complaint·June 18, 2023

Based on the LPA's investigation, the investigation revealed the following. Allegation – Facility staff failed to supervise resident resulting in the resident wandering away from the facility. Interviews with S#1 – S#2, communicated that they were not at the facility at the time resident left the facility unsupervised. S#1 wasn’t working at the facility at the time of the incident. S#2 had the day off and wasn’t at the facility at the day of the incident. S#3 communicated that S#3 did not recall what exactly happened the day the resident left the facility unsupervised. S#3 recalled that resident was a wanderer. The day resident left the facility unsupervised they had 2 new care givers working that day, they are no longer working at the facility. He believed one was in the garage doing laundry and the other care giver was helping a resident. They heard the egress signal go off and they both went to see who had opened the door. S#3 believes they checked the facility and found that one resident was no longer at the facility. They walked around the neighborhood, local stores, and restaurants looking for the resident. They could not locate resident, so they called 911 to report resident missing. When LASD arrived at the facility take the report, they informed S#3 that they had found resident, resident had gone back to resident original home. Apparently, resident had gotten into an uber and ended at resident original home. No one knows how resident was able to get an uber and give their address to have them take resident there. Interview with witness communicated that W#1 was outside of their home when they saw resident pull up in front of their home. W#1 recognized resident and was asked by UBER driver, “If they knew the passenger” and W#1 told them yes. W#1 contacted resident’s family and kept resident with them until resident’s family came to get resident. Interviews conducted did concur with the above allegation. Based on LPA’s observations and interviews which were conducted and records review, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be substantiated. According to the California Code of Regulations (Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8), LPA observed the following deficiencies and issued a citations. An exit interview was conducted with Gloria Somintac, House Manager and a hard copy of report was provided along with Appeal rights.