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 | All residents interviewed denied any complaints from other residents regarding bathing schedules. LPA was unable to interview R1 as he had passed prior to interview.
LPA Gould interviewed staff and residents regarding allegations of residents smoking in the facility. All staff and residents denied that staff allowed residents to moke inside the facility. LPA Gould interviewed two identified smokes in the facility (R2, R3) and both denied staff allow residents to smoke inside and both denied ever smoking inside. R2 and R3 identified R1 as a former resident who attempted to smoke inside. both residents stated staff addressed the issue with R1 and it was a one time occurrence due failing health of R1. All staff interviews corroborated the statements of R2 and R3 and denied that staff were allowing residents to smoke inside the facility. LPA was unable to interview R1 as he passed prior to interview.
Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. The Department has determined that the allegations of neglect/lack of supervision are unsubstantiated but if any additional information is received this complaint can be amended and the finding can be changed.
There are no deficiencies noted or cited per California Code Regulation, TITLE 22.
Exit interview was conducted with the facility administrator. Appeal Rights were issued, and a copy of this report was mailed to the facility for signature
Page 2 of 2 |