It was alleged that the facility is understaffed in the areas of the front entrance, activities and housekeeping. The complainant reports that the facility does not have a receptionist at the desk twenty-four hours a day, which is a safety concern. However, regulatory standards do not require this facility to have a receptionist on duty twenty-four hours a day. A review of the resident agreement, which is provided to all residents upon admission to the facility, it indicates ‘For your added security, the front doors are locked at sundown and will reopen at dawn.’ Staff indicated that there isn’t a receptionist in the facility after 8:00 p.m. and the protocol for residents entering after 8:00 p.m. is to either call the main number 10-15 minutes prior to re-entry, or to press the alert button outside of the facility to alert staff of their arrival to the facility. It was communicated that staff on duty should respond to the alert buttons and/or the calls to open the front door quickly.

Out of the eleven (11) resident interviews, less than a majority of the residents indicated that they had experienced wait-times upwards to twenty-five (25) minutes when they have requested entry into the facility after 8:00 p.m. However, those residents had not called prior to arriving to the facility as preferred per protocol. The majority of residents indicated that they had received a prompt response when requesting entry into the facility after 8:00 p.m. Staff interviews revealed that at times, they are unable to respond to the front door timely due to the claim that they are assisting other residents, but staff indicated that they did carry a mobile phone and would be responsive if they were aware of a resident arrival. The LPA reviewed data from January 2023 and noted that on two occasions on 01/07/2023 and 1/11/2023, the response time for responding to the alert was between 86-93 minutes. However, it is unknown if this was an anomaly. Two occasions displayed on 1/21/2023 and 1/22/2023 in the evening was approximately 13.5 minutes, whereas there were various other times that ranged from 0-7 minutes in response time.

Regarding activities, staff interviews confirmed that the facility does not have an Activities Director. However, there are several assistants whom provide activity services and residents confirmed that the facility continues to host daily activities throughout the week. However, due to insufficient staffing in the activities department, the facility has temporarily limited community outings and has focused transportation needs to serving residents that require transportation to doctor’s appointments and grocery shopping.

Based on the investigation, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim of insufficient staffing. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not sufficient evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is Unsubstantiated at this time.

Regarding the allegation: Staff do not provide adequate food service

It was alleged that the quality and quantity of food serviced is not nourishing or adequate. Interviews conducted revealed that residents have voiced concerns regarding food service, which include the portion sizes, provided choices, and quality of proteins. However, residents also supported claims that they are able to order other meal options as needed and communicated that staff are accommodating as needed. A review of the facility menus indicated that although the menu had less options than previously offered, residents still were afforded options. Interviews conducted with wait staff and culinary management revealed that the facility is constantly trying to maintain and improve on food quality by way of taking resident suggestions, implementing strategies to increase resident satisfaction, and hosting Food for Thought talks on a monthly basis to ensure continued communication between staff and residents. Staff interviews revealed that the facility can offer low salt meals, limited concentrated sweets, and regular diets. A review of Atria’s program plan revealed that the community is unable to offer any other diets. This is also reflected in the resident handbook and admission’s agreement. However, staff interviews revealed that they will attempt to assist residents with meal selections for those that are gluten-free or have other dietary substitutions.

On 01/27/2023 and 02/06/2023, the LPA toured the kitchen and observed that the perishable and non-perishable food was of good quality. The LPA did not observe food that was expired, of poor quality, nor in poor condition. Based on interviews, observation and documentation review, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim that the staff do not provide adequate food service. This allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time.

Regarding the allegation: improper rent increase

It was alleged that the licensee provided an improper rent increase. Resident interviews revealed that the rent increase appeared excessive, given that the quality of care and services has not improved. However, interviews and a review of the provided notices indicated that residents and resident responsible parties were provided a notice of rent increase on approximately 10/27/2022, with notice that the new increase would be in effect 01/01/2023. The notice stated that the reason for the increase was due to the cost of inflation, cost of living and labor costs, along with programmatic needs such as activities, housekeeping, transportation, and so on. The notice also included an addendum that reflected the new rate for care levels and rental rates. Based on review of documents and regulatory standards, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim that the rent increase was improper. Whereas it has been deemed excessive by many residents at the facility, all regulatory standards were followed as the facility followed regulation in accordance with the required notice requirements. Per Health and Safety Code 1569.147(b), ‘Licensed residential care facilities for the elderly are not subject to controls on rent imposed by any state or local agency or other local government entity’. Based on the information obtained, this allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time.

No deficiencies cited at this time. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report was issued.