Complaint Investigation Report

LPA interviewed clients, C1, C2 , C3, C4, C6. C5 refused to be interviewed. C2 stated S1 hit C1. LPA was unable to obtain information from C1, C3, and C6. C4 stated S1 hit C1 but not him or other clients. When asked for additional information regarding the alleged hitting incident. C4 was not able to provide.

LPA also interviewed staff, S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, and administrator. S1 denied hitting or slapping C1 and/or other clients. S2, S3 and S6 stated they never observed S1 hitting C1. S4, S5 and S7 indicated S1 no longer works at the facility when they started. Administrator stated that C1 has swallowing problem and has history of choking. Administrator also stated that there were times when staff did Heimlich maneuver on C1 and the other client may not know what’s going on, and have thought that the staff is hitting C1. Interview of staff confirmed C1 has history of choking and has swallowing problem. S5 stated C1 is on supervision when eating as C1 may choke due to behavior of eating fast. Review of C1’s records and incident report corroborated with administrator and staff statements. LPA personally observed C1 eating fast and was on 1:1 supervision when eating.

Based on all information gathered, the allegation is unsubstantiated. A finding that the complaint is unsubstantiated means that although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred.

Exit interview conducted and copy of report provided to Cecilia Laurente.