complaint·January 9, 2025

Continued from 9099... Therefore, the refund provided to R1’s responsible party should have been from 7/11/24-7/31/24, or at least 7/14/24-7/31/24. However, per review of R1’s account history report, the refund issued was for the period covering 7/21/24-7/31/24. So, based on LPA’s record review, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6 Chapter 8, are being cited on the attached 9099D. *Per LPA interview with Admin additional 7 rent days in question has been refunded to the responsible party as of 1/7/25.** Complaint alleges facility billed resident's authorized representative after resident's departure from facility for incontinence items. On 5/27/24 R1 was hospitalized and subsequently never returned to Brookdale. During investigation, LPA reviewed R1’s account history report. Review shows that on 7/16/24 R1’s responsible party was billed three [3] charges of $102.50 for the dates of 6/15/24, 7/2/24, and 7/16/24. Per LPA interview with Administrator, these billings were in error and on 1/2/25 Brookdale refunded R1’s responsible party $307.50 for the aforementioned “personal solutions” fees. So, based on LPA’s record review and interview the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6 Chapter 8, are being cited on the attached 9099D. Deficiencies cited from the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6 of California Regulation and the Health and Safety Code. Appeal rights given and discussed with Administrator. Failure to correct the deficiency and/or repeat deficiencies within a 12 month period may result in civil penalties. Exit interview conducted with Administrator and a copy of this report was given . Continued from 9099A... However, neither the Apria centralized billing department nor the local branch had a signed SRA on file, nor could either provide the serial number of the wheelchair dropped off on 5/26/24. Facility claims that Apria never dropped off any wheelchair, to the best of their knowledge. Apria retrieved a wheelchair from facility as of 11/19/24. However, per the Apria local branch customer service representative, the wheelchair returned may not be the property of Apria as no serial number is present. 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.