complaint·March 19, 2026

It was alleged that the facility did not provide Resident #1 (R1)’s medical records to R1/R1’s authorized representative. LPA interviewed ED Tolentino who stated that records requests go through the facility’s legal team for review and the process takes about seven (7) days. ED also stated that resident admission agreements and incident reports are released, but resident care plans, appraisals, and the facility’s “resident service guidelines” are not released. Interviews with R1’s responsible party stated that no records for R1 were received. Record review revealed that R1’s responsible party made an initial request for records on 10/20/2025. The facility released an incident report and SOC341 for R1 to R1’s responsible party on 10/22/2025. A second request for R1’s "whole file" was made on 10/22/2025. The facility released two (2) incident reports on 10/26/2025, R1’s admission agreement on 10/27/2025, and R1’s medication list on 11/04/2025. Records were released via email to R1’s responsible party. Record review and staff interview confirmed that no care plans or medical records were released. Regulation states that residents or their authorized representatives shall have the personal right to copies of records within two (2) business days. Therefore, based on interview and record review, the allegation “Staff denying authorized representative resident’s medical records” is deemed SUBSTANTIATED at this time. The following deficiency was observed (See LIC 9099-D) and cited from the California Code of Regulations, Title 22 and/or California Health and Safety Code. Administrator was informed that failure to correct the deficiency may result in civil penalties. Exit interview conducted. Appeal rights and a copy of the report were provided. It was alleged that Staff #1 (S1) and Staff #2 (S2) forced Resident #1 (R1) to shower and wash their hair. LPA interviewed five (5) staff, two (2) residents, and one (1) witness who denied staff forcing showers. Staff and witness interviews stated that R1 was not forced to shower or wash their hair. Staff stated that R1 would often refuse showers but sometimes accept hair washing. LPA observed shower logs for R1 and observed documented refusals for four (4) out of eight (8) showers in October 2025 and refusals for two (2) out of nine (9) showers in September 2025. LPA also observed resident rights, abuse and neglect, and activities of daily living trainings for S1 and S2. Based on interviews and record review, the Department does not have sufficient evidence to corroborate the allegation. Although the allegation may be valid, at this time there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation or that a violation occurred, therefore, the allegation “Staff forced resident to shower” is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. It was further alleged that the facility was scheduling medical appointments for R1 without consent from R1’s responsible party(ies). Staff and witness interviews conducted stated that the facility does not make appointments on behalf of residents without consent. Staff stated that R1’s physician was contacted multiple times due to changes of condition and behaviors. LPA reviewed fax communications between the facility and R1’s physician regarding R1’s change of condition on 08/12/2025 and 09/24/2025 with the physician’s response to schedule a visit. Per staff interviews, R1 did not attend the medical appointments as transportation was not provided. Responsible parties were responsible for providing transportation to the medical appointments for R1. Record review of R1’s admission agreement signed and dated 08/22/2022 states that “You authorize us to contact your designated…personal health care providers…to assist you to make arrangements for health care services with your providers and to coordinate with those providers regarding your care needs in the Community.” Based on interviews and record review, the Department does not have sufficient evidence to corroborate the allegation. Although the allegation may be valid, at this time there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation or that a violation occurred, therefore, the allegation “Staff scheduling doctors appointments without consent from authorized representative” is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report was issued.