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 | In addition, ED Langston indicated that they received an information via email from Department of Behavioral Health (DBH) that the bed for C1’s closed effective 09/17/2024. However, C1’s Conservator informed LPAs Brown and Serrano that they decided to close C1’s bed at the facility because during their Case Management Meeting on 09/17/2024, Facility Representative 1 specifically told them at the meeting that “If C1 cannot ambulate, then C1 cannot be here.” Furthermore, C1’s Conservator indicated that they decided to close C1’s bed at the facility because the staffs at the facility did not provide information to them that they can accept clients that are non-ambulatory. Due to facility staffs did not provide the information that they can accept non-ambulatoty clients, they believed that the facility cannot meet C1's needs. C1’s Conservator emphasized that they were concern for C1’s safety that’s why they decided to close C1’s bed at the facility because they did not know that the facility can accept non-ambulatory clients. C1’s Conservator added that if they were informed that the facility can accept non-ambulatory clients, they will not close C1’s bed at the facility. Per interview, LPAs Brown and Serrano noted that facility staffs did not inform C1’s Conservator that they can accept non-ambulatory clients, which leads to C1’s Conservator and DBH closing C1’s bed at the facility. LPAs noted that the facility’s licensed for 150 ambulatory and 30 may be non-ambulatory clients and one (1) may be bedridden which leads to C1’s Conservator and DBH closing C1’s bed at the facility. Because the facility did not inform C1’s Conservator and DBH that they can accept non-ambulatory clients that resulted to C1’s Conservator and DBH closing C1’s bed for C1’s safety, the facility did not accept C1 back after being discharged from the hospital on 09/18/2024 and no 30 Days Eviction Notice was also issued to C1's Conservator. LPAs Brown and Serrano will be issuing a citation.
Based on LPAs Brown and Serrano observations and interviews and records review conducted, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore, the allegation of Staff refused to accept client at the facility after being discharged from the hospital is SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 6 is being cited on the attached LIC9099D.
An exit interview was conducted where this report LIC9099, LIC9099D, and Appeal Rights were discussed and provided to Executive Director Jessica Langston. |