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 | Regarding the allegation that staff did not safeguard resident's personal belongings, the following was revealed: During the interviews with residents, R1 reported that R2 tried to take her walker away. Per R2 and R3, staff always safeguard their personal belongings. During the interviews with staff, S1 reported that R2 did not take away R1's walker. Per AD, R2 did not take away the walker from R1. AD reported that if R2 had hit R1 that R1 would have bruises.
Regarding the allegation that staff did not report incident to resident's responsible party, the following was revealed: LPA reviewed the UIIR for R1. Per UIIR, the unwitnessed incident was reported to R1 and R2's daughters. During the interviews with residents, R1 reported that she is not aware if the AD notified her family. Per R2 and R3, staff report incidents to their family. During the interviews the AD reported that she talked to both residents' daughters.
Based on the information gathered during the investigation and review of documents obtained, LPA is unable to ascertain if the allegations occurred as reported due to conflicting information. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove or refute the alleged violations occurred; therefore, these allegations are deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED.
For today’s visit, there were no citations issued per Title 22, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations.
LPA conducted an exit interview with AD Amurao, and a copy of this report was provided to the facility. |