Inspection Reports for
Brookdale Auburn

The complaint investigation was conducted following allegations that staff failed to adequately supervise residents resulting in injury, did not meet incontinence needs, and did not assist with showering. The allegations were found to be unfounded based on interviews and record reviews.

The investigation included interviews, facility tour, and record reviews. All allegations were found to be unfounded, with evidence showing residents were adequately supervised, incontinence needs were met, and showering assistance was provided as required.

The facility was found to be clean, well-maintained, and in substantial compliance with regulations. No deficiencies were cited during this visit.

The facility was found to be clean, well-maintained, and in substantial compliance with regulations. No deficiencies were cited during this inspection.

The facility was found to be clean, well-maintained, and in substantial compliance with regulations. No deficiencies were cited during this inspection.

The facility was found to be clean, well-maintained, and in good condition with no deficiencies cited. Residents appeared active and in good spirits, and all safety and medication storage requirements were met.

The complaint investigation was initiated due to multiple allegations including residents being left soiled, insufficient staffing, unsafe food handling, poor facility maintenance, lack of hygiene products, chemical restraint use, medication mishandling, and staff yelling at residents. After interviews with 5 residents, 4 care staff, 1 housekeeper, 1 medication technician, and the administrator, and review of medications and facility conditions, all allegations were found to be unfounded.

The Licensing Program Analyst investigated all allegations including insufficient staffing, residents being left soiled, unsafe food handling, poor facility maintenance, lack of hygiene products, chemical restraint use, medication mishandling, and staff yelling at residents. All allegations were found to be unfounded based on interviews with residents, staff, and administrator, as well as facility observations and medication reviews.

The complaint included nine allegations: residents being left soiled for extended periods, insufficient staffing, unsafe food handling, poor facility maintenance, lack of hygiene products, chemical restraint use, medication mishandling, and staff yelling at residents. All allegations were investigated and found to be unfounded.

The Licensing Program Analyst investigated all allegations by interviewing residents, staff, and the administrator, as well as touring the facility and reviewing medication records. All allegations were found to be unfounded based on the evidence gathered during the investigation.

The inspection found no immediate health, safety, or personal rights violations. No deficiencies were cited as a result of the inspection.

The Licensing Program Analyst toured various areas of the facility and reviewed resident and staff files, medication records, and safety supplies. No immediate health, safety, or personal rights violations were observed, and no deficiencies were cited as a result of the inspection.

The complaint investigation was triggered by multiple allegations: staff not following physician's orders, infection control non-compliance, failure to notify responsible parties of resident illness, and refusal to clean residents' rooms. The findings were unsubstantiated due to conflicting evidence and lack of proof.

The investigation found conflicting information for all allegations, including issues related to COVID-19 positive residents and staff actions. Due to lack of preponderance of evidence, all allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.

The complaint involved multiple allegations: staff not following licensed physician's orders, noncompliance with infection control practices, failure to notify responsible parties of resident illness, and refusal to clean residents' rooms. The findings were unsubstantiated due to conflicting evidence and lack of preponderance of proof.

The investigation found conflicting information on all allegations including failure to follow physician's orders, infection control practices, notification of responsible parties, and cleaning refusals. Due to insufficient evidence and conflicting statements, all allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.

The complaint investigation addressed allegations that the facility was not stopping the spread of COVID-19, staff did not routinely change a resident's clothes, staff did not order or dispense prescribed medication as required, and staff did not provide a refund to the responsible party. All allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated or unfounded after review of staff interviews, documentation, and observations.

All allegations were found to be unsubstantiated or unfounded. The facility was found to have appropriate COVID-19 screening and isolation protocols, addressed resident clothing issues once aware, made attempts to obtain and dispense medication despite delays caused by external parties, and provided refunds according to their admission agreement.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated. Allegations included failure to stop COVID-19 spread, failure to routinely change resident's clothes, failure to order and dispense prescribed medication, and failure to provide a refund. Each allegation was investigated and found to be unsubstantiated or unfounded based on evidence and interviews.

The investigation found that the facility was routinely screening for COVID-19 and following isolation protocols, but it was not possible to determine if COVID was contracted at the facility; staff addressed resident clothing issues appropriately once aware; medication ordering and dispensing delays were due to issues between the doctor's office and pharmacy, not facility fault; and refund allegations were unfounded based on the facility's admission agreement. All allegations were unsubstantiated or unfounded.

An immediate exclusion was delivered to staff S1, prohibiting them from being present in or working with any residents of a facility licensed by the Department of Social Services. The exclusion was delivered to the facility Executive Director and read to S1, who then left the facility.

An immediate exclusion was delivered to staff S1, prohibiting them from being present in or working with residents of any facility licensed by the Department of Social Services. The exclusion was delivered to the facility Executive Director and read to S1, who then left the facility.

The facility was found to be in overall compliance with no deficiencies cited. The facility was clean, well-furnished, well-stocked with PPE and COVID tests, and residents participated in various activities.

The facility was found to be in overall compliance with no deficiencies cited. The facility was clean, well-furnished, well-stocked with PPE and COVID tests, and residents participated in various activities.

The visit was complaint-related due to an incident report alleging a staff member grabbed a resident's arm roughly causing bruising. The staff admitted to the action, was terminated by the staffing agency, and the facility reported the incident to the Ombudsman, Sheriff, and resident's POA. The complaint was substantiated and appropriately addressed.

The facility thoroughly investigated the incident, took appropriate immediate action including terminating the staff involved, and reported the incident to relevant authorities. No deficiencies were cited during this visit.

The visit was complaint-related due to an incident report alleging staff misconduct. The staff member admitted to grabbing the resident's arm, was terminated by the staffing agency, and the facility filed reports with the Community Care Licensing, Ombudsman, Placer County Sheriff, and notified the resident's POA.

The facility had thoroughly investigated the incident, took immediate and appropriate action including terminating the staff involved, and reported the incident to relevant authorities. No deficiencies were cited during this visit.

The complaint alleged that the facility overcharged a resident. The allegation was investigated and found to be unfounded.

The investigation found that the facility had appropriately repaid the responsible party as per the admission agreement/contract, and therefore the allegation that the facility overcharged the resident was unfounded.

Complaint was unsubstantiated. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there was not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation occurred.

The investigation found no evidence that the staff member was rude to residents, although the staff may have spoken gruffly with other staff. The complaint was determined to be unsubstantiated due to lack of evidence.

The complaint alleged that the facility over charged a resident. The allegation was investigated and found to be unfounded.

The investigation found that the facility had repaid the responsible party appropriately as per the admission agreement/contract. Therefore, the allegation that the facility over charged the resident was determined to be unfounded.

The complaint alleged that staff spoke rudely to residents. The investigation was unsubstantiated, meaning there was not a preponderance of evidence to prove the allegation occurred.

The investigation found no evidence that the staff was rude to residents, although the staff may have spoken gruffly with other staff. The complaint was determined to be unsubstantiated as there was insufficient evidence to prove the alleged violation occurred.

The facility was found to be in substantial compliance with no immediate health, safety, or personal rights violations observed. No deficiencies were cited as a result of the inspection.

The facility was found to be in substantial compliance with no immediate health, safety, or personal rights violations observed. No deficiencies were cited as a result of the inspection.

The facility staff conducted rounds as scheduled and responded promptly to the resident's call for help, immediately dialing 911 and contacting the resident's responsible party and primary physician. No deficiencies were cited during the visit.

The facility staff conducted rounds as scheduled and responded promptly to the resident's call for help, immediately dialing 911 and notifying the responsible party and primary physician. No deficiencies were cited during the visit.

The complaint was investigated and found to be unfounded, meaning the allegation was false, could not have happened, or was without reasonable basis.

Based on interviews and documentation review, the allegation was found to be unfounded as the preponderance of evidence standard was not met. The complaint was determined to be false or without reasonable basis.