complaint·March 19, 2024

The investigation revealed the following: In regard to the allegation: staff did not respond to resident in a timely manner, it was alleged that staff did not provide assistance to resident timely after resident fell. Ten (10) out of eleven (11) residents who were interviewed could not corroborate the allegation. Resident interviews revealed that facility staff would provide timely care if residents called on the signal button for help. All five (5) staff who were interviewed denied the allegation. Staff interviews revealed that staff would assist residents timely if residents when residents called for help. LPA tested and called the signal button. Staff responded to LPA’s calls in about 2 minutes and staff attended to residents’ rooms to provide care in range of from 3 minutes to 10 minutes. Therefore, there was not preponderance evidence to show staff failed to respond to resident in a timely manner. In regard to the allegation staff are not providing resident with privacy, it was alleged that staff did not provide privacy to residents and visitors during visits and did not allow visitor to go to resident’s room during the visit. Ten (10) out of eleven (11) residents who were interviewed could not corroborate the allegation. Resident interviews revealed that staff provided privacy to residents during visitation and residents could choose where the visitation took place. All five (5) staff who were interviewed denied the allegation. Staff interviews revealed that staff honored residents’ privacy and offered it to residents for visitations. Per record review, residents had personal rights for privacy and visitation. Therefore, the facility staff provided residents and visitors with privacy during visits. In regard to the allegation staff did not safeguard resident's personal belongings, it was alleged that resident’s cell phone was missing while in care. Ten (10) out of eleven (11) residents who were interviewed could not corroborate the allegation. Resident interviews revealed that when their cell phones or personal items were claimed missing, staff would assist to find them and one (1) of eleven (11) residents did not report missing a cell phone. Their items were misplaced and found in the next day. Residents were not aware of any personal items being stolen. All five (5) staff who were interviewed denied the allegation. Staff interviews revealed that staff would search for the missing items and return them to residents when found. Staff stated the claimed missing items were misplaced, not missing. Therefore, the investigation did not reveal facility fail to safeguard residents’ belongings. (-continued in LIC 9099C-) In regard to the allegation staff did not provide a comfortable environment for resident, it was alleged that resident was left in a shivering cold room in the cold day. Ten (10) out of eleven (11) residents who were interviewed could not corroborate the allegation. Resident interviews revealed that residents had never left in a cold room shivering. The staff would check on them and assist as needed. All five (5) staff who were interviewed denied the allegation. Staff would do rounds and respond to call buttons to assist resident if rooms were cold or hot. Per LPA’s observation, resident’s rooms’ temperature were in the range of 70- 75 degree Fahrenheit which was in compliance with Title 22. Therefore, the residents’ rooms had comfortable temperature. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted with Administrator. A hard copy of the reports were provided.