Inspection Reports for
Oakmont of San Jose

The complaint investigation was triggered by allegations that the facility increased resident fees without proper notice, charged fees for services not provided, and failed to notify a resident's physician of a change in condition. The fee increase allegation was substantiated, the fees for services not provided allegation was unfounded, and the failure to notify physician allegation was unsubstantiated.

The investigation substantiated that the facility increased a resident's fees without providing the required written notice within two business days. The allegation that the facility charged fees for services not provided was found to be unfounded. The allegation regarding failure to notify the resident's physician of a change in condition was unsubstantiated due to insufficient evidence.

The complaint investigation was substantiated for the allegation that the facility increased resident's fees without proper notice. The allegations that the facility charged fees for services not provided and did not notify the resident's physician of a change in condition were found to be unfounded and unsubstantiated respectively.

The investigation substantiated that the facility increased a resident's fees without proper written notice within two business days as required. The allegation of charging fees for services not provided was found to be unfounded, and the allegation regarding failure to notify the physician was unsubstantiated due to insufficient evidence.

The complaint investigation was substantiated for allegations related to staff not following COVID-19 protocols and unsanitary medication administration. Allegations that staff were providing care while ill and not performing hand hygiene were unsubstantiated. The allegation that the administrator was not disclosing COVID-19 cases truthfully to family members was unfounded.

The investigation substantiated allegations that staff failed to follow COVID-19 protocols and administered medication unsanitarily, posing immediate health and safety risks. Other allegations, including staff working while ill, failure to perform hand hygiene, and administrator not disclosing COVID-19 cases truthfully, were found to be unsubstantiated or unfounded.

The complaint investigation was substantiated for allegations that staff did not follow Covid-19 protocols and administered unsanitary medication. Allegations that staff provided care while ill and failed to perform hand hygiene were unsubstantiated. The allegation that the administrator did not disclose COVID-19 cases truthfully to family members was unfounded.

The investigation substantiated that staff failed to follow Covid-19 protocols and administered medication unsanitarily, posing immediate health and safety risks. Other allegations, including staff providing care while ill, failing to perform hand hygiene when assisting with medications, and the administrator not disclosing COVID-19 cases truthfully, were found unsubstantiated or unfounded.

The complaint investigation was substantiated based on interviews and records review. Allegations included inaccurate resident records and unauthorized disclosure of confidential resident information.

The investigation substantiated that the facility failed to maintain accurate resident records for a resident (R1), including incorrect primary physician information and missing diagnosis. Additionally, staff disclosed confidential COVID-19 test results of another resident (R2) to an unauthorized person, posing immediate health, safety, or personal rights risks.

The complaint was substantiated based on interviews and records review showing the facility increased fees after move-in contrary to the admission agreement.

The investigation substantiated that the facility changed the agreed-upon fee after the resident moved in, increasing the rate from $3,179 to $4,148 effective 2/1/2019, which violated the admission agreement requirements.

The complaint investigation was substantiated for the allegation that staff did not respond timely to residents' alert calls, with evidence including call logs showing numerous calls with response times over 10 minutes and resident interviews confirming delayed responses. Other allegations were unsubstantiated or unfounded based on interviews, observations, and record reviews.

The investigation substantiated that staff did not respond timely to resident call alerts due to insufficient staffing, resulting in a cited deficiency. Other allegations including cold food, staff sleeping on duty, leaving residents unattended, uncomfortable environment, and improper medication training were unsubstantiated with no deficiencies cited. An allegation regarding staff performing duties without appropriate skilled professional present was also unfounded.

The complaint was substantiated. The allegation was that the facility did not adhere to the residents' admission agreement by changing the fee after move-in.

The investigation substantiated that the facility changed the agreed-upon fee after the resident moved in, increasing the rate from $3,179 to $4,148 effective 2/1/2019, which violated the admission agreement.

The complaint investigation was substantiated for delayed staff response to resident alerts due to understaffing. Other complaints about food temperature, staff sleeping, supervision, environment comfort, and medication training were unsubstantiated. An allegation about staff performing duties without appropriate skilled professional was unfounded.

The investigation substantiated that staff did not respond timely to residents' pendant alerts due to insufficient staffing, citing a deficiency under CCR 87411(a). Other allegations including cold food, staff sleeping on duty, residents left unattended, uncomfortable environment, and improper medication training were unsubstantiated with no deficiencies cited. A separate allegation regarding staff performing duties without an appropriate skilled professional was found unfounded.

The complaint was substantiated. The allegation was that a resident was unlawfully evicted while in care. The investigation confirmed that the eviction notice was unlawful and invalid due to procedural deficiencies.

The investigation substantiated the allegation that the facility issued an unlawful 30-Day Notice of Termination of Residence Agreement. The eviction notice was found invalid due to incorrect 30th day calculation and missing required information such as the address of the State Local Long Term Care Ombudsman and resources for alternative housing and care options.

The complaint was substantiated. The allegation was that a resident was unlawfully evicted while in care. The investigation found the eviction notice invalid due to incorrect 30th day calculation and missing information about the State Local Long Term Care Ombudsman and housing resources.

The investigation substantiated the allegation that the facility issued an unlawful 30-Day Notice of Termination of Residence Agreement. The eviction notice was found invalid due to missing required information and incorrect dates, posing an immediate risk to persons in care.

The complaint investigation was substantiated for failure to seek timely medical attention for resident (R1), resulting in hospitalization with a life-threatening infection and virus. Other complaints regarding medication dispensing, unauthorized recording, retaliation, and showering needs were unsubstantiated or unfounded.

The investigation substantiated the allegation that the facility failed to seek timely medical attention for a resident (R1), resulting in hospitalization and an immediate civil penalty. Other allegations including medication dispensing errors, unauthorized recording, retaliation, and unmet showering needs were found to be unsubstantiated or unfounded. One deficiency was cited related to failure to ensure timely medical attention.

The visit was triggered by a complaint investigation (control number: 26-AS-20231227155220) regarding delayed medication administration and failure to notify physician of resident's change in condition. Deficiencies were substantiated and a civil penalty was assessed.

The facility failed to notify a resident's physician immediately of a change in condition and delayed administration of PRN medication by about two hours, posing immediate health, safety, and personal rights risks. Deficiencies were cited under California Code of Regulations, Title 22, and a civil penalty of $250 was assessed for repeat violations.

The visit was triggered by a complaint investigation (control number: 26-AS-20231227155220) regarding delayed medication administration and failure to notify the physician of a resident's change in condition. The complaint was substantiated with deficiencies cited.

The facility failed to provide a resident (R1) with a PRN medication in a timely manner, delaying administration by about 2 hours, and did not immediately notify the resident's physician of a change in condition, posing immediate health, safety, and personal rights risks.

The complaint investigation was substantiated for allegations including resident pressure injury due to staff neglect, failure to administer medication, leaving resident in soiled diapers, unmet resident needs, and inadequate staffing in memory care. Allegations of inadequate food service and unqualified staff were unsubstantiated or unfounded.

The investigation substantiated several allegations including resident pressure injury due to staff neglect, failure to administer medication as prescribed, leaving resident in soiled diapers, unmet resident needs, and inadequate staffing in memory care. Some allegations such as inadequate food service and unqualified staff were unsubstantiated or unfounded. Deficiencies were cited with plans of correction required.

The complaint investigation was substantiated for allegations including resident pressure injury due to neglect, medication administration failures, inadequate diaper changing, and insufficient staffing in memory care. Allegations of inadequate food service and unqualified staff were unsubstantiated or unfounded.

The investigation substantiated several allegations including a resident sustaining a pressure injury due to staff neglect, failure to administer prescribed medication properly, leaving a resident in soiled diapers for extended periods, and inadequate staffing in memory care. Other allegations such as inadequate food service and unqualified staff were found to be unsubstantiated or unfounded.

The complaint investigation was substantiated for failure to seek timely medical attention which resulted in resident hospitalization. Other complaints regarding medication dispensing, unauthorized recording, retaliation, and showering needs were investigated and found unfounded or unsubstantiated.

The investigation substantiated the allegation that the facility failed to seek timely medical attention for a resident (R1), resulting in hospitalization and a serious bodily injury, leading to a cited deficiency and a $500 immediate civil penalty. Other allegations including medication dispensing errors, unauthorized recording of residents, retaliation, and unmet showering needs were found to be unfounded or unsubstantiated with no deficiencies cited.

The complaint was substantiated based on evidence that staff did not administer PRN medication as prescribed and failed to notice and report a resident's change of condition related to constipation. The investigation included interviews with 9 staff members and review of medical and facility records.

The investigation substantiated that staff failed to assist resident R1 with prescribed PRN medication for constipation after noting no bowel movement for over 3 days, and failed to notify the resident's physician and family member, posing immediate health and safety risks.

The complaint was substantiated based on evidence that staff did not administer PRN medication as prescribed and failed to notice and report a resident's change of condition related to constipation. The investigation included interviews with 9 staff members and review of medical and medication records.

The investigation substantiated that staff did not assist resident R1 with prescribed PRN medication for constipation after noting no bowel movement for over 3 days, and failed to document or notify the resident's physician and family, posing immediate health and safety risks.

The complaint alleged the facility did not report suspected abuse within 24 hours to the Department and appropriate agencies. The allegation was substantiated based on interviews, record review, and observation. The facility did not inform local law enforcement about suspected rough handling of resident R1 by staff S1 on 12/02/2023 within the required timeframe.

The investigation substantiated the allegation that the facility failed to report suspected physical abuse of a resident by staff to local law enforcement and the licensing department within 24 hours, posing an immediate health and safety risk. A deficiency was cited under California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 87211(c).

The complaint alleged that the facility did not report suspected abuse within 24 hours to the Department and appropriate agencies. The allegation was substantiated based on interviews, record review, and observation.

The investigation substantiated that the facility failed to report suspected physical abuse of a resident by staff within 24 hours to local law enforcement and the licensing department, posing an immediate health and safety risk. A deficiency was cited under California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 87211(c).

The visit was complaint-related, investigating an incident and death report for resident (R1). The complaint was substantiated by findings of regulatory non-compliance related to resident falls and notification failures.

The facility failed to conduct a re-assessment of resident (R1) after the first fall in memory care and did not notify the resident's family or physician after the second fall. Resident (R1) sustained three falls, with the third fall resulting in death. Deficiencies were cited for failure to comply with California Code of Regulations, Title 22.

The visit was based on an incident report and death report for resident R1. The complaint investigation substantiated that the facility failed to conduct required re-assessment and notification after multiple falls, contributing to resident harm.

The investigation found that the facility failed to re-assess resident R1 after a fall in memory care and did not notify the resident's family or physician after a second fall on the same day, posing immediate health, safety, and personal rights risks.

The complaint investigation was substantiated for failure to respond to resident call buttons but unfounded for failure to provide documents to authorized representatives.

The investigation substantiated that staff failed to respond to resident call alarms, with 116 instances recorded where calls were not answered. However, the allegation regarding withholding documents from authorized representatives was found to be unfounded after review of records and interviews.

The Licensing Program Analyst observed that the previously cited deficiency and technical violations were corrected, including medication logs, personnel records, and emergency supplies. No issues were noted during this pre-licensing inspection, and the facility was deemed ready to be licensed pending final approval.

The previously cited deficiency and technical violations were observed to be corrected. No issues were noted during this pre-licensing inspection, and the facility was found ready to be licensed pending final approval by the Central Application Bureau.

The facility was toured and inspected for compliance with safety, medication storage, and resident accommodations. A deficiency and technical violation were cited, and the facility was found not ready to be licensed, with a follow-up visit planned after corrections.

The facility was found to have one deficiency and a technical violation during the pre-licensing inspection. The facility was not ready to be licensed and a follow-up visit will be conducted once corrections are made.