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 | (Continued from LIC9099) On today's visit, LPA interviewed two (2) out of four (4) clients not previously interviewed during the initial unannounced complaint visit and obtained a copy of the clients' time spent at their work program from 08/2025 to 11/2025.
The investigation revealed the following:
Regarding the allegation: Staff do not ensure clients have access to the home at all times. It is alleged that staff did not allow three (3) clients into the facility upon their 1:00 p.m. arrival from the day/work program, and that no staff were present in the facility. Interviews with four (4) out of four (4) clients in the facility all denied ever being unable to access the home. According to two (2) of the three (3) clients from the day/work program, they finished work early, and one (1) client did not want to continue sitting in the day/work program staff member’s car. The client requested to be dropped off at the facility, and upon arrival, no staff were present. They contacted the licensee, who stated they were unable to come to the facility and would need to arrange for S1 to return. The clients were then taken to a North Los Angeles County Regional Center (NLACRC) office and later returned to the facility, where S1 arrived and granted them access. Interviews with the administrator and licensee indicated that the day/work program does not have consistent drop off times, and clients have reported that after completing short jobs, there is little for them to do. According to the Administrator and Licensee the clients have expressed interest in changing their day/work program. LPA’s interview with the client who requested to return to the facility revealed that they asked to go to NLACRC to be in a cool room and to speak with their CSC about changing their day/work program. This client reported having no concerns about accessing the facility, explaining that they typically text or call staff before arriving. The client could not recall specific details about the day in question but stated that if it was summer, they did not want to remain in a car or at a park due to the heat. The client also stated that the day/work program often finished work early, after which they were required to go to the library to submit job applications, but after several weeks of this they were “over it”. The administrator confirmed that the facility operates 24/7, however, the day/work program agreement specifies certain hours, which allows facility staff to take breaks. The inconsistency in drop off times has created challenges, though the administrator stated they have no issue meeting clients at the facility when needed.
Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated.
(Continue to LIC9099-C) Page 2 of 3 |