Complaint Investigation Report
In regards to the allegation that " Staff did not provide adequate supervision resulting in resident being threaten by another resident in care," it is alleged that C2 had been threatening C1 in the facility, and that staff took no action to prevent the harassment. During interviews with the clients, three (3) out of three (3) could not corroborate the allegation. One of the clients interviews stated C2 has never yelled at any of the other clients in the facility. Another client interviewed stated that no clients have ever threatened one another in the facility. During interviews with the staff, four (4) out of four (4) did not corroborate the allegation. One of the staff interviewed stated that they have never noticed C2 threatening C1 or any of the other clients in the facility. Another staff stated that C2 has never been confrontational with C1.
In regards to the allegation that " Staff yells at resident in care," it is alleged that S1 has yelled at C1 in the facility. During the investigation, two (2) out of three (3) clients did not corroborate the allegation that clients have been yelled at by staff. One client interviewed stated that S1 has never raised their voice at them or any of the other clients in the facility. Another client interviewed stated that they have never noticed S1 or any of the other staff yelling at clients in the facility. During interviews with staff, four (4) out of four (4) did not corroborate the allegation. One of the staff interviewed stated that in a recent incident, C1 had become upset after S1 had asked them to throw away certain items in their room, which upset C1, however S1 did not raise their voice at them and C1 later apologized. Another staff interviewed stated that they have never seen S1 yell at C1, and that none of the staff in the facility raise their voice at the clients.
In regards to the allegation that " Staff did not ensure resident medical equipment was in good working condition," it is alleged that repairs were required on C1's Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) machine, however for a stretch of time the repairs were not made and C1 was not able to use the machine. During interviews with the clients, three (3) out of three (3) did not corroborate the allegation. One of the clients interviewed stated that they saw that C1 always had the CPAP machine in their room. Another client interviewed stated that from what she saw, C1 always had access to her CPAP machine that was located in her room. During interviews with the staff, four (4) out of four (4) did not corroborate the allegation. One of the staff interviewed explained that C1 had a sleep study in March of 2024, where it was determined that they required a different setting for their CPAP machine, and therefore had a subsequent advanced sleep study conducted in May of 2024, where it was determined that new settings were required for the machine.
Source: California Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing. Methodology · Report a correction