complaint·April 27, 2022

Continued from LIC9099 Per Administrator, on March 17, 2022, when R1 notified her of the alleged forgery, she immediately notified law enforcement and completed all reporting requirements to licensing and Long-Term Care Ombudsman. Administrator, Narasappa indicated that their company new hire onboarding process requires for all staff to complete trainings that specifically include a comprehensive review of personnel policies and procedures. The company personnel handbook states that it is against company policy for any employee to accept money or gifts from a resident, a family member or any other facility affiliate. In addition, Narasappa stated that S1’s position provides direct resident care to residents by bringing them meals, therefore S1 received specific trainings as a caregiver and mandated reporter requirements. LPA reviewed onboarding documents and training records and confirmed the onboarding process was completed and acknowledged by S1, which disclosed no exceptions in the hiring process. In addition, facility received background clearance for S1 prior to hiring on March 2, 2020, which indicated no prior criminal activity. Review of the Facility Resident Theft and Loss Record (LIC9060) disclosed no other loss or stolen personal property. Based on review of hiring practices, training practices and internal control systems established at the facility it appeared that this was an isolated incident that only affected R1. On April 8, 2022, S1’s employment was terminated and subsequently S1 was arrested and charged with two (2) felony charges, Penal Code 470 (D) forgery and Penal Code 368 (E) financial elder abuse by caretaker. The criminal case is pending. Based on interviews conducted and records review there is sufficient evidence to support the allegation. The investigation findings clearly indicated that the intended amount of the check of $100 written by R1 was subsequently changed by S1 to $1,000 without R1’s knowledge nor approval. Review of security surveillance video by law enforcement confirmed S1 as the individual depositing the check issued by R1. Therefore, the allegation is deemed to be substantiated. A substantiated finding means the allegation is valid because the preponderance of the evidence standard has been met. A deficiency was cited per Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8 of the California Code of Regulations and is listed on LIC 9099-D. A plan of corrections was developed with Administrator, Narasappa and was subsequently completed on April 13, 2022. An exit interview was conducted with Administrator, Nithi Narasappa and a copy of this report and Licensee/Appeals Rights (LIC 9058 01/16) were provided.