Complaint·December 3, 2024

R1 was admitted to the hospital for evaluation of the changes in R1s condition. The administrator informed licensing that R1 was sent back to the ER because R1 was still aggressive, not at her baseline, and the facility was concerned. The hospital tried to send her back to the facility after evaluation. The facility administrator asked that the resident go back to the hospital for further evaluation, due to extreme change in condition. Also, the facility wanted her evaluated to assess if she needs a higher level of care if needed. R 1 was told by staff that R1 could not return to the facility because there was no one there to assess R1 at that time. It was learned that R1 stayed at the hospital for an evaluation. LPA conducted interviews of staff and reviewed the facilities policy in regards to proper assessment of residents after being discharged from the hospital. It was learned that the facility did not acted appropriately in not allowing this resident to return to the facility without a proper reassessment from facility staff. It appears that the facility did refuse the resident the right to return; they asked for further evaluation of her health condition; and evaluation to ascertain if a higher level of care was needed. The facility did not complete a re-assessment of R1 before R1 leaving the facility or at the time the hospital was ready to discharge. Based on LPA’s observations, file reviews and interviews, the Department finds the complaint to be SUBSTANTIATED. A finding that the complaint is SUBSTANTIATED means that the preponderance of evidence standards has been met. Per California Code of Regulations, Title 22, a citation was issued. Personal Rights 87468.1(2) An exit interview was conducted, and a copy of this report was given to Chinyere.