Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

COTTAGES AT HEMETLicense 3318000551 citation on this visit
1 citation recorded

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

It was additionally noted that R3 was on a blood thinning medication (Plavix) which is known to cause its users to be easily susceptible to bruising. Side effects regarding this medication and R3's bruises were discussed with R3's doctor, who confirmed that the medication causes patient to easily bruise and even experience sub-dermal bleeding. Based on record review and interviews conducted, the allegation of "Residents have unexplained bruising" is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Regarding allegation "Food service is inadequate": LPA Colvin reviewed the facility's Dietary Quarterly Quality Assurance Reports for the last 12 months, as well as the sample menu provided by the Administrator to LPA Colvin. LPA Colvin observed that in the Quarterly Reports (which are conducted by Registered Dietician from outside of the facility) the facility has maintained an "A" grade, with 100% rating for Meal Service and Nutritional Assessment in the last 4 reports. LPA Colvin additionally observed that the facility was docked a few points from their score in Sanitation for minor errors, which do not correlate with the concern in the complaint, which is specific to the portions of the food being served being inadequate. Based on record review, the allegation of "Food service is inadequate" is UNSUBSTANTIATED. A finding of UNSUBSTANTIATED means although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided to Resident Services Director Barbara Bogoje . LPA Colvin reviewed R2's history of care at the facility and observed that R2 had a history of developing pressure injuries, and with the assistance of wound care from Hospice, R2's pressure injuries tended to heal. R2's Hospice records show that the nurses from Hospice that would treat R2's pressure injury would consistently communicate with facility staff, provide training and instruction, and order additional supplies (such as low air loss mattress) for R2 in order to attempt to treat R2's worsening pressure injury. Therefore, due to interviews and record review, the allegation of "Resident developed a bed sore while in care of facility" is UNFOUNDED. We have found that the complaint was UNFOUNDED, meaning that the allegation was false, could not have happened and/or is without a reasonable basis. We have therefore dismissed the complaint. An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was provided to Resident Services Director Barbara Bogoje. In LPA Colvin's interviews, R1's weight loss was attributed to R1 not eating or drinking for long periods of time, yet during LPA Colvin's review of the facility records, LPA Colvin observed that this was not documented in any documentation provided to LPA Colvin, nor in any documented correspondence to R1's physician. In LPA Colvin's investigation of the allegation, LPA Colvin confirmed that R1 was hospitalized for dehydration in addition to other medical concerns, all of which were unobserved by facility staff, who failed to adequately document the R1's changing condition or seek timely medical attention for the resident. Due to LPA Colvin's review of the facility's file, the resident's medical records, and interviews, the allegation of "Resident was hospitalized for dehydration" is SUBSTANTIATED. A finding that the complaint is SUBSTANTIATED means that the allegation(s) is valid because the preponderance of the evidence standard has been met. Due to investigation that was conducted by LPA Colvin, the facility was cited, and deficiencies noted on LIC 9099 D. An exit interview was conducted with Resident Services Director Barbara Bogoje where this report and appeal rights were discussed. A copy of this report, LIC 9099D, and appeal rights were provided to Resident Services Director Barbara Bogoje during the exit interview.

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.

  • 87468.2(a)(4)Type A

    Additional Personal Rights...in Privately Operated Facilities: (a) In addition to the rights listed...residents...shall have all of the following personal rights: (4) To care, supervision, and services that meet their individual needs... This requirement was not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interviews, the Licensee did not comply with the above regulation with R1. On 11/23/21, R1 suffered from an unwitnessed fall in the facility, which resulted in bruising on most of R1's extremeties and facial hematoma. This was an immediate health risk to R1.

  • 87466Type A

    Observation of the Resident: The licensee shall ensure that residents are regularly observed for changes...and that appropriate assistance is provided...licensee shall ensure that such changes are documented and brought to the attention of...physician and...responsible person...This was not met by: Based on record review and interviews, the Licensee did not comply with the above regulation with R1. R1 had sustained 12 falls in 2019 alone yet no additional protective measures were taken for R1 despite this need being identified. This was an immediate safety risk to R1.

  • 87415(a)(3)Type B

    Night Supervision: (a) The following persons providing night supervision...shall...be available as indicated below to assist in caring for residents... (3) In facilities caring for one hundred one (101)...residents...one employee shall be on call and capable of responding within ten minutes. This was not met by: Based on record review, the Licensee did not comply with the above regulation with at least one shift (NOC). LPA Colvin observed the NOC shift to only have two caregivers to four cottages, and at times, one caregiver to four cottages. Response times show excess of ten minutes. This is a potential personal rights risk.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the September 16, 2021 inspection of COTTAGES AT HEMET?

This was a complaint inspection of COTTAGES AT HEMET on September 16, 2021. 1 citation were issued: 1 Type A (serious).

Were any citations issued to COTTAGES AT HEMET on September 16, 2021?

Yes, 1 citation was issued (1 Type A, 0 Type B). The first citation was for: "Additional Personal Rights...in Privately Operated Facilities: (a) In addition to the rights listed...residents...shall ..."

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.