Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

LASSEN HOUSE SENIOR LIVINGLicense 5250027551 citation on this visit
1 citation recorded

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

Staff does not ensure resident's fall monitors are in good repair. - SUBSTANTIATED It was reported that Resident 1 is supposed to have fall monitors on their clothing and bed but the monitors were not present. LPA reviewed R1’s care plan which states “motion detector, must carry at all times. Verify Motion Alarm Is in the MC med room. 2. Make sure its charging. Med Techs Charting. Executive Director stated R1 has been using fall monitors since March 2024. The family purchased a fall monitor for R1 to wear, this fall monitor mistakenly went through the laundry and the facility reimbursed R1’s responsible party for the ruined monitor. The facility installed a motion detector in R1’s room that reports to the Med Tech laptop. Memory Care Director (MCD) stated R1’s personal fall monitor got washed, they spoke to R1’s RP and explained what happened. They planned to order a new fall monitor but it was taking too long. MCD told RP they would refund the money for the monitor and RP agreed to this. It was determined that the facility washed R1’s clothing with their fall monitor still attached to their clothing which damaged the fall monitor and rendered it non-operable. This allegation is substantiated. Based on interviews and evidence obtained during the investigation, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore, the allegation that staff does not ensure resident's fall monitors are in good repair is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations, (Title 22), is being cited on the attached LIC809D. Appeal rights were provided. Exit interview was conducted and the report was provided to administrator Nicole Braswell Resident sustained an unexplained fall and was left on the floor for an extended period of time. – UNSUBSTANTIATED. It was reported that Resident 1 fell and it took several hours before they were assisted. LPA reviewed care plan for R1 which states that R1 has a high fall risk [ADL's/Mobility and Transferring]. R1 has history of falls and has poor safety awareness. Staff are to provide full assistance to resident with walking needs for short distance only. Assist in morning and night during wake-up and bedtime. Nighttime checks- four times per night at 12:00 AM, 2:00 AM, 4:00 AM, 10:00 PM, as needed. LPA reviewed an internal incident report which states on 07/20/2024 at 1:30 AM care staff heard Resident 1 (R1) calling for help. Staff found R1 in their bathroom on the floor. A Med Tech examined R1 for injury and found that R1 had two minor cuts to their right elbow. Med Tech provided first aid. R1 could not recall how or why they fell. Staff notified R1’s physician, responsible party, and the Executive Director of the incident. During staff interviews it was learned that staff had done rounds 15 – 30 minutes prior to the fall. Staff asked R1 if they needed to use the restroom and R1 declined. 15 minutes later staff were in the room next door to R1 when they heard R1 call out. Med tech provided first aid for a small cut on R1’s elbow. Executive Director stated R1 fell in their bathroom on 07/20/2024. R1 had a small cut on their right elbow as a result of the fall. R1 was found by care staff. Memory Care Director (MCD) stated staff found R1 at about 1:15 AM. It was determined that during rounds staff had checked on R1 15 minutes before R1 called out for help. The allegation is unsubstantiated. Continued on LIC9099-C Facility is not following admission agreement and is overcharging resident in care. - UNSUBSTANTIATED It was reported that the facility is overcharging Resident 1 (R1). LPA reviewed R1’s admission agreement that states “Future adjustments to the Base Rent require 60 days' prior written notice to the resident and/or resident’s legal representative which will include the reason for the increase, the amount of the increase, and a general description of the additional costs, except for an increase in the rate due to a change in the level of care of the resident, for which the resident or resident’s representative will be given a two day written notification. Evaluation:” The Service Level Fee shall be reviewed 30 days after the Resident's move-in and then quarterly thereafter, although the Community reserves the right to review the Service Level Fee on a shorter interval when appropriate given changes in the level of service required by the Resident. Future adjustments to the Service Level Fee will take effect at any time following a Growth & Wellness Plan review.” Executive Director stated Since R1 returned from their last stay in rehab they did come back to the facility at a higher level of care. Per the admission agreement changes to care change the monthly fee. Memory Care Director stated before R1 returned to the facility from a stay in rehab she spoke with R1’s responsible party (RP) and explained that there would be an increase in monthly fees. The RP signed off on the updated Wellness Plan for R1. It was determined the facility adhered to their admission agreement. This allegation is unsubstantiated. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violations occurred, and the findings are UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted. A copy of the report was provided to administrator Nicole Braswell.

Citations

1 citation recorded*CCLD

What does Type A vs Type B mean?

Type A. Serious citation. Imminent or substantial risk to children. The regulator requires corrective action immediately and may impose a civil penalty.

Type B. Lower-severity citation. Corrective action required, no imminent risk. The regulator monitors compliance on the next visit.

  • 87217(b)Type B

    87217(b) Safeguards for Resident Cash, Personal Property, and Valuables (b) Every facility shall take appropriate measures to safeguard residents' cash resources, personal property and valuables which have been entrusted to the licensee or facility staff. The licensee shall give the residents receipts for all such articles or cash resources. This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on document review and interviews the licensee did not prevent the residents’ personal fall monitor from being laundered and rendered inoperable as a result. This poses a potential Health, Safety and Personal Rights risk to clients in care.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the September 17, 2024 inspection of LASSEN HOUSE SENIOR LIVING?

This was a complaint inspection of LASSEN HOUSE SENIOR LIVING on September 17, 2024. 1 citation were issued: 1 Type B.

Were any citations issued to LASSEN HOUSE SENIOR LIVING on September 17, 2024?

Yes, 1 citation was issued (0 Type A, 1 Type B). The first citation was for: "87217(b) Safeguards for Resident Cash, Personal Property, and Valuables (b) Every facility shall take appropriate measur..."

What type of inspection was this?

This was a complaint inspection. Complaint inspections are triggered when someone reports a concern about the facility to CCLD.

SourceView on CCLDView original report

Share this reportEmail

Next steps

If this is your facility,claim this pageand correct anything the record gets wrong. Free.

Researching this visit professionally?Book a 15-minute calland we will walk through what we have on file.

Data from CCLD public records. Last updated . If you believe any information is inaccurate, report it here.