It is alleged that a client is experiencing abuse at their current place of residence. It is also alleged that client is being threatened and mistreated and staff have not taken any action to intervene.

The investigation revealed the following:

Interviews with Staff 1 – Staff 5 (S1-S5), deny the allegation. Information obtained during interviews with S1-S5 indicated, clients living at the home are treated respectfully and are made aware they can turn to staff for support when other clients may have behavioral moments towards them. S1-S5 acknowledged that clients may have arguments and disagreements from time to time; however, staff are always available to redirect clients and ensure they are safe. S1-S5 stated that they have open communication with clients and encourage clients to express their feelings appropriately. Also, S1-S5 stated, they are trained in helping clients manage their aggression by using non-confrontational methods and by providing privacy for those clients who want to express concerns.

Interview with Regional Center Service Coordinator (SC) indicated, they are aware of the behavior incidents between some clients in the home, however, SC stated, staff are providing support to defuse aggressive behavior. SC stated, “Facility is working well with clients, including C1. C1’s needs are being met by staff.” Furthermore, SC stated, staff from the home keep up with training regarding the level of care needed to provide services to clients with their particular behavioral characteristics.

Interviews with Client 2 – Client 4 (C2-C4) indicated, although sometimes clients are verbally aggressive, they feel comfortable approaching staff to talk about their concerns and get their support. C2-C4, further indicated, they feel staff are doing what they can to pacify arguments between clients. C2-C4 also stated, staff are helpful and are keeping them safe.

Interview with C1 indicated, staff are not doing anything to prevent client from calling other clients and staff bad language. C1 stated, staff have not been able to prevent client from being verbally aggressive toward C1 because of client’s age and current mental health state. C1 stated, they have expressed their concerns to staff; however, staff are not helping manage the situation.” Interviews with staff, regional center SC, and clients do not corroborate the allegation.

***Continues on LIC 9099-C page 2

It is alleged that a client is not receiving any support from staff who have refused to provide her with medical assistance for a broken foot.

The investigation revealed the following:

Interviews with Staff 1 – Staff 4 (S1-S4) deny the allegation. Interviews with S1-S4 stated, all clients receive medical attention in a timely manner during emergency situations and staff ensure clients attend all their scheduled routine doctor appointments. S1-S2 stated, they have personally transported clients to emergency services at odd hours of the day and have waited with clients to ensure they receive health updates from medical staff. S1-S4 stated, clients are helped with scheduling their doctor appointments and staff also ensure clients attend their routine check-ups when they are due by attending the appointments with clients. S1 stated, C1 was taken to the hospital for a toe injury C1 sustained at the facility by C1’s 1:1 staff. S1 stated, C1 initially did not tell facility staff about the injury on their toe; however, 1:1 staff confirmed via phone call, they transported C1 to the hospital to have their toe looked at by a doctor after C1 complained to 1:1 staff about pain C1 was experiencing while out in the community accompanied by 1:1 staff. Record review of after visit summary revealed, C1 received medical attention for the pain in their toe on 8/1/2025. Regional Center SC stated, administrator has been providing updates every other day regarding C1’s foot injury and other events pertaining to C1. SC stated, there has been constant communication from the administer and SC was made aware of C1’s toe and the visit to the hospital on the day of the injury happened via phone calls and SIR sent by administrator. SC further stated, C1’s needs are being met, including C1’s medical needs. Interview with C1 indicated, C1 has been to the doctor two times for the toe pain and was provided medical intervention for the injury sustained. C1 confirmed, 1:1 staff took C1 to the hospital after C1 complained about the pain to 1:1 staff, during a day out in the community with 1:1 staff. C1 stated, staff at the facility called 1:1 to get information about C1’s whereabouts and 1:1 staff explained that they were at the hospital getting C1’s toe checked by a doctor. Interviews with C2-C4 indicated, staff take them to their doctor appointments and are also taken to the doctor if they feel sick as soon as they make staff aware of their ailments. C2-C4 stated, their medical needs are met and they have no concerns. LPA was unable to conduct interview with 1:1 staff due to privacy policy from their third party agency. 1:1 staff is not directly hired by the home in which C1 resides. Interviews with staff, clients, regional center SC and record review, do not corroborate the allegation.

Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is no preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted Giovanni Mitchell, DSP, and a copy of this report was provided.