Complaint Investigation Report

Interviewed staff denied the allegation and stated that they never heard or witnessed a client left alone in the room in full body restraints. Interviewed staff stated that C1 uses a helmet as a protective device to protect C1 from self injurious behavior. S1 stated that they do not have any other type of full body restraints other than the helmet that was ordered by C1's Physician. S1 also indicated that staff receive training on a weekly basis on how to use restraint and intervention techniques with the least restrictive intervention. Interviewed staff also stated that they receive personal rights in service training regularly. During LPA's visit on 5/07/2024, LPA conducted a tour of C1's room and observed the helmet stored in C1’s closet. LPA did not observe any full body restraint devices. LPA also observed C1 sitting on the chair in his bedroom without any type of restraints. LPA attempted to interview clients C1 through C4, but unsuccessful due to their cognitive abilities. There were no witnesses to the alleged incident. Review of documentation revealed that the facility did not submit or had an exception granted for protective helmet for C1.

Based on statements and interviews conducted with clients and staff as well as reviewed files and documentation, there was not enough supportive evidence to corroborate the allegation.

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

Exit interview and a copy of this report was provided to Raiko Vides, Direct Support Professional I.