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 | Administrator, David Wall, stated that R1 was not being evicted, but he was not letting him return back to the community due to R1's medical needs. Administrator stated that his community is Assisted Living and R1 needed to go to a Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF).
The information available shows that R1 was discharged back to the facility with an appropriate care plan. It was the responsibility of the licensee to accept the resident back and then, if needed, perform a reappraisal of the resident. If the reappraisal showed that the licensee could not meet those needs, then the licensee needed to issue a 30-day eviction notice and follow corresponding eviction procedures. Based on this information, there is preponderance of evidence that R1 was illegally evicted from the community when the licensee refused to accept the resident back, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED.
Deficiencies of the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, are cited on the attached LIC9099-D. Appeal Rights given. This report was discussed and reviewed with Administrator, David Wall.
|