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 | CONTINUED FROM FORM LIC9099-C
Regarding the allegation of Unlawful Eviction, the following has been concluded: Based on interviews conducted and a review of records, it was determined that following an increase in the frequency and severity of the resident R1's behavior episodes and aggressive acts towards facility staff, the resident's responsible party were involved in a telephone care conference during which they were notified of the necessity to either seek alternative placement in a more suitable facility or put a one-on-one companion in place for the resident through a third party. The content of the care conference was later confirmed in an email to the responsible party that was added to the complaint file. This is found to be in accordance with the terms of the admission agreement concluded between the facility and the resident's responsible party. Five days following the implementation of the one-on-one, the resident was voluntarily moved to a facility deemed to be more suitable to the type of cognitive impairment he suffers. Given the voluntary nature of the move and the fact that the terms of the admission agreement were followed through the proceedings, it cannot be concluded that an eviction did occur. Therefore the allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated, meaning that although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred.
Regarding the allegation that Licensee did not notify responsible party of change in condition, the following has been concluded: There is ample evidence of a documented thread of notification directed at resident R1's responsible party from the Progress notes provided to LPA during the investigation with at least 13 individual contacts occurring between March 3, and April 20, 2023. Therefore the allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated, meaning that although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred.
Regarding the allegation that Licensee unlawfully increased rate, the following has been concluded: The resident's base rate for services was unaffected. The additional cost incurred was due to the voluntarily contracting of a one-on-one caregiver. As a result, the allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated, meaning that although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred.
A consultation was provided to facility staff on the necessity to clearly state that moving a resident from the facility or contracting a third-party one-on-one caregiver are decision that are at the absolute discretion of the resident's responsible parties and that no immediate removal would follow as a result of a refusal to follow the directives. This would however constitute ground to file a 30-day eviction notice as described in California Code of Regulations Section 87224. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to a facility representative. |