Complaint Investigation Report

According to staff interviews, all staff stated there was no verbal abuse towards residents. LPA interviews with R2 and R3 were deemed unsuccessful due to communication barriers.

According to interview with RPR1 staff is being mentally and verbally abusive to R1. RPR1 stated R1 has been ignored by staff and being called names. LPA Ivey Canady observed staff and client interaction while at the facility on 3 separate occasions. According to LPA Ivey Canady observation, R1 appears to have requests fulfilled quickly by staff. R1 is cognitively more advanced than the other residents and verbalizes wants and needs very well. LPA reviewed receipt documents of office furniture and computer that administrator identified as purchased specifically for R1 with R1's funds. LPA Ivey Canady observed area where the office furniture is set up and administrator identified the area as R1's own personal area.

LPA Ivey Canady interviewed Reporting Party (RP) stated facility was asked to remove S5 from the facility schedule due to R1 family reporting S5 is rude to R1. Upon investigation, no direct evidence of S5 being rude was found. Upon further review, RP did not speak directly with R1. RP requested staff be removed from schedule based on complaint from 3rd party.

According to Resident 1 (R1) Individual Program Plan (IPP), R1 is on target with behavioral targets. Noted as a status of "met and ongoing" are behaviors defined as yelling at staff when they are in the same room and making demands without saying "please" or "thank you" or not allowing them to help when there is a safety concern." Per interview with administrator, there are times when staff yells at R1 when R1 is yelling because it is too loud in the facility and R1 cannot hear staff because R1 is yelling. According to all staff interviewed, the yelling is occurring because of the heightened noises made by all residents. LPA observed R1 Behavioral Intervention Plan (BIP) does note increased incidents of R1 consistently yelling at staff. There are replacement behaviors and prevention procedures listed. LPA interview with all staff resulted with all staff stating the prevention procedures are being implemented.

Based on all the information collected by the Department there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegation occurred, therefore this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Due to the above noted information, although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation(s) did or did not occur, and therefore the allegations are unsubstantiated.

Per California Code of Regulations (CCRs) - Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, no deficiencies cited. Exit interview was held and a copy of report was given to Licensee.