Complaint·April 29, 2026

(Cont. from LIC 9099) Regarding the allegation that staff do not ensure that R1's hygiene needs are met, interviews revealed that R1 was originally independent with bathing, and staff initially provided only standby assistance. Staff reported that R1 had a skin condition, and observed that R1 was not showering effectively, which contributed to worsening of the condition. Interviews revealed that once these concerns were identified, staff began providing increased assistance, transitioning from standby to full shower assistance, and increased shower frequency. Staff also confirmed that daily showers were provided in collaboration with home health when medically recommended for aid in treatment of R1's skin conditions. Staff interviews consistently reported efforts to support R1’s hygiene and compliance with updated care needs. Interview with R1 revealed that R1 previously showered on their own but staff decided to begin helping R1. R1 stated that staff "always" give them showers. Records review of shower logs from September 2025 through February 2026 showed that R1 consistently received the documented showers, including daily showers throughout February 2026. Records further showed that R1’s care plan was formally updated during a care conference on 02/25/2026 to include daily showers per medical recommendations. During the visit, LPA observed R1 to be clean and well groomed. Regarding the allegation that staff does not keep the facility clean and sanitary and that staff did not adequately address a pest infestation, interviews consistently reported that they had not observed cockroaches or other pests inside resident rooms, including R1’s previous room. Housekeeping staff stated that rooms and bathrooms are cleaned on a rotating schedule throughout the week and that additional cleaning is provided as needed. Staff also reported that the facility contacted pest control when R1’s POA reported seeing a bug in R1's previous room. Multiple staff reported that pest control inspected the room and did not find evidence of pests/infestation. R1 reported that their room was clean, that they never saw any pests, and that they were moved to another room because of a loud roommate, not due to pests. Records review of Pest control invoices showed routine monthly prevention services throughout 2025, and a February 2026 inspection report indicated no pests were found in R1's previous room. Facility pest-control maps showed bait stations already in place as preventive measures. Review of housekeeping schedules confirmed that rooms and common areas are cleaned regularly, with 3–4 rooms cleaned daily and all rooms completed weekly. During a facility visit, LPA observed the facility without pests, and rooms and common areas were clean and observed being cleaned by housekeeping staff. (Cont. on LIC 9099-C pg. 1) (Cont. from LIC-9099-C) Regarding the allegation that staff did not follow protocols to prevent the spread of scabies and that staff are not following reporting requirements, interviews reported that R1 was isolated each time scabies was suspected or diagnosed, and that staff followed infection control procedures including PPE use, and additional cleaning. Staff stated that no other residents developed scabies, and that another resident(R2) who was evaluated for a rash tested negative for scabies. Interviews reported that the administrator notified the public health department regardless of only one case of scabies, and that the department stated that this was not an outbreak case. Records review of the facility’s infection control policy included clear scabies prevention protocols such as isolation, laundry procedures, PPE use, and environmental cleaning. Review of email correspondence showed that the facility reported scabies concerns to the Department of Public Health. Records review revealed that the facility sent incident reports for R1 and R2 sent to CCLD regarding rash/scabies and follow up for the conditions of both residents. Medical records confirmed that R1 received prescribed treatments, and documentation showed that the second resident tested negative for scabies following a skin scrape. Regarding the allegation that staff did not implement prescribed medical treatment in a timely manner, interviews reported following physician orders as they were received and administering treatments accordingly. Staff stated that one prescription was delayed over a weekend because the pharmacy did not process it, and the facility was not notified until the following Monday. Staff reported following up immediately upon returning, and the pharmacy acknowledged and apologized for the delay. The reporting party confirmed that the delay was caused by the pharmacy rather than the facility. Staff also reported that oral medications, creams, and antibiotic treatments were administered according to medical instructions, and that home health supported wound care and daily bathing when needed. Records review of R1's medication prescriptions and medication administration record revealed that the delayed prescription was later processed and administered, and all other ordered treatments were provided as directed. The Department has investigated the above-mentioned allegations and based upon the information obtained during this investigation, it is determined that the preponderance of evidence was not met to support or corroborate these allegations and therefore deemed unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted with Administrator Susan Caccam, to whom a copy of this report and the Licensee’s Rights (LIC9058 01/16) were provided.