Complaint·October 16, 2025

Bassi said that R1 was moved back to memory care on October 1, but R1 could not return to their original room, D3, because another prospective client had already placed a deposit on the room. R1 was moved to room D7, according to Bassi. LPA Moleski spoke with R1's responsible party over the phone, who declined to answer questions. In an interview, R1 said they had been recently moved, but that they preferred their original room to their new room and and that they did not know why they were moved. LPA Moleski reviewed R1's and R2's files. LPA Moleski observed that R1 had only one admission agreement on file, dated April 30, 2024. The admission agreement specifies R1's room as room D3. The admission agreement states, in part, that "[R1] may live in [their] room on a month-to-month basis..." The admission agreement does include sections which clarify expectations in the event of room transfers, as well as termination conditions. Page 7 of R1's admission agreement states that "Ivy Park may need to substitute your apartment with another apartment ... for any ... reasonable purpose, as determined by the executive director of the community ... upon a thirty (30) day notice. A request by you for an apartment substitution will be granted in Ivy Park manager's discretion." 22 CCR Section 87507(c-d) requires all attachments or modifications made to admission agreements to be signed and dated. LPA Moleski requested all modifications to R1's admission agreement. Bassi provided LPA Moleski an apartment transfer form for R1, indicating that R1 was moved from room C2 to D7 as of October 1. The form was not signed by facility representatives, the resident, or the resident's responsible party. Page 8 of R1's admission agreement indicates that their contract may be terminated by the resident "at any time, with or without cause, by giving the executive director of the community ... thirty (30) days prior written notice of termination." Licensee-initiated termination of contract is outlined by 22 CCR Section 87224, which requires under most circumstances a 30-day notice. The termination conditions outlined in the admission agreement do not indicate that, by moving into a different room, R1's contract was automatically terminated. R1 was not required to have a new admission agreement signed for their stay in room C2 between Sept. 25 and Oct. 1. 22 CCR Section 87507(c) requires a new admission agreement seven days after admission, and R1 was in room C2 for only six days, according to Bassi. However, in lieu of any signed and dated modifications, formal termination with applicable written notice, or an entirely new signed and dated admission agreement for their new room, R1's contract remained in effect as originally agreed upon, meaning that R1 should have retained the right to return their original room, D3. [continued on 9099-C] LPA Moleski reviewed the file of the resident who currently resides in room D3 (R3). LPA Moleski observed a signed admission agreement permitting R3 to live in room D3. The admission agreement was dated September 27, just two days after R1 left room D3. LPA Moleski reviewed a payment authorization form and a community fee receipt for R3, both signed and dated Sept. 27. LPA Moleski did not observe a current admission agreement for R1 for their new room, D7. According to Bassi and S1, R2 was moved out of room D7 into room C2, in order to permit R1 to return to their initial memory care cottage. LPA Moleski reviewed R2's file and observed no admission agreements on file. Bassi said R2's initial admission agreement was written under the previous management company. LPA Moleski was provided two apartment transfer forms for R2. One indicated that R2 was to be moved from room D7 to room C2, however, this form was not signed. The second indicated that R2 was to be moved from room D7 to room C5. This version was signed by R2's responsible party, and by a facility representative, and was dated Sept. 26. However, as of today's visit, R2 is living in room C2, not room C5, as the signed and dated modification states. R2 had no current signed and dated admission agreement on file regarding their present residency in room C2. During a tour of Cedar cottage, LPAs Moleski and Lindstrom observed an office area in the cottage unattended. LPAs Moleski and Lindstrom observed several binders left lying on a desk area, despite the presence of locking cabinets directly above the desk. LPAs Moleski and Lindstrom observed multiple documents containing confidential resident information present in these binders, including residents' diagnoses, care plans, care notes, prescription information, medical information, and other personal identifying information. There was not a staff member in the immediate vicinity when LPAs Moleski and Lindstrom began inspecting the area. LPAs Moleski and Lindstrom did, however, observe residents and at least one visitor walking by during their inspection of the records. The department has determined the following as it relates to the allegations that staff did not allow a resident access to their bedroom and that staff do not safeguard residents' confidential information: Based on interviews and record review, the above allegations are SUBSTANTIATED. A finding that the complaint allegations are substantiated means that the allegations are valid because the preponderance of evidence standard has been met. This facility is hereby cited per 22 CCR Sections 87507(f) and 87506(c)(1) An exit interview was held with Bassi. A copy of this report and appeal rights were left with Bassi.