complaint·February 16, 2023

During today’s visit LPA Campos met with Memory Care Director Sheila Ramirez at approximately 9:50 a.m., obtained pertinent documents, interviewed staff at 12:30 p.m., 12:58 p.m., 1:18 p.m. and 1:35 p.m., 2:20 p.m. and 3:27 p.m. interviewed residents at 11:15 a.m., 11:23 a.m., 11:27 a.m. and 3:16 p.m. Regarding the allegation: Staff denied resident food The complainant alleged that staff do not feed the residents and if a resident sleeps through breakfast and asks for food staff will refuse to serve them. Staff interviews denied the allegation that residents are not fed or denied food if they arrive after mealtimes. Staff confirmed that some residents will come back after they just ate because they forgot they had eaten and will redirect them after explaining they had just ate. Staff interviews revealed that all residents are offered a meal and any residents who do not arrive for the meal hour will have their food set aside until they arrive. The LPA observed the dining room area in Memory Care and confirmed that plates were set aside for those residents who did not arrive for their meal. The LPA additionally observed residents arriving after the designated meal hour and saw that they were seated and given their plate of food. Interviews with residents did not reveal any concerns regarding meals not being served after meal hours or not being fed. Interviews with residents revealed that if they are hungry, they can have a snack. Based on the information obtained, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim that staff denied resident food. This allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time. During today’s visit LPA Campos met with Memory Care Director Sheila Ramirez at approximately 9:50 a.m., obtained pertinent documents, interviewed staff at 12:30 p.m., 12:58 p.m., 1:18 p.m. and 1:35 p.m., 2:20 p.m. and 3:27 p.m. interviewed residents at 11:15 a.m., 11:23 a.m., 11:27 a.m. and 3:16 p.m. Regarding the allegation: Staff are not responding timely to residents’ call buttons On 02/16/2023, starting at 3:16 p.m., LPA interviewed Resident #1 (R1). Interview with R1 revealed that they have a pendant that isn’t always answered timely. R1 stated, it takes more than 10 -15 minutes or more for staff to answer the pendant call for help. LPA had R1 press the pendant at 3:16 p.m., again at 3:19 p.m. and one last time at 3:22 p.m. no one answered the call until 3:24 p.m. when a staff notified of the pendant over the walkie. Interview with Memory Care Director Sheila Ramirez on 2/16/2023, revealed that staff are supposed to be responding right away. Sometimes staff are busy with other residents and cannot answer however it should not take them more than 5 minutes to respond. R1 has a working pendant. It was communicated that staff have pagers that receive notification in both memory care (MC) and assisted living (AL). When the call is not answered by MC it is answered by AL, who then walkies MC to answer the call. On 2/16/2023, starting at 1:30 p.m., LPA Campos reviewed the SMARTcare Alert Call Button report for Resident #1 (R1). Regarding R1, it was indicated that there were nine (9) instances where R1 pressed their pendant between February 11th and February 16th 2023, there was one (1) alert that staff received and responded to at 37 minutes but failed to respond to the the other eight (8) alerts at all. R1 confirmed that they are often left for long periods of time waiting on a response after pressing their pendant. R1 will sometimes call the front desk with their personal phone to request that someone come help them as no has answered their pendant notification. Staff interviews confirmed that R1 will call the front desk for assistance if they have not been helped timely. Additionally, LPA Campos reviewed the SMARTcare Alert Call Button report for Resident #2 (R2). Regarding R2, it was indicated that there were ten (10) instances where R2 pressed their pendant between February 11th and February 16th 2023, there was three (3) alerts that staff received and responded to timely and two (2) alerts in which staff responded between (twenty) 20 to (fourty-four) 44 minutes after but failed to respond to the other five (5) alerts at all. As a result, the provided logs may not fully represent the time(s) in which R1 and R2 required assistance, or when R1 or R2 was without a button and still required assistance. Based on the information from the investigation, there is sufficient evidence to support the claim that staff are not responding to residents’ call buttons in a timely manner. Based on record review and interview, the allegation is Substantiated at this time.