Complaint Investigation Report

(Continuation from LIC9099: Substantiated)

Residents report that meals are rarely home cooked are unhappy with the quality of food being provided. LPA Flores conducted an annual visit to the facility in December of 2025. During the annual visit in December of 2025, LPA Flores issued deficiencies for not maintaining food of nutritional value.

Information received alleged staff installed video surveillance in resident’s room without proper authorization. Witness #1 (W1) provided the department with photo proof of the locations of the surveillance cameras. Upon LPA’s initial visit, LPA observed that the camera were removed from the residents bedrooms where it was reportedly installed. LPA Flores and LPA Mixson observed camera mounts and wiring where the camera was once present. LPA interviewed (4) four out of (4) four residents. (3) Three out of (4) four residents reported observing the cameras present but were not given informed consent to have the camera’s in the room. Interview with Resident #1 (R1) stated that they informed Staff #1 (S1) of wanting the camera to be removed from their bedroom but were ignored. A review of the (4) four residents admission agreements detailed that surveillance will be implemented in residents rooms if it was deemed necessary for safety precaution. Interviews with S1 confirmed that video surveillance was implemented for safety concerns. S1 further explained that R1 mental health concerns may place R1 at a health and safety risk which is why the camera’s were implemented in R1’s room. Although R1 may have given written consent during the time of admission, R1 may verbally withdraw the consent at any time. Furthermore, R1 resides in a shared bedroom with R3. Interview with S1 further confirmed that there were no health and safety concerns that would allow the camera’s in the bedrooms for (3) three out of the (4) four residents residing in the facility. The implementation of surveillance camera’s in all resident bedrooms imposed upon the personal rights to privacy to all residents.

Information received alleged staff did not allow Resident #1 (R1) to contact emergency services. Interviews conducted with Staff #1 (S1) believed the allegation stemmed from an incident with R1 explaining that R1 has a history of behavioral episodes resulting to R1 frequently contacting emergency services on numerous occasions. S1 reported that there were occasions when R1 contacted emergency personnel every five minutes. S1 reports that upon law enforcement arrival, law enforcement instructed to take away R1’s personal cell. With the authorization of R1’s child, the cellphone was taken away.