Complaint·August 20, 2025

LPA Haddadin also reviewed Shower–Body Check Forms for nine randomly selected residents across various dates. These forms were properly completed and documented that full body checks were performed at the time of showering to ensure no injuries, bruises, or rashes were present. In addition, LPA Haddadin interviewed residents in their rooms and did not observe any residents with rashes or signs of neglect; no odors suggestive of poor hygiene were detected. The investigation into the allegation that “Staff refused to seek medical attention for resident in care” revealed the following: interviews with six staff members and six residents did not identify any instances in which medical attention was delayed or refused. A review of records for Resident-1 (R1) indicated that the resident was actively receiving hospice care and home health services for a pressure injury, which was managed by a wound specialist on weekly onsite visits. Medical records further documented that R1’s primary physician conducted a follow-up onsite visit on June 26, 2025, which stated: “no suspicious lesions, no suspicious bruises and no evidence of scars, with normal skin coloration and moisture.” The investigation into the allegation that “Staff handled residents in care in a rough manner resulting in injuries” revealed the following: All six staff members and six residents interviewed denied that staff handled residents roughly or caused injuries. A review of facility records confirmed that the facility has policies in place requiring staff to maintain training consistent with their duties. This policy is outlined in the facility’s Policy and Procedures, pages 7 and 8. Staff files documented participation in training sessions, including one held on April 23, 2025, and a refresher session on June 10, 2025. Staff files also contained signed SOC 341 (Mandated Reporter) forms, demonstrating staff awareness of their reporting responsibilities of any type of abuse or neglect towards any residence. Based on the information obtained, the Department could not corroborate the allegations. While the allegations may have occurred or could be valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove or disprove that the violations took place. Therefore, the allegations are determined to be Unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was discussed with and provided to facility representative.