NARRATIVE |
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 | LPA Marrufo obtained copies of R1’s Identification and Emergency Information Form and Admission Agreement, which both state R1 was admitted into the facility on 03/08/2024.
During interview, PD stated that R1 does not have an LIC602 Physician’s Report in R1’s resident record at the facility. PD stated that when R1 moved into the facility on 03/08/2024, PD told R1 on 03/11/2024 that R1 needed to see R1’s doctor to have an LIC602 Physician’s Report completed. PD stated R1 did not want to provide facility staff with the contact information of R1’s doctor. PD stated R1 stated the soonest R1 could schedule an appointment with R1’s doctor would be in mid-April.
During interview, R1 stated that facility staff had not asked R1 to make an appointment to complete an LIC602 Physician’s Report.
The House Rules section in R1’s Admission Agreement states on page 4, “Residents are not allowed to keep any prescribed medications or over the counter (OTC) medications in the bedroom. All medications must be stored in the facility medication room, unless otherwise instructed by doctor in writing.”
During interview, R1 stated that PD told R1 that R1 initially told R1 that R1 cannot take R1’s medication when R1 moves out of the facility because R1 did not yet have an LIC602 Physician’s Report that verified that R1 could handle medication. R1 stated that now the staff have told R1 that R1 can take R1’s medication when R1 moves from the facility.
R1 stated that staff have not kept R1 from taking medications according to doctor’s orders while R1 has been living at the facility.
During interview, PD stated that staff have not withheld medications from R1. During interview, CM stated that facility staff have always given R1 medications according to doctor’s orders.
Based on information from interviews conducted with staff, and observations made, although the allegations listed above may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur. Therefore, the allegations are unsubstantiated. No Deficiencies were cited under California Code of Regulations Title 22. This report was reviewed with Prunella Cardozo and a copy of this report was provided. Page 2 of 2. END REPORT. |
Deficiency Type
POC Due Date /
Section Number | DEFICIENCIES | PLAN OF CORRECTIONS(POCs) |
Type B
04/25/2024
Section Cited
CCR
80068.5(c) | 1
2
3
4
5
6
7 | 80068.5 Eviction Procedures (c) The notice to quit shall state the reasons for the eviction, with specific facts supporting the reason for the eviction including the date, place, witnesses, if any, and circumstances. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: | 1
2
3
4
5
6
7 | Licensee agrees to review any ongoing 30-day eviction notices, included R1’s 30-day eviction notice, and retract the 30-day notice if it does not include the required specific facts supporting the reason for eviction by POC date. |
 | 8
9
10
11
12
13
14 | Licensee did not ensure that the 30-day eviction notice given to resident R1 included specific facts supporting the reason for eviction including the date, place, witnesses, if any, and circumstances, which poses a potential safety risk to residents in care.
| 8
9
10
11
12
13
14 | If the Licensee decides to re-issue the 30-day eviction, the licensee shall ensure that the revised 30-day eviction contains specific facts supporting the reason for eviction and submit a copy of the revised 30-day eviction to CCL by POC date. |
Type B
04/25/2024
Section Cited
CCR
85068.5(b)(1) | 1
2
3
4
5
6
7 | 85068.5 Eviction Procedures (b) The licensee shall be permitted to evict a client by serving the client with a three-day written notice to quit provided that both of the following requirements have been met: | 1
2
3
4
5
6
7 | Licensee agrees to retract the 3-day eviction notice to R1 and submit a statement of understanding of the Eviction Procedures regulations in CCL Title 22 Regulations 85068.5 and 80068.5 by POC date. |
 | 8
9
10
11
12
13
14 | (1) The licensing agency has granted prior written and/or documented telephone approval for the eviction. This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Licensee did not ensure that the licensing agency had granted approval for the 3-day eviction for R1 prior to the facility serving the 3-day eviction to R1. | 8
9
10
11
12
13
14 |  |