complaint·June 30, 2022

determined during investigative interview that R1 previously received services from a hospice agency, but services that were being provided to R1 by the hospice agency were being discontinued, as R1 was not eligible to receive additional services from the agency. R1’s responsible party was presented the opportunity to select a different hospice agency, which the responsible party did. R1’s responsible party confirmed that the decision was made by him/her, and the licensee did not make the selection or force the selection of any particular hospice agency. Based upon a lack of sufficient evidence to conclude that either of the allegations occurred, the allegations are unsubstantiated. This finding means that although the allegations may have happened or may be valid, evidence was not obtained to prove that the alleged violations occurred. An exit interview was conducted with Ma Niza Ambalada, Staff, and copies of this report and Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC 9058) were provided to the staff at the conclusion of the visit. Ma Niza Ambalada’s signature on this report acknowledges receipt of copies of the rights and report.