complaint·July 22, 2025

Based on review of the police report, the report was written for information purposes. It’s indicated that R1 stated to have been kissing a staff member, but the kissing was consensual. R1 did not remember the staff member’s name. The facility’s Executive Director advised that R1 suffers from a neurocognitive disorder but can still make decisions for him/herself. Based on the description that was provided of the staff member, it did not match any of the facility staff members on site. R1 was interviewed. Based on interview, R1 made inconsistent statements to the Department, local police officers and facility staff regarding the alleged incident that was reported by R2. The review of records shows that R1 has a diagnosis of a neurocognitive disorder and history of forgetfulness. Facility staff were interviewed. Based on interview, there were no facility staff who fit the description that was provided by R2. 7 out of 7 staff members interviewed denied the observation of any staff conducting inappropriate behavior with any resident, including R1. The Department has investigated the above allegation. Based on interview, record review and observation the above allegation is unsubstantiated. An unsubstantiated finding indicates that although the allegation may have happened and/or is valid there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegation did or did not occur. No deficiencies were cited per California Code of Regulations, Title 22. This report was reviewed with Executive Director, Rachel Brown and a copy of the report was provided. Page 2 of 2.