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 | Licensing Program Analyst (LPA) Ashley Smith conducted an unannounced Case Management - Incident visit, to conclude the findings from an investigation that began on 5/26/2022. The LPA met with Executive Director Elizabeth Spencer and explained the reason for the visit.
On 5/25/2022, the facility submitted a Report of Suspected Dependent Adult/Elder Abuse and a Special Incident Report, where it was alleged that Resident #1 (R1) had engaged in a sexual relationship with Staff #1 (S1). This incident was referred to the Community Care Licensing Division’s Investigation’s Branch and assigned to Investigator Hector to investigate. Investigator Hector interviewed R1 on 6/7/2022 at 3:30 p.m. and interviewed S1 on 7/22/2022 at 12:28 p.m. Additional staff interviews took place on 6/7/2022 4:50 p.m., and additional resident interviews happened on 7/25/2022 at 1:13 p.m., 1:42 p.m., 1:58 p.m., 2:13 p.m., 2:18 p.m., and 2:38 p.m. A police report regarding the case was requested and reviewed on 6/23/2022.
The investigation revealed that during S1’s tenure at the facility, residents described S1 as hard-working, dedicated, and helpful. Residents whom had consistent interactions with S1 denied claims that they had observed S1 interacting with R1 or other residents inappropriately. Interviews affirmed that S1 engaged with residents in a professional manner. Yet R1 claimed that R1 and S1 had a romantic relationship, in which R1 alleged that they engaged in sexual contact with S1. However, R1 was unable to identify, confirm or deny the presence of tattoos or other modifications on S1’s body, nor was R1 able to recall specific details of their sexual encounters with S1. Per the information obtained from a police report, it was indicated that they were unable to establish that a crime had occurred.
According to interviews with facility residents, R1 was known amongst the residents as being overly affectionate and had been known to kiss residents on the lips in a ‘friendly manner’. Yet S1 denied all claims that they had engaged with R1 in a sexual manner.
|