Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

LA POSADALicense 1986035043 citations on this visit
3 citations recorded

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

Allegation: Staff did not notify authorized representative of incident. It is alleged that on January 20, 2025, resident (R1's) authorized representative observed a bruise under the resident's right eye and questioned staff about the incident. A total of seven staff were interviewed. Based on interviews conducted, the findings indicate that on January 17, 2025 at approximately 7:30 AM, morning shift caregiver staff (S3) observed the bruise. Caregiver immediately reported the observation to AM shift med-techs, whom typically contact the resident's physician, hospice, and responsible party. However, in this case the two (2) AM med-techs on duty on January 17, 2025 failed to report the incident to family and forgot to communicate the incident with the next shift med-tech. Additionally, the bruise incident was not documented on the facility electronic software system or charting notes. Per Charting Notes records, staff did not document the bruise that was observed on January 17, 2025, but a Skin Integrity Monitoring Form was completed. Staff acknowledged the incident was not reported to R1's responsible party and documentation/communication protocols were not followed. Therefore, there is sufficient evidence to corroborate the allegation. Allegation: Staff are not repositioning resident every 2 hours. It was reported that hospice resident (R1) required repositioning every 2 hours due to a sacral pressure injury, but despite regular hospice wound care the pressure injury was getting worse. Seven (7) staff were interviewed. Caregiver staff stated they checked on the resident every 2 hours, and as the resident's health declined staff were checking on the resident at least every hour. Staff stated sometimes R1 refused to be repositioned every 2 hours because the resident preferred to lay in bed in a flat position due to pain when rotated to the side. Staff acknowledged that sometimes the NOC shift caregiver staff did not log in routine checks. It is unknown if they performed rotations on the resident. One of the NOC shift staff (S8) in question was terminated on January 24, 2025 for misconduct and suspicions of improper handling of cognitively impaired residents during incontinence changes. Bedridden residents were interviewed. One (1) resident stated staff are not repositioning every 2 hours, especially during night time. Charting notes [1/1/25 - 1/29/25], records indicate that the majority of the time R1 was routinely being checked every 2 hours. However, on several dates staff checked the resident past the required repositioning time. In addition, many of the documented checks did not specify whether the resident was repositioned every 2 hours. There is sufficient evidence to corroborate the allegation. Allegation: Resident received an unexplained injury. On January 17, 2025, AM shift caregiver staff observed a bruise under resident (R1's) right eye. The injury was documented on a Skin Integrity Monitoring Form and med-tech staff were notified. None of the residents interviewed reported staff rough handling incidents that have caused bruising. All seven (7) staff interviewed confirmed that resident (R1) had a bruise under the right eye. Staff interviews revealed that former NOC shift staff (S8) stated that when the resident was being turned the resident's hand hit their own face. Staff stated that R1 was experiencing agitation behaviors during repositioning assistance, and may have unintentionally hit themselves. The majority of staff interviewed do not believe the bruise was intentionally caused by malicious intent, but confirmed the resident sustained an unexplained bruise. Picture evidence was obtained. Based on interviews conducted and record review, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegations are found to be SUBSTANTIATED . Deficiencies are being cited according to Title 22. See LIC 9099D. Exit interview was conducted with Business Office Manager Andrea Lopez. A copy of the report and appeal rights were provided.

Citations

3 citations recorded*CCLD

What does Type A vs Type B mean?

Type A. Serious citation. Imminent or substantial risk to children. The regulator requires corrective action immediately and may impose a civil penalty.

Type B. Lower-severity citation. Corrective action required, no imminent risk. The regulator monitors compliance on the next visit.

  • 87211(a)(1)Type B

    Reporting Requirements. A written report shall be submitted to the licensing agency and to the person responsible for the resident within seven days of the occurrence of any of the events specified in (A) through (D) below..... This requirement was not met evidenced by: Based on record review and interviews conducted staff did not notify R1's responsible party of the bruise staff observed on 1/17/25 under R1's right eye. Responsible party observed the bruise on 1/20/25. Note: Staff did not submit an incident report to CCL as required. This posed a potential health and safety risk to persons in care.

  • 87411(d)(3)Type B

    Personnel Requirements - General. All personnel shall be given on the job training or have related experience in the job assigned to them. This training and/or related experience shall provide knowledge of and skill in the following....(3) Skill and knowledge required to provide necessary resident care and supervision, including the ability to communicate with residents. Based on interviews and record review, the findings indicate noc shift (S8) repositioned bedridden resident (R1), and the following day (1/17/25) staff observed bruising under R1's eye. This posed a potential health and safety risk to resident in care.

  • 87468.2(a)(4)Type A

    Additional Personal Rights of Residents in Privately Operated Facilities...... shall have all of the following personal rights: (4) To care, supervision, and services that meet their individual needs and are delivered by staff that are sufficient in numbers, qualifications, and competency to meet their needs. This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on interviews and records review, the findings indicate that on several dates in the month of Jan. 2025 caregiver staff did not reposition hospice resident (R1) every 2 hours as required. R1 had a pressure injury. This posed an immediate health and safety risk to the resident.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the May 2, 2025 inspection of LA POSADA?

This was a complaint inspection of LA POSADA on May 2, 2025. 3 citations were issued: 1 Type A (serious) and 2 Type B.

Were any citations issued to LA POSADA on May 2, 2025?

Yes, 3 citations were issued (1 Type A, 2 Type B). The first citation was for: "Reporting Requirements. A written report shall be submitted to the licensing agency and to the person responsible for t..."

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.