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 | INVESTIGATION REVEALED THE FOLLOWING:
Allegation: Staff do not meet the needs of resident in care.
The details of the complaint stated that the staff do not meet resident #1 (R1's) care needs. The complainant reported (R1) had expressed an interest in room #104 on the first floor with staff #1 (S1) on 12/15/22. The complainant stated the request was not honored by (S1) once the room became available on 01/18/23 and was rented to a new resident who was on the waitlist. The complainant felt (R1) was overlooked for this request as (R1) assumed that management did not like (R1). An interview with staff #1-#2 (S1-S2) explained that there is a process. The room that (R1) had an interest in room #104 only became available in February 2023. The former resident provided a 30-day notice in the first week of January 2023, not in December 2022. (R1) found out the room would potentially become available was not from any management staff according to (S1-S2). (S1-S2) claimed room #104 was already spoken for by a new resident who had made a deposit and was on the waitlist. (S1-S2) claimed they had no knowledge that (R1) had expressed interest in room #104. (S2) contends that preferential treatment is not involved. (S1) stated available rooms were offered to (R1) but were refused. According to (S1-S2) this matter has been settled with (R1) and she is currently on the waitlist for room #104 and will have priority over newly admitted residents. Interviews with residents #2-#8 (R2-R8) all had complimentary comments about their services and reported their needs are met by staff.
The details for the complaint mentioned (R1) had requested for consistent staff member assigned to (R1) for showers instead of multiple care staff providing the service. According to staff #1 and #3 (S1-S3), (R1) does require assistance with showers twice a week. (S1) claimed that (R1's) preference for two individual care staff who have left for another employer and the other is injured. ( S1 to S3) are diligently working with (R1) to fulfill this request and ensure that her needs are being met. During interviews with residents #2-#8 (R2-R8), the care staff were described as diligent, hardworking, and responsive. (R2-R8) were comfortable, and the services they received were not problematic. (R1) was out of the community and was not available for an in-person or phone interview. Based on the information provided, the Department finds insufficient evidence to support the allegation mentioned above.
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.
An exit interview was conducted with Business Director Armida Uchiyama and a copy of report was provided. |