Complaint·March 7, 2025

The investigation consisted of the following: On 02/22/2024 and 03/28/2024, from 9:30am -11:00am, the department requested and received the following documents: Staff and Resident rosters, SIR reports, Physician's report, ALW appraisal, Summons for Eviction for residents, records from Southern California Hospital at Culver City, and other pertinent records associated with this complaint. The department conducted interviews with witnesses (W1-W3), residents (R1-R8) and staff (S1-S8). On 03/7/25, the department conducted interviews with (S1, S2, and S9). Investigation Revealed the Following: Allegations #1: Staff did not accept resident back into care following hospitalization. The details of the complaint alleged that the facility did not accept a resident back into care following their hospitalization. On 02/22/2024 and 03/28/2024, from 9:30am -11:00am, the department interviewed staff (S1-S8) and residents (R1-R8) and witnesses (W1-W3). On 3/7/25, from 12:00pm-1:00pm, the department interviewed S1, S2, and S9 regarding the allegation. 3 of 9 staff interviewed corroborated the allegation that Staff did not accept resident back into care following hospitalization. While 6 of 9 staff had no knowledge of the incident. 3 of the 9 staff that corroborated the allegation stated that the reason the resident was not admitted back to the facility was because the resident needed a higher level of care that the facility could not give. 3 of 3 witnesses interviewed corroborated the allegation Staff did not accept resident back into care following hospitalization, stating there was an issue with the resident returning to the facility. The department interviewed residents R1-R8 about the allegation that Staff did not accept resident back into care following hospitalization. 7 of 8 residents interviewed stated they had no knowledge of the incident. Whereas 1 of 9 residents refused to be interviewed. The department reviewed all documents received from the facility and found that the facility did not follow proper procedures according to Title 22 regulations when it comes to residents who need a higher level of care. Based on interviews conducted and records reviewed, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met. Therefore, the above allegation Staff did not accept resident back into care following hospitalization, is found to be Substantiated . California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division (6) and chapter (8) are being cited on the attached LIC 9099D. Citations were issued on this visit. Note: *Citations not cleared by the due date will have a $100 fine assessed for each citation until it is cleared. Civil penalties will continue to accrue until Proof of Corrections (POC) is cleared. If the facility plans to appeal, the plan of corrections must still be completed by the due date. An exit interview was conducted, appeal rights were printed and discussed with Luz Rose, Administrator, and a hard copy of this Complaint Investigation Report was provided. The department interviewed residents R1-R8 about the allegation that Staff attempted to administer resident’s medication by force. 7 of 8 residents interviewed stated that the facility does not force them to take their medication. The department reviewed all documents received from the facility and found no evidence that the facility forces residents to take their medication. Based on interviews and observations there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation Staff attempted to administer resident’s medication by force. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is Unsubstantiated. No citations were issued. An exit interview was conducted and discussed with Luz Rose, Administrator, and a hard copy of this Complaint Investigation Report was provided.