Regarding the allegation of Personal Rights. The Reporting party alleges that after the facility has knowledge of client’s (C1) diagnosis of dementia, the facility is engaging in conduct that escalates C1’s emotional distress by making them subject of verbal interactions that upset C1 to the point where C1 developed self-harm behaviors. These documented self-harm behavioral incidents have resulted in a 30-day eviction notice issued to C1. Per reporting party, the placement agency was made aware of photographs of C1’s bruises as a result of a fall, but they have not provided guidance regarding safe placement alternatives. On 5/14/26, LPA conducted 10-day visit to the facility, made observations, reviewed records and conducted interviews with staff and clients in care. Based on interviews with the Licensee confirmed that they have made comments to C1 about whether their loved ones won’t have a desire to be around them due to their behavior but deny that their comments have triggered C1’s emotional distress. On May 15, 2026, the department received a revised written lawful 30-day eviction notice issued to C1 due to failure to comply with the general facility policies with effective date of June 14, 2026. However, on May 20, 2026, LPA learned that C1 was residing with them after another incident of fall occurred resulting in C1’s hospitalization, where C1 will be residing until their relocation process is safely completed. The preponderance of evidence standard has been met; therefore, the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations is cited on the attached LIC 9099D. Appeal Rights Given.

LPA obtained C1’s individual program plan (IPP) dated 4/15/2026 indicating that C1 responsible parties attended and helped to develop C1’s IPP, which specifies that there have been evaluations for age related cognitive decline, where test results have raised the specter of Alzheimer’s dementia. The placement agency addresses that they are in the process of finding a home that best meets their care needs based on their diagnosis of moderate intellectual disability, unspecified psychotic disorder, hypothyroidism, and other gastrointestinal diseases. IPP determines that weight loss, increased agitation episodes, fragile ambulation, self-injury behaviors, and cognitive decline are side effects of the aging process, but C1’s physician has prescribed medications to reduce side effects with their new age-related diagnosis to help them improve cognitive function and daily activities. Additionally, IPP confirmed that C1’s responsible party and facility staff are playing a primary and supporting role through their involvement in meeting C1’s safety, medical and dental needs as well as medication management. According to facility records the facility has been implementing preventive measures including private room assignment, de-escalation protocols, staff training, close monitoring while out in the community, working collaboratively with placement agency until proper placement is found and C1 gets relocated. LPA was provided with incident reports regarding incidents above described, which were not submitted to the department apparently Licensee was under the impression that incident reports that they submitted to the placement agency were going to be cross reported to CCL by placement agency. Based on records and interviews conducted with pertinent parties, it was determined that C1 has a significant change of condition that requires more support and care, but currently the facility is meeting C1’s care needs and supervision by making adjustments to be able to meet C1’s care needs while placement agency finds an adequate home to relocate C1. A finding that the complaint allegation client's care needs not being met is unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED.