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 | Continued from LIC9099...
A second fax was successfully sent to R1’s primary physician on 8/25/25 at 2:05:29pm advising that R1 was in their bed showing signs of sweating, trouble breathing and notifying them of R1’s transportation to Sutter hospital. LPA obtained police records #SD250826005 confirmed information above mentioned regarding staff seeking medical care for R1 with an unfounded resolution. Also, LPA reviewed incident reports submitted to the department, where it was confirmed that the facility submitted an incident report on 8/25/25 regarding R1’s condition. Based on LPA’s observations, records review and interviews conducted with pertinent parties, it was determined that the facility has followed proper protocol regarding seeking timely medical care assistance to R1 and it’s unclear the reasons why the unknown staff told the reporting party that R1 had not received medical care for two days. A finding that the complaint allegation of staff did not assist residents with obtaining medical care in a timely manner is unsubstantiated meaning that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED.
Another allegation of staff did not report the incident to appropriate parties. Per Reporting Party, R1 was transported to the hospital, after they allegedly needed immediate care due to respiratory condition. According to the Reporting Party, unknown staff told them that they had not notified R1's responsible party of their condition. Based on records review, R1’s identification and emergency information form (LIC601) revealed that R1 has listed placement agency and nearest relative person as their responsible parties, which coincides with R1’s physician orders for life-sustaining treatment (POLST) form. Based on LPA’s observations, records review and interviews conducted with pertinent parties it was confirmed that the facility have reported the incident to one out of the two R1’s party responsible listed on file, the findings coincide with police records #SD250826005 obtained, where the case was determined as unfounded after police officers have conducted confidential interviews with pertinent parties. A finding that the complaint allegation of staff did not report the incident to appropriate parties is unsubstantiated meaning that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. |