Inspection Reports for
Mainplace Senior Living

The complaint investigation was substantiated. Allegations included lack of facility supervision causing serious injuries and multiple falls, and failure to provide timely medical attention. Evidence showed multiple unwitnessed falls of Resident #1, inadequate monitoring, failure to reassess care needs, and delayed emergency response violating facility policy.

The investigation substantiated that Resident #1 suffered multiple falls over approximately three months without documented re-evaluation of care needs, resulting in serious injuries requiring hospitalization. The facility failed to provide timely medical attention after a fall on December 20, 2024, causing a delay of over five hours in medical services. The facility violated its own policies and regulatory requirements.

The complaint was substantiated based on the preponderance of evidence from staff interviews and training record reviews. The licensee failed to ensure adequate staff training as alleged.

The investigation found that eight of eight direct care staff training records did not meet the required 40 hours of training, including specific dementia care and other required topics. Additionally, five of eight staff files lacked proof of first aid training. The allegation was substantiated based on staff interviews and record reviews.

The complaint investigation was substantiated based on interviews and document review. Allegations included Resident 1 sustaining multiple bruises and unsafe interactions among residents, including Resident 2's abusive behavior. The preponderance of evidence standard was met.

The investigation substantiated that Resident 1 sustained multiple bruises not consistent with falls, and Resident 2 engaged in unsafe behaviors including yelling and biting Resident 1. Violations of California Code of Regulations Title 22, Division 6 were cited.

The visit was conducted in conjunction with complaint control #22-AS-20230629084645.

The licensee failed to correct deficiencies related to personnel records training and orientation, specifically in-service training for direct care staff serving residents with dementia, as required by Title 22 regulations. The deficiencies remain uncured as of the visit date.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated overall. Allegations included failure to administer eye drops as prescribed, inadequate temperature, insufficient staffing, failure to provide admissions agreement, and failure to communicate health changes. The investigation included interviews, record reviews, and site tours. Two deficiencies were cited related to record keeping and timely access to records.

The investigation found that although some allegations had some basis, there was insufficient evidence to substantiate violations. Two Type B deficiencies were cited related to incomplete resident records and delayed provision of records to the authorized representative. Other allegations such as medication administration, temperature comfort, staffing levels, and communication were found unsubstantiated.

The complaint was substantiated. The allegation was that staff did not adequately supervise a resident, resulting in multiple wanderings from the facility. Evidence included incident reports and facility disclosures confirming the resident's unsupervised wanderings and the associated risks.

The investigation substantiated the allegation that staff failed to adequately supervise the resident, leading to multiple wanderings which posed an immediate health and safety risk. A deficiency was cited under Title 22 Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations.

The complaint investigation was triggered by allegations received on 06/29/2023 regarding inadequate staffing, residents being left unattended, and untrained staff providing care. The allegation of untrained staff was substantiated, while the others were unsubstantiated.

The investigation found conflicting information regarding staffing adequacy and residents being left unattended, resulting in those allegations being unsubstantiated. However, the allegation that untrained staff were providing care and supervision was substantiated based on interviews and staff training record reviews, revealing deficiencies in required dementia care training.

The complaint investigation involved two allegations: 1) the facility did not report theft of a resident's personal belongings, which was substantiated; 2) staff were going through residents' personal belongings, which was unsubstantiated. The substantiated allegation cited a violation of California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8.

The complaint that the facility did not report theft of a resident's personal belongings was substantiated, as the facility filed a police report 18 days after the discovery of stolen property valued at $400, exceeding the 36-hour reporting requirement. The allegation that staff were going through residents' personal belongings was unsubstantiated due to conflicting information and lack of preponderance of evidence.

The complaint investigation was substantiated. The resident sustained injuries from multiple falls, including one requiring hospitalization. Staff and the resident corroborated the falls. The resident's appraisal was not updated after the falls, and no meeting was arranged to discuss the significant change in condition.

The investigation found that the resident fell multiple times, including one fall requiring hospitalization, and the resident was not re-assessed or had their appraisal updated after these falls. The allegations were substantiated and deficiencies were cited related to failure to update the resident's appraisal and failure to arrange meetings regarding significant changes in the resident's condition.

The visit was related to Complaint # 22-AS-20230630114211 dated 6/30/23. The complaint was investigated during this 10-day complaint visit.

The Licensing Program Analyst observed that the 'See Something Say Something' poster was not posted in the main entryway as required, although Ombudsman posters were posted by the elevators. The Executive Director acknowledged the issue and agreed to correct it. A Technical Assistance Advisory Note was issued.

The visit was related to a 10-day complaint visit (Complaint # 22-AS-20230630114211 dated 6/30/23).

The See Something Say Something Poster was not posted in the main entryway as required, though Ombudsman posters were observed in other locations. The Executive Director acknowledged the issue and agreed to correct it. A Technical Assistance Advisory Note was issued.

The complaint was regarding illegal eviction. The allegation was substantiated after investigation. Resident 1 was issued a 30-day eviction notice for failure to follow house rules, with Licensing Department approval. The facility had court approval for unlawful detainer but had not issued it yet. Resident 2 had a change in level of care and was reappraised by the facility director.

The facility failed to provide proper 30-day eviction procedures and did not include the necessary information as required by Title 22 regulations. The allegation of illegal eviction was substantiated based on the preponderance of evidence.

The complaint investigation was unannounced and conducted by Licensing Program Analyst Patricia Velazquez. The complaint control number is 22-AS-20230317144713. The allegations included failure to administer medication, failure to provide resident's record to emergency personnel, failure to provide care and supervision, failure to maintain a clean and sanitary environment, inoperable call buttons, failure to follow reporting requirements, and failure to answer phone calls. The investigation found some allegations substantiated and others unsubstantiated.

The investigation substantiated allegations that the facility failed to provide a clean and sanitary environment, had inoperable resident call buttons, did not follow reporting requirements, and did not answer phone calls promptly. Other allegations related to medication administration, provision of resident records to emergency personnel, and care and supervision were unsubstantiated due to lack of sufficient evidence.

The complaint alleged that the resident's call button was in disrepair. The allegation was substantiated after investigation and interviews with staff and administration.

The investigation confirmed that the resident call button system was inoperable, with call button lights broken and ignored by staff. The allegation was substantiated based on interviews and observations.

The complaint investigation was substantiated for issues with dryers and cable service, but unsubstantiated for food menu adherence and administrator phone call responsiveness.

The complaint regarding nonoperational dryers and cable was substantiated, with dryers being nonoperational from 12/2/20 to 12/4/20 and cable being out from 12/31/20 to 1/5/21. The complaint about food menus not being followed and administrator phone calls was unsubstantiated. The facility followed Covid precautions affecting dining service and calls were returned after the administrator's absence.