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 | During their interview, S1 stated that on January 2, 2026, it had been raining on and off and R1 was "insistent" on getting their girlfriend a phone. Per S1, R1 was able to leave the facility unassisted and did so from time to time. S1 stated shortly after R1 left to the cell phone store on foot, they received a call from the Hospital stating R1 had fallen outside of the cell phone store. Per S1, R1 did have a walker, however, R1 was able to ambulate without it and only used the walker occasionally. S1 stated they were unsure if R1 had their walker prior to leaving the facility or if R1 had been using the walker at the time of their fall. During their interview, R1’s responsible party, Witness 1 (W1) stated they were unsure if R1 had their walker prior to leaving the facility, however, stated R1 was able to ambulate without it, and often did so at their own discretion. During their interview, R1 was unable to confirm or deny if they had their walker prior to leaving the facility or if they been using the walker at the time of their fall.
Based on record review of R1’s LIC602 and LIC624, and due to allegation being uncorroborated during interviews conducted, the Department is unable to determine if Staff did not ensure that resident had their required mobility aid prior to leaving the facility. Although the above allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore at this time the above allegation is unsubstantiated.
An exit interview was conducted and copy of this report was provided at the end of the inspection. |