complaint·July 16, 2024

The investigation revealed the following: Per resident interviews, four (4) out of five (5) residents interviewed revealed staff treated residents nicely and provided them fluid, including coffee, teas and water, three times daily with meals and three to four times daily with medication. One (1) out of five (5) residents was sleeping and unable to be interviewed. During the interview, all residents were able to verbize their needs. Per staff interviews, all three (3) staff denied the allegation. It revealed staff provided residents with water/fluid with meals and medication multiple times a day. Besides, a jar of water or a 8 oz cup of water with lid was provided in each room near resident’s bed. Per observation, residents had fluid during mealtimes and medication, and additional fluid, such as a jar of water, was observed in each room. Thus, there were not preponderance of evidence showing resident did not receive adequate fluid intake while in care. In regard to staff do not ensure resident is provided bathing assistance, it was alleged that facility did not clean residents correctly and did not provide showers to residents. The investigation revealed the following: all four (4) residents interviewed revealed residents were bathed at least twice / weekly or more as needed. Per staff interviews, all staff denied the allegation. It revealed residents had their bathing schedules. Staff would clean residents after changed diapers or as needed. Sometimes, residents would and had rights to decline to be bathed. Per observation, residents were observed to be clean with no foul odor. Thus, staff did not fail to provide bathing assistance to resident while in care. In regard to staff do not ensure resident is provided clean clothing, it was alleged that staff did not ensure residents were placed in clean clothing every day. The investigation revealed the following: all four (4) residents interviewed revealed residents had their clothes changed daily. Per staff interviews, all staff denied the allegation. It revealed residents’ clothes were changed daily. However, residents had rights not to be changed. Staff would encourage residents to change clothes if residents declined to be changed. As mentioned above, residents were observed to be clean with no foul odor. Thus, resident is provided with clean clothing. In regard to staff do not ensure resident is provided with toileting assistance, it was alleged that staff allowed resident to sit in soiled diaper and did not provide toileting assistance. The investigation revealed the following: all four (4) residents interviewed revealed staff would change residents’ diapers when got soiled and change their clothes as needed. (-continued in LIC 9099 C-) Residents would tell staff when they needed to go to the bathroom or staff would check on residents throughout the day. Per staff interviews, all staff denied the allegation. It revealed staff would check on residents who needed toileting assistances or check resident’s diaper every 2 hours or so. Staff had in-service training on residents’ right and proper care to elderly. Per observation, staff would ask and assisted residents to go to the bathroom during the investigation visit. Thus, residents were provided with toileting assistance. In regard to staff did not ensure an adequate care needs assessment plan was conducted for resident in care, it was alleged administrator did not do proper care needs assessment on resident when resident was ready to discharge from the hospital. The investigation revealed the following: all four (4) residents interviewed revealed staff would assess them or asked them questions upon their returns to the facility after discharged from hospitals. Per staff interviews, all staff denied the allegation. Administrator would assess resident when resident was ready to discharge from the hospitals. Per record review, resident’s assessment was conducted and progress notes were updated regularly. Thus, adequate care needs assessment plan was conducted for resident in care. In regard to facility is not following doctor orders for medications, it was alleged that the staff allowed resident to sleep and did not waking resident up to ask resident to take the medication as prescribed. The investigation revealed the following: all four (4) residents interviewed revealed staff would wake them up for medication and they were not aware of any missing medication. Per staff interviews, all staff denied the allegation. Staff had followed doctor’s instruction on providing the prescribed medication to residents. Per record review, resident’s medical records did not show missing medication. Staff had in-service training on residents’ medication administration. Thus, facility is following doctor orders for medications. In regard to facility is not advising residents responsible party of resident’s health status, it was alleged that staff did not inform the resident’s doctor and responsible party of the resident’s health status. The investigation revealed the following: all four (4) residents interviewed revealed staff would inform their responsible parties about their physical heath status. Per staff interviews, all staff denied the allegation. Administrator and staff would notify residents / responsible parties if there were updates about resident’s health condition changes. Per record review, resident’s records were updated with medical and physical care needs. Staff had in-service training on reporting residents’ physical / medical changes. Therefore, there were not preponderance of evidence showing facility staff failed to notify residents responsible party of resident’s health status. (-continued in LIC 9099 C-) Facility did not accept resident back to the facility upon discharge from hospital, it was alleged that staff did not accept resident back to facility after being discharged from hospital. The investigation revealed the following: all four (4) residents interviewed revealed staff would accept them back after discharged from hospitals. Per staff interviews, all staff denied the allegation. Administrator had accepted the resident back after discharge from the hospital. Per record review and LPA’s observation, resident had returned and residing at the facility. Therefore, facility had accepted the resident after discharged from hospital. Based on the information obtained during the investigation, interviews with staff, residents, review of resident files and LPA's observation, the investigation did not reveal any evidence to support the allegations mentioned above. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted with administrator and findings were discussed. A copy this report was provided at the time of visit.