complaint·November 10, 2022

The investigation revealed of the following: In regard to the allegation of " Resident not accorded reasonable access to telephones, to both make and receive confidential calls." LPA interviewed residents and they all denied the allegation and stated that they were able to make phone calls any time they want. There's no restriction for them. LPA also interviewed staff and reported its residents personal right to use the facility phone any time they wanted. Staff also stated that the facility has a wireless phone for residents to use. There's also common phone in the middle of the area for residents to access. The staff reported that R1 also had her own cell phone at that time. R1 can make any phone calls or receive any phone calls that R1 wanted. In regard to the allegation of " Resident not accorded dignity in relationships with staff." LPA interviewed residents and they all denied the allegation. They all stated that all the staff in the facility are nice and respectful. They treat them very well. LPA interviewed staff and also denied the allegation and reported they never witnessed any staff was disrespectful to the residents in the facility. And all the staff have been trained to be respectful and kind to all residents and guests, basically everyone in the facility. In regard to the allegation of " Staff are locking the resident on facility premises." The administrator and staff stated that the facility is a secured community/facility for residents safety but the residents are not in person or locked in the facility or something. The administrator stated that as long as someone is able to sign the resident out, the resident is able to go out with their family, friends or whoever signed them out. Based on statements and interviews conducted with staff, residents and recorded review, there was not enough supportive evidence to concur with the reported allegations. Although the allegations 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 allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report and appeal right was provided to the Administrative Assistant Maria Torres. The investigation revealed of the following: In regard to the allegation of "Staff are not allowing resident to leave or depart the facility at any time." LPA reviewed the resident sign out log and LPA did not see any visitors sign R1 out from June 10th to July 11th, 2021 when R1 reported friends wanted to take R1 out to lunch before June 24, 2021 but got rejected from the facility to leave the building. In regard the allegation of " Staff are not allowing resident to have visitors during reasonable hours and without prior notice." LPA also reviewed the visitor sign in sheet. On June 18, 2021, R1's friend name was not on the visitor sign in log. R1's friend was unable to visit R1 on June 18, 2021. LPA reviewed R1's friend name but was able to visit R1 on either June 19th or June 20th, 2021. Therefore, it shown proof that R1 was not allowed visitor at one point. Administrator also mentioned that R1's son did not want one of R1's friend to come and visit R1 at one point. Based on LPA observations and interviews which were conducted and record review(s), the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6 & Chapter 8, are being cited on the attached LIC9099D. An exit interview is being conducted with Administrative Assistant Maria Torres and a copy of this report is being provided and Appeal Rights were given.