Complaint·June 7, 2021

At 12:00pm, LPA observed the laundry room sink has a brush that was placed on top of gray dust and hair. The washer has hair and black dust under the cover on the right corner and dryer has black dust on top and in between the lid. At 12:05PM, LPA observed bathroom #1 on the 1st floor has white partials on top of the faucet, white dirt around the sink, a tooth brush inside of a plastic cup on the right side of the sink and an open pack of toothache brushes on the left side of the sink. At 12:15PM, LPA observed bathroom #2's faucet has orange and rusty stains. The staff member acknowledged the above observations and reported that it was the night Shift's responsibility to clean the bathrooms and other parts of the facility. At 2:15PM, LPA spoke to the Administrator via phone regarding the above findings and the Administrator stated that it was shocking to identify the above conditions as all the staff members were supposed to clean it daily and after each use. Based on observation and interviews, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met. Therefore, this allegation is determined to be substantiated. This deficiency is cited in accordance with CA Code of Regulations, Title 22 are cited on the attached LIC 9099-D. Exit interview was conducted with the Administrator, Juliet Pacaldo and Appeal Rights were given. Regarding to facility not managing resident incontinence, the Reporting Party stated that R1 was sitting in soiled diaper for 25 hours, however, the staff members denied this allegation. The day shift staff reported that R1 is being changed every 4-5 hours and whenever is needed in between. The night shift staff reported that R1 is being changed once per night and R1 would get angry if being bothered too many times for changes during the night. LPA also interviewed the witness who stated that R1 was not soiled during the visit. Based on the above information, interviews, and record during this investigation, it was determined that although the above allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore the allegations are deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. This report was discussed and reviewed with the Administrator and a copy is provided.