Complaint Investigation Report

Regarding Allegation: Staff mishandled a client's personal funds while in care. It is alleged that facility mishandled P & I monies from C4. W1 is payee of C4 and handles C4 P & I. There is no evidence that facility ever handled any P & I money for C4.

Regarding Allegation: Facility has insufficient staffing for the clients. It is alleged that there is not enough staff on duty to assist clients with their needs. 5 of 5 staff denied that allegations. 3 of 4 clients could not collaborate the allegations. There are 12 total staff and there are 2 during the day and 1 overnight on rotating schedule. W1 could not collaborate the allegations. LPA reviewed schedule and it show there to be coverage 24 hours a day.

Regarding Allegation: Client was not afforded privacy while in care. It is alleged that staff do not provide privacy to client when showering. 5 of 5 staff denied the allegations. Staff stated that they will assist the clients for their own safety but if clients can take care of their own personal care, they are afforded privacy. 2 of 4 clients could not collaborate the allegation. W1 did could not collaborate the allegation.

Regarding Allegation: Staff do not have planned activities for the clients. It is alleged that staff do not have activities for clients . 5 of 5 staff denied the allegations. 2 of 4 clients denied the allegations. W1 stated that they don’t have activities that C4 enjoys and can participate. LPA observed a weekly activity schedule on the wall by the front door and reviewed pictures of clients and staff participating in activities.

Regarding Allegation: Staff behavior posed as a risk to a client while in care. There were not any details regarding this allegation and 5 of 5 staff denied that their behaviors or those of other staff pose a risk to clients. 3 of 4 clients denied the allegations and W1 stated W1 didn’t know what this allegation may be about but one time a trip was made to a casino that included 2 staff and C1 and C4. S1 stated that on that occurrence, 2 staff and 3 clients made the trip to the casino and included a stop at the mall with consent from all 3 (C1-C3). C1 collaborated this when asked if it was his decision. C4 also mentioned that he participated on this excursion. C3 did not go because C3 was working.

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 allegations are UNSUBSTANTIATED .

Exit interview held. A copy of the report was provided to Facility Staff Kristine Jimenez.