A & M Assisted Living of Scottsdale, LLC.

“Based on documentation review, observation, and interview, the manager failed to ensure a food menu included any food substitutions no later than the morning of the day of meal service with a food substitution. Findings include: 1. In observation R1 was served a bowl of soup for lunch. 2. In documentation review, the facility's posted menu on Monday, September 23, 2024, indicated lunch was Stuffed Peppers, Potato chips, Pickles and Jello. The menu documented the meal for the prior day, Sunday, was to include Roast turkey, Green Beans and Mash Potatoes for lunch and Baked potatoes, sour cream Canadian bacon and mixed vegetables for dinner. 3. During an interview, E1 reported Sundays lunch was ham salad with corn and carrots, and the dinner meal served was chicken legs. 4. During an interview, E1 and E2 acknowledged the lunch and dinner meal served on Sunday, September 22nd, and the lunch meal served on Monday, September 23, 2024, was not the same as what was documented on the menu, and the substitutions were not documented.”

“Based on observation and interview, the manager failed to ensure the premises were free from a condition or situation that could pose a hazard. The deficient practices posed a safety risk to residents, who resided in the facility. Findings include: 1. During an environmental inspection with E1, the Compliance Officer (CO) observed the inside and outside of the facility was in the midst of a remodel. The kitchen was missing cabinets, construction tools and equipment were observed in the kitchen, a bathroom and an unoccupied bedroom, and cords were across the floor. Several "workers" were observed inside and outside of the house. 2. During an interview, E1 and E2 acknowledged the facility was in the midst of a remodel, and had an ambulatory resident. E2 acknowledged there was construction going, including the kitchen, bathroom and addition of bedrooms, with tools and equipment in the facility, which could pose a hazard. 3. During an environmental inspection, the CO observed the laundry room door was open, and the door to the garage was unlocked and allowed access to the garage; the garage door was open, and allowed access to the street. 4. During an interview, E1 and E2 acknowledged the facility had an ambulatory resident, who received directed care services, and the unlocked and open doors could pose a hazard. 5. During an environmental inspection, the CO observed R2 and R3 had bed rails on the bed. 6. During an interview, E1 reported [E1] didn't know why the rails were on the bed, "they came that way." E1 reported R2 and R3 were confined to the bed, and unable to walk. E1 and E2 were unable to lower the bed rails, and the bed rails could pose a hazard.”

“Based on observation and interview, the manager failed to ensure toxic materials stored by the facility were stored in a locked area and inaccessible to residents. The deficient practice posed a risk to the physical health and safety of a resident if toxic materials were accessible. Findings include: 1. During an environmental inspection with E1, the Compliance Officer observed a hallway by resident rooms, which had an open door to the laundry room, which had an unlocked door to the garage. The laundry room contained a bottle of stain remover and Windex on the floor. The garage had several bottles of cleaning supplies, including; but not limited to, Resolve, Spot Shot, Pledge, Rust Oleum, and Febreze. Cans of paint were stored in the garage. 2. During an interview, E1 and E2 acknowledged the facility stored toxic and poisonous materials in areas that were unlocked and accessible to residents. The facility had an ambulatory resident who received directed care services.”

“Based on documentation review, observation, and interview, the licensee implemented a modification of the facility, without an approval or amended license issued by the Department. The deficient practice posed a risk as the Department was unable to assess and approve the modification, as the facility did not submit an updated floor plan, and documentation of compliance with local building and zoning codes. Findings include: 1. In documentation review, Department documentation revealed a floor plan for AL8220. The document indicated AL8220 had six bedrooms. Department documentation revealed no documentation the licensee submitted a request for approval for a modification to the physical plant, including the addition of four bedrooms. 2. During an environmental inspection, the Compliance Officer observed the inside and outside of the facility were in a remodel. The facility had an additional four bedrooms added on to the facility. 3. During an interview, E1 reported being unaware approval was required from the Department for a modification of the facility. E1 acknowledged modifications were made to the facility, and to the floor plan, without Department approval.”