complaint·September 25, 2023

Based on interviews conducted, R1 was in continuous monitoring even if there is an electronic monitoring system in place. There was also a follow up video appointment that staff assisted the resident. Incident was reported to the POA, although POA advised that if another family member asks then facility can provide information regarding R1s health status. Regarding the allegation, staff did ensure a resident consumed an appropriate amount of fluids while in care, it was reported that facility failed to read client's discharge paperwork which provided specific instruction for staff to monitor client's liquid intake and output. Based on records review, R1 was found to be dehydrated as reported in the discharge papers form the said hospital visit. According to staff interviews, they were not aware that R1 was dehydrated. Staff constantly offer different types of hydrations to residents. There are a variety of fluids apart from water that they offer such as juices and cold jello. Since R1 is in memory care, staff offers constant hydration since residents tend to forget to drink if not offered or made aware. Regarding the allegation that staff did not follow resident's medical orders, it was reported that R1 was dehydrated, and facility was not following this order. Facility only has one medical order given to them by the doctor. There were no previous orders that facility needed to follow. Based on record reviews, after discharge from hospitalization, it was ordered that R1 needs to hydrate, and that facility needed to keep track of food and fluid intake. Therefore, based on the interviews conducted, files reviewed, and information collected, the allegations mentioned are UNSUBSTANTIATED, meaning that although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is no preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Report is reviewed and a copy is provided.