Skip to main content

Inspection visit

complaint

OAKMONT OF RIVERPARKLicense 5658501682 citations on this visit
2 citations recorded

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

Continued from LIC 9099-C Following is a summary of the investigation findings: Regarding allegation, “Staff did not notify resident’s responsible party of an incident” – it was alleged that Resident #1 (R1) sustained a fall at the facility on June 22, 2023, a week after admission and the responsible party was not informed. Staff interviewed revealed that R1 was admitted on 06/13/2023 and did sustain two (2) falls on or about 06/22/2023 and another in 08/23/2023. Staff interviews and records reviewed confirmed that the 06/22/2023 fall was not reported to the responsible person or the department. Based on the above information gathered, there is sufficient evidence to support the allegation of “Staff did not notify resident’s responsible party of an incident”. Therefore, the allegation is deemed SUBSTANTIATED at this time. Regarding allegation, “Staff did not communicate with resident's family regarding increase in medication” – Information was received that facility staff requested a medication change from R1’s doctor without obtaining consent from R1’s responsible party. Records reviewed and interviews conducted with staff on 09/13/2023 revealed that between 6/24/2023-8/24/2023, R1’s was exhibiting behavioral issues which was reported to the doctor and therefore the seroquel medication was increased. Staff interviewed and records reviewed confirmed that R1’s seroquel medication was increased from 50mg to 75mg then to 100mg. Interview with staff revealed that R1’s change in condition since move-in and medication changes were not communicated to R1’s responsible person. Based on the above information gathered, there is sufficient evidence to support allegation “Staff did not communicate with resident's family regarding increase in medication”. Therefore, the allegation is deemed SUBSTANTIATED at this time. Pursuant to Title 22 Division 6 Chapter 8 of the CA Code of Regulations, the following deficiencies was cited (refer to LIC 809-D): Exit interview conducted. A copy of the report and appeal rights provided. Continued from LIC 9099 Regarding allegation, “Staff did not seek medical attention for a resident in a timely manner” - The complainant alleged that Resident #1 (R1) was observed with a swollen arm and staff did not seek timely medical attention. Interview with staff and record reviewed confirmed that staff were notified that R1’s right arm was swollen by R1’s responsible person on 07/17/2024 and a tele-visit was conducted with R1’s doctor. Staff interviewed reported that prior to 7/17/2023, R1’s arm was not observed to be swollen. Following the tele-visit on 07/17/2023, R1’s doctor order an x-ray; which was conducted at the facility once the order was approved. X-ray of R1’s arm did not reveal any issue. R1 was a resident in the memory care unit and has since passed away. Based on the above information gathered although the allegations may be valid, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation or that a violation occurred; therefore, the above allegation “Staff did not seek medical attention for a resident in a timely manner” is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. Regarding allegation, “Resident hygiene needs not met” - It was alleged that R1 was not cleaned up after a bowl incident (date unknown) and was observed with dry feces on the hand the following day. Staff interviewed denied the allegation and expressed that if a resident is in the room resident is checked on at least every two hours by staff. Staff interviewed reported that residents are not left unattended and are checked on and cleaned regularly. Staff denied allegation and stated that resident are kept clean and odor free. Staff expressed that resident do have accidents and are cleaned immediately when observed. Facility common areas, and random resident rooms were toured in the assisted living and memory care on 9/13/2023, and 10/24/23. During these visits, residents and common areas did not observe to be unkept. R1 was a resident in the memory care unit and has since passed away. Based on the above gathered although the allegations may be valid, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation or that a violation occurred; therefore, the above allegation “Staff leaves residents unattended” is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. Continued on LIC 9099-C Continued from LIC 9099-C Regarding allegation, “Staff are taunting resident” - Information was received that during the firsts two weeks of move-in R1 was observed having a volatile episode and “nurses” (names unknown) observed laughing at R1. Random staff interviewed denied witnessing any “nurses” laughing at or taunting R1. No other witnesses to the alleged was reported. Interview was attempted with random resident in the memory care unit however residents were unable to effectively communicate with LPA due to loss of level of cognitive abilities. A few random residents who were greeted by LPA did express that they like the staff and are not mistreated. R1 was a resident in the memory care unit and has since passed away. Based on the above information gathered although the allegations may be valid, there is insufficient evidence to support the allegation or that a violation occurred; therefore, the above allegation “Staff are taunting resident” is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED at this time. Exit interview conducted and copy of report provided.

Citations

2 citations 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.

  • 87211(a)(1)Type B

    Reporting Requirements: (a) Each licensee shall... reports as the Department may require,...(1)A written report shall be submitted... person responsible...This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on interviews and record review, licensee did not comply with the above section by failing to report incidents to the Department and the responsible party involving R1, which is a potential personal rights risk to residents in care.

  • 87468.1(a)(8)Type B

    Personal Rights of Residents(a) Residents in all residential care facilities for the elderly...following personal rights: (8) To have their representatives regularly informed by the licensee of activities related to care or services...This requirement is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interviews, licensee did not comply with the above section by failing to inform R1 Responsible party of any change in condition or care needs related to R1, which is a potential

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the September 27, 2024 inspection of OAKMONT OF RIVERPARK?

This was a complaint inspection of OAKMONT OF RIVERPARK on September 27, 2024. 2 citations were issued: 2 Type B.

Were any citations issued to OAKMONT OF RIVERPARK on September 27, 2024?

Yes, 2 citations were issued (0 Type A, 2 Type B). The first citation was for: "Reporting Requirements: (a) Each licensee shall... reports as the Department may require,...(1)A written report shall be..."

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.