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 LPA Colvin’s interview with S1, S1 stated that they pushed R1 away from them with their arm due to R1 having bitten their arm and needing to “feed the bite” as proper procedure to reduce further injury and encourage R1 to release.
When LPA Colvin reviewed the security footage from the incident, LPA Colvin observed the following: At 8:47:15, R1 lunges towards S1 and hits S1 in the face. At 8:47:16, S1 gets their left arm around in-between R1 and themselves and starts pushing R1 backwards towards the wall/window. At this point it is clear that R1’s mouth is not on S1’s arm, and R1’s head is in fact turned away from S1 and facing the camera. S1 continues to push R1 the length of the table towards the window/wall, and it is not until 8:47:18 that R1 puts their mouth on S1’s arm, which is now pushing against R1’s face while S1 forces R1 backwards. At 8:47:19, R1 becomes pinned against the window and has their mouth on S1’s arm while S1 is still pushing into them. The video footage shows additional facility staff coming to assist and actually pulling S1 off of R1 and removing S1’s arm from R1’s mouth.
Based on LPA Colvin’s review of the video footage, the series of events are different than what was stated by S1, as S1 had opportunity to disengage from the conflict with R1, and if S1 had done so, it is likely that R1 would not have had the opportunity to bite S1’s arm, which further escalated the incident. At the time of S1 pushing R1 backwards across the length of the dining room table and almost up until R1 was pinned against the window, S1’s arm was not yet in R1’s mouth, therefore discrediting S1’s reason for why they needed to push into R1. Therefore, based on video footage obtained from the facility, the allegation “Client was not accorded dignity in relationships with staff” is SUBSTANTIATED.
A finding that the complaint is SUBSTANTIATED means that the allegation(s) is valid because the preponderance of the evidence standard has been met.
Due to observations made by LPA Colvin, the facility was cited, and deficiencies noted on LIC 9099 D. An exit interview was conducted where this report and appeal rights were discussed. A copy this report, LIC 9099D, and appeal rights were provided to Administrator Adelita Buckingham during the exit interview.
|