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 | That same day, the complaint was referred to the Community Care Licensing Division (CCLD) Investigations Branch (IB) and assigned to Investigator Sonia Torre.
The initial investigation was conducted by LPA Tuesday Cabiness on February 24, 2025, from 12:45 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. During the visit, LPA obtained facility and resident records, including Special Incident Reports (SIRs), the admission agreement, move-in documentation, fire department records, physician's reports, and resident assessments. Between January 25, 2025, and April 26, 2025, IB Investigator Torre conducted interviews with residents, staff, and witnesses, and reviewed additional resident records, medical records, and incident reports involving R1. Allegation: Facility staff neglect resulted in Resident #1 sustaining a fracture.
It was alleged that between September 15, 2024, and December 6, 2024, Resident #1 (R1) experienced six reported falls. The final fall, which occurred on December 6, 2024, resulted in a fractured femur.
According to the IB investigation and a review of the 911 audio recording, staff reported that R1 was unable to support their own weight, did not want to be changed while in bed, and required a higher level of assistance than previously identified.
Interviews with the Executive Director (ED) and the Residential Services Director (RSD) revealed that, due to R1's frequent falls, administration intended to reassess R1 in September 2024 to determine the appropriate level of care. However, the reassessment and implementation of an updated care plan were delayed because R1's responsible party was unavailable to participate in the meeting. The RSD stated that although staff provided two-person assistance with transfers when deemed necessary, this practice was temporary and not formally incorporated into R1's care plan because it was inconsistent with facility policy.
Interviews with direct care staff consistently identified R1 as a high fall risk whose condition had progressively declined. Staff acknowledged that R1 increasingly required two-person assistance with transfers due to recurrent falls and declining mobility; however, this increased level of assistance was never formally documented or incorporated into R1's service plan.
(Cont'd LIC9099C - page 2) |