complaint·May 11, 2022

R1 indicated that she does want this individual to visit her and call her at the facility. LPA was provided a document signed by R1 indicating that she would like advanced notice prior to being visited by this certain individual. R1 confirmed that she is aware of this document and that she signed this document. LPA did not observe any documents or evidence in R1's file indicating that facility is restricting visitation from certain individuals. All residents interviewed indicated that they are allowed to have visitors of their choice during visiting hours and facility does not restrict their visitation rights. Therefore there was insufficient evidence to corroborate with this allegation. In regards to the allegation "resident is not allowed to receive confidential calls", it is alleged that facility staff deny phone calls from certain individuals for R1 unless a staff member is present to monitor the call. Interviews conducted with staff members denied this allegation. Staff members interviewed indicated that they do not monitor any resident calls. Staff members interviewed indicated that residents have the right to confidential calls and there are multiple phones available throughout the facility to make and/or receive confidential calls. LPA torued the facility and observed multiple working phones. All residents interviewed indicated that they are able to make and/or receive calls in private and without staff monitoring the calls. Therefore there was insufficient evidence to corroborate with this allegation. Based on statements and interviews conducted with staff, residents, review of resident files and facility file records, there was not enough supportive evidence to concur with the reported allegations. Although the allegations may have happened or arevalid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. Exit interview held, and a copy of this report was provided.