Failure to Recognize and Thoroughly Investigate Sexual Abuse Allegation Involving a Minor
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to recognize and investigate an allegation of sexual abuse involving a minor resident and an adult resident, and to implement required protections and notifications. A self-report submitted by the former DON stated that a staff member overheard a cognitively intact resident (BIMS 15) say he had received sexual acts from another cognitively intact resident, and that both residents later acknowledged a consensual sexual encounter that occurred the previous day. The facility’s reports to the State Agency did not identify the younger resident as a minor and characterized the incident as a consensual encounter between two residents, rather than as potential sexual abuse. The facility’s 5‑day investigation concluded that abuse could not be substantiated and that the incident occurred between consenting individuals, despite the younger resident’s minor status and the nature of the sexual act. The incident was reported in a police report as a sexual assault that occurred in the evening, with the adult resident performing oral sex on the minor in a bathroom after being asked by him, and the adult resident acknowledging she knew his age. The police report documented that an LPN entered another resident’s room, saw the adult resident on her knees with the minor in the bathroom, and reported the incident to her supervisor; the adult resident was then moved to a separate wing. However, the facility’s internal investigation did not include a written statement from this LPN and instead documented that she had only seen the two residents together watching videos with no inappropriate behavior. Staff schedules showed that none of the six staff interviewed by the facility for its investigation had worked the night shift when the incident occurred. The facility also did not document interviews with the resident whose room was used or with other residents, including other minors, who might have had information about the event. Clinical records for both residents showed they were placed on change of condition monitoring for psychosocial well-being due to a “reported event,” and care plans were initiated the day after the incident, but the documentation did not specify the nature of the event. There was no evidence in the clinical record that protective interventions were implemented on the date the incident occurred to protect the minor from further abuse or to protect other residents from the alleged perpetrator. Staff interviews indicated that prior to the incident the two residents had been “hanging out together a lot,” that staff had warned the adult resident that the younger resident was a minor, and that the minor had freedom to roam the facility without direct supervision. There was no documentation of interventions to supervise or discourage their contact, or of increased supervision or monitoring of either resident prior to the incident. The facility did not report the incident to the Department of Child Services, and DCS later confirmed it only became involved when the minor was discharged to a hospital that reported the incident. The facility’s own abuse policy required prompt, thorough investigation of all abuse allegations, interviews with all relevant staff and residents on all shifts, review of all circumstances surrounding the incident, immediate protection of the alleged victim, increased supervision, and appropriate external reporting, but the actions taken did not meet these requirements as described in the report. An APS investigation later verified neglect of the adult resident, identified as a vulnerable adult with serious mental illness, and verified that a sexual assault occurred. The former DON stated that she did not consider the incident to be sexual abuse because she believed it was not unwanted and that the minor could consent to sexual activity with an adult, and she acknowledged that the incident was not reported or investigated until the following day after a staff member overheard the minor describe the sexual act. The current DON and current administrator, interviewed later, described that a minor cannot legally consent to sexual activity with an adult, that such an incident would be considered sexual abuse or statutory rape, and that such events require immediate reporting and investigation, but they were not employed at the time of the incident and did not participate in the original response. The report concludes that because the facility failed to recognize the incident as potential abuse, it did not initiate a thorough investigation, did not take appropriate corrective actions to protect residents from possible abuse, did not assess and monitor other residents at risk, and did not notify law enforcement and DCS as required, thereby placing residents at risk for harm.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
Failure to Investigate Allegation of Verbal Abuse: A volunteer reported that an activities staff member yelled at a resident during bingo and then yelled at the volunteer when she intervened. Interviews with the resident and volunteer confirmed the staff member spoke rudely and loudly to the resident, and the regional clinical director confirmed there was no evidence the verbal abuse allegation was reported or investigated.
Staff failed to remove alleged perpetrators from duty and fully investigate verbal abuse during two separate abuse allegations involving a resident and two CNAs. In the first event, a resident reported being intentionally pushed into a siderail during in-bed care, while multiple other residents described the same CNA as rough and having a bad attitude; despite this, the CNA completed the shift and worked additional days while the abuse investigation was open. In the second event, the same resident alleged that another CNA pushed his leg and made a profane, threatening statement, but the facility’s investigation did not address the verbal abuse allegation, and that CNA was also allowed to finish the shift and work subsequent days during the investigation. Timecard records and interviews with the administrator and DON confirmed that alleged perpetrators continued working with unrestricted access to residents while abuse allegations were under investigation, leading surveyors to identify immediate jeopardy and substandard quality of care.
The facility failed to investigate multiple major injuries and an allegation of sexual abuse involving three residents with severe cognitive impairment and significant medical conditions. One resident, dependent for transfers, was found on the floor after attempting to get out of bed and was later found to have bilateral femur fractures. Another resident with Parkinson’s disease was found on the floor after a wheelchair alarm sounded and was later diagnosed with a femur fracture following complaints of leg pain. A third resident, described as very independent, triggered a bed alarm and was found kneeling by a recliner, later requiring ORIF for fractures of the right 4th and 5th metacarpals. In each case, the ADM acknowledged awareness of the fractures, stated there was no belief of neglect or abuse, and confirmed that no investigation into the cause of the injuries or the alleged abuse was initiated or documented.
Failure to investigate allegations of resident-to-resident sexual inappropriateness: A resident with dementia and TBI was documented as being inappropriate with another resident, and psych notes later described increased sexually inappropriate behaviors toward other residents. Staff interviews showed the resident had been observed touching others and needing frequent redirection, but the DON, ADON, and Administrator acknowledged the facility did not complete an investigation or recognize the allegation as possible abuse.
A resident with moderately impaired cognition and a preferred language other than English developed bilateral wrist discoloration and swelling during ADL care when a CNA reported the resident was resisting and bumped her wrists on a wheelchair. Documentation noted the injury, assessment, and treatment, but the care plan was not updated. A family member reported that the resident said staff grabbed her hand and tried to force care, and this was reported to nursing and administration. Despite this allegation, the facility did not conduct a full abuse investigation per its policy: the Social Service Director did not interview the resident or other cognitively intact residents or complete a trauma assessment, and the Administrator/DON confirmed that only the involved CNA and RN were interviewed before concluding no abuse occurred.
The facility failed to report the results of an abuse allegation investigation within the required five working days. An SBAR note documented that two residents in the lobby began cussing at each other while one was preparing to leave for dialysis, and that one resident punched the other on the body as she was on the gurney leaving. The Administrator confirmed that while the initial SOC 341 was sent on the date of the incident, the 5-day summary of the investigation was not sent to the state agency until several days later, exceeding the timeframe required by the facility’s abuse reporting policy.
Failure to Investigate Allegation of Verbal Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure an allegation of verbal abuse was thoroughly investigated for resident #55. A complaint/grievance form documented that a volunteer reported activities staff member #1 yelled at resident #55 during bingo after the resident called out bingo, and the volunteer stated the staff member continued yelling at the resident and then yelled at the volunteer when she intervened. The grievance also noted that two residents reported the activities staff member yelled at them all the time and spoke to them the same way during bingo. Interviews confirmed the incident involved rude and loud comments by the activities staff member toward resident #55 during bingo, including telling the resident to stop interrupting and making a smart-ass remark. Resident #55 stated the interaction upset him/her and that the staff member was later terminated. A volunteer corroborated hearing the staff member speak loudly and rudely to the resident and then yell at the volunteer. Review of the state survey agency incident database showed no evidence the allegation was reported, and the regional clinical director confirmed the facility had no evidence the verbal abuse allegation was investigated.
Failure to Remove Alleged Abusers and Investigate Verbal Abuse During Abuse Allegations
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to protect residents during investigations of two separate abuse allegations made by one resident against two CNAs and failed to investigate an allegation of verbal abuse. In the first incident, the resident alleged that a CNA pushed him over "so the fuxx hard" while cleaning him on the evening shift that his head hit the siderail and that it was done on purpose. The resident contacted 911 the evening of the incident and police responded to the facility, indicating staff were aware of the allegation that same evening. The DON assessed the resident with no injury noted. Staff interviews documented that the resident became verbally and physically abusive during care, scratched staff, and that his head "tapped" the rail but not hard or on purpose. The resident, however, told another CNA that the aide had rolled him too hard, his eye hit the rail, and his legs came out of the bed, and he repeated similar details to the DON, stating the aide came in with an attitude and rolled him extra hard. As part of the facility’s internal investigation of the first incident, 12 residents were interviewed about the CNA’s care. Several residents reported that the CNA was rough, pulled them over hard, almost threw them on the floor when turning them in bed, had a bad attitude, and one resident did not want the CNA in her room. Despite these concerns and the resident’s allegation of being intentionally pushed, the CNA was allowed to complete her shift and to work subsequent scheduled shifts while the investigation was ongoing. Timecard records showed that the CNA worked the night of the incident and additional shifts on the following days and was paid for those hours. Although a suspension notice was later dated and an involuntary termination recorded, the contemporaneous documentation and time records demonstrated that the CNA remained in the building and had access to residents during the open abuse investigation. In the second incident, the same resident alleged that another CNA verbally and physically abused him during ADL care. The resident reported that the CNA pushed his leg down harder and stated, "I want to fuck with you now," and he called 911 to report that a staff member pushed his leg. Four staff members present in the room provided statements that no one harmed him, describing that his leg was lifted to remove a pillow and dirty sheets and then set down softly, after which he began yelling, accusing the CNA of cracking his leg and hip, cursing staff, and digging his fingernails into a staff member’s arm. Police interviewed staff and concluded that no harm was done to the resident. The facility’s investigation included resident safety interviews, one of which noted a resident did not feel safe on certain shifts due to staff. However, the verbal abuse allegation (the reported statement "I want to fuck with you now") was not addressed in the facility’s investigation, and the CNA involved was allowed to complete her shift and work additional scheduled days while the investigation was in progress. The administrator later acknowledged that she did not instruct the CNA to go home and that everyone "stayed kinda together" during the investigation. These actions and inactions resulted in surveyors identifying immediate jeopardy and substandard quality of care due to residents not being protected from alleged perpetrators during abuse investigations.
Failure to Investigate Major Injuries and Alleged Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to initiate and document investigations into multiple major injuries and an allegation of sexual abuse, as required for all alleged violations involving abuse and injuries of unknown source. For one resident with hemiplegia, hemiparesis, and severely impaired cognition (BIMS score of 6), nursing notes documented that his roommate activated the call bell after the resident fell while attempting to get out of bed by himself. He was found on the floor between his bed and the window, reported knee pain with a popping sensation, and was sent to the ER. On return from the hospital, he was noted to have bilateral femur fractures, immobilizing braces on both legs, and was placed on comfort care due to bones not being strong enough for surgery. The Administrator acknowledged awareness of the bilateral femur fractures, stated he did not believe neglect or abuse caused the injury, and confirmed he did not investigate the cause of this major injury. Another resident with Parkinson’s disease and a BIMS score of 0 (rarely/never understood) was documented in an incident note as sitting in a wheelchair in the dining room when his alarm sounded; he was found supine on the floor, denied hitting his head or injury, and was assisted back into the chair with no signs of injury noted. Several days later, nursing notes recorded that CNAs reported the resident complaining of left leg pain when getting him out of bed. On assessment, he had tenderness and wincing with movement of the left leg but was able to bear weight. The MD was notified, an x-ray was ordered, and the resident was transported for imaging, which revealed a femur fracture for which surgery was not pursued. The Administrator stated he was aware of the femur fracture, did not feel neglect or abuse caused the major injury, and did not investigate the cause of the injury. A third resident with COPD, scoliosis, and severely impaired cognition (BIMS score of 7) had an incident note documenting that her bed alarm sounded and staff found her in a kneeling position leaning into her recliner after she attempted to get up from bed to go to the bathroom, stating her walker “didn't go where she was going.” She complained of left knee, left elbow, and right pinky pain, with no visible injury except an abrasion on the right ring finger. A later nursing note documented that she underwent ORIF of fractures of the right fourth and fifth metacarpals at a hospital and returned from surgery the same day. The Administrator reported being aware of the fractures, described the resident as very independent and wanting to wander the facility, stated he did not feel neglect or abuse caused the major injury, and confirmed he did not investigate the cause of the injury. Across these three residents, the facility did not initiate or document investigations into the causes of the major injuries or the related allegation of sexual abuse, nor did it determine causation or responsible parties as required.
Failure to Investigate Allegations of Resident-to-Resident Sexual Inappropriateness
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that allegations made by residents were recognized as possible abuse by staff and that all allegations were investigated for Resident ID #41, who was admitted with diagnoses including dementia and traumatic brain injury. A facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, stated that an immediate investigation is warranted when suspicion of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or reports of abuse, neglect, or exploitation occur. A progress note written by an RN documented that a resident reported Resident ID #41 was being inappropriate with another resident. Subsequent records included psychiatric evaluations stating the resident was being seen due to increased sexually inappropriate behaviors toward other residents and that sexual impulses may present an unsafe environment for other patients in the facility. Staff interviews revealed that Resident ID #41 had been observed touching other residents' shoulders and hands and required frequent redirection. The RN who documented the incident stated the behavior involved an attempted hug without contact and that both residents were separated and assessed, while the ADON and DON acknowledged they were unaware of the behavior or that the facility had not investigated the allegations. The Administrator also acknowledged that an investigation had not been completed to determine what sexually inappropriate behavior had occurred and that staff did not identify the allegation as possible abuse or investigate it immediately.
Failure to Investigate Allegation of Abuse After Resident Wrist Injury
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to investigate an allegation of potential abuse after a resident sustained bilateral wrist injuries during ADL care by a CNA. The resident, who had moderately impaired cognition with a BIMS score of 11 and whose preferred language was Korean, was admitted with altered mental status. On the date of the incident, an incident report documented that the CNA informed an RN that the resident developed discoloration and swelling of both wrists during clothing changes when the resident was resisting care and bumped her wrists against the wheelchair during transfer. A nurse’s note recorded similar information, stating that the resident developed bilateral wrist discoloration and swelling after an accident during clothing changes while the resident was resisting, and that ice was applied and an x-ray was ordered to rule out fracture. The resident’s care plan, which addressed discoloration, was not updated after the wrist injuries occurred. The facility did not conduct a comprehensive abuse investigation as required by its policy. The CEO acknowledged there was no investigation for the incident and only produced a grievance document. A family member reported that the resident told her staff grabbed her hand and tried to force her when she refused to be changed, and that this allegation was reported to a nurse and the prior Administrator. The Social Service Director stated that, in abuse investigations, she typically interviews the resident and five other cognitively intact residents and completes a trauma assessment, but she did not interview this resident, did not interview other residents, and did not complete a trauma assessment related to this incident. She reported that the facility held a meeting and determined abuse did not occur but was unsure how that conclusion was reached. The Administrator, who was the DON at the time, stated that after allegations of abuse they immediately start an investigation, but in this case they only interviewed the involved CNA and RN and relied on the CNA’s denial of abuse and explanation that the injury occurred during ADL care, without interviewing the resident, witnesses, or others as required by the facility’s abuse, neglect, and exploitation policy.
Failure to Timely Report Abuse Investigation Results
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the results of an abuse allegation investigation were reported to the state agency within the required five working days. Resident 1, who had diagnoses including a right shoulder fracture and end-stage renal failure, was involved in an altercation documented in an SBAR note dated 4/13/26, which stated that the resident and her roommate were in the lobby, began cussing at each other while the roommate was preparing to leave for dialysis, and that when Resident 1 was on the gurney leaving, the roommate punched Resident 1 on the body. The Administrator confirmed that the initial SOC 341 report was sent on 4/13/26, but the 5-day summary of the abuse allegation investigation was not sent to CDPH until 4/21/26. This reporting timeframe did not comply with the facility’s policy titled “Reporting Alleged Violations of Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Mistreatment,” which requires that results of all investigations of alleged violations be reported within five working days of the incident. The deficiency centers on the delay between the incident date and the submission of the 5-day investigation summary, as verified through interview with the Administrator and review of the email to CDPH, demonstrating that the facility did not adhere to its own policy and the expected reporting timeframe for abuse investigation results.
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release June 24, 2026) and official state health department websites — never guesswork.
Trusted by long-term care providers and associations.
