complaint·September 9, 2025

...continued from LIC9099. In addition, statements were obtained from Staff (S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6) and Witnesses (W1, W2, W3, W4, W5). The allegation occurred on 03/10/25 around 06:48 AM. S5 assisted R1 with ADL’s, charted details of bruises on R1’s body and reported the incident to S1. S1 stated that he/she had never seen any bruises like this before on R1’s body and contacted 911. BFD arrived on site at the facility. BFD obtained urines samples, reported R1’s physical and mental condition BPD. On 03/10/25 at 06:50 PM, BPD responded to BFD personnel; W1 was present to assist with R1’s language translation. It was alleged that staff (W2) sexually assaulted R1. Due to R1’s diagnosis of Dementia, R1 was not able to provide details or additional information about the bruises and R1’s statements did not consist of sexual assault. W2 denied sexually assaulting R1 and stated that he/she had not observed any bruising or had any sexual contact with R1. W2’s last contact with R1 was through W2’s shift on 03/09/25 that ended around 10:45 PM. W2 was not employed by the facility, instead by R1’s family. On 03/09/25 at 05:40 PM, S5 and S6 provided care to R1 with ADL’s and toileting. S6 did not observe anything unusual or bruising on R1. S7 stated and reported on R1’s Progress notes dated 03/10/25 at 07:57 AM that R1 slept for 4.5 hours and noted R1 using his/her hands to hit his/her legs; it was very loud, and the noise was heard at the nursing station in the next room #28, R1 resided in room #29. PRN Codeine and Olanzapine were given to R1 at 3:09 AM, noted effective, and no abnormal findings were reported by W2. Records and interviews from S1, S2, S3, W1, W2, and W3 revealed that R1 was a fall risk, there was no evidence of sexual assault and no determination for the cause of bruises on R1. Based on all the information obtained, there was not enough evidence to conclude that R1 was sexually assaulted; therefore, the allegation is unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Exit interview conducted and copy of this report provided to Michelle Neumann, Senior Administrator Specialist.