Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

During investigation, between 09/20/22 and 11/29/22 IB investigator Seng conducted interviews with R1’s hospice and palliative care physician, facility Administrator, other staff, residents, witnesses, and a family member. The facility staff indicated that they assisted R1 with all prescribed medications, which included medications prescribed by the Hospice doctor. R1’s family member was unaware that since R1’s admission to hospice care on 07/07/2022, R1 was prescribed with additional medications. As per hospice physician, the medications prescribed to R1 were ineffective and therefore could not have been used as chemical restraints. A review of R1’s medication record conducted by LPA Reed on 01/13/2023 at 9:50am, revealed that in addition to R1’s medication prescribed by R1’s regular physician, resident was receiving other medication prescribed by the hospice doctor. The information revealed from record review verified the information received from staff interviews. Based on interviews and record review, there is not sufficient information to support the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. Regarding the allegation “Due to staff neglect resident developed multiple Urinary Tract Infections”, it was alleged R1’s multiple UTIs were caused by overmedication and staff removing R1’s catheter. From interviews of medical professionals, facility staff, and residents and review of medical records conducted by IB Investigator Seng between 09/20/22 and 11/29/22, R1’s medications would not have caused a UTI or constipation. R1’s UTIs and constipation were likely the result of dehydration, and the irritation of a UTI was a probable cause for R1 removing their catheter. Staff noted multiple attempts to keep R1 hydrated. R1 admitted to removing their catheter several times from July 2022 to September 2022 due to discomfort. Based on interviews and record review, the allegation is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. Regarding the allegation “Resident was placed on hospice while at the facility without consent of resident's representative”, it was alleged R1 was placed under hospice care without consent from their responsible person. From record review of facility files conducted on 01/13/2023 at 9:50 a.m., R1 was admitted to the facility with no responsible person. R1’s medical assessment showed no legal representative either. R1’s admission was contracted through the Department of Mental Health. R1 signed their own hospice paperwork on 07/07/2022. From IB Investigator Seng’s interview of the facility Administrator on 09/20/2022, the facility did not receive any paperwork identifying family member as a designated Power of Attorney (POA) for R1. The information revealed from R1’s records verified the information received from the Administrator. Based on record review and interviews, the allegation is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. Regarding the allegation “Staff did not seek medical attention for resident in care in a timely manner”, it was alleged the facility did not immediately attend to R1’s medical needs. From record review conducted on 01/13/2023 at 9:50 a.m. R1 was hospitalized three times while at the facility. Staff Interviews conducted by IB Investigator Seng on 09/20/2022 revealed that R1 was in poor health upon arrival, but staff did their best to care for R1. While in care, R1 was hospitalized few times. In each instance, the facility notified R1’s case workers, hospice agency, primary care physician, and Community Care Licensing. 9-1-1 was called immediately thereafter. Based on interviews and record review, the allegation is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. Regarding the allegation “Staff did not ensure that resident in care received follow-up medical attention”, it was alleged R1’s overmedication led to their bowel blockage and staff did not provide required medical attention. From staff interviews conducted on 09/20/2022 by IB Investigator Seng, the hospice care was recommended for R1 due to their chronic pain and constipation. In addition, staff attempted to hydrate R1 on an hourly basis. From record review conducted on 01/13/2023 at 9:50 a.m. by LPA Reed, R1 had a history of chronic constipation. The facility’s sign-in sheet showed multiple visits each month from case managers and hospice nurses visiting R1 to address chronic health problems. Based on interviews and record review, the is an insufficient information and evidence to support the allegation, Therefore, the allegation is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. No immediate health and safety issues were noted during this visit. Exit interview conducted. Appeal rights discussed. Copy of report provided.

Citations

No citations recorded on this visit

The inspector found no violations of California child care regulations during this visit.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the March 11, 2023 inspection of PRIME RESIDENTIAL SENIOR CARE?

This was a complaint inspection of PRIME RESIDENTIAL SENIOR CARE on March 11, 2023. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to PRIME RESIDENTIAL SENIOR CARE on March 11, 2023?

No citations were issued during this inspection. The facility was found to be in compliance with all applicable regulations.

What type of inspection was this?

This was a complaint inspection. Complaint inspections are triggered when someone reports a concern about the facility to CCLD.

SourceView on CCLDView original report

Share this reportEmail

Next steps

If this is your facility,claim this pageand correct anything the record gets wrong. Free.

Researching this visit professionally?Book a 15-minute calland we will walk through what we have on file.

Data from CCLD public records. Last updated . If you believe any information is inaccurate, report it here.