Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

STUDIO ROYALELicense 198601566
Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

Interview with the Health and Wellness Director (S2) indicated that R1’s pendant was removed because R1 said it was chocking R1 at night. Thus, S2 said the caregiver tied the pendant to the bedrail. S2 said R1 thought the pendant was on the end desk and R1 attempted to retrieve it resulting in a fall. S2 indicated that R1 was given a wrist pendant in response to the incident and at the request of the R1’s family. October 31, 2024 email correspondence revealed that R1 had two call buttons to return to the facility. S2 indicated that R1’s bed is on the same wall as the pull cord. CCLD Staff observed pull cords near residents’ bed and in the bathroom. Six out of six staff interviews indicated they do not remove residents’ pendants. Five out of nine resident interviews indicated that staff have not removed their pendants. Four out of nine residents said they do not have a pendant. Regarding the allegation “Staff did not provide resident with a call button," based on record reviews, interviews, and observations, the Department found no evidence to support the allegation mentioned above. 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, as a result, the allegation is Unsubstantiated. No deficiency was cited for this allegation. Allegation: Regarding the allegation "Staff did not ensure that resident was hydrated,” it is being alleged Resident #1 (R1) had to go to the hospital due to dehydration because staff did not ensure R1 remained hydrated. Preplacement and Service Plan revealed R1 does not require assistance with meal consumption as of June 2024. Six out of six staff interviews indicated they encourage residents to stay hydrated and they provide water. Record review revealed that UTI and Hydration In-Service training was provided to staff on 06/27/24. Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) In-Service training was provided to staff on 08/14/24. Four out of nine resident interviews indicated staff does not ensure they drink plenty of water. Four out of nine residents indicated staff does ensure they drink plenty of water. One out of nine residents indicated water is offered at mealtimes. Interview with the Health and Wellness Director (S2) indicated hydration is encouraged to all residents and R1; especially when R1 receives new medication. Interview with S2 indicated residents also have pitchers or water bottles in their rooms. CDSS staff observed water stations in the bistro room, the dining room, and bottled water in residents’ room. Continue to LIC9099-C. Regarding the allegation Staff did not ensure that resident was hydrated,” based on record reviews, interviews, and observations the Department found no evidence to support the allegation mentioned above. 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, as a result, the allegation is Unsubstantiated. No deficiency was cited for this allegation. Allegation: Regarding the allegation "Staff did not provide responsible party with a refund,” it is being alleged staff has not refunded $932.00 prorated rent (10/28/24 – 10/31/24). Resident #1’s (R1) Admission Agreement revealed that “you may terminate this Agreement at any time, with or without cause, by giving the Executive Director thirty (30) days’ prior written notice of termination. You will continue to be responsible for your full Monthly Fee until the thirty (30) day period has expired”. Interview with the Executive Director (S1) indicated that R1 is responsible for giving a 30-day notice and notice was given on 10/25/24. Therefore, S1 said the billing extends to November 25, 2024, R1 would not receive a refund, and R1 would be responsible for the remaining balance. S1 indicated that the balance can be waived in good-faith. Regarding the allegation “Staff did not provide responsible party with a refund," based on record reviews and interviews, the Department found no evidence to support the allegation mentioned above. 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, as a result, the allegation is Unsubstantiated. No deficiency was cited for this allegation. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report was provided to the Health and Wellness Director Tamera Gant.

Citations

No citations recorded on this visit

The inspector found no violations of California child care regulations during this visit.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the November 14, 2024 inspection of STUDIO ROYALE?

This was a complaint inspection of STUDIO ROYALE on November 14, 2024. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to STUDIO ROYALE on November 14, 2024?

No citations were issued during this inspection. The facility was found to be in compliance with all applicable regulations.

What type of inspection was this?

This was a complaint inspection. Complaint inspections are triggered when someone reports a concern about the facility to CCLD.

SourceView on CCLDView original report

Share this reportEmail

Next steps

If this is your facility,claim this pageand correct anything the record gets wrong. Free.

Researching this visit professionally?Book a 15-minute calland we will walk through what we have on file.

Data from CCLD public records. Last updated . If you believe any information is inaccurate, report it here.