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 | Based on the LPA's investigation, the investigation revealed the following.
For Allegation 1 – Staff are not safeguarding resident personal property. Interviews with S#1 – S#10, communicated that residents in the memory care unit obviously forget where they put their belongings. They leave their clothes and other items in other resident’s rooms and sometimes take other resident’s things too. They do not do it intentionally, but they just can’t remember or don’t know if it’s there’s or not. When the staff see residents in other resident’s rooms, they redirect them to their own rooms. If they see clothes that don’t belong to the residents in their rooms, they take the belongings back to the appropriate resident. R#1 had misplaced their cell phone, but the staff found it inside the drawer of the night stand next to their bed. The clothes are never misplaced or switched by staff; the residents do that on their own. Staff always makes sure they keep every resident belonging with the appropriate resident. When the laundry is done, staff makes sure all the resident’s gets their own clothes back. Interviews conducted with R#1 – R#7, communicated that they don’t get their clothes stolen or nothing else. The interviews conducted did not concur with the above allegation.
Allegation 2 - Staff told authorized representative they could not visit resident. Interviews conducted with S#1 – S#10, communicated that they have never denied any family member entrance to the facility and/or the right to visit their resident’s. Everyone has the right to visit the resident’s anytime they want. Visitors are even allowed to visit late at night, after visitor hours are over. Interviews conducted with R#1 – R#7, communicated that their family members always come to visit. W#1 communicated that they did not prohibit them from visiting their resident, there was an incident with another resident, where the resident was yelling at W#1 and they had to ask W#1 to leave for that particular day. W#1 returned the next day and was able to visit with R#1 with no more incidents. The interviews conducted did not concur with the above allegation.
Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are unsubstantiated.
An exit interview was conducted with Carrena Dixon, Med Tech and a hard copy of report was provided.
|