Skip to main content

Inspection visit

Complaint

WALNUT HOUSELicense 3427001861 citation on this visit
1 citation recorded

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

It was confirmed from today's scheduled meeting with the Ombudmsan that ballots were passed out to all residents on 6/18/2021 and were due by 7/7/2021. The ballot used was entitled "Nominations for Resident Council Meeting" and instructed residents to make their selection for each of the (4) officers listed and selections were to be written in as no names were pre-listed. The Administrator stated on 7/21/2021 that many residents expressed their reasons and discontent to her about the election not being valid and fair. The Ombudsman stated to the Administrator that if there are residents who are unhappy and/or have concerns with how the resident council is functioning, those residents can contact the Ombudsman's office for assistance and request the Ombudsman attend future resident council meetings. LPA and Ombudsman stressed that the facility role is to encourage and assist residents in the formation, operation and promotion of its council. Ombudsman provided Administrator with a copy of Rights of Resident Councils, based on Health and Safety Code §1569.157 and explained that any (2) residents can start a resident council and have the right to hold meetings without any facility staff attendance or interference. Resident (R1) who was nominated "President" stated that (13) ballot responses were received and when their follow up meeting was held on 7/9/2021, the Administrator, staff (S1) and a corporate staff member attended and disbanded the meeting, and eliminated the vote, saying that not enough residents had voted, and a new election would be needed. Residents (R1/R2) provided additional information on 10/19/2021 that at the start of the resident council meeting on 7/9/2021, the owner informed the residents that the Administrator was in charge of the meeting and staff (S1) was there to take notes . Residents (R1/R2) stated to LPA they had invited the Administrator and the owner, who indicated that his mother would probably like to attend the meeting, but they did not invite staff (S1) as they did not feel it was necessary to have her attend since she was not a manager or a person able to make changes at the facility. The Administrator stated to LPA on 10/19/2021 that both she and the owner had been invited to the meeting on 7/9/2021 by R1 but that staff (S1) attended and "took notes as a courtesy", as it had been done at prior resident council meetings. Staff (S1) stated to LPA on 7/21/2021 that corporate facility staff instructed her to be present at the resident council meeting, on 7/9/2021, to take meeting notes and because she and the Administrator were also attending. Staff (S1) further stated that multiple residents who attended the meeting were upset due to not being able to complete a ballot and not being comfortable with elected board members on the resident council. Additionally, it was learned through interviews that residents were instructed by the facility to print their first and last names on the ballots at the meeting on 7/9/2021. Based on information obtained, LPA finds the allegation " Staff is interfering with residents council meetings" to be SUBSTANTIATED- A finding that the complaint is Substantiated means that the allegation is valid because the preponderance of the evidence standard has been met. Exit interview. Copy of report and appeal rights printed and 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.

  • 1569.157(g)Type B

    §1569.157 Resident-oriented facility council (g) A facility shall not willfully interfere with the formation, maintenance, or promotion of a resident council, or its participation in the regulatory inspection process. For the purposes of this subdivision, willful interference shall include, but not be limited to, discrimination or retaliation in any way against an individual as a result of his or her participation in a resident council, refusal to publicize resident council meetings or provide appropriate space for either meetings or a bulletin board, or failure to respond to written requests by the resident council in a timely manner. This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on interviews conducted, the Licensee did not ensure that the facility did not willfully interfere as multiple facility staff attended a resident council meeting, held on 7/9/2021, and took control and adjourned the meeting and didn't allow the residents to lead their meeting, which posed a potential personal rights violation to residents in care.

    Read full inspector narrative

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the July 21, 2021 inspection of WALNUT HOUSE?

This was a complaint inspection of WALNUT HOUSE on July 21, 2021. 1 citation were issued: 1 Type B.

Were any citations issued to WALNUT HOUSE on July 21, 2021?

Yes, 1 citation was issued (0 Type A, 1 Type B). The first citation was for: "§1569.157 Resident-oriented facility council (g) A facility shall not willfully interfere with the formation, maintenanc..."

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.