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 | The Department was unable to interview Resident #1 (R1) because (R1) was no longer available at the facility and had left with no forwarding contact information.
The Department attempted to contact the family conservator, identified as Witness #1 (W1), multiple times by telephone; however, the calls went unanswered.
As a result of the review of Resident #1 (R1's) Physicians Report LIC 624A (dated 12/10/22) revealed that (R1) suffers from a neurological disorder and requires medications to control aggressive behaviors. A review of (R1's) Medication Administration Record (MAR) (dated 02/01/23 through 02/28/23) revealed (R1) was prescribed (9) medications and (5) out of the (9) are to treat neurological disorder. Further review of (R1’s) Residential Care for Elderly Admission Agreement (dated 12/09/22), Identification and Emergency Information LIC 601 (dated 12/09/22) revealed (R1’s) family member (W1) holds conservatorship and has control to make decisions for (R1). Narrative Charting (dated 02/10/23 through 02/15/23) and telecommunications messages dated 02/14/23) showed that the facility was not engaging in “patient dumping” nor had the facility served an eviction notice to (R1) and that the conservator had decided to terminate residency by choice. A review of In Service/Meeting (dated 06/08/25) revealed all staff members have completed training on Personal Rights of Residents in Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly.
During the visit on August 9, 2025, the Department observed that the facility actively promotes the rights of its residents. The facility had posters detailing Resident Rights, Personal Rights, and the California Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly Complaint Poster prominently displayed throughout the premises.
Based on the information gathered, there is not enough evidence to support the allegation mentioned above.
Based on the information collected from the facility inspections, observations, interviews, and records analysis, the Department found no evidence to support the above allegation. The allegation may have happened or is valid, but there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. Therefore, the allegation is Unsubstantiated.
An exit interview was conducted with the Genessis Garcia, and copies of the reports were provided.
|