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
Regarding the allegation: Staff are verbally and psychologically abusing resident.
It was alleged that staff were making inappropriate comments to Resident #1 (R1) in the form of threats, such as telling R1 they will be kicked out, telling R1 not to use the pendant, and berating R1 for requiring assistance. Although staff denied claims that they had been verbally abusive towards R1, some indicated that R1 had been verbally abusive towards them. The LPA obtained a letter issued to R1 from the Executive Director dated 01/23/2023, which noted that R1 was in violation of the Resident Handbook, as it was alleged that R1 used inappropriate language and behavior towards the staff. A review of the Resident Handbook that was signed by R1 indicated that ‘reported incidents of improper behavior, either toward other residents or employees, can result in eviction from the Community’. Per regulation, a licensee may evict a resident for one or more reasons, which can include ‘failure of the resident to comply with general policies of the facility. Said general policies must be in writing, must be for the purpose of making it possible for residents to live together, and must be made part of the admission agreement.’ An interview with R1 revealed that R1 enjoyed residing at the community and denied claims that staff had been rude or disrespectful. R1 admitted that they had had a ‘couple disagreements’ with staff but indicated that everything had been worked out.
In addition, it was alleged that staff had made inappropriate comments towards R1. Staff commented that R1 would use their pendant often to receive care assistance with toileting and repositioning, but R1 had regularly used their pendant for assistance with retrieving their remote, obtaining a tissue, and so on. Staff commented that they would attempt to keep things within reach of R1 as they understand that R1 requires care assistance, but some staff admitted that they had informed R1 that it was best to use the pendant for care assistance or for emergencies only. Staff indicated that they were re-enforcing the use of the pendant to ensure that all residents in the community received prompt and adequate care. Lastly, there was an incident where a staff member was providing care to R1, in which the staff commented that R1 was ‘heavy’. A review of the video footage and interviews indicated that the staff member’s tone was more so matter of fact, and not in an accusatory tone in alluding that they were making an inappropriate comment about R1’s weight or appearance. The video footage further indicated that the staff tried to explain the reason as to why they referred to R1 as heavy by stating that R1 should assist during a one-person transfer, as the staff did not want to get hurt when assisting R1. |