complaint·August 28, 2023

Between 1:50pm and 2:23pm, LPA reviewed facility records. Facility records confirmed what staff told LPA. R1 was assessed on 11/09/2022 and 11/17/2022 and it was determined that they were bedridden and that they required a higher level of care. At 2:00pm, LPA called R1's responsible party and they stated that R1 was not evicted but rather told that do to their change in condition they could not return to the community because they required a higher level of care. Based on interviews and records review, there is not sufficient information to support this allegation. Therefore, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. It was alleged that facility is accepting payments for resident no longer in care. Between 11:15am and 12:20pm, staff interviews were conducted. Interviews revealed that as soon as it was determined that R1 would no longer be returning to the community, that the facility stopped billing them. R1 was on an assisted living waiver and their social worker was notified that they would no longer reside at the facility. At 4:14pm, LPA reviewed facility records. Records revealed that R1 was not billed but that Social Security continued to make payments. Facility paid back the money to SSA on 6/20/2023; Based on interviews and records review there is not sufficient information to support this allegation. Thus this allegation is deemed to be UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. It was reported that facility did not adhere to resident's Admissions Agreement. Between 1:50pm and 2:23pm, LPA reviewed facility records. Moreover, per admission policy in the admission agreement, the facility does not accept or retain the following adults: 1. Persons who are bedridden... R1 was assessed on 11/09/2022 and 11/17/2022 and it was determined that they were bedridden and that they required a higher level of care. Indeed, the facility did not retain R1 because they were adhering to the admission agreement. Staff interviews also confirmed this information. Staff told LPA that R1 had a change in condition and based on hospital assessments, required a higher level of care. Based on records review and interviews, there is not sufficient information to support this allegation. Therefore, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. Exit interview conducted and a copy of the report was issued.