complaint·July 24, 2025

The allegation of “Facility Staff did not safeguard a resident's personal belongings.” alleges that resident #1 (R1)’s two (2) pairs of Levi jeans, five (5) long sleeved shirts, two (2) robes, and a pair of black Velcro sneakers that they arrived to the facility with are now missing. Additionally, the allegation alleges that a suede jacket was washed improperly and ruined by facility staff. LPA reviewed R1’s file and reviewed their signed personal property and valuables sheet. LPA observed this sheet to be signed by both Resident #1 (R1) and the facility Administrator. LPA observed this sheet to indicate that R1 arrived to the facility with two (2) pants, nine (9) t-shirts, three (3) outerwear, two (2) underwear, and six (6) socks. LPA did not observe the property and valuables sheet to contain robes, long sleeved shirts, or sneakers. LPA observed R1’s closet and observed eight (8) t-shirts. Additionally, LPA observed R1 wearing one (1) t-shirt. LPA did not observe any additional clothing items in R1’s closet. LPA interviewed the Administrator, the Designee, and S1. All three (3) staff interviewed did not know where the outerwear, underwear, or socks were located. The Administrator confirmed that the two pairs of jeans were rendered unwearable following accidents and were subsequently discarded. The Administrator and Designee stated that they are in the process of replacing the pants and they should be arriving Sunday (07/27/2025). LPA interviewed Witness #1 (W1) who stated that they were in control of R1’s suede jacket. W1 confirmed that the jacket never resided at the facility and was not ruined in the laundry. During today's visit LPA was provided with copies of receipts showing the order of two (2) pairs of Levi Jeans and men's boxers tare o be delivered Sunday (07/27/2025). Based on the information obtained during interviews there is sufficient evidence to support the allegation of “Facility Staff did not safeguard a resident's personal belongings.” Therefore, the allegation is deemed Substantiated at this time. The following deficiency was cited (refer to LIC 9099D). This report was read to the Administrator via telephone call. A copy of the report was printed, appeal rights were provided, and exit interview was conducted. The allegation of “The facility telephone is inoperable” alleges that the facility does not have a working telephone for resident use. LPA conducted a physical plant tour and observed an iPhone that is designated as the facility’s telephone for resident use. LPA observed the telephone to be charged and the telephone appeared functional. LPA made a call to the telephone and confirmed proper function of the device. LPA interviewed S1. S1 was knowledgeable on the resident’s rights and confirmed that they were aware of the resident’s rights to utilize the facility telephone. S1 stated that if calls are received on the phone they will hand the telephone to the resident and provide them privacy while they speak. LPA interviewed the Administrator who confirmed that the facility telephone is always present at the facility and is available for resident use upon request. During today’s visit LPA observed resident #1 (R1) to request to use the facility phone. LPA observed S1 immediately providing the phone to R1 for use. Resident #2 (R2) was interviewed and had no concerns about access to the facility phone. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation of, “The facility telephone is inoperable.” Therefore, the allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time. This report was read to the Administrator via telephone call. A copy of the report was printed, and exit interview was conducted.