1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | The investigation revealed the following: Regarding the allegation, “Staff does not ensure that resident is able to receive services of their choice,” it is alleged that facility staff interfered with R1’s choice to receive enhanced care services. Observations conducted revealed the following: During the interview, the Department observed R1 participate in the interview and responded directly and consistently to questions regarding R1’s decision to receive enhanced care services. Interviews conducted revealed the following: The Department conducted interviews with six residents (R1–R6). Interview with R1 confirmed that R1 wanted enhanced care services and did not ask anyone to cancel the services. Of the remaining five residents, R3 and R4 disagreed with the allegation and did not provide further details and (R2, R5, and R6) were unable to provide relevant information due to observed cognitive and health-related limitations. Interview with A1 confirmed that A1 contacted the enhanced care service provider and requested that R1’s services and related documents be cancelled and voided. A1 stated having concerns regarding how R1’s consent was obtained and believed the process was not transparent. W1 stated that A1 requested cancellation of R1’s services rather than R1 requesting cancellation. Records reviewed revealed the following: Records reviewed confirmed that R1 signed and initialed the enhanced care service provider consent form dated 08/06/26, documenting R1’s consent & acknowledgement to receive enhanced care services. Written communication from A1 to the service provider dated 08/11/26 at 10:51AM, confirmed that A1 requested that the information and signatures obtained from R1 be cancelled and voided. R1’s Facility Admission Agreement dated 06/20/26 identified R1 as responsible for self. R1’s Medical Assessment dated 06/25/26 did not identify cognitive condition.
Based on the evidence gathered, interviews conducted, and records reviewed, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met; therefore, the above-mentioned allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. This is a violation of California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8. A citation is being issued on the attached LIC-9099D.
An exit interview, a copy of this report, and appeal rights were provided to the Administrator. |