Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

VINTAGE RESIDENTIAL 1License 374603126
Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

By the time the LPA made contact with the facility, the issue had been resolved and the resident had their phone connected, with their prior phone number as desired by the resident. Although there were some challenges in getting the phone connected in the resident’s room, interviews did not reveal any evidence that the facility staff was not allowing resident-family communication. This allegation is unsubstantiated. The next allegation of the facility not allowing a resident to have their personal possessions while at the facility was based on a concern that the resident had a bed that was not being used at the facility. Interviews revealed that the resident and their supporters made arrangements to move the bed and that the resident chose to stay in a bed provided by the facility stating that the resident is happy with the mattress they were using. Although moving and storing the resident’s belongings was not smooth, there was no evidence to support the allegation that the facility was not allowing the resident to have their personal belongings at the facility. This allegation is unsubstantiated. The allegation of the facility staff not allowing resident to have visitations with their family had to do with COVID precautions. One of the resident’s family members had symptoms that were consistent with COVID and was told by the facility not to visit. Another family member came to the facility without a mask and was required to mask-up prior to entry. Interviews revealed that individuals did have their access to face-to face visits with the resident restricted to comply with COVID mandates, visits could resume with all COVID precautions in place. This allegation is unsubstantiated. Lastly is was alleged that facility is not adhering to Admissions Agreement, specifically about food service. The resident has specific tastes that may not be consistently aligned with the facility’s regular menus. The interviews revealed that the administrator is willing to accommodate the resident’s palate, however the resident prefers to make dietary requests of a family friend. The administrator facilitates the storing and serving of any foods designated for this individual resident. This allegation is unsubstantiated. Based on interviews and LPA observations, the above allegations have been determined to be unsubstantiated. Meaning there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. This report was discussed with Cynthia Grape, Licensee and Administrator. A copy along with Licensee Rights (01/2016) was emailed to Ms. Grape at the conclusion of the visit. An electronic response confirms the receipt of these documents.

Citations

No citations recorded on this visit

The inspector found no violations of California child care regulations during this visit.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the February 14, 2022 inspection of VINTAGE RESIDENTIAL 1?

This was a complaint inspection of VINTAGE RESIDENTIAL 1 on February 14, 2022. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to VINTAGE RESIDENTIAL 1 on February 14, 2022?

No citations were issued during this inspection. The facility was found to be in compliance with all applicable regulations.

What type of inspection was this?

This was a complaint inspection. Complaint inspections are triggered when someone reports a concern about the facility to CCLD.

SourceView on CCLDView original report

Share this reportEmail

Next steps

If this is your facility,claim this pageand correct anything the record gets wrong. Free.

Researching this visit professionally?Book a 15-minute calland we will walk through what we have on file.

Data from CCLD public records. Last updated . If you believe any information is inaccurate, report it here.