Inspection Reports for
Brookdale Garden Grove

The complaint involved allegations that a resident sustained unexplained injury, had bed bugs and pests in their room, was not provided toiletries, and staff did not maintain residents' hygiene. The investigation included interviews with staff, residents, and responsible parties, review of service plans, progress notes, pest control invoices, and shower schedules. The allegations were found unsubstantiated.

The investigation found that although there were multiple falls by Resident #1 and a bed bug issue in their room that was addressed by the facility, there was insufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations. The facility provided appropriate medical care, pest control treatments, and toiletries, and residents reported no ongoing issues. The allegations were deemed unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The inspection was related to amended findings for Complaint Control Number 22-AS-20210726164318.

During the inspection, the Licensing Program Analyst and Staff #1 reviewed and discussed the previously delivered findings and the amended findings. The amended report was delivered to the facility representative.

The inspection was conducted for the purpose of delivering amended findings related to a complaint investigation identified by Complaint Control Number 22-AS-20210726164318.

During the inspection, the Licensing Program Analyst and facility staff reviewed and discussed previously delivered findings and amended findings. The amended report was delivered to the facility representative.

The complaint involved a resident reporting $850 missing from their room, alleging a staff member took it. The police reviewed evidence but were unable to confirm theft and closed the investigation.

The investigation found conflicting information regarding the alleged theft, and the police determined the money was lost and not stolen. No deficiencies were observed or cited during the inspection.

The visit was triggered by a self-reported incident of a fall resulting in a fracture. The investigation did not corroborate lack of care or supervision causing the fall, and the complaint was effectively addressed by updated care plans and additional assistance.

The inspection found that the facility regularly updated Resident #1's Personal Service Plans and added assistance as necessary to address the resident's chronic and evolving fall risk. No deficiencies were observed or cited during the inspection.

The investigation did not corroborate the presence of the missing money in the resident's room, and conflicting information was obtained regarding the alleged theft. No deficiencies were observed or cited during the inspection.

The complaint involved allegations that staff stole money from a resident and went through residents' personal belongings without consent. The allegations were investigated through interviews with residents and staff and record review. The findings were that the allegations were unfounded and could not be corroborated.

The investigation found that the allegation of staff stealing $70 from a resident was unfounded as the resident later found the money misplaced. The allegation of staff going through residents' personal belongings without consent was also unsubstantiated based on interviews and record review. Therefore, all allegations were deemed unfounded.

The complaint alleged that Resident #1 had gastrointestinal issues causing odor that affected other residents. The investigation included facility inspection, interviews with administrator, residents, and staff, and review of Resident #1's medical records. No corroborating evidence was found and the complaint was determined to be unfounded.

The investigation found no evidence to support the allegation. Inspections, interviews, and medical record reviews revealed no bad odors or gastrointestinal issues related to Resident #1, and no residents were bothered by odors or became ill. The allegation was found to be unfounded.

The complaint alleged inadequate supervision of a resident resulting in injury. The allegation was unsubstantiated based on interviews, document review, and observations.

The investigation found that 12 out of 12 resident interviews and 2 out of 2 staff interviews did not corroborate the allegation. Documentation showed the resident had a history of falls and sustained a bruise but no injury from the fall. The allegation was deemed unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The complaint alleged that the facility’s AC system was not properly maintained causing poor performance and uncomfortable temperatures. The investigation was unsubstantiated as no evidence confirmed the allegation.

The investigation found no health or safety issues related to the air conditioning system. Interviews with residents and staff, inspection of temperatures in resident rooms, and review of maintenance records showed that the facility has been diligently working to diagnose and fix the air conditioning issues, and residents were not impacted by uncomfortable temperatures. The allegation was deemed unsubstantiated due to lack of sufficient evidence.

The complaint alleged that a resident sustained a head injury and multiple falls due to lack of supervision. The investigation included interviews with staff, residents, and review of medical and care records. The allegations were unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The investigation found that while the resident had multiple falls, none resulted in serious injury or hospitalization. The facility had updated the resident's care plan and conducted staff training to address fall risks. There was insufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations, and the complaint was deemed unsubstantiated.

The complaint alleged that staff do not ensure the facility is free from mold. The allegation was found to be unsubstantiated after investigation including tours, interviews, and review of the facility.

The investigation included tours of the facility, resident interviews, and review of physical plant areas. Evidence showed a past water damage incident with adequate containment and no current mold presence. The allegation was found to be unsubstantiated due to insufficient evidence.

The visit was related to complaint control #22-AS-20240226102932 dated 2024-06-21. The report discussed was an amended complaint report.

The Licensing Program Analyst called the facility administrator to discuss the amended complaint report and conducted an exit interview by telephone. The administrator agreed to print, sign, and email the amended report and case management report back to the analyst.

The complaint alleged the facility did not provide requested records to an authorized representative. The allegation was unsubstantiated after investigation.

The investigation found that the facility did not provide records initially because the requestor was not an authorized representative until a change of POA was received. Records were subsequently provided, and the allegation was deemed unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence.

The visit was triggered by a complaint with Control Number 22-AS-20230919083629. No substantiation status is provided in the report.

During the visit, the Licensing Program Analyst interviewed a resident and obtained records related to the complaint. An exit interview was conducted with the Executive Director, and a copy of the report was provided.

The complaint involved allegations that a resident was inappropriately pushed, residents sustained unexplained injuries, staff spoke inappropriately to a resident, and residents sustained multiple falls. The investigation concluded these allegations were unsubstantiated.

The investigation included interviews with staff, residents, and witnesses, and a review of documentation. The allegations were found to be unsubstantiated due to lack of preponderance of evidence to prove the violations occurred.

The inspection found no health and safety issues; the facility was clean, organized, and well-stocked with food supplies. No deficiencies were cited during this inspection.

The complaint alleged the facility failed to provide a refund. The allegation was found to be unfounded, meaning it was false, could not have happened, or was without a reasonable basis.

The investigation revealed that the facility required payment of monthly rent despite the resident not admitting due to lack of a dementia diagnosis. The facility's admission agreement requires a thirty-day notice for a refund. The allegation was determined to be unfounded.

The inspection found no health and safety issues; the facility was clean, organized, and compliant with COVID-19 protocols. No deficiencies were cited during this inspection.