewed stated that none of the staff would ever hit or physically abuse a client. And that if a staff member gets to a client, they are fired immediately as the facility has zero tolerance policy that prohibits such behavior. LPA did not observe any bruises or cuts on the clients nor any signs of being withdrawn during the visit. LPA made several attempts to contact the Service Coordinator at the Regional Center but was unsuccessful due to no response received. LPA also attempted to interview (4) clients who lived with C1, but unsuccessful due to their cognitive abilities. Therefore, there was insufficient evidence to corroborate with this allegation.
Based on statements and interviews conducted with staff, residents, review of resident files and facility file records, there was not enough supportive evidence to concur with the reported allegations. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED.
Exit interview conducted and a copy of this report was provided to Magdalena Estrada, Administrator.
|