complaint·December 2, 2025

In addition, S1 referred to R1 only as “she” rather than by name. As a result, R1’s identity was not disclosed on social media. Furthermore, records and interviews confirmed that both staff members involved had received appropriate training on resident rights, HIPAA, confidentiality, and the facility’s team member handbook, which includes policies on social media and internet posting. Moreover, in an interview with 5 out of 5 facility staff who stated that both S1 and S2 were appropriately trained and are aware of policies and procedures. In an interview with R1 who stated “I don’t know” when asked if S1 asked R1 for permission to have their photo taken. In addition, it was learned that disciplinary measures will be taken, including the termination of (S1) and (S2). Based on these findings, the investigation determined that the preponderance of evidence standard was not met, therefore, the above allegation that staff posted a resident’s picture on social media without consent is found to be UNSUBSTANTIATED. An unsubstantiated finding means that while the allegation may have happened or is valid there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. An exit interview was conducted with Assistant Executive Director Mccune and Memory Care Director Hendrix, and a copy of this report was provided to the facility.