Complaint Investigation Report

The second allegation is that the licensee did not maintain accurate medication administration record. It was reported that the medication administration record was dated to reflect that the following day’s medication had already been administered. Interview with staff during the visit revealed that on the date in question, medication had been administered; however, the medication administration record had not been signed to reflect administration of the medication.

The third allegation is that the licensee did not maintain accurate records of client resources. It was reported that client Personal and Incidental (P&I) logs did not reflect the balance retained on behalf of the client, and Client 1’s (C1) log did not reflect a signature or any method that indicated client’s receipt of funds. During today’s record review, LPA observed that the P&I logs of both clients reflected balances of funds; however, records reflected that prior to 4/16/2024, disbursements from C1’s funds were not signed, initialed, or indicated by C1 in any way.

Accordingly, the above listed allegations are substantiated. This finding means that the preponderance of the evidence standard has been met and the allegations are valid. Deficiencies are cited in accordance with California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8 and noted on the attached LIC 9099-D.

An exit interview was conducted with Rene Ramos, and copies of this report and Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC 9058) were provided at the conclusion of the visit. Rene Ramos' signature below serves as acknowledgment of receipt of copies of the report and rights.