| INVESTIGATION REVEALED THE FOLLOWING:
Allegation: Staff did not allow resident to have visitors.
The details of this complaint alleged facility staff did not allow resident #1 (R1) to have visitors. It is reported that (R1) was refused a visit on 09/26/24, and the act violated (R1’s) personal rights.
On 10/30/24, between 1:00 pm – 1:40 pm, the Department interviewed residents #1-#4 (R1-R4) and found that they could not corroborate this accusation. (R1) stated has only been a resident at this facility since 06/19/24 have received visits from family and business representatives with no issues. (R1-R4) reported that no individuals have been denied visitations, and they are provided privacy during visits by the facility staff. (R1-R4) were complimentary of staff and claimed they were efficient and accommodating to their needs.
On 10/30/24, between 2:00 pm – 2:30 pm, the Department interviewed witnesses #1-#4 (W1-W4) and expressed they have had no problems with visits with the residents at this facility. (W1-W4) claimed they have never been restricted from visits and that staff have been accommodating with family guests to conduct visits outside of normal visiting hours.
On 10/30/24, between 11:15 pm – 12:40 pm, the Department interviewed staff #1-#5 (S1-S5) reported this allegation was false. (S1-S5) stated there are no guests who are denied visits unless there is a legal court order. (S1-S5) stated that guests' visits and communications are welcome 24/7. (S1-S2) who was mentioned in this complaint explained that on 09/26/24, a family guests from out of state visited (R1). A Notary Public accompanied the family associates. Parties met outside of the facility accordingly to (S2). The notary endorser had no idea that the family guests of (R1) were not the actual Power of Attorney (POA) to (R1). (S2) did not want to allow for the notary endorser to have access to (R1) until (R1’s) power of attorney (W1) was notified and authorized. (S1-S3) were able to verify this incident on 09/26/24 and stated that family guests from out of state have come to visit in the past and were allowed visits. (S1) stated no one of (R1’s) family guests or business representatives had been denied visitations with (R1). (S1-S2 and S5) indicated there have been some conflicts between (R1’s) family representatives of legal authority who should act on behalf of (R1). (S1 and S5) stated they were only protecting the interest of (R1) who had no knowledge of the Notary visit and had no authorization from (R1's) POA. (S2 and S5) stated the family guests from out of state came back a few hours later and met with the Executive Director (S5) in the lobby and did not sign the visitors log and did not want to see (R1) on 09/26/24 on the returned visit.
(Evaluation Report continues LIC 9099-C) |