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 | The investigation revealed the following:
In regards to the allegation: "Staff did not accord resident privacy", it is alleged that it was discovered that C1 had 2 air tags in his front right pocket and staff had given those to C1 to keep with him. S1 corroborated the allegation and stated that he provided the air tags to C1 for his safety and to track and monitor him to make sure that the Administrator know where C1 is at all times. S1 stated that it was C1 who likes to bring the air tags because it was recommended to C1 by the law enforcement months ago, according to C1. However, there was no evidence provided to LPA about this communication. S1 also stated that he typed up a letter on behalf of C1 to inform the day program that no one is forcing him to carry those items. Interview with S2 indicated that she does not know what an air tag is for and no idea what those are for. Interview with C1 indicated that he does not know what air tags are for and why he has those in his pocket. C1 also stated that he did not write a letter regarding the air tags. Interview with C2 revealed that he is aware that C1 carries air tags and know that those are for tracking. LPA reviewed the signed letter written by the Administrator on behalf of C1 indicating that no one is forcing C1 to carry those items. However, C1 denied writing the letter and indicated that he has no knowledge of the letter. LPA did not observe other supporting documentation regarding C1 carrying trackers/air tags. Interview with Regional Center indicated that they are investigation the situation.
Based on LPA’s interviews, and record reviews, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Deficiency cited on the attached LIC 9099D.
An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided to Victor Mora, Administrator along with the Appeals Rights.
|