Complaint·May 19, 2023

The investigation consisted of the following: LPA observed facility, as well as common areas of the facility. A comfortable temperature is maintained throughout the facility. LPA observed the facility to be operational and in good repair, LPA reviewed pertinent documents pertaining to the investigation. The following documents were gathered: Staff and Client Rosters, file for resident (R1) and any other pertinent documentation needs and service, physician report, residency agreement, medication records for R1. On 01/17/2023 LPA Randle interviewed (S1) and resident (R1). LPA requested, received, and reviewed the following information: file of R1, Staff roster, Resident roster, and other documents relevant to the investigation. On May 18, 2023, LPA interviewed Anita Csukardi Executive Director and Resident (R1) was follow up interviewed, LPA requested and reviewed pertinent documents pertaining to the investigation. LPA received the following pertinent documents pertaining to the investigation: Resident Roster, Staff Roster, Admissions Agreement, Needs and Services Plan, LPA reviewed Staff schedule, resident generated CALL ALERT signal times LPA interviewed staff (S2-S7) and residents (R1-R7). regarding allegation listed above. -Continued The investigation revealed the following: S1 stated that resident R1 did indeed activate R1’s call device for assistance for rest room care and staff did respond to the call for assistance. S1 stated to LPA that S1 investigated the incident and found R1 refused assistance from S4 due to gender differences. LPA interviewed staff S4 and S4 confirmed that S4 attempted to assist however R1 declined stating gender preference. S1 stated to LPA during this time period requested gendered preference staff was engaged with other residents that were requiring assistance at the same time. LPA reviewed call logs and found that multiple calls had occurred at or around the same time. R1 was however provided assistance by requested gender preference staff. LPA interviewed R1, R1 confirmed that she received assistance from S3 to the rest room and R1 stated R1 did not soil or wet R1’s person, however R1 stated “I wish help came quicker but I know they are always busy”. LPA interviewed staff S3, S3 confirmed S3 provided assistance to R1, S3 informed LPA “I do assist residents when we get busy all staff are trained to help out and respond asap”. Continued LPA interviewed Director of Care Services, S2, S2 denied the allegation. S2 stated to LPA all the staff responds timely to every call for assistance from all the residents. LPA interviewed staff (S2-S7) and staff confirmed they respond quickly to the call alerts from residents promptly as trained. LPA interviewed residents (R2-R7). regarding allegations listed above -Staff did not answer resident's call button in a timely manner, of residents interviewed the residents reported they had not encountered a problem with staff not responding timely. Findings Based on information gathered, the department did not find sufficient evidence to support the 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 allegation is Unsubstantiated . An exit interview was conducted and a copy of the LIC 9099 was provided to Anita Csukardi Executive Director