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 | a position of control over R1. Witness (W1) believes that R1’s fear might not be real, but believes they are. Staff (S2) indicated that schedules and duties had been changed since they were made aware of the complaint. Interview with S2 revealed that they have made the decision to temporarily directed two staff members to respond to R1’s room when assistance is needed. Interview with S2 revealed that they have not been made aware of any teasing to any of the residents in that unit of the facility. Staff or residents have not said anything or mentioned any issues with residents being teased.
It is alleged that staff touched resident in a sexual manner. Resident (R1) initially reported to therapist that a staff member dried R1 in an inappropriate manner. R1 explained that a towel was used to dry R1 and there was no skin to skin contact. Per interview conducted R1 could not explain as to why R1 felt to be dried off in an inappropriate manner. During interview R1 refused to identify staff member by name and would not be able to give details of what happened and was unable to recall when incident occurred. R1 indicated that staff (S1) did not do anything wrong and R1 was dried off the same way other caregivers do after a shower. Interview with staff (S2) indicated they were aware of the details in the allegations and found it strange that R1 remembers S2’s name and the names of the other caregivers mentioned in the complaint, but R1 cannot remember the name of the staff member who allegedly assaulted R1. S2 indicated that staff is rotated often and S2 has no idea who R1 is referring to on that date since R1 was able to provide a date or time when this occurred. Interview with witness (W1) revealed that during a meeting with R1 they gave W1 details on the occurrence. However, R1 was unable to explain why they thought it was done in an inappropriate manner. W1 indicated that R1’s perception of things is skewed due to anxiety and a reason R1 may have made the allegations is because R1 does not approve in the staff member in questions sexual preference. Based on the information received from interviews, the lack of information regarding incident in question, and the lack of corroborating witnesses, LPA is unable to determine if the alleged violation occurred as reported.
Based on the information mentioned above, the Department is unable to ascertain if the allegation occurred as reported. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove or refute the alleged violation occurred; therefore, these allegations are deemed Unsubstantiated.
An exit interview was conducted with Administrator and a copy of this LIC9099 report was left at facility.
|