Complaint Investigation Report

Regarding the allegation that f acility is malodorous, the following was revealed: During the initial visit on August 20, 2024, and subsequent visit on February 3, 2026, LPA tour the facility bedrooms, restrooms, kitchen, living room, and garage, all of which were free of odors. During the course of the interviews with clients, Client 1 (C1) through C3 reported that the facility is not malodorous. During the course of the interviews with staff, Staff 1 (S1) reported that the day of the incident they did a deep cleaning of the damage area. Per S2, the facility was not malodorous.

Regarding the allegation that f acility did not provide a safe, healthful, and comfortable accommodation , the following was revealed: During the initial visit LPA tour the facility and did not observe any clients present. During the course of the interviews with staff, S1 reported that the clients were relocated to other houses. S1 stated that staff immediately cleaned throughout the house. Per S2, staff shut down the damaged bedroom. S2 reported that the carpet was removed and stated that they hired a contractor to do the repairs. During the course of the interviews with clients, C1 through C3 reported that the facility provides a safe, healthful, and comfortable accommodations and/or stated that it is always safe.

Regarding the allegation that f acility staff does not allow resident(s) phone usage , the following was revealed: During the investigation LPA reviewed documents including the A Mission for Michael house rules. Per house rules, it states a facility house phone remains available during designated times for approved calls. During the interviews with clients, C1 through C3 reported that they can use the house telephone anytime and/or stated that they have access to the house telephone.

Based on the information gathered during the investigation and review of documents obtained, LPA is unable to ascertain if the allegations occurred as reported due to conflicting information. Although the allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove or refute the alleged violations occurred; therefore, these allegations are deemed UNSUBSTANTIATED.

For today’s visit, there were no citations issued per Title 22, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations.

LPA conducted an exit interview with facility representative, and a copy of this report was provided to the facility.