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 | Residents activate the call system by pulling a string in their room, which lights up an indicator outside the room to alert staff that assistance is needed. 4 out of 6 staff members admitted that the facility’s call system is outdated and inefficient, as it relies solely on visual signals rather than sound. This means that if an RA is assisting another resident in their room, the resident who needs help must wait until the RA is available or if another staff member notices the light. Based on records review the facility does not have a system in place to track the call system's performance, other than periodic inspections to ensure it is operational. During the investigation, LPA Lee observed two separate incidents where residents were unable to get timely assistance. On 12/03/24 at 1:46 PM, LPA Lee observed a resident in room 309 needing help, but no RA attended to them until LPA Lee approached Assistant Administrator Katelyn. Upon inspecting the call light, LPA Lee discovered it was not in good working order. A similar issue was observed on 01/29/25, when a resident in room 206 required assistance, but their call light was also found to be malfunctioning. LPA Lee raised these concerns with Administrator Caleb Summerhays and Assistant Administrator Katelyn Flores, specifically addressing the malfunctioning call lights and the lack of response when the lights are not functioning properly.
It was alleged that staff were not meeting the incontinence care needs of residents. The investigation included interviews with staff and residents, as well as observations. LPA Lee interviewed 5 out of 8 residents, all of whom expressed concerns about the long wait times for incontinence care from resident aide (RA) staff. Residents mentioned using the call system to request assistance, but RA staff would take 30 minutes to an hour, or sometimes not respond at all, before providing help. During an observation on 01/29/25, LPA Lee noticed a strong urine odor in resident room 106 and a mild urine odor in resident room 213. In an interview with facility staff, it was revealed that the resident in room 106 requires assistance with incontinence care and tends not to use the urinal. LPA Lee recommended that the resident in room 106 may need additional oversight, such as reminders for incontinence care and more frequent cleaning in the room to reduce the strong urine odor.
It was alleged that the facility staff did not properly address scabies in the facility. The investigation involved interviews with staff and residents, as well as a review of facility records. LPA Lee interviewed 4 out of 8 residents, who either raised concerns about scabies in the facility or mentioned hearing about other residents having scabies.
Continued LIC 9099-C
|