complaint·March 4, 2026

...Continued from 9099 During the investigation, LPA conducted two (2) facility visits. During these visits LPA attempted to interview client C1. In both instances, client C1 did not want to provide any information regarding the investigation to the LPA. In both instances client C1 referred the LPA to speak with witness W1 for information pertinent to the investigation. LPA interviewed two (2) staff members (S1 and S2) of the facility. Both S1 and S2 stated that client C1 did not report the alleged theft to them. As client C1 did not wish to speak with the SRPD or with the investigating LPA, the only information the LPA was able to gather was hearsay. So, although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. No deficiencies cited during today's visit. Exit interview conducted. Copy of report discussed and provided to CG Gallardo. Signature on form confirms receipt of documents.