Skip to main content

Inspection visit

Complaint

CAMBRIDGE COURTLicense 3060047611 citation on this visit
1 citation recorded

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

Two residents reported that they have had previous issues with their medication, such as not receiving their medication and not receiving the right amount of their medication. Five residents reported not having any issues with receiving their medication. The Department reviewed the medication and medication administration records for the seven residents. The Department observed that the facility did not have Resident #2's (R2's) Alendronate 70 MG tablet, despite R2 currently having active orders for the routine medication. The Department also observed the facility did not have Resident #3's (R3's) Amlodipine Besylate 10 MG tablet, despite R3 currently having active orders for the routine medication. Based on the evidence gathered during this investigation, the Department obtained sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations that, staff administered wrong medication dosage to resident . The preponderance of evidence standards has been met; therefore, the above allegation is SUBSTANTIATED. A deficiencies is being cited on the attached LIC9099-D page. An exit interview was conducted with Office Assistant Teresa Mejia. A copy of the report and appeal rights were provided at time of visit. The eight residents interviewed also confirmed that medication technicians and wellness coordinators are the only staff that have assisted them with their medication. The Department reviewed the training records for the five medication technicians and two wellness coordinators currently employed by the facility. The Department observed that the seven staff have received the initial, and annual medication training as required per regulations. Regarding the allegation, staff shoved medication into resident's mouth, the following has been concluded: It was alleged that staff shoved medication into Resident #1 (R1) mouth. The Department was unable to conduct an interview with R1 for this complaint due to R1 moving out of the facility in December 2024. The Department conducted eight resident interviews. Eight out of the eight residents interviewed denied the allegation and reported that they have never been forced to take any medication. The Department conducted six staff interviews. Six out of the six staff interviewed also denied the allegation and denied ever observing a staff forcing a resident to take medication. Regarding the allegation, facility has a rodent infestation, the following has been concluded: During the investigation, the Department inspected the facility's kitchen, dining area, laundry rooms, medication room, two staff offices, eight resident bedrooms, and the center courtyard area. During the Department's visits conducted to the facility on May 3, 2023, July 15, 2025, and May 8, 2026, the Department did not observe any rodents or any signs of rodents being present at the facility. The Department observed that the facility has consistently received pest control services twice a month to prevent any rodents. The Department observed the facility received pest control services on May 2, and May 16, 2023, which was the month the Department originally received the complaint. The Department additionally conducted eight resident interviews. Eight out of the right residents interviewed denied the allegation and denied ever observing a rodent present at the facility. The Department conduced six staff interviews. Six out of the six staff interviewed also denied the allegation and denied ever observing a rodent present at the facility. Based on the evidence gathered during the investigation, the Department is unable to ascertain if the allegations occurred as reported. Although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove or refute the alleged violation occurred; therefore, the three allegations are deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted with Office Assistant Teresa Mejia and a copy of the report was provided.

Citations

1 citation 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.

  • Assist residents with self-administered medication

    87465 Incidental Medical and Dental Care :(a) A plan for incidental medical and dental care shall be developed by each facility...(4) The licensee shall assist residents with self-administered medications as needed.This requirement was not evidenced by: Based on records reviewed, the Licensee did not ensure that R2 and R3 had their routine medications present at the facility, despite having active orders for the medications. This poses an immediate health and safety risk to persons in care.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the May 8, 2026 inspection of CAMBRIDGE COURT?

This was a complaint inspection of CAMBRIDGE COURT on May 8, 2026. 1 citation were issued: 1 Type A (serious).

Were any citations issued to CAMBRIDGE COURT on May 8, 2026?

Yes, 1 citation was issued (1 Type A, 0 Type B). The first citation was for: "87465 Incidental Medical and Dental Care :(a) A plan for incidental medical and dental care shall be developed by each f..."

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.

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.