complaint·May 1, 2026

Attachments to the agreement may be utilized as long as they are also signed and dated as prescribed above." LPA conducted a file review for R1 and observed that R1 was admitted to the facility on October 25, 2025. LPA observed that there was an admission agreement on file for R1, however, it was not signed by R1’s power of attorney, Witness #1 (W1), until January 9, 2026. LPA observed that the admission agreement was not signed by the Licensee until January 16, 2026. Based on a review of the admission agreement on file for R1, LPA observed that the admission agreement was not signed by either party within the seven day period following R1’s admission into the facility as required by regulations. LPA conducted an interview with W1. W1 confirmed that she was not provided with an admission agreement upon R1’s admission into the facility, and that she did not sign an admission agreement until January 9, 2026. LPA conducted an interview with the Licensee. The Licensee denied the allegation and stated that he provided W1 with an admission agreement upon R1’s admission into the facility. However, the Licensee was unable to provide any documents to support that he provided W1 with an admission agreement and was unable to provide any documents to support that follow up attempts were made to have W1 sign the admission agreement. Regarding the allegation, Licensee did not provide resident or resident's authorized representative a comprehensive description of billing and payment procedures, the following has been concluded: It was alleged that the Licensee did not provide R1 or R1's authorized representative with a comprehensive description of billing and payment procedures. LPA reviewed the admission agreement on file for R1. LPA observed that the admission agreement did not specify the basic services to be provided to R1, or the payment provisions of the contract. Additionally, LPA observed that the admission agreement did not specify a comprehensive description of any items or services that would be provided to R1. Furthermore, the Licensee was also unable to provide any documents during the investigation to support that he provided R1, or R1’s authorized representative a comprehensive description of billing and payment procedures during R1’s stay at the facility. Based on the evidence gathered during this investigation, the Department obtained sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations, Licensee did not complete an individual written admission agreement with each resident or their resident's representative, upon admission, and Licensee did not provide resident or resident's authorized representative a comprehensive description of billing and payment procedures. The preponderance of evidence standards has been met; therefore, the above allegations are deemed SUBSTANTIATED. Deficiencies are being cited on the attached LIC9099-D page. An exit interview was conducted with Licensee Lonnie Fischer. A copy of the report and appeal rights were provided at time of visit. (19) To have prompt access to review all of their records and to purchase photocopies of their records. Photocopied records shall be provided within two (2) business days and at a cost that does not exceed the community standard for photocopies.” LPA conducted an interview with R1, however, LPA was unable to qualify R1 for an interview. LPA conducted an interview with R1’s power of attorney, Witness #1 (W1). W1 stated that she made request to the Licensee for records for R1. However, W1 was unable to provide any documents to LPA to support that these requests were made to the Licensee. LPA conducted an interview with the Licensee who denied the allegation and stated that he did not receive any request from W1 for records for R1. Regarding the allegation, Licensee is falsifying resident records, the following has been concluded: LPA reviewed the files for the five residents that were in care at the time the complaint was received by the Department. LPA did not observe any discrepancies or indication of resident files being falsified. Additionally, LPA was unable to gather any documents during the investigation to corroborate the allegation. LPA conducted three staff interviews. Three out of the three staff interviewed denied the allegation. 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 two allegations are deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted with Licensee Lonnie Fischer and a copy of the report was provided at time of visit.