complaint·June 23, 2023

Based on the LPA's investigation, the investigation revealed the following: Allegation 1 - Staff did not keep resident's authorized person informed regarding resident's care. Interviews conducted with staff #1, S#2, S#4, S#6, & S#9, communicated that R#1, family members were always at the facility. There was no way that the family members did not know what was happening with R#1, every time they would come to the facility, there were always asking about R#1 and telling staff what R#1 needed. R#1’s family members were very involved with R#1’s care. S#1 & S#2, also communicated that family members were always either calling or emailing facility about R#1’s care. Interviews conducted with resident #1 - #8, could not communicated with LPA. Interviews conducted did not concur with the above allegation. Allegation 2 - Staff retaliated against resident for complaining. Interviews conducted with staff #1 – S#9, communicated that they would never do anything like that to any resident for any reason and they would never allow that to happen to any resident, they would report it if they were aware of someone doing that to any resident. Interviews conducted with resident #1 - #8, could not communicated with LPA. Interviews conducted did not concur with the above allegation. Allegation 3 - Staff did not ensure that resident's dentures were adequately installed. Interviews conducted with staff #1, S#2, S#4, & S#9, communicated that R#1’s dentures were a bit loose, and they informed the family members. They believed they had become loose because R31 had recently lost weight. They did not fit properly. S#1 personally made sure that R31’s dentures were put in properly, cleaned and had enough paste to keep them on. S#1 asked staff to make sure they checked R#1’s dentures before every meal. The dentures would be fine but then they would move, again because they needed to be refitted and family members, never took them to get refitted for R#1. LPA reviewed admission agreement, family members were responsible for R#1’s dentures and their care. Interviews conducted with resident #1 - #8, could not communicated with LPA. Interviews conducted and records reviewed did not concur with the above allegation. Allegation 4 - Staff did not ensure that resident's hearing aid was charged and properly installed. Interviews conducted with staff #1, S#2, S#4, & S#9, communicated that R#1’s hearing aid was charged every night, but she could not hear even though, it had been charged and/or exchanged for another one. The family was responsible for providing their residents hearing aid and getting them fixed and/or replaced. The facility would let the family members know about the hearing aid and they would say that they would go and get them fixed, but the hearing aid still had the same problem. Interviews conducted with resident #1 - #8, could not communicated with LPA. LPA reviewed R\#1 admission agreement, and it was the family members responsibility to provide the hearing aids for their resident. Interviews conducted with resident #1 - #8, could not communicated with LPA. Interviews conducted and records reviewed did not concur with the above allegation. Although the allegation may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted with Idona Avila, Family Ambassador and a hard copy of report was provided.