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 | On the allegation, “Staff coerced resident” it is the concern of the reporting party that on 03/12/26, Resident 1 (R1) complained of a stomachache and was taken to urgent care by their day program staff. The reporting party alleged that group home staff coerced R1 into returning home instead of seeking medical treatment. Interviews with staff and R1 revealed that while in the urgent care parking lot, R1 spoke with Staff 1 (S1) by phone. S1 provided R1 with two options: enter the urgent care facility where home staff would meet them or return home to rest with the understanding that home staff would provide transport back to urgent care if the pain persisted. R1 confirmed they chose to return home, stated they did not feel pressured to do so, and noted they would have gone inside if they felt it was necessary. Once home, R1 reported feeling better after resting. Further investigation included an interview with R1’s Tri-Counties Service Coordinator, who expressed no concern regarding R1’s susceptibility to coercion, noting that R1 is highly verbal and capable of self-reporting. Administrator Joyce Abutin stated that the Day Program should have their own medical care policies and prioritize emergencies regardless of facility staff opinions. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, based on staff interviews and interview with R1, the department does not have sufficient evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur as interviews indicate R1 exercised personal choice, therefore the allegation, “Staff coerced resident” is UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time.
On the allegation, “Staff berated resident” it is the concern of the Reporting Party (RP) that hat on an unspecified date in January, Staff 1 (S1) berated Resident 1 (R1) by using a raised voice and asking rhetorical questions, such as, “Do you think you’re special?” The reporting party also alleged that S1 spoke inappropriately to R1 regarding the quantity of R1’s delivered meals. During an interview, R1 denied any inappropriate interactions and stated that all staff treat them with respect. R1 further reported feeling safe at the facility and maintained that they have a good relationship with the staff. S1 also denied the allegation, explaining that the conversation was a legitimate attempt to clarify how R1 wanted their meal deliveries handled, as staff cannot dispose of them without the resident's input. Additionally, R1’s Tri-Counties Service Coordinator, who speaks with R1 almost weekly, reported no concerns regarding staff conduct. The coordinator noted that while R1 may become upset when discussing meal management, there is no concern of verbal abuse or berating by staff. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, based on interviews with the resident, staff, and the service coordinator, the department does not have sufficient evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation, “Staff coerced resident” is UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. Report will continue on LIC9099-C, 3rd page.
|