complaint·August 11, 2021

***This is an amended report and supercedes report dated 8/11/21. Additional details were added, but the findings were not changed.*** The investigation consisted of the following: Regarding the allegation that facility staff does not safeguard residents' belongings, LPA Spencer reviewed the admissions agreement showing the facility's theft and loss policy includes inventory of residents personal property and valuables. LPA reviewed residents' files and observed that all residents had a completed personal property and valuables inventory list. Interviewed staff stated that if residents report missing items, the staff will look for the items, inform the responsible party, and replace the item if not found. Staff stated that any missing items are usually found in the resident's room. Three (3) out of five (5) residents stated that they have not had missing items, while two (2) out of five (5) stated they were missing items such as clothing and important papers. However, the resident reporting missing clothing stated that it was stolen by a staff member whose name was not listed on the staff roster, and the resident who stated they were missing important papers stated in a follow-up interview that it was later found in the resident's room. Regarding the allegation that staff open residents' mail, all staff interviewed stated that residents' mail is given to the residents' responsible party unless the resident is self responsible, independent and gets their own mail. All staff denied the allegation that staff open the residents' mail. The administrator stated that R6's mail was mistakenly forwarded to the administrator's P.O. Box and was partially opened and crumpled but gave it to the resident and explained what happened. The administrator stated that the mail was never opened by facility staff and it was likely damaged at the post office during the sorting of the mail. Four (4) out of five (5) residents stated that their family gets their mail and were unaware of staff opening residents' mail, while one (1) out of five (5) stated that two letters were pre-opened when the resident received it. Based upon interviews conducted and records reviewed, the findings indicate although the allegation(s) may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, therefore the allegation(s) are Unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted with Administrator Elna Villaflor and a hard copy of the report was provided. Three (3) out of five (5) residents interviewed stated that residents are not allowed to go outside of the facility at this time, one (1) of out five (5) stated that they are allowed to go in the backyard and have outings with family members once in a while, and one (1) stated that they were unsure. F2 stated that family members were previously taking R6 on outings and the facility was allowing R6 to go out independently, but recently the family has refused to provide transportation due to family disputes. In a follow-up interview with the administrator, the administrator clarified that they were previously allowing R6 to go out on outings using Dail-a-ride or arranging transportation through family, however, due to family disputes, the administrator did not allow the resident to leave based on the family's request. A review of R6's records shows that the resident is not conserved and can leave the facility unassisted. Per admissions agreement, the basic services include assistance with transportation. Based upon interviews and record reviews, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegations are found to be SUBSTANTIATED . California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, is being cited on the attached LIC 9099D. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to the Administrator along with the Appeals Rights.