Inspection Reports for
Whispering Winds of Apple Valley

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated. Allegations included failure to dispense medication as prescribed, failure to address changes in resident condition timely, failure to notify responsible parties, and failure to maintain completed care plans. Evidence did not support these claims.

The investigation found no sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations. Interviews and record reviews confirmed that medications were dispensed as prescribed, residents were supervised and safe, authorized representatives were notified of condition changes, and care plans were properly maintained. No deficiencies were cited during the visit.

The complaint involved allegations that staff did not inform authorized representatives of new medication, residents had unexplained bruises due to lack of supervision, and staff did not notify authorized representatives of changes in residents' conditions. The investigation concluded these allegations were unsubstantiated.

The investigation found all allegations to be unsubstantiated based on interviews with residents and staff, and review of facility records. No deficiencies were cited during the visit.

The complaint involved two allegations: 1) staff allowed a resident to enter a contract without the resident's representative consent, and 2) staff transferred the resident to memory care without the resident's representative consent. Both allegations were found to be unsubstantiated based on evidence that the responsible party had legal authority and had signed required documents.

The investigation found that the resident could legally enter into financial agreements prior to mental incompetence and that the resident's responsible party had signed the necessary affidavits and consented to the transfer to memory care. The allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated and no deficiencies were cited during the visit.

The facility was found to be in compliance with all licensing requirements. No deficiencies were cited during the visit. The facility's operation, physical plant, food service, care and supervision, and record reviews met regulatory standards.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated, meaning there was not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violations occurred.

The investigation found all allegations to be unsubstantiated based on staff and resident interviews, observations, and document reviews. The facility was found to be adequately staffed, clean, properly supervised, with trained staff who administer medications correctly and respond promptly to resident needs.

The visit focused on reviewing and discussing amendments to the bedridden status application and hospice waiver increase request, with relevant regulations provided to the Executive Director to assist with the submission process.

The visit focused on reviewing and assisting with the resubmission of the bedridden status application and hospice waiver increase request, providing relevant regulations to the Executive Director for review and guidance.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated based on observations and interviews. Allegations included improper cleaning of residents' bathrooms and water containers, both found unsubstantiated.

The investigation found that bathrooms were properly cleaned based on inspection and interviews, and there was insufficient evidence to support the allegation regarding water container cleaning. The allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.

The facility was found to be operating within its licensed capacity and in compliance with regulations. No deficiencies were cited. The physical plant, food service, care and supervision, and record reviews were all satisfactory.

The facility was found to be operating within its approved capacity, clean, well-maintained, and safe for clients. No deficiencies were cited during the inspection.

The Memory Care Unit was found to be compliant with Title 22 regulations and fire safety requirements, including secured perimeter and delayed egress. Facility areas such as medication room, living room, dining area, kitchenette, bedrooms, bathrooms, sunroom, and courtyard were all reported to be in good repair and properly secured.

The Memory Care Unit was found to be in compliance with Title 22 regulations, secured with delayed egress and door alarms, and the facility was cleared for a total capacity of 116 non-ambulatory residents. All furniture and equipment in the unit were reported to be in good repair.

The memory care unit was still under construction with no residents present. The facility was cleared by fire safety for increased capacity. The unit was secured with controlled access, and the living areas and furniture were in good repair. No deficiencies were cited during the visit.

The memory care unit was still under construction and not yet occupied. The facility was observed to be in good repair with adequate seating, furniture, and safety features such as pull cords and handrails. No deficiencies were cited during this visit.

The facility was found to be in compliance with regulatory requirements, including infection control measures, operational standards, and safety protocols. No deficiencies were cited during the inspection.

The facility was found to be in compliance with regulatory requirements, including infection control measures, operational standards, and safety protocols. No deficiencies were cited during the inspection.

The complaint investigation was unsubstantiated, meaning there was insufficient evidence to prove the alleged violations occurred. Allegations included inadequate food service and improper charges related to Admissions Agreement fees.

The investigation included interviews with staff and residents and a records review. Due to conflicting statements and lack of corroborating evidence, all allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated.

The complaint involved three allegations: 1) staff not responding timely to call buttons, 2) inadequate food service, and 3) failure to communicate residents' care needs to authorized representatives. All allegations were found unsubstantiated after interviews and record reviews.

The investigation included interviews with residents and staff and review of records. All three allegations were determined to be unsubstantiated due to insufficient evidence to meet the preponderance of evidence standard.

The Licensing Program Analyst verified that the individual named in the removal letter was not present, employed, or residing at the facility. No deficiencies were cited during this visit.