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 | On the allegation: Staff violated resident personal rights
It was alleged that staff at the current and previous homes under this licensee took inappropriate images and videos of C1, it was also alleged that abuse at prior facilities was conducted. During the investigation prior interviews done in September and October of 2025 related to an incident involving the care of client 1 (C1) were reviewed. Five interviews conducted for prior complaint # 29-AS-20250820071748 were relevant to this complaint. Three Collateral visits were done on 10/16/25, 11/04/25, and 12/17/25 in which 5 current or prior staff were interviewed. A phone interview with an administrator/supervisor of staff who work with C1 was done on 12/23/25. Staff interviewed have worked in and around C1 or work with staff who work with C1. None of the staff admitted to observing any abuse or to possessing, viewing, or sharing images of C1. All staff have stated they have not heard of other staff who have possessed or shared inappropriate videos or images of any client.
LPA interviewed Witness 1 (W1) identified by C1’s family as the individual who informed them about the images. W1 denied seeing or possessing any images but admitted to LPA and Quality Assurance Specialist with Tri-County Regional Center during an interview on 10/16/25 that they had heard of staff at Bauer facilities taking photos and videos. LPA did a follow-up visit with W1 on 12/17/25 and again inquired about the allegations in which W1 stated that Staff 2 (S2) who works at the facility with C1 had told W1 about the incidents. LPA and TCRC on 9/10/25, during the investigation for complaint # 29-AS-20250820071748 had interviewed S2, who was asked about abuses taking place and about video or photographs of C1, during interview the staff member stated they did not have and have not seen any video or photographs, S2 claimed that they had heard C1 was tied up, but had not witnessed it.
During the investigation, LPA was provided with an image of C1 sitting naked in a recliner, with feces visible between their legs. The image was sent to Family 1 (F1) in the context of accompanying text messages. C1 is mostly non-verbal and due to their disability is unable to provide consent for this image.
Based on documentation obtained during the investigation, it was determined that staff violated C1’s personal rights by taking and sharing an inappropriate image. There is no evidence at this time that multiple incidents involving inappropriate videos or images occurred, nor that any abuse was conducted. However, due to the one image being unnecessarily shared and in violation of C1’s personal rights, the allegation is Substantiated.
Pursuant to Title 22 Division 6 Chapter 8 of the CA Code of Regulations, the following deficiency was cited (refer to LIC 9099-D).
Exit interview conducted, copy of appeal rights and report printed for administrator. |