Arizona Comfort Care.

“Based on documentation review, record review, and interview, the manager of an assisted living center who contacted emergency responders on behalf of a resident failed to provide to the emergency responders a written document that included all information required in A.R.S. § 36-420.04, for one of two applicable residents sampled. The deficient practice posed a risk if the emergency responder was not aware of critical health information for the resident.   Findings include: 1. A review of facility documentation revealed an incident report dated January 6, 2026. The report revealed R1 had been transported to the hospital. 2. In an interview, when the Compliance Officer requested a copy of the documentation given to EMS in compliance with this statute, E1 reported "resident face sheet and MAR was provided". When the Compliance Officer asked if E1 had a copy of the documentation given to EMS, E1 stated, “No.” When the Compliance Officer asked if facility personnel gave EMS a document in compliance with this statute, E1 stated, “No, I was not aware of this new rule." 3. In an exit interview, the findings were reviewed with E1 and no additional information was provided.”

“Based on record review and interview, the manager failed to ensure that before or at the time of acceptance of an individual, the individual submitted documentation dated within 90 calendar days before the individual was accepted by an assisted living facility, and included whether the individual required continuous medical services, continuous or intermittent nursing services, or restraints and was dated and signed by a medical practitioner or registered nurse. Findings include: 1. Record review revealed R1's pre-admission determination, which included whether R1 required continuous medical services, continuous or intermittent nursing services, or restraints and was dated and signed by a medical practitioner. However, this was not completed within 90 days before R1 was admitted to the facility. 2. In an exit interview, findings were discussed with E1 and no additional information was provided.”

“Based on documentation review and interview, the manager failed to ensure that documentation of each evacuation drill included the identification of residents needing assistance for evacuation. The deficient practice posed a risk if employees were unable to implement the evacuation plan. Findings include: 1. Review of the evacuation drills revealed a drill conducted on October 26, 2025. However, the drill did not include the identification of residents needing assistance for evacuation. 2. In an interview, E1 reported that R1 and R2 were unable to ambulate with assistance and would need assistance during an evacuation. E1 acknowledged that the evacuation drill did not include the identification of residents needing assistance.”