complaint·May 25, 2021

Regarding the allegation: Food is not of good quality or quantity. The investigation revealed the following: On 5/23/2021 from 9:50am to 10:15am LPA Cifuentes reviewed facility dining menu. Facilities dining menu changes weekly and offers at least two entrée choices for lunch and dinner. The menu changes every week. Facility also has a Japanese food menu available at lunch, which offers a third entrée choice. If residents do not wish to eat one of the entrees on the menu, facility also provides an a la carte menu with a variety of salads, sandwiches and other foods. LPA reviewed facility records from 1:00 to 1:30pm. On 5/23/2021 from 12:00 to 1:00pm LPA Cifuentes toured facility grounds. LPA viewed food supply and found a two-day supply of perishable and a seven day supply of non-perishable foods. LPA was also able to observe residents eating lunch and observe portions given to them. On 5/23/2021 at 10:15am LPA Cifuentes interviewed administrator Alejandra Mendoza. Per Administrator Mendoza, residents receive 3 meals a day plus a snack at 8pm. If a resident is still hungry after they have finished their meal, they can ask for seconds. Residents are also able to ask for snacks and if there are changes they would like to see, they can bring them up to the Dietary Manager, who manages the kitchen and the food ordering. If a resident wants a large supply of a snack food or other item, facility staff will help them order it or contact their family to get it for them. On 5/25/2021 from 11:00am-1:00pm LPA Cifuentes interviewed resident 1 -resident 6. LPA asked residents if they believed they were receiving enough food at meals and for snacks. 3 out of 6 residents stated they received enough food at meals, with a fourth stating they stocked up on snacks. When asked about the quality of the food, 4 out of 6 residents stated the food was good. On 5/25/2021 from 10:15am to 1:00pm LPA Cifuentes interviewed staff 1-5. When asked if they believed residents received enough food, 5 of the 5 staff members stated yes. Based on LPA’s observation, interviews conducted, and records reviewed, the preponderance of evidence standard has not been met. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted, and a hard copy left with administrator Alejandra Mendoza.