Inspection Reports for
Westmont of Morgan Hill

The inspection found the facility to be in compliance with no deficiencies cited. Resident files, medication records, staff files, and safety equipment were all complete and functional. The facility maintained proper environmental conditions and emergency preparedness.

The complaint included allegations that staff were not adhering to residents' care plans and not addressing ant infestations. After interviews with staff and residents, and review of records, the allegations were found to be unfounded.

The investigation found that staff were providing timely care and supervision to residents, with no evidence of residents being left in wheelchairs all day. The facility addressed ant issues promptly through maintenance and a third-party vendor. The allegations were determined to be unfounded with no deficiencies cited.

The complaint alleged that a resident was physically assaulted and not properly cared for, including not receiving medication, bathing, or escorting assistance. The investigation included interviews with multiple staff members, residents, and review of incident reports and service plans. The allegations were found to be unfounded.

Based on interviews with staff, residents, and review of records, the investigation found no evidence supporting the allegations. The department concluded the allegations were unfounded, meaning they were false or without reasonable basis.

The visit was triggered by a complaint incident report regarding a resident eloping from the facility. The incident was substantiated by the facility's report and further investigation was deemed necessary.

The resident was found outside the community and safely returned with no visible injuries. The Licensing Program Analyst interviewed staff and requested relevant documentation. The incident requires further investigation.

The complaint included allegations that facility staff told a resident to use their diaper rather than assist them to the bathroom, did not offer water resulting in dehydration, failed to safeguard resident's personal belongings, and handled a resident roughly. These allegations were found to be unsubstantiated due to lack of evidence.

The investigation found insufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations. Contradictory information and lack of proof led to the conclusion that the allegations were unsubstantiated.

The inspection found no deficiencies; resident files and medication records were complete, fire safety equipment and emergency plans were in place and functional, and environmental conditions such as temperatures and food storage met standards.

The inspection found no deficiencies cited under California Code of Regulations, Title 22, but advisory notes were provided. Some egress doors in the memory care area were in disrepair and did not alarm, and the facility took immediate corrective actions while scheduling repairs. Medication record discrepancies were corrected promptly. Staff training and emergency preparedness were reviewed and found adequate.

The complaint alleged that staff did not file resident (R1)'s insurance paperwork for reimbursement since January 2023. The allegation was found unsubstantiated after investigation.

The investigation found that the allegation was unsubstantiated based on interviews, record review, and observation. The facility was notified of the issue in June 2023 and acted immediately. There was no written agreement that the facility was responsible for filing insurance paperwork, and no deficiencies were cited.

The complaint alleged that staff did not allow resident (R1) to have visitors. The allegation was found unsubstantiated after investigation, indicating insufficient evidence to prove the violation occurred.

The investigation found that the resident had a signed visitation list specifying who was allowed and not allowed to visit, and that the resident refused to see visitors. Based on interviews, record review, and observation, the allegation was unsubstantiated and no deficiencies were cited.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated. Allegations included delayed response to call buttons, unmet dietary requests, and failure to maintain resident rooms. Interviews with staff and administrators, record reviews, and facility work orders showed no preponderance of evidence to prove the allegations occurred.

After interviews, record reviews, and investigation, there was insufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations. The facility follows a pre-set menu and addresses special dietary needs, call system issues were related to an outdated signal system replaced in 2022, and maintenance work orders were completed timely based on priority.

The complaint alleged that a resident suffered from dehydration. The investigation included interviews with three hospice care staff and review of medical and hospice records. The allegation was determined to be unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

Based on interviews with hospice care staff and record review, the allegation of dehydration was unsubstantiated. The resident was under hospice care, visited regularly, and there was no evidence that facility staff neglected or refused to provide food or fluids. No deficiencies were cited.

The complaint alleged that staff discontinued resident services without adequate notice. The investigation determined the allegation was unsubstantiated based on interviews and records review.

The investigation found that the allegation was unsubstantiated. Residents confirmed they continued receiving all services, and the discontinuation of water bottle supply was communicated through resident council meetings and memos. The supply of water bottles was a courtesy during communicable disease outbreaks and not part of resident services. Multiple hydration stations were available.

No deficiencies were cited during the visit. Recommendations were made to improve infection control practices related to COVID-19, including use of PPE and isolation room protocols. The facility had 8 COVID-19 positive residents and 2 COVID-19 positive staff at the time of the visit.

The complaint alleged staff caused injury to a resident and pushed the resident, resulting in bruising and swelling. The investigation included interviews with staff and review of resident records. The allegations were found unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The investigation found that the allegations of staff causing injury and pushing the resident were unsubstantiated based on record reviews and staff interviews. The resident sustained bruising and a swollen breast, but no evidence showed staff caused the injury.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated. Allegations included failure to provide agreed services, activities, adequate food and water, and toileting assistance. Multiple unannounced visits and interviews were conducted between 07/25/2019 and 10/18/2019. Evidence did not support the allegations.

Based on observations, interviews with residents, visitors, and staff, and records review, the Department found the allegations to be unsubstantiated. Activities were provided daily, residents had adequate food and water, and toileting needs were met. No evidence supported the complaint allegations.

The LPAs reviewed resident records, interviewed staff, and toured the facility. R1 had transitioned from Assisted Living to Memory Care and exhibited exiting behaviors. Staff were monitoring the transition and had notified family and primary care provider of changes. A care conference was held and staff were directed to call 911 in emergencies. No citations were issued per California Code of Regulations Title 22.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated. Allegations included unmet resident needs, failure to prevent resident altercations, visitor restrictions, lack of assistance with medical and dental appointments, poor food quality, and failure to safeguard residents' personal property. Interviews and observations did not provide a preponderance of evidence to prove violations occurred.

After interviews with residents, staff, and witnesses, review of records, and observations, the investigation found that although the allegations may have occurred or be valid, there was insufficient evidence to substantiate the complaints. The facility was generally found to be meeting resident needs, preventing altercations, allowing visitors, assisting with medical appointments, serving good quality food, and safeguarding personal property. No deficiencies were cited.

The resident (R1) was observed to be doing well with no injuries despite recent falls. The resident's care plan and physician's report were reviewed, and no deficiencies were cited during the visit.

The complaint was unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations occurred.

The investigation found no evidence to substantiate the allegations. Residents were not locked in rooms, needs were met including timely changing of soiled bedding, and the facility did not smell like urine according to staff statements.

Recommendations were made to the facility to reach out to the local county health department for assistance regarding incomplete vaccinations and to contact occupational medicine clinics or industrial hygienists for Fit Testing.

The Licensing Program Analyst and Clinical Consultant made recommendations to promote social distancing in the break room and community elevator, including signage and limited occupancy.