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 | Page 2 of 2. On 04/7/23, LPAs met and interviewed staff (S1). S1 stated that sometime in March when drop-off it was raining, and the door of the van was opened wherein resident (R1 said to him/her "shut the fucking door," S1 replied, "let me put R...." S1 stated that R1 threw his/her lunch bag at S1. S1 then flipped him/her off. S1 stated that another staff (S2) who was the designated driver who witnessed the incident but no longer works at the facility. On 04/18/2023, the Department conducted interviews with clients wherein they stated that staff at the facility are 'nice.'
On 07/19/2023, the Department interviewed Administrator (ADM) who is aware of R1's use of foul language or profane language when he/she hears something. ADM stated that R1's Service Coordinator from San Andreas Regional Center (SARC) and family wherein R1's behavior has been discussed when he/she use profanity and accusing staff. ADM stated that when R1 hears other client use of profane language, R1 would turn around and accused that staff said the profane language. ADM stated that staff at the facility does not threatened R1. ADM stated that R1 is no longer a client at this program.
On 07/19/2023, the Department interview staff (S2 and S3) at R1's ARF home. At 10:32AM, staff (S2) was interviewed and provide information about R1's behavior, S2 stated that when R1 hears another client being upset using profane language, R1 would get upset and accused staff why they use profane language or bad words at him/her. S3 stated that when R1 hears another resident using bad words, he/she will copy it but lately he/she is doing fine.
On 7/19/2023,at 10:17AM, ARF Administrator (ARF ADM) was interviewed. ARF ADM stated that he/she is the new ARF ADM for the past 20 days, he/she said aware of R1's aggressive behavior but has not observed R1's use of profane language.
The Department has investigated the above allegation. Based on observation and interview, the Department has determined that the above allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. An unsubstantiated finding indicates that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur.
No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with Administrator Melissa Ramos and a copy of the report was provided. |