Complaint·July 12, 2023

Continued from 9099 - Page 2 Based on LPA review of resident (R1's) file, communication documentation, and medication chart. The change was completed approximately in the month of July 2022 with verbal approvals, not written. All power of attorneys (POA's) or residents had to set up reoccurring credit care approval for charges with pharmacy, so they would have been aware and notified. Based on LPA review of R1’s admissions agreement which states all excluded services like laboratory services; the facility is not responsible for services. Therefore, the facility did not fail to assist resident with medical care. Based on LPA review of R1’s resident records and correspondence, LPA did not find responsible party not being notified for resident records that are allowed to be released. Therefore, the facility did provide responsible party resident records upon request. Based on LPA review of R1’s resident records and medication records. LPA did not find anything indicating a change in condition that facility would need to notify responsible party. Therefore, facility did not fail to notify responsible party of change in condition. As a result of this investigation, this Department found the allegations to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. Due to the above noted information, although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, and therefore the allegations are unsubstantiated. Per California Code of Regulations, Title 22, no deficiencies were observed during this visit. An exit interview was conducted with business office manager. A copy of the 9099 and 9099-C, LIC 811 (Confidential Names), and appeal rights were provided to the facility.