1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | Per R3, she is not aware of an altercation between R1 and R2. R3 reported that if there is an altercation between residents it is not due to staff not supervising the residents and stated that some residents are difficult. During the course of the interviews with staff, Staff 1 (S1) reported that the altercation was not due to inadequate staff supervision. Per S2, she disagrees with the statement that staff did not provide adequate supervision resulting in a physical altercation between residents in care. During the course of the interviews AD reported that the altercation was not due to lack of staff supervision. Per AD, staff reported that R2 was in bed sleeping or resting when staff walked in. During the course of the interviews with witnesses, Witness 1 (W1) reported that the facility staff provided adequate supervision and stated that he does not expect staff to be checking on R1 24 hours per day.
Based on the information gathered during the investigation and review of documents obtained, LPA is unable to ascertain if the allegation occurred as reported due to conflicting information. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove or refute the alleged violation occurred; therefore, this allegation is deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED.
For today’s visit, there were no citations issued per Title 22, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations.
LPA conducted an exit interview with ED Hipolito, and a copy of this report was provided to the facility.
|