complaint·July 13, 2023

LPA Tao attempted to interview resident#1 but all attempts failed. Five (5) out of six (6) residents interviewed could not corroborate the allegation. Resident reviews revealed that staff was not being negligent taking care of residents who has/had UTIs. Four (4) staff interviewed denied the allegation. LPA reviewed R1’s facility record revealed that R1 had UTIs due to having catheter for years and staff had been monitoring resident closely. Therefore, resident who has recurrent UTIs was not due to staff negligent. Regarding the allegation “staff did not seek medical attention for resident in a timely manner,” it was alleged that staff did not send resident#1 (R1) to hospital for medical treatment on a timely basis. LPA attempted to interview resident#1 but all attempts failed. Five (5) out of six (6) residents interviewed could not corroborate the allegation. It revealed that residents received medical treatments as needed on a timely basis. Four (4) staff interviewed denied the allegation. LPA reviewed R1’s facility record revealed that staff had monitored R1’s medical needs closely and provided medical care timely. Therefore, facility staff did not fail to seek medical attention for resident in a timely manner. Regarding the allegation “staff did not ensure that resident's catheter needs were met,” it was alleged that staff failed to change resident#1’s catheter bag nightly. LPA attempted to interview resident#1 but all attempts failed. Five (5) out of six (6) residents interviewed could not corroborate the allegation. Four (4) staff interviewed denied the allegation. LPA reviewed R1’s facility record revealed facility staff was not allowed to change catheter tube and bag because facility is not a skilled nursing facility. Resident’s catheter bag needed to be changed in the hospital. Therefore, staff had met resident's catheter needs while in care. Based on the information obtained during the investigation, interviews with staff, residents, review of resident files and LPA's observation, the investigation did not reveal any evidence to support the allegations mentioned above. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted with Administrator and findings were discussed. A copy this report was provided to Administrator at time of visit.