Complaint Investigation Report

***This report serves as an amendment and supersedes the original complaint investigation report created on 04/05/24. The findings remain as unsubstantiated. ***

The investigation revealed the following:

In regard of allegation staff threatened authorized representative of eviction of resident, it was alleged that a resident may not be able to return and reside at the facility because the resident may need a higher level of care. LPA interviewed residents, six (6) out of seven (7) residents stated residents and their authorized representatives had never been threatened of evicting residents. One (1) out of seven (7) residents declined to be interviewed. All four (4) staff interviewed denied the allegation. Staff interviews revealed no resident were threaten of eviction. Upon record review, it was determined an eviction notice had not been issued to R1 and that R1 returned to the facility on 04/14/24 after a short stay at the SNF. Thus, staff did not threaten resident and resident’s authorized representative for eviction.

In regard of allegation staff refused to cash resident's check, it was alleged that the facility held on the collection of the resident’s checks for March rent payment. LPA interviewed residents, six (6) out of seven (7) residents stated the facility processed their rent payments monthly on time. One (1) out of seven (7) residents declined to be interviewed. All four (4) staff interviewed denied the allegation. Staff stated residents' rent were processed at the beginning of each month. The reason holding on rent collection of the month was an act of courtesy when resident was absent from the facility for a short period of time. Per record review, the facility cashed the resident’s March rent payment on 04/05/24 as the courtesy hold was ended. Thus, staff did not refuse to cash resident's check but withhold the rent collection for a courtesy reason.

Based on the information obtained during the investigation, interviews with staff, residents, review of resident files and LPA's observation, the investigation did not reveal any evidence to support the allegations mentioned above.

Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations did or did not occur, therefore, the allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED.

An exit interview was conducted with Administrator Jennifer and findings were discussed. A copy this report was provided to Administrator at time of visit.