complaint·July 25, 2022

[CONTINUED FROM LIC 9099] After seeing R1 become angry, R2 never used the word again. This contrasted with R1’s interview, where they said S2 used the racist word repeatedly, and that its use was distinctly overheard by an outside source, by their conservator, by Staff #1 (S1), and by neighboring Resident #3 (R3). However, the outside source told LPA while they heard second-hand about the allegation from R1, they never observed/overheard such act, and denied bringing it to the attention of facility staff. R1’s conservator, S1, and R3 also denied observing/overhearing any such act, or even knowing about R1’s allegation against R2. According to 2 of 2 additional direct care staff assigned to both R1 and R2’s care: they argue with each other, with R1 usually instigating the squabbles. However, none of these staff witnessed, overheard, or heard about either resident saying anything racist towards the other. The evidence did not show that licensee failed to respond to R1’s allegation. When LPA asked each resident if they wanted to change rooms to get away from each other: R1 said of R2, “[They] are not a bad [person.] They are nice to me now, after [Manager #1 (M1)] came out.” [When LPA spoke to M1: they denied witnessing, overhearing, or hearing about either resident saying anything racist towards the other and thus never needed to confront either one about that it.] R1 denied to LPA ever requesting a room change from facility staff on account of R2’s conduct (which M1 corroborated). R2 also denied to LPA ever requesting a room change from facility staff, saying of R1, “[They] talk a lot, talking and talking, shares a lot,” but also “I still want to be [their] roommate. [They] are my friend.” M1 confirmed that they approached R2 in the past to inquire if they wanted to change rooms (after seeing R1 instigate arguments with them), but R2 insisted on staying with R1. M1 said in the approximate year that R1 has lived at the facility, they had 4 other roommates before R2. R1 had a habit of shouting out unsolicited comments towards each roommate (something unanimously corroborated by staff, R1’s conservator, and the facility’s written care notes). The first roommate requested a room change to get away from R1, which M1 granted. The second roommate was largely unaware of their surroundings, to include R1. (LPA was unable to interview either one since each had passed away by the time of this complaint). M1 initiated the relocation the third roommate to a different room (this resident told LPA that R1’s behavior annoyed them). M1 initiated the separation of a fourth roommate to a different room away from R1 (this resident also told LPA that R1’s behavior annoyed them). The Department concluded that by the time of this investigation, R1 was finally situated with a roommate (R2) who wanted to cohabit with them, that the sentiment was mutual, and that licensee’s repeated flexibility with room changes supported residents’ personal rights. [CONTINUED ON LIC 9099-C, 2 of 2] [CONTINUED FROM LIC 9099-C, 1 of 2] Based on records and interviews, a preponderance of evidence does not exist to prove that licensee did not protect R1 from verbal abuse. The allegation is therefore unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted with Salomon, to whom a copy of this report and the Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC9058 01/16) were provided.