Inspection Reports for
Brookdale Santa Monica Gardens

The complaint alleged that staff do not respond timely to residents' calls for assistance, residents must wait up to one hour for help, planned daily activities are not provided due to lack of an activities director, and the facility does not maintain an activities calendar. Interviews with staff (S1-S4) and residents (R1-R8) mostly denied these allegations, with the majority confirming timely assistance and presence of planned activities and calendar. The investigation concluded the allegations were unsubstantiated.

Based on interviews with staff and residents, review of records including staff rosters, activity calendars, and in-service trainings, and direct observations, there was insufficient evidence to substantiate any of the allegations. The staff were found to respond timely to calls, planned daily activities were provided, and the facility maintained an activities calendar. No citations were issued.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated. Allegations included uncomfortable accommodations due to noise from pipe repairs, poor food quality linked to use of Styrofoam containers causing gout and hospitalization, and incorrect refund amounts. After interviews and document reviews, no violations were found.

The investigation found no evidence to support the allegations. Resident and staff interviews, as well as record reviews, indicated that noise complaints were addressed appropriately, food quality was maintained despite temporary use of Styrofoam containers, and refund amounts were correctly applied as credits to resident accounts. All allegations were unsubstantiated.

The facility was found to be sanitary, appropriately furnished, and compliant with Title 22 regulations. No deficiencies were cited during the inspection, and infection control practices were observed to be adequate.

The complaint investigation addressed four main allegations: 1) staff not maintaining accurate records, 2) staff not monitoring a resident's change in condition, 3) resident left in soiled diapers for extended periods, and 4) staff not allowing resident's responsible party to remove the resident from the facility. Each allegation was investigated through interviews and document review, and all were found unsubstantiated due to lack of sufficient evidence.

The investigation found insufficient evidence to substantiate any of the allegations. Staff and resident interviews, document reviews, and observations indicated that while some concerns were raised, there was no preponderance of evidence to prove violations occurred. All allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.

The complaint alleged that resident #1's representative was not provided with an itemized statement of charges, including a disputed $2,000 rate increase. The investigation reviewed the Residency Agreement, assessments, account reports, and interviewed staff. The allegation was found unsubstantiated.

The investigation included interviews, record reviews, and a facility tour. The Department found no evidence to support the allegation, concluding the complaint was unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The complaint involved two allegations: 1) staff failed to safeguard resident's personal property, including theft of items, and 2) resident was being financially abused through overcharging for services. Interviews and document reviews did not find sufficient evidence to support these allegations, resulting in an unsubstantiated status.

The investigation included interviews with residents and staff, review of relevant documents, and facility tours. No evidence was found to substantiate the allegations of theft or financial abuse. The allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated, and no deficiencies were cited during the visit.

The facility was found to be sanitary, appropriately furnished, and compliant with infection control protocols. No deficiencies were cited during the inspection.

The complaint alleged inadequate supervision and isolation of Resident 2 by Resident 1, including solicitation of funds. The allegation was found unsubstantiated after investigation.

The investigation included interviews, record reviews, and observations. It was found that Resident 1 is controlling but not isolating Resident 2, and there was no evidence of solicitation of funds. Both residents and staff denied the allegations. The complaint was unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated. Allegations included facility charging residents for unneeded services, staff not properly assessing residents, retaining residents with unstageable pressure injuries, and retaining residents requiring a higher level of care. The investigation included interviews with residents, staff, witnesses, and review of service records and facility documents.

The investigation found no evidence to support the allegations. Interviews, record reviews, and observations indicated that residents were properly assessed, charges were transparent, pressure injuries were managed appropriately, and residents requiring higher levels of care were not improperly retained. The allegations were unsubstantiated and no deficiencies were cited.

The facility was found to be sanitary, appropriately furnished, and compliant with infection control protocols. No deficiencies were cited during this inspection visit.

The complaint investigation was triggered by allegations that a resident sustained multiple fractures, multiple pressure injuries, and multiple falls due to lack of supervision. After review of hospital and facility records and interviews with staff and family, the allegations were found to be unsubstantiated.

The investigation found no evidence to substantiate the allegations. Record reviews and interviews indicated that the resident did not sustain multiple fractures, pressure injuries, or falls while at the facility. All allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.