Complaint Investigation Report

The interview with C1 also revealed that it was C1’s choice to not meet in private, or at all, with specific visitors.

It was also alleged Client(s) were not able to receive confidential calls. Additionally, it was alleged facility staff restricted client(s) visitations. An interview with C1 revealed having a personal cell phone but did not give their number out due to not wanting specific individuals calling them. C1 also revealed refusing certain calls made to the facility’s landline and had requested facility staff to decline their calls. Likewise, C1 requested facility staff to decline visits made by specific individuals, however would receive visits weekly by others. Interviews with outside sources, and facility staff, corroborated C1 and other clients in care received visits on a regular basis.

It was also alleged Clients are not provided activities. Interviews with outside sources corroborated staff provide the clients in care with a lot of activities, including celebrations, and outings. Lastly, it was alleged S1 intimidated clients in care. Interviews with outside sources and C1 revealed S1 did not intimidate clients. The interview with C1 reiterated it was their choice not to communicate with certain individuals and that S1 had no influence on the matter.

Due to lack of corroborating evidence, the finding regarding the above allegations were established to be unsubstantiated. This finding means although the allegations may have happened or could be valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violations occurred.

LPA Correia conducted an exit interview with Administrator Fernandez. At the time of the exit interview Administrator Fernandez was advised a copy of the Complaint Investigation Report (LIC9099) and Licensee Rights (LIC9058 01-2016) will be provided and signature on this report acknowledges receipt of the documents.