Complaint·January 28, 2025

At 9:25 am, LPA reviewed Resident 1's (R1) file, and other documents relevant to the investigation. Between 10:15 am and 12:30 pm, LPA conducted on-site interviews with Administrator, Staff, and six (6) responsible family members of facility residents. The Reporting Party (RP) alleges that staff failed to provide health status notifications regarding wound care services provided to R1. Additionally, the RP states facility staff did not attempt to notify the responsible family member that, in the month of December 2024, R1 had been transferred out of the facility, and transported to Hospital to diagnose the possibility of a stroke. LPA conducted a review of R1's file, and relevant documentation, finding the following: Prior to R1's September 2024 admission into the facility, R1 was identified as having a foot wound requiring medical care. R1's file contains documentation confirming that wound care service assistance was initiated in the same month of R1's admission, and continues to the current date. Facility Administrator provided LPA phone texts communicating to R1's responsible family member (F1) the status of R1's wound care assistance. LPA interview with F1 revealed the following: F1 confirmed to LPA that the Administrator did provide them notification that wound care services were being provided by Agency, Skilled Home Health, and that R1's wound is currently "dry and healing." LPA interview with the Administrator and Staff revealed the following: Both Administrator, and Staff refute this allegation, stating that facility medical staff informed F1 regarding status updates of R1's wound care, and notification of R1's transfer and hospitalization. LPA interview with six (6) responsible family members of residents revealed the following: Six (6) out of six (6) responsible family members state that facility staff consistently report activities related to resident care and services. Based on LPA documents, interviews with staff, and responsible family members of residents, The allegation is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time.