complaint·April 25, 2025

interviewed during the investigation all agreed that R1 is a bit stubborn and oppositional creating some minor friction between R1 and their spouse. Since the alleged incident occurred, Executive Director (ED) Christian Otbo explained the staff have been monitoring R1 and their spouse. The Irvine Police Department (PD) were contacted right away by the facility when the alleged incident was first reported to facility management staff, acknowledging how serious they took the situation. Irvine PD talked to R1 and their spouse and let the facility know nothing criminal occurred after their investigation, concluding there are no indications the spouse intentionally harms R1 and the fact the complaint of pain could be due to a prior rotator cuff injury. Based on the police report LPA obtained from Irvine PD, the facility always had personnel/caregivers typically stayed around the couple when they were together prior to the incident occurring. In the police report, the investigator also reported the facility placed enough safeguards to deter further harm toward R1 afterwards, in which a caregiver is always present with them when R1’s spouse visits. The police investigator noted in the report the facility continually follows up and document’s R1’s shoulder pain. 3 out of 3 facility staff interviewed indicated that the facility did keep a close eye on R1 and their spouse after the incident. Assisted Living Director (ALD) Rose Alcantara explained that the pair have supervised visits at the facility bistro and library where generally there are a lot of people and staff present. If they go to R1’s room a caregiver is always present with them to ensure safety measures for R1. ALD Alcantara also mentioned the facility did safety checks, checked up on R1 every hour and did a medical assessment, where x-rays indicated no evidence of a fracture or injury. Therefore, based on LPA Tea's observation and interviews conducted and records review the allegation the staff did not intervene when visitor caused injury to resident has been determined to be unsubstantiated meaning that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. No deficiencies cited at this time and an exit interview was conducted and a copy of the report and confidential names list was provided to the facility.