complaint·February 23, 2026

(Cont. from LIC 9099) HA submitted a lab work for R1 on 10/21/24 and results on 10/22/24 revealed R1 was positive for UTI. HA stated that a clogged catheter, no urine output, and no intake could contribute to a UTI. When ADM was interviewed, ADM mentioned not remembering calling hospice. One staff member (S1), confirmed that they observed a clogged catheter and reported it to the ADM. The ADM neglected and/or failed to seek medical services for R1 when ADM acknowledged that R1 had a clogged catheter, with no urine output for 24 hours; and when R1s change of condition was observed. ADMs neglect and failure to seek immediate care for R1 resulted in R1s UTI. At the time of the complaint inspection on 02/23/2026, licensee was informed that the incident is currently under review and a future civil penalty may apply based on Health and Safety Code § 1569.49. Based on interviews which were conducted and record reviews, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegations are found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, is being cited on the attached LIC 9099D. An Immediate Civil Penalty of $500.00 was also assessed (refer to the LIC421-IM page). An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report along with Licensee Rights (LIC 9058 03/22) were provided to Caregiver Jesus Arenas, whose signature below confirms receipt of these rights. (Cont. from LIC 9099) Furthermore, RN confirmed that the administrator (ADM) was trained and educated in treating and dressing the wound during the days that hospice did not visit. For the allegation of Licensee refused medical care for resident, RP stated that when R1 returned to facility, R1 had another fall but licensee declined a visit from hospice. According to the records, a notation stating that ADM called hospice about the fall, voiced no injury for R1, refusing help but yelling out for help. ADM stated that hospice is always called every time R1 has a fall and doesn’t deny help for R1. Regarding the allegation of Licensee restrained resident, RP indicated that staff are using chairs to block the residents’ bed to prevent falls. According to ADMs interview, it was stated that chair was used to assist R1 when staff is helping the R1and not restrain. R1 has a waiver to not use bed rails. For the allegation of Licensee did not follow eviction procedures, RP said the ADM wants the resident moved out to another facility but has not issued an eviction notice to R1s responsible parties. Based on the records, initially ADM didn’t want to accept R1 back after R1 was discharged from a hospital visit. ADM was educated about submitting a notice for eviction. ADM accepted R1 back but did not give notice about eviction and continued care for R1. Based on interviews and records review, the department has determined that although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED.' An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report along with Licensee Rights (LIC 9058 03/22) were provided to Caregiver Jesus Arenas, whose signature below confirms receipt of these rights.