GARDENS NURSING AND REHAB CENTER

190 NE 191ST STREET, MIAMI, FL 33161 (305) 651-9690
For profit - Corporation 120 Beds ELIYAHU MIRLIS Data: November 2025 4 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
0/100
#497 of 690 in FL
Last Inspection: August 2024

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Gardens Nursing and Rehab Center has received an F Trust Grade, indicating significant concerns about its quality of care and management. Ranking #497 out of 690 facilities in Florida places it in the bottom half of nursing homes, and at #43 out of 54 in Miami-Dade County, it shows that there are better local options available. The facility is, however, on an improving trend, with issues decreasing from 36 in 2024 to just 7 in 2025, suggesting some positive changes are being made. Staffing is a strong point, rated 5 out of 5 stars with a low turnover rate of 26%, which is well below the state average. Unfortunately, the facility has incurred fines totaling $277,745, which is concerning and indicates possible ongoing compliance issues. Specific incidents raise alarms about resident safety, including failures to effectively manage a rodent infestation that could expose residents to diseases, and the lack of timely follow-up on reported rodent sightings. These critical issues reflect a serious risk to the health and safety of the residents, despite the facility's strengths in staffing and some quality measures. Families should weigh these strengths and weaknesses carefully when considering this nursing home for their loved ones.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Florida
#497/690
Bottom 28%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
36 → 7 violations
Staff Stability
✓ Good
26% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 22 points below Florida's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
Penalties
○ Average
$277,745 in fines. Higher than 62% of Florida facilities. Some compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 34 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Florida. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
60 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Overall Rating
★★★★★
5.0
Staff Levels
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 36 issues
2025: 7 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
  • 4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Low Staff Turnover (26%) · Staff stability means consistent care
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover is low (26%)

    22 points below Florida average of 48%

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.

The Bad

2-Star Overall Rating

Below Florida average (3.2)

Below average - review inspection findings carefully

Federal Fines: $277,745

Well above median ($33,413)

Significant penalties indicating serious issues

Chain: ELIYAHU MIRLIS

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 60 deficiencies on record

4 life-threatening 1 actual harm
Jun 2025 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews facility failed to notify one (Resident #1) out of three sampled residents' representativ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews facility failed to notify one (Resident #1) out of three sampled residents' representative of a change in condition. As evidenced by Resident #1 with a clinical diagnosis of Disorganized Schizophrenia (a mental condition that cause an individual to have trouble organizing their thoughts, which can lead to behaviors that seem random) left the facility Against Medical Advise (AMA) and the responsible party was not notified.The findings included:Record review of a demographic sheet revealed Resident #1 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis that included: Schizophrenia and Psychosis, responsible party listed: [] Advocacy Group and discharged on 5/5/2025.Record review of an admission/discharge/transfer list revealed Resident#1 was listed as discharged Against Medical Advice on 5/5/25.Record review of an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) reference dated 3/24/2025 revealed Resident#1 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 14 out of 15; indicated no cognitive impairment, was taking Antipsychotic medications and did not have a wander/elopement alarm and had an active discharge planning occurring for return to the community.Interview on 06/25/2025 at 3:50 PM via telephone, Resident #1's Advocate/Representative stated: The last time I saw [Resident #1] was in the hospital on [DATE], I was not notified [Resident #1] is not at the facility, it is not safe for him to be out he need his medication.Record review of Resident #1's physician's order sheet for May 2025 revealed orders dated 3/17/2025 for Olanzapine oral tablet 5 Milligram (MG) by mouth at bedtime for Psychosis, order dated 3/18/2025 Monitor blood sugar every shift, Colostomy Care Every Shift every shift and monitor/document for behaviors, and order dated 3/25/2025 Olanzapine Oral Tablet 10 MG give one tablet by mouth at bedtime for Psychosis.Record review revealed Resident #1 had a care plan initiated on 3/18/2025 and revised on: 05/08/2025 for Alteration in mood and/or behavioral status AEB/ Related to: Psychotic symptoms (Hallucinations/Delusions) with a goal to be easily redirected and free from injury/adverse outcome related to wandering through next review and interventions that included: Monitor resident for ongoing psychosocial issues. Record review of a progress note dated: 5/5/2025 at 11:10 AM revealed Resident #1 left AMA and form was not signed. On 6/26/25 at 9:00 AM, the DON (Director of Nursing) stated: A Night shift staff called me around 11:00 PM on 5/4/25 and reported to me that the CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) could not find the resident (Resident #1). I instructed them to look everywhere and that I would be in my way. I notified the administrator. They called me back and said they found the resident in another resident's room, and the resident was determined to leave. I instructed the supervisor to stay with the resident. The next morning when I came in, I spoke with [Resident #1], and the resident insisted on leaving. At that time, I checked and saw [Resident#1's] BIMS score was 14. I then spoke to the medical doctor and the doctor advised to let [Resident #1] leave AMA. I presented the AMA form to [Resident #1] and the resident refused to sign it. I called the responsible party three or four times, left a voicemail and no response was received.During an interview on 6/26/25 at 9:42 AM, the Social Services Director (SSD) stated: If a resident left AMA. I normally do a wellness check if I have the discharge location, however for [Resident #1] I did not have a location. The health care proxy is to be notified about any incident, and they are the person who is to sign a resident out AMA. The Social Services Director presented Resident #1's signed Affidavit of Health Care Proxy dated 3/3/25 indicating Patient name: [Resdient#1], Agency accepting Proxy Designation:Record review of a Policy titled Against Medical Advice effective date 05/10/2024 indicated:Procedure:5. Notify the resident's representative, family, or designated person that the resident is leaving the facility AMA and document in the medical record.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0627 (Tag F0627)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure one (Resident #1 out of three (Resident #1) saf...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure one (Resident #1 out of three (Resident #1) safely and appropriately discharged to a safe location where ongoing clinical care could be provided, as evidence by on 05/05/2025 Resident #1 a vulnerable resident with clinical diagnoses of Disorganized Schizophrenia (a mental condition that cause an individual to have trouble organizing their thoughts, which can lead to behaviors that seem random) insisted on leaving the facility was presented with an Against Medical Advise (AMA) form which he refused to sign. The facility did not obtain a valid address for Resident #1's next place of residence and did not inform the resident's advocate/representative about the AMA discharge. At the time of this survey Resident #1's location is unknown. The findings include: Observational tour of the facility's exterior revealed the facility is in a residential area with high volume of traffic and cross streets; the facility is not gated at the entrance. The facility has side fences (approximately four feet at the front of the building's parking lot and to the right while entering the facility the fence is approximately six feet extending to the rear of the facility of the building. The front entrance to the building requires a code to enter and exit. Tour of the facility's interior revealed only one out of two elevators in working condition and required a code to get on and off. The stairway has an alarm with a 5-10 seconds delay before the door is opened. Every exit door has an alarm. The patios on the second and third floor are screened but a resident could easily lift the screen and jump off the patio.Review of Resident #1's closed medical records revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged AMA on 05/05/2025. Clinical diagnoses include Colostomy status, disorganized schizophrenia, other psychotic disorder not due to a substance or known physiological condition .Review of the Physicians Orders Sheet (POS) for May 2025 included an order dated 3/17/2025 for Olanzapine Oral Tablet 10 milligrams; give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime for Psychosis Colostomy care every shift.Record review indicated Resident #1's Care Plans Initiated: 03/18/2025, Revision on: 05/08/2025 documented: Focus area: Alteration in mood and/or behavioral status related to psychotic symptoms (Hallucinations/Delusions). Goal: Will be easily redirected and free from injury/adverse outcome related to wandering through next review. Interventions: Provide additional Social Service support as needed. Offer/provide psychosocial support services as available/accepted. Medications as ordered, Redirect patient as necessary. 15 minutes checks per facility protocol. Monitor resident ongoing psychosocial issues . Care Plan Date Initiated: 03/19/2025 Revision dated 05/08/2025-Focus: Resident wishes to stay in the facility for Long Term Care. Resident discharged AMA, forms not signed. Goal: -Resident will have no psychosocial issues regarding the decision to stay in facility for LTC. Interventions: - Monitor resident ongoing psychosocial issues. Psych consultation as necessary Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident # 1 is cognitively intact. [NAME]- Adequate, Speech Clarity- clear speech, Makes Self Understood- usually understood/ understands . High-Risk Drug Classes taking: Antipsychotic; No wander/elopement alarm used; Active discharge planning already occurring for the resident to return to the community-YesReview of Progress Note dated 5/5/2025 02:19 (2:19 AM)-Narrative Nurses note: Resident left AMA form was not signed.Review of a Progress Noted dated 5/5/2025 2:44 AM: During the routine checkup, Staff notice [Resident #1] was not in his room. The Supervisor, primary nurse and staff searched the whole building but couldn't find the resident. The Administrator, DON (Director of Nursing) and ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) were contacted. One of the residents shared [Resident #1] wanting to leave, and said he was tired of being locked up. MD (Medical Doctor) has also been notified. Tried reaching out to [] Florida Advocacy Group.but there was no response. Voicemail message was left for them to return the call . Interview on 06/25/2025 at 1:57 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed Resident # 1 went missing on the 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM shift and apparently the 11:00 PM to 7:00 PM shift staff reported the resident was found in another resident's room on the third floor. Interview on 06/25/2025 at 3:50 PM via telephone, Resident #1's Advocate stated: The last time I saw [Resident #1] was in the hospital on [DATE], I was not notified [Resident #1] is not at the facility, it is not safe for him to be out he need his medication. Interview on 06/26/2025 at 9:07 AM The DON) revealed: If a resident wants to leave AMA the staff are to notify me and either myself or staff try to convince the resident to remain in the facility. If the resident insists on leaving, the medical doctor is notified, and the resident is asked to sign a form that explains the risks. If a resident leaves AMA, we notify the MD (Medical Doctor) [local community-based State agency] and emergency contact. The most recent AMA was [Resident#1]. A night shift staff called me around 11:00 PM on 5/4/2025 and reported to me that the CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) could not find the resident. I instructed them to look everywhere and that I would be in my way. I notified the administrator. They called me back and said they found the resident in another resident's room, and he was determined to leave. I instructed the supervisor to stay with the resident. The next morning when I came in, I spoke with [Resident #1] and the resident insisted on leaving. At that time, I checked and saw Resdient#1's BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) score was 14 (score of 14 out of 15 indicate the resident is cognitively intact). I then spoke to the medical doctor and the doctor advised to let Resident #1 leave AMA. I presented the AMA form to Resident #1 and the resident refused to sign it. I did not write a progress note that the resident was here on 5/5/25 in the morning. I called three or four times to the responsible party and left a voicemail and no response. This resident has a diagnosis of Schizophrenia. During an interview on 6/26/25 at 9:42 AM, the Social Services Director (SSD) stated: If a resident left AMA. I normally do a wellness check if I have the discharge location, however for [Resident #1] I did not have a location. The health care proxy is to be notified about any incident, and they are the person who is to sign a resident out AMA. The Social Services Director presented Resident #1's signed Affidavit of Health Care Proxy dated 3/3/25 indicating Patient name: [Resdient#1], Agency accepting Proxy Designation: [Advocacy Group]. If a resident wants to leave AMA and I am present I request that they sign an AMA and advise them of the possible risks associated with leaving AMA. I don't remember if I told DCF that Resident #1 left AMA because I only forwarded the note written on 5/5/25 at 2:00 AM. On 6/26/25 at 10:50 AM The DON stated: I didn't document that the resident was found because there was a lot going on .No one called the police because the resident was found in another room.Interview on 6/26/2025 at 11:34 AM the DON reported that on 05/05/2025 Resident #1 insisted he wanted to leave and was presented with an Against Medical Advise (AMA) form, but he did not sign the AMA form and left the facility at 10:42 AM with his clothes and colostomy supplies. He was wearing shorts; we watched him cross the street to the bus stop. The Administrator (NHA) Minimum Data Set (MDS) Coordinator, Therapy Director and the Receptionist were present when the resident left. The DON revealed she was aware Resident #1 had an Advocate/Representative, and she called and left a message. The Doctor was also notified that the resident left AMA. The DON was asked why the facility did not [NAME] Act the resident for his own safety; the DON reported there was no Doctor's order to [NAME] Act the resident.Interview on 06/26/2025 at 2:10 PM with Staff C, Certified Nursing Assistant, revealed I have worked with [Resident #1] before and everybody work together with him, I remember that Sunday night about 10:00 PM they said he was missing, and we looked for him everywhere. I was leaving at 11:00 PM and they had not found him but the next day I heard that they had found him, and he had left. On 06/26/2025 at 2:18 PM, interview via phone with the Primary Care Physician (PCP) he stated: [Resident #1] was my patient; he was oriented and is independent. I received a call on Sunday 05/04/25 at around 11:00 PM stating [Resident #1] was missing. I did not hear from them until Monday morning and at that time they did not tell me where he was found that morning. They said he left AMA. The PCP was asked if it was safe for the resident to be out of the facility off his medication, The PCP stated, If the [Resident #1] does not get his medication, he will get worse. We got him from another county pretty much while he was at the facility he was ok; he needs his medication and needed to continue taking it because he was stable. I was not aware he was with the advocate program. When this kind of patient try to leave, he should be [NAME] Acted. The PCP was asked if a Physician's Order is required for a [NAME] Act, the PCP stated no, the facility have the right to call 911 because maybe at that time when he wanted to leave, he was experiencing or was in altered mental status. We have had patients that try to leave, and it is hard to escape from that facility. I was not notified until Monday morning and that was after he had already left AMA. Interview on 06/26/2025 at 2:35 PM, the Administrator (NHA) was asked about the incident related to Resident # 1 leaving the facility; the NHA stated: He left AMA, he did not tell us where he was going, it is not uncommon for homeless people to want to leave so he may have gone back to the streets, the doctor was called per the DON. The NHA was asked if she contacted the Advocate/ Representative, she stated: I left a message I only have a phone number. He usually makes his decision; he signed his admission package when he came in., we did not do a wellness check because according to Social Services Director (SSD), she reported it to [local community-based State agency], but they did not take the case. No police report or missing person reports were done because he left AMA. When asked if the resident can survive without meds, the NHA stated: Yes, he may have psychotic episodes, but he lived on the streets before he has no income .and when he needs supplies he will go to the hospital .He can change the colostomy bag himself. The staff reported he was missing at nighttime on the 11:00 PM to 7:00 AM shift and they found him in another resident's room (room number unknown). He said the next morning I can't be here. The NHA was asked if the resident's doctors were notified; the NHA stated: The primary doctor was called and I do not know if the Psychiatrist was called The NHA was asked if she thought a resident would be safe on the streets, she responded yes. He refused to sign the AMA. I witnessed him leaving. The NHA was asked if the Social Services Director (SSD) was made aware that the resident wanted to leave and, the NHA revealed the SSD was not involved. Follow up interview on 06/26/2025 at 3:38 PM, the SSD was asked if she had tried to encourage the resident not to leave the facility. The SSD stated: I was not involved and was not notified until after the resident ha left. The SSD further revealed: [Resident #1] expressed at times that he wanted to leave but not aggressively and was redirected. If I knew what was happening, I could have redirected him. I was at the facility that Monday he was not here when I put my note in; it is a concern that he is out there on his own . Interview on 6/27/25 at 9:50 AM, Staff G, Registered Nurse (RN) stated I am familiar with [Resident #1]. I have been his nurse several times. He was very quiet and short with words and always walking around. He never expressed any desire to leave the facility. He always took his medicine. I was told that this resident eloped. I would not consider that a safe discharge due to his Schizophrenia. Review of a Psychiatric Note for Resident #1 dated 3/24/2025 indicated: Resident #1 is very delusional, says the government has given him authority to take as much ecstasy as he wants and his family was executed, Diagnosis: Psychotic disorder .Schizophrenic disorganized type, recommendation to increase Olanzapine to 10 mg at bedtime.Interview via telephone on 06/27/2025 at 12:39 PM with the Psychiatrist, he stated: I know that resident he was new, but he is Schizophrenic and with those types of patients moods will change without warning; he needs to take his medication to remain stable; and if he left without saying where he is going that is dangerous because; He may be roaming around the streets and will get in trouble and the police will lock him up and maybe put him in a psych unit. I was informed a week ago that he was not in the facility. The facility should have tried to find out where he was and where exactly he was going. The expectation is for the facility to notify me immediately before they let him leave. the plan when he was admitted was for him to stay in the facility. The facility should have a protocol in place for a psychotic patient like [Resident #1]. This is a major concern because I was only told that he was not in the facility a week ago. On 6/27/25 at 1:50 PM with Staff I, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) that was assigned to Resident #1 on the date of the incident stated: I don't remember that resident [Resident #1]. I don't remember any resident going missing on my shift. I don't remember, I don't know that resident. When asked if she recalled residents on any of her assignment with colostomy she stated: I don't remember. Staff I was asked about the medication that was not administered nor signed off on the Medication Administration Records (MAR) on 05/04/2025, Staff I, again stated: I don't remember why I didn't sign the MAR. Review of the facility's policy provided titled Against Medical Advice, Effective date: 05/10/2024. Policy: A physician's order should be obtained for all discharges unless a resident or representative is discharging himself or herself against medical advice.Procedure: 1. Should a resident, or his or her representative request an immediate discharge; notify the physician and document in the medical record.2. If the resident or representative insists upon being discharged without the approval of the physician, the resident and/or representative should sign a Release of Responsibility (AMA) form. Should either party refuse to sign the release, such refusal is to be documented in the medical record. 5. Notify the residents' representative, family, or designated person the resident is leaving the facility AMA and document in the medical record.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0813 (Tag F0813)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to honor their policy for Foods brought in by family/visitors for one (Resident #13) out of three sampled residents as evidenced ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to honor their policy for Foods brought in by family/visitors for one (Resident #13) out of three sampled residents as evidenced by the facility's staff refuse to warm Resident #13's food brought in by family. The findings included: During observation on 06/25/25 at 12:55 PM Resident #13 was observed seated in her wheelchair at the bedside. Resident #13 revealed she had a recent disagreement with the dietary manager about her food that had been brought in by her brother being too burnt when staff warmed it up in the kitchen .As a result the Dietary Manager is unwilling to warm her food in the kitchen. The resident further explained the microwaves were removed and residents must warm up outside food in the kitchen. Interview on 06/25/25 at 02:25 PM, the Dietary Manager reported there is currently no microwave on each floor, as the previous ones were removed due to repeated damage and have not been replaced. Per facility policy, staff are not permitted to reheat outside food brought in by residents or their families. Only food prepared in-house may be reheated. This policy has been longstanding, though there have been numerous complaints from residents regarding the inability to warm up outside food. Review of the facility's undated policy titled: Foods brought in by family/visitors. POLICY: It is the policy of this facility to permit liberalized diets as much as possible. Staff must be aware of foods brought to a resident by family/visitors. PROCEDURE: 10. Outside food/liquids is only permitted to be reheated by dietary staff to prevent the possibility of bums or injury.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to store food under sanitary condition in two out of two snack/nourishment refrigerator on the resident's unit. as evidenced by r...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to store food under sanitary condition in two out of two snack/nourishment refrigerator on the resident's unit. as evidenced by residents' foods brought to the facility by visitors and family were observed unlabeled and not appropriately dated. This deficient practice has the potential to affect residents receiving food brought in from outside sources. The findings include.Observation on 06/25/2025 at 3:15 PM of the facility's Nourishment Pantries refrigerators that stores resident's food that is brought into the facility by visitors, family and other outside sources revealed the refrigerator on the second floor had 17 unlabeled grocery type bags with food items and three plastic containers in plastic bags with food items dated 05/29/2025 and had no names. The third-floor refrigerator also had several unlabeled undated plastic bags with food items. Interview on 06/25/2025 at 3: 25 PM Interview with Staff J, Registered Nurse revealed (RN) stated: all these foods belong to the residents. items in the refrigerator located in the pantry to residents. Interview on at 3:45 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing acknowledged the concerns and revealed: Food should be labelled and dated with the resident's name and should be discarded after three days. Review of the facility's policy titled: Foods Brought in By Family and Visitors indicate:POLICY:It is the policy of this facility to permit liberalized diets as much as possible. Staff must be aware of foods brought to a resident by family/visitors.PROCEDURE:1. Family members/visitors must inform the nursing staff of their desire to bring foods into the facility.5. Perishable foods must be stored in re-sealable containers with tightly fitting lids in the refrigerator (used for resident items). Containers must be labeled with the resident's name, the item and the use by date.6. The facility staff, in charge of cleaning the common area refrigerator, is responsible for discarding perishable foods on or before the use by date/3days. The family is responsible for discarding perishable food stored in personal refrigerators kept in resident rooms.
Mar 2025 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a discharge care plan for one ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a discharge care plan for one (Resident # 1) out of three resident whose discharge care plans were reviewed. There were 106 residents residing in the facility at the time of this survey. The findings included: Record review of Resident # 1's clinical records revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 03/08/2025. Clinical diagnoses include Displaced Tri malleolar Fracture of Right Lower Leg, Subsequent Encounter for Closed Fracture with Routine Healing, Encounter for Other Orthopedic Aftercare. Record review of orders dated 03/07/2025 indicated the resident was to be discharged home with family on 08/08/2025. Review of the admission Minimum Date Set (MDS) Section C for Cognitive Patterns dated 02/11/2025 revealed the Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) summary score was 07 out of 15 indicating severe cognitive impairment. The section for Functional Abilities dated 02/11/2025 revealed the resident was independent for eating, oral hygiene, toileting hygiene, upper body dressing and personal hygiene. The resident needed partial/moderate assistance for shower/bath and lower body dressing and needed substantial/maximal assistance for putting on/taking off footwear. Record review of the overall Discharge Summary revealed the resident is to be discharged home with family. No medical equipment needed, or home health requested. The resident choice to be discharged on 03/08/2025. Review of the admission Baseline Care Plan dated 02/06/2025 indicated on the Initial Admission/discharge: Remain in the facility. Review of the MDS Discharge Return Non-Anticipated Information dated 03/08/2025 revealed the resident was discharged to home/community. Review of the Nursing Home Transfer and Discharge Notice dated 03/07/20205 revealed the facility gave the resident a 30-day notice to vacate the facility due to the resident's unpaid bill for services received at the facility after reasonable and appropriate notice to pay Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a discharge care plan for one (Resident # 1) out of three resident whose discharge care plans were reviewed. There were 106 residents residing in the facility at the time of this survey. The findings included: Record review of Resident # 1's clinical records revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 03/08/2025. Clinical diagnoses include Displaced Tri malleolar Fracture of Right Lower Leg, Subsequent Encounter for Closed Fracture with Routine Healing, Encounter for Other Orthopedic Aftercare. Record review of orders dated 03/07/2025 indicated the resident was to be discharged home with family on 08/08/2025. Review of the admission Minimum Date Set (MDS) Section C for Cognitive Patterns dated 02/11/2025 revealed the Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) summary score was 07 out of 15 indicating severe cognitive impairment. The section for Functional Abilities dated 02/11/2025 revealed the resident was independent for eating, oral hygiene, toileting hygiene, upper body dressing and personal hygiene. The resident needed partial/moderate assistance for shower/bath and lower body dressing and needed substantial/maximal assistance for putting on/taking off footwear. Record review of the overall Discharge Summary revealed the resident is to be discharged home with family. No medical equipment needed, or home health requested. The resident choice to be discharged on 03/08/2025. Review of the admission Baseline Care Plan dated 02/06/2025 indicated on the Initial Admission/discharge: Remain in the facility. Review of the MDS Discharge Return Non-Anticipated Information dated 03/08/2025 revealed the resident was discharged to home/community. Review of the Nursing Home Transfer and Discharge Notice dated 03/07/20205 revealed the facility gave the resident a 30-day notice to vacate the facility due to the resident's unpaid bill for services received at the facility after being given reasonable and appropriate notice to pay. Interview on 03/25/2025 at 1:35 PM the Social Services Director revealed she is not in charge of the development of care plans, and she is in charge of the Nursing Home Transfer and Discharge Notice. Interview on 03/25/2025 at 1:50 PM; the MDS Coordinator revealed she is in charge of the development of care plans. The MDS Coordinator acknowledge the resident did not have any discharge care plan. Record review of the facility's Policies and Procedures for Care Plan-Comprehensive with effective date 09/01/2022 revealed Overview: An individualized comprehensive care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetable to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychological needs is developed for each resident. Policy: Our facility's care plan planning/Interdisciplinary team, in coordination with the resident, his/her family or representative (sponsor, develops and maintains a comprehensive care plan for each resident that identifies the highest level of functioning the resident may be expected to attain. Procedure: 5- The resident's comprehensive care plan is developed within seven (7) days of the completion of the resident's comprehensive assessment.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 03/27/2025 at 3:10 PM, the DON was asked about the usage of leg drainage bag for both residents. The DON revealed when the le...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 03/27/2025 at 3:10 PM, the DON was asked about the usage of leg drainage bag for both residents. The DON revealed when the leg bag is in place the residents tried to remove it, but she will attempt to do so again. Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure indwelling catheters are secure for two (Residents #7, and Resident #8) out of two residents reviewed for indwelling urinary catheter. As evidenced by Resident #7's was observed in the hallway carry his catheter bag in his hand and at times placing it on the floor. Resident # 8 was observed with the catheter's drainage bag on his lap and the tubing on the wheelchair's wheels. These deficient practices increases the risk for catheter related urological trauma if the indwelling urinary catheter is unintentionally pulled resulting in dislodgement. The findings include: Resident #7 On 03/27/2025 at 10:05 AM, Resident#7 was observed in the hallway with his indwelling catheter resting on his lap. At the time of the observation, there was no privacy bag in use to cover the catheter. (Photographic evidence) On 03/27/2025 at 11:28 AM, Resident#7's indwelling catheter was observed on the floor, the catheter was not properly secured or positioned. A staff member was noted performing 15-minute checks on residents, and did not notice the catheter bag on the floor (Photographic evidence) On 03/27/2025 at 03:00 PM, Staff X, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), entered Resident #7's room. The nurse picked up the catheter bag and placed it on the side of the bed while the resident was sitting in the wheelchair; if the resident were to roll the wheelchair, there was a potential risk of the indwelling catheter being dislodged. Review of the medical records for Resident #7 revealed the resident was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Clinical diagnoses include but not limited to malignant neoplasm of the bladder, unspecified hydronephrosis, bladder-neck obstruction, benign prostatic hyperplasia without lower urinary tract symptoms and Alzheimer disease Review of Resident#7's Physician's Orders for March 2025 included but not limited to urinary catheter care every shift, Leg bag placed every morning; Catheter to be changed monthly and as needed for occlusion or leakage, drainage bag to be changed once a day for catheter care . Urine output should be monitored every shift. Enhanced Barrier Precaution: Applied as necessary for infection control. Medication ordered include Finasteride 5 milligram( mg) 1 tablet by mouth daily for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH), Tamsulosin HCl: 0.4 mg 1 capsule in the evening for BPH. Record review of Resident #7 's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed: The resident has a brief interview mental status score of 00, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Functionally, the resident has bilateral upper extremity impairment but is independent in lower extremities, using a walker and wheelchair. The resident has an indwelling catheter, is not on a toileting program, and is frequently bowel incontinent. Active diagnoses include renal insufficiency, obstructive uropathy, bladder calculus, and other bladder-related conditions. Record review of Resident #7 's Care Plans Reference date 12/10/2024 and revised on 03/27/2025 revealed: The resident has an indwelling urinary catheter due to a bladder disorder, and the goal is to prevent catheter-related trauma. Interventions include positioning the catheter bag below the bladder and away from the door, checking for kinks in the tubing each shift, monitoring intake and output, and observing for signs of discomfort or infection. The resident has behavior issues related to noncompliance with the treatment regimen, including putting the indwelling urinary catheter tube around the neck and allowing the bag to drag on the floor, despite education and redirection. The goal for this behavior is to reduce episodes and avoid adverse consequences. Interventions include anticipating the resident's needs, educating the family and caregivers on coping strategies, explaining procedures, discussing inappropriate behaviors, and intervening as needed to ensure the resident's safety and comfort. Interview on 03/27/2025 at 02:56 PM, Staff X, LPN acknowledged that having the indwelling catheter's drainage bag on the floor was unacceptable due to the increased risk of infection and dislodgement. On 03/27/2025 at 3:06 PM, Staff T, Certified Nurse assistant and the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed they also made efforts to educate the resident about the risks of having the catheter on the floor and explained that the resident was confused and did not consistently follow their instructions regarding catheter care. During this interview Resident # 7 was observed ambulating unsteadily in the hallway holding the urinary catheter in his hand. Staff T assisted the resident back to his room and placed the catheter's drainage bag on the wheelchair. Resident # 8 On 03/27/2025 at 10:20 AM, Resident #8 was observed exiting the elevator with the indwelling catheter drainage bag on his lap and the tubing on the wheelchair's wheels increasing the risk for dislodgement and trauma if the indwelling catheter is unintentionally pulled out. On 03/27/2025 at 03:40 PM, Resident #8 was observed returning to his room after playing bingo, the catheter bag and tubing were positioned in close proximity of the wheelchair's wheels increasing the risk for dislodgement of the catheter. The DON was present and was shown the concerns; and revealed sometimes the resident move the catheter around. Review of the medical records for Resident #8 revealed the resident was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Clinical diagnoses include but not limited to: Malignant neoplasm of prostate, obstructive and reflux uropathy, and benign prostatic hyperplasia without lower urinary tract symptoms. Review of Resident # 8's Physician's Orders Sheet for March 2025 revealed orders that include, Urinary catheter care is required every shift, catheter to be changed monthly or as needed for occlusion or leakage. Medications included Finasteride 5 mg daily for BPH and Furosemide 20 mg daily as a diuretic. Record review of Resident #8 's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed: The resident's brief interview mental status score is 13, indicating mild cognitive impairment. The resident does not have impairments in upper or lower extremities and uses a wheelchair. The resident has an indwelling catheter and is not on a urinary or bowel toileting program. Active diagnoses include obstructive uropathy and benign prostatic hyperplasia without lower urinary tract symptoms. Record review of Resident #8 's Care Plans Reference date 04/24/2024 and revised on 03/27/2025 revealed focuses on managing the resident's indwelling catheter due to obstructive and reflux uropathy. The goals are to prevent catheter-related trauma and avoid urinary infections. Key interventions include changing the catheter as needed, positioning the catheter bag properly, checking tubing for kinks, monitoring intake/output, and documenting symptoms of discomfort or infection .resident sometimes lets the indwelling catheter bag drag on the floor. The goal is to reduce these behaviors and prevent adverse consequences. Staff should monitor behavioral episodes and document potential causes to help manage future occurrences.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Drug Regimen Review (Tag F0756)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations records reviewed and interviews; the facility failed to ensure Drug Regimen Reviews were completed for one...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations records reviewed and interviews; the facility failed to ensure Drug Regimen Reviews were completed for one (Resident # 13) out of three residents reviewed as evidenced by Resident #13 who was admitted to the facility has been receiving a combination of antidepressant, blood pressure medication, muscle relaxer, and atypical antipsychotic medication that has the potential to cause serious interactions and side effects has not received the Drug Regimen Review within the required time frame. The findings include. On 03/25/2025 at 10:15 AM Resident # 13 was observed smoking at the designated smoking patio located on the second floor interacting with staff. On 03/26/2025 at 11:19 AM Resident #13 was observed in the elevator going up to the third floor. It was noted that another resident made fat shaming remarks directed at Resident #13. Who did not respond and held her head down. On 3/27/2025 at 9:35 AM Resident # 13 was observed on the smoking patio and interacted with staff. On 3/27/2025 at 9:50 AM Resident #13 was in her room, and was compliant with taking her medications during medication administration observation. After the nurse left the room; Resident # 13 stated: I get a lot of medications. I like to be in my room by myself sometimes because I get sleepy, I drink a lot of coffee when I go downstairs to smoke. I am doing good now, I came from a Wheelchair to a walker. I was getting a medicine that make me so sleepy, and I am happy I don't get it anymore. I am here because I got hit by a car in [NAME] and this is the only place that will take me in. Record review revealed Resident #13 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #13's clinical diagnoses include: fracture of the first lumbar vertebra, specifically a subsequent encounter for fracture with routine healing, traumatic hemorrhage of the cerebrum, Schizoaffective disorder bipolar ll disorder and a range of other conditions affecting her physical and mental health including treatment for hypertension and type 2 diabetes. Resident #13's medications ordered include but not limited: Remeron 45 mg (milligrams) at bedtime (antidepressant medication). Quetiapine Fumarate Oral Tablet 300 mg; one tablet by mouth two times a day (0800 and 1700) for Psychosis (antipsychotic medication). Risperidone Oral Tablet 1 mg one tablet by mouth two times a day (0800 and 1700) for Psychosis (an antipsychotic medication). Celecoxib (a muscle relaxer) Oral Capsule 100 mg, one capsule by mouth one time a day for Joint pain. Metformin 1000 mg, one tablet orally two times a day for Diabetes and Valproic Acid Oral Solution 250 mg /5 ml( milligrams per milliliters)10 ml by mouth three times a day for Seizures. Review of Resident #13's Minimum Data Set (MDS) Quarterly assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #13 is cognitively intact, show minimal or no depression, showed no behaviors and Psychosis ( hallucinations and delusions). Section for High-Risk Medications indicated the resident is taking high risk medications that include Antipsychotics and Antidepressants that are being taken routinely. The MDS indicated no GDR (Gradual Dose Reduction) had been attempted and section for Medication Follow-up documented: Not assessed/no information. During an interview on 03/27/2025 at 2:16 PM; the Psychiatrist was asked how frequently he visits the facility to see Resident #13 and if he receive report from staff and interact with the resident. He stated: I physically see all the residents and I see [Resident #13] every quarter like I see all my patients. I think I saw her in January. The Psychiatrist was asked to explain Resident #13's current Medication Regiment which include: Seroquel, Mirtazapine and Risperidone and if it is necessary for the resident to be taking this combination of high-risk medications based on the resident's history that include substance abuse. The Psychiatrist stated: She has calmed down and the medications are effective, when I go to see her she is doing pretty good, and she is able to tell me how she is doing. When asked if any attempts were made to a GDR on any of the medications. He stated: We are always getting recommendations .we declined attempting GDR because she does need the dosage she is taking, and we usually do the GDR once if the pharmacy recommend, only because we are forced/so we attempt. The Psychiatrist about the high dosage of Seroquel that Resident #13 is taking. He asked: What is the dose? The surveyor informed him that the resident is taking Seroquel 300 mg twice daily; the Psychiatrist was also asked about the Risperidone 1 mg twice per day and the Mirtazapine 45 mg. The Psychiatrist stated: I am wondering why I gave her the Seroquel and Mirtazapine, she may have been agitated and depressed; based on her behaviors at first when she was admitted because she was irritable and now she is laid back, and the last time I saw her she was doing better. I think that is why I have her each of these medications instead of only the Mirtazapine. I think I will decrease the Seroquel dose and Risperdal. On 03/27/2025 at 4:35 PM, interview with the Director of Nursing (DON); she revealed between 10/2024 and 11/2024 the Resident was observed drooling and sleeping, and could not do therapy and was not able to hold her cigarette. The DON revealed she called and informed the Psychiatrist that the Klonopin needed to be discontinued, and he discontinued the Klonopin on 12/04/25. Review of the Psychiatrist visit notes dated 12/04/2024 documented D/C (discontinue) all Klonopin. Review of Resident #13's Medication Regimen Review (MRR) with the DON revealed a recommendation documentation dated 7/31/2024 indicating: Federal guidelines state psychopharmacological drugs should have an attempt at a gradual dose reduction (GDR) twice per year for the first year in 2 different quarters with 1 month between attempts, then annually thereafter, when used to manage behavior, stabilize mood or treat psych disorder. This resident has been taking Quetiapine 300 mg BID and Risperidone 1 mg BID. Could we attempt a dose reduction(s) at this time to verify this resident is on the lowest possible dose? If not, please indicate response below: RESPONSE: previous, in facility, GDR failure OR Use is in accordance with relevant current standards of practice. Both options require clinical rationale for continuing by physician; stated below OR documented in the clinical record. The response was signed by the doctor on 08/19/2024. Further review of the Medication Regimen Review Log with the DON revealed no reviews completed for-08/2024, 09/2024,10/24, 11/2024, 12/2024. The DON acknowledged the concerns.
Aug 2024 35 deficiencies 3 IJ (3 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL (K) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Administration (Tag F0835)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews; the facility's Administrator failed to follow up on reported rodent sightings in a timel...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews; the facility's Administrator failed to follow up on reported rodent sightings in a timely manner and address them immediately, failed to ensure the designated Infection Preventionist who is responsible for the facility's Infection, Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) had completed specialized training in infection prevention and control. The facility's administrative staff failed to ensure that their policies for pest control services were followed, coordinate with other department heads, failed to contact the appropriate local agencies regarding the rodent infestation. The facility's failure to immediately implement an effective pest control program to eradicate and contain the rodents identified in residents' areas had the potential to spread diseases to residents and potentially affect 111 residents residing in this 120 bed facility. Rats and mice are known to carry many diseases. These diseases can spread to people directly, through handling of rodents; contact with rodent feces (poop), urine, or saliva (such as through breathing in air or eating food that is contaminated with rodent waste); or rodent bites. Rodents can also carry ticks, mites, or fleas that can act as vectors to spread diseases between rodents and people. The system failure to ensure pest control/infection control and prevention interventions and services were effective and implemented resulted in the likelihood for serious injury and/or death. This failure resulted in the determination of Immediate Jeopardy on 06/27/2024. The findings of Immediate Jeopardy were determined to be ongoing on 8/30/2024. The findings included: A review of the facility's Administrator's job description signed on 04/04/2022 revealed the following: Delegate the administrative authority, responsibility, and accountability necessary for carrying out assigned duties. Responsible for day-to-day clinical and administrative activities of the facility, including profit and loss responsibility, and ensures compliance with all state and federal regulations. Provide leadership to all facility staff to meet the goal of providing quality resident care. Schedule regular meetings with direct report staff to provide supervision, ensure communication, and monitor the facility. Ensure a safe, clean and comfortable environment for residents, visitors and staff. Maintain effective relationships and open communication with residents, families, staff, contractors, and the outside community. A chart review revealed that Resident #9 (room [ROOM NUMBER]) was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Hemiplegia, Muscle Weakness, and Gout. The last Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], section C, revealed Resident #9 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated that she was cognitively intact and able to communicate. Section GG of the MDS revealed that Resident #9 could wheel at least 150 feet in a corridor or similar space once she is seated in a wheelchair. In an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 11:24 AM, Resident #9, stated that for the last 4 Saturdays there has not been any housekeeping services and the place was dirty. The facility's Supervisors were aware that there were pests, roaches, and mice/rodents in the facility. When asked how often she has seen any, she said, They practically live here. Resident #9 then pointed at a flat, sticky trap (with a rat picture on the label) used for mice/rats in her room that was still in an unused packet sitting on top of her belongings. Resident #9 reported that these traps were used for mice/rats sighting in her room near the air-conditioning area. In this interview, the Surveyor observed a white boxed container, which was located by the air-conditioning unit and was labeled for pests and roaches. According to Resident #9, the white box used for trapping pests did not work for rats or rodents, and this was why she kept requesting the pest control technician to get her the unused designated mice trap that was seen earlier on top of her belongings. During this entire interview, the Surveyor noted that food packaging that were opened on the over bed table, and other unsealed food items were around the bed. In an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 7:20 AM with Staff OO, the Pest Control Technician stated that the facility does not have a Pest Control Log that he checks every time he comes into the facility for the specific locations and rooms that need treatments. The facility's Administrator reports all pest sightings verbally to him. The facility's Administrator only told him of rodent sightings for the first time last week. In an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 1:30 PM with the facility's Administrator, she stated she was not aware of any rodents sighting in the facility and reported that any residents or staff members had not told her of any rodents in the facility. She further stated that Pest Control Services are here once a week, and she is in constant contact with the pest control technician. In an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 7:53 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated that he had never seen any rodents or rats in the facility but was told by Staff RR, a Registered Nurse who saw three rodents in room [ROOM NUMBER] which was on 06/27/24. The DON sent a message to the Administrator letting her know of the sighting which was reported by Staff RR. The Administrator told him that she would let Staff PP, the Former Maintenance Director who is no longer an employee with the facility, to take care of the issue According to the DON, he received multiple complaints of rodent sightings in the last six months from various staff members. Some staff members reported rodents coming out of the air-conditioning unit, but this was never verified. He always discussed these sightings in the department heads' meetings that are conducted daily, and the Administrator was aware of the rodent issue for the last six months. He was told by the facility's Administrator that the rodent issue would be handled in-house by the Maintenance Department rather than called a Pest Control Company. He did not document any of the reports or sightings from staff members and did not report the dates and times of the sightings. The DON stated that he expected the Administrator to take care of the rodent issue immediately, but she did not. Since he expected the Administrator to take care of the rodent concern, he did not notify the Health Department of the rodent infestation. He further reported that he is responsible for ensuring that the residents are kept in a safe, clean environment. He even discussed with the Administrator why she did not call the Pest Control Company but decided to take care of it in-house by the Maintenance Director. The Director of Nursing said that the Administrator was not overly concerned and said that she would have the in-house team take care of the rodents' sightings. In an interview with the Administrator on 08/29/24 at 8:00 AM, she revealed being was aware that Resident #9 reported seeing rodents in her room last Thursday and she told the pest control technician to treat Resident #9's room. The Administrator said they were going to deep clean the room and put all the food items in the room in tight plastic containers. In a phone interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 8:40 AM with Staff PP, who started working in the facility in December of 2023 and left a month ago( July).; revealed the Administrator was aware of the rodent issue in the facility and was very involved in the pest control area before he was even hired. Around March of this year, he started getting reports of rodents sighting around the facility. He was not sure as to what arrangements were made with the Staff OO, the Pest Control Technician, and the Administrator, but Staff OO did not know of the rodent infestation in the facility. Staff OO visited the facility weekly, and they always discussed pest control issues. Staff OO never mentioned any rodent sightings reported to him by the Administrator. Staff PP received multiple complaints of rodents sighting by staff members which were not documented or written down in a pest control log. Most of the rodent's sightings were reported on the 2nd floor [NAME] Wing. He further revealed he never felt the support or leadership skills from the facility's Administrator. There were no systems in place to control the rodent's problem from the source. The in-house treatments that were done in some of the rooms did not resolve the problem and were only a temporary fix. Staff PP advised the Administrator to close the [NAME] Wing unit to treat the entire wing and eradicate the issue, which she refused. A chart review revealed Resident #36 (room [ROOM NUMBER]) was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Dementia and Bipolar Disorder. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 12 which is mild cognitive impairment. In an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 9:38 AM with Staff RR, Registered Nurse stated she has worked in the facility for the last 13 months. Around two months ago, she came down to the Director of Nursing (DON) office and told him that she saw three rodents running around in Resident #36's room; it was during medication administration, it was late in the evening when she noticed the rodents located at the end of the room. The DON told her that he would let management know of the rodent's sighting. A few days later, the DON told her that rodent traps would be placed in the resident's room.
CRITICAL (K)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations, interviews, the Administrator failed to follow up on reported rodent sightings in a timely...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations, interviews, the Administrator failed to follow up on reported rodent sightings in a timely manner and address them immediately, the administrative staff failed to follow infection preventions and control techniques and CDC (Centers for Disease Control) guidelines for How to Control Wild Rodent Infestations, the facility's administration staff failed to ensure that their policies for pest control services were followed, coordinate with other department heads; failed to contact the appropriate local agencies regarding the rodent infestation. The facility's failure to immediately implement an effective pest control program to eradicate and contain the rodents. The facility's failure to properly inspect, clean and remove food sources identified in 2 of 17 Residents' rooms (Resident #9 and Resident #36). Rats and mice are known to carry many diseases. This can cause a severe life-threatening disease, Mpox (virus that affects rodents, and causes a painful rash, enlarged lymph nodes and fever in humans), and rat-bite fever (causes fever, vomiting, headache, muscle, and joint pain, and rash in humans) which has the potential to affect 111 residents residing in the 120-bed facility. The facility failed to ensure that infection control procedures and guidelines were followed to properly handle the Glucometer for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Blood Glucose Monitor Testing (Resident #48). The facility failed to ensure proper hand hygiene and Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) guidelines were followed during wound care treatment for 1 of 1 resident observed for wound care (Resident #307). The facility failed to ensure a clear separation between the soiled linen area and the clean laundry areas to prevent cross-contamination during 2 of 2 observations of the laundry room. Facility failed to ensure designated Infection Preventionist who is responsible for the facility's Infection, Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) had completed specialized training in infection prevention and control. The system failure to ensure pest control/infection control and prevention interventions and services were effective and implemented resulted in the likelihood for serious injury and/or death. This failure resulted in the determination of Immediate Jeopardy on 06/27/2024. The findings of Immediate Jeopardy were determined to be ongoing on 8/30/2024. The findings included: 1) The Surveyor requested to review completed copy of specialized training in infection prevention and control from the Director of Nursing (DON), who was also assigned the infection Preventionist (IP). No certificate of completion was provided. Review of job description for DON/IP dated 10/31/23 sign by the DON/IP revealed that the Certification in Infection Control as specified by Appendix PP at 880 is required or must obtain within the first 90 days of employment. An interview was conducted on 08/30/24 at 11:45 AM with the DON/IP. He stated he has worked at the facility since 10/31/23 and that he was not aware that he was assigned as the infection Preventionist until 2 months ago when the Administrator informed him to start the infection Preventionist modules. When asked if he had completed the entire IPCP training program and had a certificate, he stated that he started the modules but has not finished and has not obtained a certificate. Review of the facility's job description titled, Infection Preventionist, included the following: The primary purpose of your job position is to plan, organize, develop and direct the overall operation of our Infection Control and Prevention Program in accordance with current federal, state, and local standards, guidelines, and regulations that govern our center and as may be directed by the Medical Director or Director of Nursing (DON) to ensure that the center provides a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent and control the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Experience: Certification in Infection Control as specified by Appendix PP at 880 is required or must obtain within the first 90 days of employment. 2) During an observation conducted on 08/26/24 at 11:50 AM, two Surveyors were on the 2nd floor [NAME] Wing hallway across from Resident #9's room. Upon exiting the room across, they observed a rodent running in the [NAME] Wing hallway toward Resident #9's room. Further observation revealed Resident #9 was sitting in her wheelchair in the hallway. She was noted lifting one leg to avoid touching the rodent with her feet. Resident #9 then said to the Surveyors, There it is. Did you see it? as she pointed at the rodent running into her room. Record review for Resident #9 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include: Hemiplegia, Muscle Weakness, and Gout. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #9 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated that she was cognitively intact and able to communicate. Section GG of the MDS revealed that Resident #9 could wheel at least 150 feet in a corridor or similar space once she is seated in a wheelchair. During an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 11:24 AM with Resident #9, she stated that for the last 4 Saturdays, there had not been any housekeeping services and that the place was dirty. The facility's Supervisors were aware that there were pests, roaches, and mice/rodents in the facility. When asked how often she has seen any, she said, They practically live here. During this entire interview, the Surveyor noted that food packaging was opened and laying on the overbed table, and other unsealed food items were around the bed and on the bedside table. During an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 7:53 AM with the DON/IP, he stated that he had never seen any rodents in the facility but was told by Staff RR, a Registered Nurse who saw rodents in a resident's room on 06/27/24 and reported it to him. Staff RR reported seeing rodents in room [ROOM NUMBER] running around by the window. She further said to him that she witnessed 2 out of 3 medium-sized rodents who were not fully grown and who went by her very fast. This sighting was passed to the Administrator, who said she would handle the issue. During an interview with the Administrator on 08/29/24 at 8:00 AM, she stated that she was aware that Resident #9 reported seeing rodents in her room last Thursday. The Administrator stated that they are going to treat the entire room, take all furniture and belongings out, and look for possible openings and holes. According to the facility's administration, Resident #9 has been in the facility for 20 years, and her family brings her groceries every week, which are stored all around her room. During an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 9:38 AM with Staff RR, the Registered Nurse reported around two months ago, she came down to the Director of Nursing (DON) office and told him that she saw three rodents running around in Resident #36's room. It was late in the evening, during medication administration, when she noticed the rodents were located at the end of the room. The DON told her that he would let management know of the rodent's sighting. A few days later, the DON told her that rodent traps would be placed in the resident's room. Any rodents or pest sightings are documented on the pest control log in the nurse's station. When asked if she had documented the sighting in the pest control log, she said no. Record review for Resident #36 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] clinical diagnoses include: Dementia, Bipolar Disorder. Review of the MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 12, which was slight cognitive impairment. Review of the CDC's How to Control Wild Rodent Infestations, 01/03/23, https://www.cdc.gov/healthy-pets/rodent-control/index. html included in part the following: Rodents, such as rats, mice, and chipmunks, are known to carry many diseases. These diseases can spread to people directly, through: Handling of rodents. Contact with rodent droppings (poop), urine, or saliva. Rodent bites. Rodent droppings, urine, and saliva can spread by breathing in air or eating food that is contaminated with rodent waste. Rodents can also carry ticks, mites, or fleas that can spread diseases. Review of the facility's policy titled, Pest Control Services, dated 12/08/23, included the following: A program will be established for the control of insects and rodents within the facility. Procedure: 1. The Administrator coordinates with the Maintenance Department to arrange pest control services on a monthly basis, or as needed. 2. Food preparation, service, and storage areas will be monitored regularly for any signs of pest/vermin 3) Record review for Resident #48 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] diagnoses that include: Metabolic Encephalopathy. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #48 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 07, which indicated that he was severely cognitively impaired. Review of the Physician's Orders showed that Resident #48 had an order dated 04/24/24 for Humalog KwikPen Subcutaneous Solution Pen-injector 100 Unit/ml (Insulin Lispro), Inject as per sliding scale before meals and at bedtime for DM. Injector 1 Fingerstick blood glucose monitoring QID (four times a day) before meal and at bedtime for Diabetes Mellitus (DM). On 08/27/24 at 4:00 PM observation of blood glucose monitoring test (Accu-Chek) conducted by Staff WW, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff WW gather all the following supplies: Glucometer, 2 alcohol wipes, lancet, a container of blood glucose test strips, and placed them all on a foam tray. She entered the room for Resident #48, washed her hands, donned gloves, placed the foam tray on the bedside table, and performed the Accu-Chek on Resident #48. She then, placed the dirty Glucometer and the container of blood glucose strips back on the foam tray and walked outside of the room to discard the used lancet into the sharp's container. Staff WW returned to Resident #48's bedside table, placed the dirty Glucometer and the container of blood glucose strips into her uniform pocket and threw away the foam tray, then walked to the bathroom and washed her hands. She exited Resident #48's room and removed the dirty Glucometer and the container of blood glucose strips from her pocket and placed them on top of her medication cart. Staff WW donned gloves, bleach wipes and cleaned the dirty Glucometer and sat it on top of Medication cart to dry. When asked why she placed the dirty Glucometer in her pocket, Staff WW stated that she had no place to carry it, and she needed to wash her hands. Review of the CDC's Infection Prevention during Blood Glucose Monitoring and Insulin Administration, 02/06/13, https://www.cdc.gov/celiac/docs/addenda/celiac/07b_celiac_2013march_glucose_monitoring Blood Glucose Meters: General: Whenever possible, blood glucose meters should be assigned to an individual person, and not be shared. If blood glucose meters must be shared, the device should be cleaned and disinfected after every use, per manufacturer's instructions, to prevent carry-over of blood and infectious agents. Unused supplies and medications should be maintained in clean areas separate from used supplies and equipment (e.g., glucose meters). Do not carry supplies and medications in pockets. 4) Record review for Resident #307 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], clinical diagnoses include but not limited to: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with other Specified Complication; Pressure Ulcers. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #307 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 11, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Review of the Physician's Orders showed that Resident #307 had an order dated 07/04/24 for Enhanced Barrier Precautions every shift for Wounds PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) required; Wound care Cleanse the wound with Dakins and pat dry with gauze. Apply Santyl to the wound bed followed by alginate. Cover with foam with silicone bordered dressing daily and PRN (as needed) for soiled or loose dressing. Collagenase Ointment 250 Unit/GM, apply to Left Posterior Groin topically as needed for Wound care Cleanse the wound with Dakins and pat dry with gauze. During a wound care observation conducted on 08/28/24 at 2:48 PM, Staff XX, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) noted she has been working at the facility for 3-4 months as the wound care nurse. Staff XX was observed gathering the following supplies from the wound care cart: a hand sanitizer pump, gloves (placed on a foam tray), gauzes, a cup of the powered medication (alginate), and a cup of clear liquid (Dakin's solution). She entered Resident #307's room and set-up the supplies on the over-bed table that was covered with a chuck pad. Staff XX went to the bathroom, washed her hands and returned to the bedside and donned on double gloves (no gown was donned). She soaked gauze with the Dakin's solution and cleaned the groin area, removed the top pair of gloves, leaving bottom pair of gloves on and donned a new clean pair of gloves over dirty pair that remained on her hands. Staff XX continued to double glove and don clean gloves over the dirty pair of gloves at least six times during the wound treatment procedure. In addition, Staff XX was observed in the bathroom washing her hands, used a small bottle (which she thought it was soap, however it was labeled hand sanitizer) to wash her hands. She then stated that the soap dispenser has not been working. Review of the CDC's Implementation of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Use in Nursing Homes to Prevent Spread of Multidrug-resistant Organisms (MDROs), 04/02/24, https://www.cdc.gov/long-term-care-facilities/hcp/prevent-mdro/PPE.html included in part the following: Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) Expand the use of PPE and refer to the use of gown and gloves during high-contact resident care activities that provide opportunities for transfer of MDROs to staff hands and clothing. The use of gown and gloves for high-contact resident care activities is indicated, when Contact Precautions do not otherwise apply, for nursing home residents with wounds and/or indwelling medical devices regardless of MDRO colonization as well as for residents with MDRO infection or colonization. Examples of high-contact resident care activities requiring gown and glove use for Enhanced Barrier Precautions include Device care or use: central line, urinary catheter, feeding tube, tracheostomy/ventilator. Wound care: any skin opening requiring a dressing. Review of the CDC's Clinical Safety: Hand Hygiene for Healthcare Workers, 02/27/24, https://www.cdc.gov/clean-hands/hcp/clinical-safety/index.html included in part the following: Know when to clean your hands: Immediately before touching a patient. Before performing an aseptic task such as placing an indwelling device or handling invasive medical devices. Before moving from work on a soiled body site to a clean body site on the same patient. After touching a patient or patient's surroundings. After contact with blood, body fluids, or contaminated surfaces. Immediately after glove removal. During an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 3:00 PM, Staff XX was asked why she did not wear a gown during the wound treatment, she just lowered her head and shrugged her shoulders. In addition, she was asked why she did not perform hand hygiene after removing her gloves, Staff XX stated that the hand sanitizer dries her hands, so she does not use it and that's why she wore double gloves. Review of the facility's policy titled, Infection Control Guidelines for All Nursing Procedures, dated April 2013, included the following: To provide guidelines for general infection control while caring for residents. General Guidelines: 3. Employees must wash their hands for ten (10) to fifteen (15) seconds using antimicrobial or non-antimicrobial soap and water under the following conditions: a. Before and after direct contact with residents. d. after removing gloves. 4. In most situations, the preferred method of hand hygiene is with an alcohol-based hand rub. If hands are not visibly soiled, use an alcohol-based hand rub containing 60-95% ethanol or isopropanol for all the following situations: a. Before and after direct contact with residents. f. Before moving from a contaminated body site to a clean body site during resident care. j. After removing gloves. 5. Wear personal protective equipment as necessary to prevent exposure to spills or splashes of blood or body fluids or other potentially infectious materials. 5) An observation was conducted on 08/26/24 at 10:48 AM of Staff I, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) dumping an open bag of dirty laundry down the 3rd floor laundry chute. During an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 10:49 AM, Staff I was asked if she just dumped dirty laundry down the chute in an open bag, she stated yes. She acknowledged that sometimes she does dump dirty laundry down the laundry chute in an open bag and sometimes she does not. During this interview, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) approached Staff I and stated that the dirty laundry should always be in a closed bag before dumping it down the laundry chute. Review of the facility's policy titled, Laundry Services- Handling/Storing/Transporting Linen, dated 12/08/23, included the following: The purpose of this procedure is to provide a process for the safe and aseptic handling, washing, and storage of linen. Procedure: Standard Precautions 1. Separate soiled and clean linen at all times. Bagging and Handling/Sorting Soiled Linen: 1. All soiled linen must be placed directly into a covered container designated for soiled linen and/or plastic bag which can contain the moisture. 4. Handle soiled linen as little as possible to prevent agitation. 5. Employees sorting or washing linen must wear a gown and gloves. Washing Linen and other Soiled Items: 5. Keep soiled and clean linen, their respective hampers and laundry carts, separate at all times. 7. Wash mops separately from linens, using bleach/EPA registered germicidal A tour of the facility's laundry room was conducted on 08/30/24 at 10:20 AM with the Maintenance Director and the Environmental Director. Upon entering the laundry room, it was noted that Staff EE, laundry aide, was not wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) and she was about to load soiled linen into the washer. She realized that the surveyor had entered the laundry and donned on a gown. The laundry was a small room that had 2 washers and 2 dryers (no separation between the contaminated linens and the clean laundry areas). There was an attached room for receiving the soiled laundry via the chute from the 2nd and 3rd floor, and another room where residents' clean clothing is sorted and stored; both room doors were propped open. In addition, there were 4 labeled laundry carts used to transfer linens between the soiled room, the washers, the dryers and the clean clothing room. Further observation revealed one of the carts was filled with clean dry residents' clothing, however, the cart was labeled for soiled linens. During an interview conducted on 08/30/24 at 10:30 AM, Staff EE stated she sorts the soiled linens and residents' clothing by color in the container in the soiled/chute room (the clothing are left inside the container until enough accumulate of the same color). Observation of the soiled room revealed that the chute and container were filled with soiled linen and residents' clothing; some of the clothing were in plastic bags and some were not. Staff EE acknowledged that the space is small and not divided, however, the staff is aware which cart to use for soiled linen versus clean linen since they are labeled. On 08/30/24 at 3:15 PM, a 2nd visit to the laundry room was conducted; only one laundry aide was observed in the room, Staff K, housekeeping and laundry aide. The surveyor noted a laundry basket overflowing with wet clean linens (hanging out of the basket and very close to the floor). Staff K stated that she was not sure why the other dryer was not working and was waiting for the one dryer currently working. .
CRITICAL (K) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Deficiency F0925 (Tag F0925)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility's administrative staff failed to implement, maintain, and me...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility's administrative staff failed to implement, maintain, and measure an effective pest control program to eradicate and contain rodent infestation. Facility administrative staff was unable to address rodent sightings in a timely manner. The facility's administrative staff failed to follow their own policy for pest control and educate staff members appropriately. These diseases can spread to people directly through the handling of rodents; contact with rodent feces (poop), urine, or saliva (such as through breathing in air or eating food that is contaminated with rodent waste); or rodent bites. This had the potential to affect 111 residents residing in this 120-bed capacity facilities. The system failure to ensure pest control/infection control and prevention interventions and services were effective and implemented resulted in the likelihood for serious injury and/or death. This failure resulted in the determination of Immediate Jeopardy on 06/27/2024. The findings of Immediate Jeopardy were determined to be ongoing on 8/30/2024. The findings included: A review of the facility policy titled Pest Control Services dated 12/08/23 showed the following: A program will be established to control insects and rodents within the facility. The Administrator coordinates with the Maintenance Department to arrange pest control services monthly or as needed. Staff should report to the Administrator and Maintenance Department sightings of live pests, which are documented in the pest control log. Food preparation, service, and storage areas will be monitored regularly for any signs of pests or vermin. The Administrator and Maintenance Department will be notified immediately of any concerns. A chart review revealed that Resident #9 (room [ROOM NUMBER]) was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Hemiplegia, Muscle Weakness, and Gout. The last Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], section C, revealed Resident #9 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated that she was cognitively intact and able to communicate. Section GG of the MDS revealed that Resident #9 could wheel at least 150 feet in a corridor or similar space once she is seated in a wheelchair. A chart review revealed that Resident #36 (room [ROOM NUMBER]) was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Dementia, Bipolar Disorder. The MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 12, which was slight cognitive impairment. In an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 11:24 AM, Resident #9 stated that for the last 4 Saturdays, there had not been any housekeeping services and that the place was dirty. The facility's Supervisors were aware that there were pests, roaches, and mice/rodents in the facility. When asked how often she has seen any, she said, They practically live here. Resident #9 then pointed at a flat, sticky trap (with a rat picture on the label) used for mice/rats in her room that was still in an unused packet sitting on top of her belongings. Resident #9 reported that these traps were used for mice/rats sighting in her room near the air-conditioning area. In this interview, the Surveyor observed a white boxed container, which was located by the air-conditioning unit and was labeled for pests and roaches. According to Resident #9, the white box used for trapping pests did not work for rats or rodents, and this was why she kept requesting the pest control technician to get her the unused designated mice trap that was seen earlier on top of her belongings. During this entire interview, the Surveyor noted that food packaging was opened over the bed table, and other unsealed food items were around the bed. In an observation conducted on 08/26/24, at 11:50 AM, Two Surveyors were on the 2nd floor [NAME] Wing hallway across from Resident #9' room. Upon exiting the room across, they observed a rodent running in the [NAME] Wing hallway toward Resident #9's room. Resident #9, who was sitting in her wheelchair in the hallway, lifted one leg to avoid touching the rodent with her feet. Resident #9 then said to Surveyors, There it is. Did you see it? as she pointed at the rodent running into her room. In an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 1:30 PM, with the facility's Administrator, she stated she was not aware of any rodents sighting in the facility and reported that she was not told by any residents or staff members of any rodents in the facility. A chart review revealed Resident #9's roommate, Resident #96, was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Altered Mental Status, Dementia, and Cerebral infarction. The MDS dated [DATE] showed a BIMS score of 14, which was cognitively intact. In an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 12:10 PM with Resident #96, she was not able to answer any of the Surveyor's questions regarding the rodent sighting. In an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 1:07 PM with Staff PP, the Psychologist stated that she had not seen any rodents in the facility but was told by several residents that they observed rodents in the facility. A review of the Pest Control service reports showed the following: On 02/1/24, a pest control service report showed that a routine rodent control service was provided. On 03/7/24, a pest control service report that showed a routine rodent control service was provided. On 4/4/24, a pest control service report that showed a routine rodent control service was provided. On 05/02/24, the pest control service report showed that a routine rodent control service was provided. On 06/6/24, a pest control service report that showed a routine rodent control service was provided. On 07/11/24, a pest control service report showed that a rodent control service was provided for exterior perimeter rodent control for roof rats. On 08/01/24, the pest control service report showed that a routine rodent control service was provided. In an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 6:28 AM with Staff OO, Pest Control, he stated that he had been coming to the facility four times a week for the last seven months. When asked if he had seen any rodents in the facility, he said no and that he had not seen any rodent droppings. Staff OO stated that Resident #9 told him that she saw a rodent in her room near the window by the air-conditioning unit last Thursday. He then placed two glue traps in the room by the air-conditioning unit. Staff OO stated that during the above routine rodent control services conducted monthly, he checks on the five black rodent control boxes that are placed outside the facility perimeter. These boxes are checked once a month for any activities or sighting of rodents. He never found any rodents inside the black boxes, but he did see some activities inside the boxes indicating that rodents took the bates that were placed in these boxes. The rodent trap boxes are part of a routine service for preventative measures. According to Staff OO, once a week for his visits is sufficient, but twice a week would be better. He had reports of rodents being seen in the main kitchen about two months ago, and he placed traps. Staff OO did not see any rodent activities or capture any rodents from the traps that he placed in the main kitchen. According to Staff OO, the facility does not have a Pest Control Log that he checks every time he comes into the facility to review the areas and rooms that need to be sprayed or treated. The staff tells him verbally about the areas that need treatment when he comes into the facility. In an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 7:53 AM with the Director of Nursing (DON), he stated that he had never seen any rodents in the facility but was told by Staff RR, a Registered Nurse who saw rodents in a resident's room on 06/27/24 and reported it to him. Staff RR reported seeing rodents in room [ROOM NUMBER] running around by the window. She further said to him that she witnessed 3 medium-sized rodents who were not fully grown and who went by her very fast. This sighting was passed to the Administrator, who said she would handle the issue. An overnight staff member whose name he did not know told Staff SS, Medical Records, that she saw a rodent on the 2nd floor but did not give any specific room or location of this sighting. In an interview with the Administrator on 08/29/24 at 8:00 AM, she stated that he verbally tells Staff OO of pest control issues and sightings when he comes for his weekly visits. According to the Administrator, it is not written on any pest control logs. She was aware that Resident #9 reported seeing rodents in her room last Thursday, and she told Staff OO to treat the room. The Administrator stated that they are going to treat the entire room, take all furniture and belongings out, and look for possible openings and holes. According to the facility's administration, Resident #9 has been in the facility for 20 years, and her family brings her groceries every week, which are stored all around her room. In a phone interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 8:40 AM with Staff PP, the Former Maintenance Director stated that he started working in the facility in December of last year and left the facility a month ago. He was told by Staff QQ, Maintenance Staff, that Resident #36 had rodents running around her room. Staff QQ placed glue traps in Resident #36's room to try to trap the rodents, but this did not work since rodent sightings were still noted in the room. In March of 2024, he started getting multiple complaints of rodents around the facility from multiple staff members who reported sighting, but none of the sightings were documented in a pest control log. Most of the rodent sightings were coming from the 2nd floor [NAME] Wing. In an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 9:38 AM with Staff RR, the Registered Nurse reported that she has been working in the facility for the last 13 months. Around two months ago, she came down to the Director of Nursing (DON) office and told him that she saw three rodents running around in Resident #36's room. It was late in the evening, during medication administration, when she noticed the rodents were located at the end of the room. The DON told her that he would let management know of the rodent's sighting. A few days later, the DON told her that rodent traps would be placed in the resident's room. Any rodents or pest sightings are documented on the pest control log in the nurse's station. When asked if she had documented the sighting in the pest control log, she said no. In an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 9:52 AM with Staff SS, Medical Records stated that she was unaware of any rodents sightings in the facility or any other staff members reporting sighting of rodents. She denied any staff telling her verbally or via text messages of any rodents sightseeing in the facility. When asked about the policy for pest sightings, she said that she would tell the Administrator and Maintenance staff. When asked if she was part of any group chat regarding the facility, she said yes. In an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 10:04 AM with Staff QQ, Maintenance staff reported that he has been working in the facility since 2001. He has never seen any rodents around the facility and was never told by any staff members or residents of any rodent sighting. Staff PP never told him about the rodents that were sighted in Resident #36's room. Staff QQ stated that he looks at the pest control log located on each unit for any pest control issues or sightings from staff. He knows that the Pest Control technician comes into the facility once a week but does not know what was treated and which areas. In another interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 10:10 AM with Staff SS, she reported that after she was done with the earlier interview on 08/29/24 at 9:52, she suddenly remembered that a staff member said to her that they saw a rodent on the unit which was on 08/20/24. She did not know the name of the staff member who told her but knew that they worked the night shift. Staff SS sent the information to the facility's group chat. In an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 10:18 AM with Staff TT, Physical Therapy Assistance stated that she had never seen any rodents in the facility. This week, she was told of a rodent sightseeing, which was observed by Surveyors and Resident #9. She is part of a group chat from the facility by all department heads. She read on the group chat that a rodent was seen by a staff member last week, on 08/20/24. The facility's Administrator was aware of these sightings.
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Tube Feeding (Tag F0693)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations and interviews, the facility failed to follow the doctor's orders for tube feeding administ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations and interviews, the facility failed to follow the doctor's orders for tube feeding administration, complete a nutritional assessment, and identify a severe weight loss for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for tube feeding (Resident #210). The findings included: Resident #210 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Seizures, Dementia, Hypertension, and Protein Calorie Malnutrition. Hospital records dated 08/07/24 (8 days before his admission to the facility) showed the following: Resident #210 presented to the hospital with lethargy, lack of appetite, poor intake of meals, and Altered Mental Status. Resident #210 ' s daughter agreed to move forward with a Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement. The Speech Language Pathologist deemed inappropriate for food by mouth trials and at high risk for aspiration. Upon physical exam, Resident #210 ' s weight was 132 pounds. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #210 has severe cognitive impairment. A review of the physicians ' orders showed an order for enteral feeding Jevity 1.5 (tube feeding formulary) and bolus feeding six times a day, which started on 08/16/24. The bolus tube feeding regimen times are to be given at 5:00 AM, 8:00 AM, 11:00 AM, 2:00 PM, 5:00 PM, and 9:00 PM. A can of Jevity 1.5 provides 355 calories/can and 15.1 grams of protein/can. This above order will provide 2130 calories a day and 90.6 grams of protein if six cans of Jevity 1.5 are given as ordered. A review of Resident #210's electronic chart showed that no initial nutritional assessment was completed for Resident #210, and no admission weight was taken on Resident #210. In an interview conducted on 08/27/24 at 12:30 PM with Staff AA, the Clinical Dietitian stated that she completed Resident #210 ' s initial nutrition assessment on 08/25/24 but did not know why it was not in the electronic system and could not provide a copy of the evaluation to this Surveyor. She further said she completes an initial nutrition assessment within seven days of admission. If the residents are at high nutritional risk, she will try to complete the assessment sooner. Staff AA said that she did not have an admission weight obtained on admission for Resident #210 and was unaware of Resident #210 ' s weight history. In an interview conducted on 08/27/24 at 2:30 PM with Staff HH, a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) stated that a designated CNA (Staff GG) takes the weights on all residents. In an interview conducted on 08/27/24 at 2:47 PM with Staff FF, Registered Nurse, she reported Resident #210 is tolerating his bolus tube feeding well with no issues. In an interview conducted on 08/27/24 at 2:55 PM with Staff GG, CNA stated that the weights are taken and given to the assigned Nurse to put in the electronic system. Sometimes, the CNA assigned to the specific resident will take the weight on the resident. Staff GG said that she only sometimes takes the weights on all residents and that she is sometimes given other duties and assignments. When residents get admitted or readmitted their weights are taken the same day or the day after. The weights are monitored on a monthly basis, and sometimes, they are monitored on a weekly basis, depending on the specific resident. This Surveyor requested a new weight on 08/27/24 at 3:10 PM. The weight showed that Resident #210 was 109.8 pounds, which revealed a 17% severe weight loss in less than one month. In an observation conducted on 08/28/24 at 8:20 AM, Resident #210 was noted in bed with no tube feeding running at the time of this observation. In an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 8:10 AM with Staff CC, a Registered Nurse (RN) was asked about the scheduled bolus tube feeding times for Resident #210. She said that the night Nurse who worked the 11:00 PM to the 7:00 AM shift did not tell her when the last bolus tube feeding was given. Staff CC then proceeded to look in the physical paper chart for Resident #210 ' s tube feeding order. Staff CC reported that the tube feeding was not clear and that she needed to look at the electronic records for an accurate tube feeding order. After a few minutes of trying to look for Resident #210 ' s tube feeding order in the electronic system, she turned to the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), who was next to her, to help her find the tube feeding order in the electronic system. The ADON was observed helping Staff CC look for Resident #210 ' s tube feeding orders in the electronic system. Staff CC verified that the bolus tube feeding regimen times are given at 5:00 AM, 8:00 AM, 11:00 AM, 2:00 PM, 5:00 PM, and 9:00 PM. In an observation conducted on 08/28/24 at 8:20 AM, Resident #210 was noted in bed with no tube feeding running at the time of this observation. In an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 8:26 AM, the ADON stated that Staff CC usually works on different floors and was unfamiliar with Resident #210. She said that the 11:00 PM to 7:00 AM shift Nurse should have communicated the tube feeding times and orders to Staff CC. In an observation conducted on 08/28/24 at 9:00 AM, Resident #210 was noted in bed with no tube feeding running in the room. In an observation conducted on 08/28/24 at 9:30 AM, Resident #210 was noted in bed with no tube feeding running in the room. In an observation conducted on 08/28/24 at 9:40 AM, Staff CC noted feeding Resident #210 his bolus tube feeding order, which was 1:40 minutes later than his scheduled feeding time of 8:00 AM. In an observation conducted on 08/28/24 at 11:00 AM, Resident #210 was noted in bed with no tube feeding running at the time of this observation. In an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 12:25 PM, with Staff, CC stated that she was just getting ready to give Resident #210 his tube feeding since she gave the earlier feeding late. A phone interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 1:00 PM with Resident #210 ' s daughter stated that her father was 138 pounds about one month ago. She further stated that she is waiting on a Modified Barium Swallow (MBS) exam to assess for possible diet upgrade by mouth which he was in the past. In an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 2:45 PM, with Staff CC reported she still needs to give Resident #210 his tube feeding bolus feeding since the last bolus feeding was given at 12:30 PM. She further said that she only gives one bottle of tube feeding at a time as per the Physician ' s orders and does not give two bottles to compensate for the late times. A progress note dated 08/22/24 by the Physician revealed the following: Resident #210 with a history of Dementia and Protein Calorie Malnutrition. The care plan initiated on 08/27/24 showed that Resident #210 was at risk for alteration in nutrition and hydration related to malnutrition/risk for malnutrition and tube feeding. Resident #210 will eat above 50% of his meals daily through the next review date. Diet as ordered, cue, set up, and assist as needed with meals. A review of the Medication Administration Audit Report for Resident #210 revealed the following: On 08/22/24, the tube feeding scheduled for 9:00 PM was given at 10:20 PM, which was one hour and 20 minutes later. On 08/23/24, the tube feeding that was scheduled to be given at 5:00 PM was given at 6:36 PM, which was 1 hour and 36 minutes later. On 08/23/24, the tube feeding that was scheduled to be given at 9:00 PM was given at 11:07 PM, which was 2 hours and 7 minutes later. On 08/24/24, the tube feeding was scheduled to be given at 9:00 PM and was given at 1:02 AM, which was 4 hours and 2 minutes later. On 08/26/24, the tube feeding was scheduled to be given at 9:00 PM and was given at 4:58 AM, which was 7 hours and 58 minutes later. On 08/27/24, the tube feeding was scheduled to be given at 8:00 AM and was given at 12:06 PM, which was 4 hours and 6 minutes later. On 08/27/24, the tube feeding was scheduled to be given at 11:00 AM and was given at 12:14 PM, which was one hour and 14 minutes later. On 08/27/24, the tube feeding was scheduled to be given at 9:00 PM and was given at 12:50 AM, which was 3 hours and 50 minutes later. A review of the electronic record on 08/28/24 showed that Resident #210 did not complete an initial nutrition assessment, which was 13 days after his admission. A review of the facility's policy titled Nutrition Policy dated 09/07/2023 revealed the following: A Registered Dietitian or other clinically qualified nutritional professional is responsible for the completion of a comprehensive nutrition assessment for all residents/patients for the purpose of identifying and planning the nutrition care based on the needs, goals, and preferences of each resident/patient. The resident/patient nutrition status will be assessed upon admission and monitored at least quarterly thereafter. A review of the facility ' s policy titled Weight Management-Residents titled 12/2008 revealed the following: The multidisciplinary team will strive to prevent, monitor, and intervene for undesirable weight loss for our residents. The nursing staff will measure the residents ' weights on admission/readmission. The threshold for significant unplanned and undesired weight loss will be based on the following criteria [where the percentage of body weight loss = (usual weight -= actual weight) / (usual weight) X 100]: a. month -= 5% weight loss three months -- 7.5% weight loss six months -- 10% weight loss.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0558 (Tag F0558)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2)Record review for Resident #11 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses:...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2)Record review for Resident #11 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis following Cerebral Infarction affecting Left Non-Dominant side; Lack of Coordination; Anxiety Disorder; Need for Assistance with Personal Care. Review of Section C of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #11 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 13, which indicated that he was cognitively intact. Review of Section GG of the MDS revealed that Resident #11 was dependent on staff for toileting hygiene. During an observation conducted on 08/26/24 at 10:24 AM, Resident #11's call light was wrapped around the left bedside rail, hanging downward, and out of reach of the resident. When asked Resident 11 if he can reach the call light he stated no, since he cannot move his left arm, photographic evidence obtained. Asked resident to reach for the call light but was unable to reach it. 3) Record review for Resident #15 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Cerebral Palsy; Contraction of right wrist and hand; Need for Assistance with Personal Care. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #15 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 00, which indicated that he was rarely understood. Review of Section GG of the MDS revealed that Resident #15 was dependent on staff for toileting hygiene. During an observation conducted on 08/26/24 at 10:40 AM Resident #15 was in bed, call light was wrapped around the bedrail and hanging downward, photographic evidence obtained. When asked Resident #15 if he was able to reach the call light, he shook his head indicating no. 4) Record review for Resident #306 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Unspecified Fracture of the Right Femur; Shortness of Breath; History of Falling. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #306 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 05, which indicated that he was cognitively impaired. During an observation conducted on 08/26/24 at 10:35 AM, Resident #306 was in his wheelchair and was holding an empty water cup. He stated that he was going to get water. When asked why he did not call for staff to get him water, he looked confused and did not respond. Further observation revealed Resident #306's call light was behind his bed on the floor. Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the call lights were within reach for 4 of 43 sampled residents (Resident #88, Resident #11, Resident #15 and Resident #306). The findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled Call Lights dated 09/01/23 showed that the purpose of this policy is ensuring residents' request and needs are responded to. The call light should be within reach of the resident. 1. A chart review revealed that Resident #88 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Cerebral infarction and Hyperlipidemia. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #88 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12, which was a slight cognitive impairment. In a phone interview conducted on 08/25/24 at 11:33 AM with Resident #88's family stated that Resident #88 fell in the facility last week trying to go to the bathroom on his own with no assistance. The call light was not within reach and Resident #88 was not able to call for help. In an observation conducted on 08/26/24 at 7:30 AM, the call light cord was noted on the floor on the right side of the bed. In an observation conducted on 08/26/24 at 8:00 AM, the call light cord was noted on the floor on the right side of the bed. In an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 8:30 AM, Resident #88 reported that the call light cord in his room is never within reach and is always located on the right side of his bed. He had fallen last week and was not able to call for help because the call light cord was on the floor. Resident #88 said that while attempting to use the bathroom on his own, he fell and somehow managed to get back on the bed with lots of difficulties. He is worried that the next time he has a fall, he will not be able to call for help. In this interview, Resident #88's call light was noted on the floor on the right side of the bed. In an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 8:45 AM with Staff YY, a Certified Nursing Assistant stated that when the call light is used, a light will go on outside the room and at the nurse's station, indicating the room number of the resident who used the call light to call for assistance.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to initiate and resolve grievances for 4 of 43 residen...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to initiate and resolve grievances for 4 of 43 residents reviewed for grievances (Resident #6, Resident #9, Resident #19, and Resident #206). The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Complaint/Grievance, dated 09/07/23, included the following: The Center will support each resident's right to voice a complaint/grievance without fear of discrimination or reprisal. The center will make prompt efforts to resolve the complaint/grievance and inform the resident of progress towards resolution. The center will inform residents of the right to file a grievance orally and in writing, the right to obtain a written decision regarding the grievance. Procedure: 1. An employee receiving a complaint/grievance from a resident, family member and/or visitor will initiate a Complaint/Grievance Form. Complaint/Grievance forms will be available 24 hours per days 7 days a week in an unsecured common area. 2. Original grievance forms are then submitted to the Grievance Officer/designee for further action. 4. The grievance follow-up should be completed in a reasonable time frame; this should not exceed 14 days. 5. The findings of the grievance shall be recorded on the Complaint/Grievance Form. 7. The Grievance Official will log complaints/grievances on a Monthly Grievance log. 1)During an observation and interview conducted on 08/26/24 11:14 AM, Resident #6 stated that she has been soaking wet since this morning, but her call light does not work. In addition, she noted that this is not the first time she has been left soaking wet in the bed and forced to wait for the staff. Resident #6 stated staff is aware that the call light doesn't work, however, nothing has been done about it. Record review for Resident #6 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Multiple Sclerosis; Generalized Anxiety Disorder; Need for Assistance with Personal Care. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #6 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 15, which indicated that she was cognitively intact. Resident #6 was dependent on staff for toilet hygiene and needs substantial/maximal assistance for personal hygiene. 2) During an observation and interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 11:24 AM, Resident #9 stated that her call light has not worked for over 6-months now; and she has complained to the staff, and they have not done anything about it. She noted that maintenance has worked on the call light, however the call light works for a few days and then it stops working again. She acknowledged having 2 Call bells (this a manual call bell that you tap on top and it is only auditory), however the staff told her that they cannot hear them, so she doesn't bother to use them. Record review for Resident #9 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Hemiplegia, Muscle Weakness, and Gout. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #9 had a BIMS score of 15, which indicated that she was cognitively intact and able to communicate. Resident #9 could wheel at least 150 feet in a corridor or similar space once she is seated in a wheelchair. 3) During an observation conducted on 08/26/24 at 11:43 AM, Resident # 19 stated that his call light has not worked for over a month. He noted that maintenance staff told him that it was an issue with the electrical outlets, however, the maintenance staff stated that he was not an electrician. He acknowledged wheeling himself in his wheelchair out of his room to get the staff's attention when he needs assistance. Record review for Resident #19 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Hemiplegia, unspecified affecting Left Nondominant Side; Generalized Anxiety Disorder and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #19 had a BIMS score of 14, which indicated that he was cognitively intact. Resident #19 required supervision from staff for toilet transfer and shower/bath self; Resident #19 uses a wheelchair. 4) Record review for Resident #206 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Other Specified Fracture of Unspecified Pubis, Subsequent Encounter for Fracture with Routine Healing; Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus; Need for Assistance With Personal Care. Resident #206 was discharged from the facility on 07/05/24. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #206 had a BIMS score of 14, which indicated that she was cognitively intact. Resident #206 required substantial/maximal assistance for lying to sitting on side of bed and toileting hygiene. Review of Nursing progress note dated 06/12/24 created by the Director of Nursing (DON) noted Resident #206's son was concerned that Resident #206's call light was still not functioning and wanted an update on the status of the call light. The DON informed Resident #206's son that she is doing well and call light is still non-functional but repairs are on-going and that a bell would be given to the resident to alert staff of need. Nursing progress note dated 07/01/24 documented Resident #206's call light was still non-functional, and Resident #206 had a manual call bell. Review of the monthly Grievance/Complaint Log from August 2023 to August 2024 documented the following: August 2023: no grievances on the log September 2023: 2 grievances on the log October 2023: no grievances on the log November 2023: 2 grievances on the log December 2023: 1 grievance on the log January 2024: no grievances on the log February 2024: 1 grievance on the log March 2024: 3 grievances on the log April 2024: no grievances on the log May 2024: 3 grievances on the log June 2024: 1 grievance on the log (no grievance filed from Resident #206 or her son) July 2024: 1 grievance on the log August 2024: 5 grievances on the log In summary, the Grievance log from August 2023-August 2024 had no complaints of call lights not functioning from any of the above residents. An interview was conducted on 08/28/24 at 9:25 AM with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). She stated that grievances are usually written if a family member or resident puts in a complaint. For example, if the bed control is broken, maintenance would get the complaint and change the remote control, but no grievance form will be filled out, that's the way the facility does it. An interview was conducted on 08/28/24 at 11:44 AM with the DON. He stated that any complaint from a resident or family member goes on the log and the grievance form should be filled and given to Social Services. Social Services will then give the form to the proper department to resolve. After the grievance is resolved then the form is given back to the social worker to file. Sometimes, grievances are discussed during the morning huddle meetings, such as residents' complaints, any concerns with staff, and environmental issues. For Resident #206, the DON stated that the son spoke with him and told him that the call light was not working. He didn't fill out the grievance form because he went to maintenance, but they were unable to fix it. He further stated that a call bell was provided to Resident #206 until the call light system can be fixed. He acknowledged not filling out a grievance form but did document in the nursing progress notes in Resident #206's chart. During an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 5:50 PM with Staff M, Registered Nurse (RN), stated she has been working at the facility for 1 year. She noted, if a resident has a complaint, she tell the supervisor or maintenance depending on the complaint. She stated they add it to the maintenance log and maintenance would get to it in the morning. She acknowledged that sometimes she fills out the grievance form for a resident. When asked to see the grievance form, Staff M went to the nurses' station and was observed looking for the form in a box filled with papers under the table. After 10 minutes of looking for the grievance form, Staff M finally found it. When questioned how often she utilizes the grievance form, she stated not often. She stated she recalls Resident #206 letting her know about the broken call light, she let the supervisor know and a bell was provided for Resident #206; however, the call light was never fixed. During an interview conducted on 08/30/24 at 4:15 PM, Social Services Director (SSD) stated she has been working at the facility since June 2024. She stated that she is responsible for maintaining the grievance log. The SSD stated the staff will fill out the grievance form or can come downstairs and report the complaint to her and she would fill out the form. She will then contact the proper department to investigate the grievance, and they will get back to her with the form filled out when the grievance is resolved; this way she can track the concerns in the facility. When asked if she has seen the grievance logs from August 2023 to August 2024, she stated yes and closed her eyes and shook her head.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2) Record review for Resident #94 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2) Record review for Resident #94 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Anxiety Disorder; Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus With Other Specified Complication; Altered Mental Status. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] Quarterly revealed that Resident #94 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 02, which indicated that she was severely cognitively impaired. Review of the Physician's Orders showed that Resident #94 had an order dated 05/08/24 for Insulin Lispro Injection Solution, inject as per sliding scale: if 150 - 199 = 2 units ; 200 - 249 = 4 units; 250 - 299 = 6 units; 300 - 349 = 8 units; 350 - 399 = 10 units Blood glucose greater than 400 give 12 units and notify physician, subcutaneously before meals and at bedtime for DM type 2. Clonazepam tablet 0.5 mg, give 1 tablet by mouth three times a day for Anxiety. Review of the Care Plan for Resident #94 revealed only one entry for Advanced Directives dated 07/28/24, no other documentation. During an interview conducted on 08/30/24 at 3:50 PM, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated she was unable to find any Care Plan for Resident #94 prior to the one dated 07/28/24. She noted that there was only the Interdisciplinary Care Plan Conference Record dated 06/04/24 in Resident #94's paper chart. She acknowledged that Resident #94 was admitted on [DATE] and by now there should be a Care Plan in place. 3) Record review for Resident #306 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Dementia, Unspecified Severity; Depression. Review of the Physician's Orders showed that Resident #306 had an order dated 08/15/24 for Olanzapine Tablet 5 MG, Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for psychotic disorder; Observe closely for side effects of Antipsychotic medication including dry mouth, constipation, blurred vision, disorientation or confusion, difficulty urinating, hypotension, dark urine, yellow skin, nausea or vomiting, lethargy, drooling, EPS symptoms (tremors, disturbed gait, increased agitation, restlessness, involuntary movement of mouth or tongue) every shift Document: 'Y' if monitored and none of the above observed. 'N' if monitored and any of the above was observed, select chart code 'Other/ See Nurses Notes' and progress note findings. Review of the Care plan dated 08/10/24 revealed that the resident has impaired cognitive function/dementia or impaired thought processes r/t Dementia. However, there was no entry for antipsychotics medications. 4) Record review for Resident #100 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included in part: Cerebral Infarction, Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis Following Cerebral Infarction Affecting Left Non-Dominant Side, Transient Ischemic Attack, and Malignant Neoplasm of Prostate. Review of the Minimum Data Set for Resident #100 dated 06/03/24 documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 15 indicating a cognitive response. Review of the Physician's orders for Resident #100 revealed an order dated 06/01/24 for full code. Review of the Care Plan for Resident #100 revealed there was no care plan to address advanced directives. During an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 4:46 PM with the Social Service Director (SSD) who stated she has been working at the facility since June 2024. When asked about Resident #100 the SSD said his code status is full code. When asked about the advance directive care plan for Resident #100 the SSD acknowledged there was no advanced directive care plan for the resident and entered one as she was speaking with the surveyor. The SSD stated she does not know how it got missed. Based on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to implement a Comprehensive Care Plan for antipsychotic medications for 3 of 43 sampled residents (Resident #56, Resident #306, and Resident #94) and a Comprehensive Care Plan for an Advance Directive for 1 of 43 sampled residents (Resident #100). The findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled Care Plan-Comprehensive, dated 09/01/2022, revealed an individualized comprehensive care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental, and psychological needs is developed for each resident. Identifying problem areas and their causes and developing interventions that are targeted and meaningful to the resident are developed through an interdisciplinary process. The resident's comprehensive care plan is developed within seven (7) days of the completion of the resident's comprehensive assessment (MDS). Assessments of residents are ongoing, and care plans are revised as information about the resident and the resident's condition changes. A record review showed that Resident #56 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of Alzheimer's, Anemia, and Anxiety Disorder. A review of the Medication Administration Record revealed an order for Seroquel (antipsychotic medication), one tablet by mouth, two types a day for psychosis, which was dated 04/07/24. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #56 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 08, which is moderate cognitive impairment. 1. A review of Resident #56's Care Plan did not show that an antipsychotic medication Care Plan with goals and interventions was ever initiated. In an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 10:36 AM, with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) she stated that Resident #56 did not have a care plan for antipsychotic medication and that the exception is to have a Care Plan developed with goals and interventions that addresses the use of antipsychotic medications. The DON stated that they have a staff member who oversees the Care Plans, but they only work as needed but is starting full time in December of this year. In a phone interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 10:44 AM with Staff VV, the MDS Coordinator stated that she is the only staff member currently working on the residents' Care Plans in the facility. For any residents on antipsychotic medication, she will initiate a Care Plan that includes the following: gradual dose reduction, side effects of medications, overall observation of residents, and anything related to behaviors observed.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide necessary services to ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide necessary services to maintain good nutrition for 1 (Resident #45) of 6 sampled residents that are unable to eat without staff assistance. The findings included: During an observation of Resident #45 on 08/28/24 at 12:20 PM, it was noted that the resident's lunch tray had been placed on the over-bed table directly in front and in reach of the resident. It was also noted that a large container of non -thickened water with drinking straw was also placed in reach of the resident. It was noted that the resident was scooping large portions of pureed foods with bare hands above her head and dropping the pureed foods into her mouth. It was noted that the resident started coughing and regurgitation the pureed foods from her mouth onto her chest. The surveyor immediately requested the nurse to come to Resident #45's room. The Director of Nursing (DON) was noted to come to the room and observed the surveyors findings of the resident eating large scoops of pureed foods with hands and coughing and regurgitating foods. The surveyor informed the Director of Nursing that the resident is assessed to be cognitively impaired, required Honey Thick liquids, and requires maximum assistance with eating. The DON removed the lunch tray which was 75% finished and stated to the surveyor that he would take care of the incident. The CNA (Staff F) who was assigned to Resident #45 stated that she was assigned to the dining room for the lunch meal on 08/28/24 and did not know who put the lunch tray in front of Resident #45 and allowed the cognitively, dysphagia diagnosed resident to eat without supervision. Review of Resident #45's clinical record revealed an admission date of 12/31/24 with diagnoses that include Hemiplegia and Dysphagia. Further review noted physician orders for No Added Salt, Pureed Diet with Honey Thick Liquids. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented the resident is rarely understood/understands and that the resident requires maximum assistance with eating. Review of the Nutritional assessment dated [DATE] documented Purred Diet with independent feeding. Review of the current care plan dated 03/06/24 documented maximum assistance with eating. On 08/29/24 at 7:45 AM during an observation of Resident #45 it was noted that the resident was provided maximum assist with the eating of the breakfast meal and no water was available at the beside of resident according to facility policy. The DON was also interviewed and it was again confirmed that the resident is cognitively impaired, diagnosed with Dysphagia, required maximum assistance with eating, and requires Honey Thick Liquids.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure it was free from accident/hazard as evidenced ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure it was free from accident/hazard as evidenced by not providing direct supervision for 1 of 23 residents who smoke (Resident #59), paper trash observed in 1 of 1 red smolder cigarette butt bin on the smoking patio and excess lint in 1 of 2 dryers in the laundry room. The findings included: 1) On 08/28/24 at 4:08 PM an observation was made of several residents on the smoking patio, with Staff NN, a Certified Nursing Assistant who was present on the inside of the facility watching residents on the smoking patio through the window. Visibility of entire smoking patio and all residents smoking was not visible from inside the facility through the window. Resident # 59 was smoking on the smoking patio at the far end away from the glass door and window and not visible from the inside of the facility. Record review for Resident #59 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included in part: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Other Lack of Coordination, Muscle Weakness, Need for Assistance with Personal Care, and Nicotine Dependence. Review of the Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 15 indicating a cognitive response. Review of the Smoking Safety Evaluation for Resident #59 dated 05/06/24 revealed the resident utilizes tobacco. Supervision will be required for all residents during designated smoking times. This evaluation will be utilized for the Resident's smoking care plan on admission and as indicated. During an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 1:31 PM Resident #59 stated she is a smoker. During an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 4:10 PM with Staff NN CNA, When asked if she is the responsible staff member at this time to observe residents smoking, she said yes. When asked why she was inside the facility, she said they watch from the inside and just gets up to go outside from time to time when residents are outside. When asked if she can see/observe all residents specifically at the other end of the patio who were smoking, she said not while she was inside. When asked if she always performs this duty by herself, she said they take turns and usually there are 2 staff present, but not today they are a little short staffed. Review of the facility's policy titled, Smoking-Residents with an effective date of 08/01/23 included the following in part: The residents are only permitted to smoke under the direct supervision of facility staff. 2) On 08/26/24 at 11:00 AM an observation was made of the smoking patio with multiple cigarette butts scattered over the entire floor, red smolder cigarette butt bin contained cigarette butts and paper trash (Photographic Evidence Obtained). There were no residents or staff on the patio. On 08/28/24 at 4:08 PM an observation was made of several residents on the smoking patio, with Staff NN Certified Nursing Assistant who was present on the inside of the facility watching residents on the smoking patio through the window. On the smoking patio in the red smolder cigarette butt bin contained several cigarette butts and various paper trash. During an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 4:10 PM with Staff NN CNA who was asked about the red smolder cigarette butt bin with lid containing several cigarette butts and various paper trash; she acknowledged the paper trash should not be in there. On 08/28/24 at 6:25 PM a side by side observation was conducted with Staff UU Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) who acknowledged the red smolder cigarette butt bin lid contained several cigarette butts and various paper trash. She stated: I guess it needs to be emptied. 3) On 08/30/24 a review of the Lint Removal Log in the laundry area revealed no documentation indicating the dryer lint removal was completed at 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM on 08/30/24. During an observation conducted on 08/30/24 at 10:20 AM of the laundry noted 1 of 2 of the dryers was being used. Staff EE Laundry Aide was asked to open the lint compartment of the dryers. She stopped the dryer and opened the compartment. Upon opening the compartment a pile of lint was noted at the base and a coat of lint noted on the vent (Photographic Evidence Obtained). Staff EE Laundry Aide removed the lint with a broom and was about to put the cover back. Further observation of the vent revealed that more lint was piled on top of the vent. During an interview conducted on 08/30/24 at 10:20 AM with Staff EE Laundry Aide stated that they clean the lint in the dryer every 2 hours.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0730 (Tag F0730)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure a performance review of every Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was completed at least every 12 months. The findings included: On ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure a performance review of every Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was completed at least every 12 months. The findings included: On 08/27/24 at 9:00 AM the Director of Nursing (DON) was asked for the performance review for the following Certified Nursing Aides: Staff II Certified Nursing Assistant with hire date of 11/04/20 Staff JJ Certified Nursing Assistant with hire date of 11/09/21 Staff KK Certified Nursing Assistant with hire date of 01/19/22 Staff LL Certified Nursing Assistant with hire date of 02/22/24 Staff MM Certified Nursing Assistant with hire date of 08/23/23 During an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 9:50 AM with the DON who stated they are not able to provide any performance review evaluations for the 5 CNAs that was requested due to transition of ownership this week. When asked if he could try to request the information requested from the previous owner, he said Human Resources informed him it is not available to be requested.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0760 (Tag F0760)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents are free of any significant m...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents are free of any significant medication errors for high-risk medications for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for medication administration (Resident #9). The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration Policy-General, dated 08/07/23, included the following: Procedure: 3. Dose Preparation: take all measures required by Facility policy and Applicable Law, including, but not limited to the following: 3.7 Verify that the medication name and dose are correct when compared to the medication order on the medication administration record. Record review for Resident #9 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Hemiplegia, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #9 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 15, which indicated that she was cognitively intact. Review of the Physician's Orders showed that Resident #9 had an order dated 03/29/24 for Labetalol HCL 100mg tablet, give 1.5 tablets (total to be given 150 mg) by mouth every 12 hours for Hypertension. During a medication administration observation conducted on 08/27/24 at 8:28 AM with Staff CC, Registered Nurse (RN); she was observed preparing all the morning medications for Resident #9 including Labetalol HCL 100mg tablet. Upon further observation, Staff CC only prepared one tablet of Labetalol 100 mg. After all medication were prepared, Staff CC was stopped by surveyor in Resident #9's room prior to her administering the incorrect dose of Labetalol. At this point, the surveyor asked Staff CC to review the medications that she was administering to Resident #9 especially the Labetalol. Upon review of the medication orders, Staff CC acknowledged that the order was for one and a half tablet of Labetalol which would be 150 mg dose instead of the 100 mg dose that she was about to administer, she then prepared the correct dose of the Labetalol (one and a half tablets equal to 150 mg). In summary, this indicated that the nurse was about to give the wrong dose of the high-risk medication, Labetalol.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0805 (Tag F0805)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to prepare food in a form designe...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to prepare food in a form designed to meet individual needs that included; Thickened Liquids for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #45) and Purred Diet for 10 facility residents that included 5 sampled residents (Resident #17, #45, #211, #193, and #301). The findings included: During an observation of Resident #45 on 08/28/24 at 12:20 PM, it was noted that the resident's lunch tray had been placed on the over-bed table directly in front and in reach of the resident. It was also noted that a large container of non -thickened water with drinking straw was also placed in reach of the resident. Further observation of the resident noted to be scooping large portions of pureed foods with bare hands above her head and dropping the pureed foods into her mouth. It was noted that the resident started coughing and regurgitation the pureed foods from her mouth onto her chest. The surveyor immediately requested the nurse to the room of Resident #45. The Director of Nursing (DON) was noted to come to the room and observed the surveyors findings of the resident eating large scoops of pureed foods with hands and coughing and regurgitating foods. The surveyor informed the Director of Nursing that the resident is assessed to be cognitively impaired, required Honey Thick liquids, and requires maximum assistance with eating. The DON removed the lunch tray which was 75%finished and stated to the surveyor that he would take care of the incident. An interview was conducted with the CNA (Staff F) who was assigned to Resident #45 and stated that she was assigned to the dining room for the lunch meal on 08/28/24 and did not know who put the lunch tray in front of the resident and allowed the cognitively, dysphagia diagnosed resident to eat with supervision. On 08/29/24 at 7:45 AM during an observation of Resident #45 it was noted that the resident was provided maximum assist with the eating of the breakfast meal and no water was available at the beside of resident according to facility policy. The DON was also interviewed and it was again confirmed that the resident is cognitively impaired, diagnoses of Dysphagia, required maximum assistance with eating, and requires Honey Thick Liquids. During the review of the clinical record of Resident #45 on 08/27-28/24 it was noted an admission date of 12/31/24 with diagnoses of Hemiplegia, ASHD, Dementia, and Dysphagia. Further review noted physician orders for No Added Salt, Pureed Diet with Honey Thick Liquids. Further review of the MDS dated [DATE] documented that the resident is rarely understood/understands and that the resident requires maximum assistance with eating. Review of the Nutritional assessment dated [DATE] documented Purred Diet with independent feeding. Review of the current care plan dated 03/06/24 documented maximum assistance with eating. 2) During the review of the approved menu for the Breakfast meal of 08/28/24 , it was noted that Pureed diets were to receive a portion of Pureed Grits (#8 scoop - 4 ounces) and Pureed Scrambled Eggs (#12 scoop). Observation of the breakfast meal in the main kitchen on 08/28/24 at 7:30 AM noted pureed Grits and Scrambled were not located on the steam table. Further observation noted that regular consistency Grits and Scrambled Eggs were being served to residents on a Pureed Diet. Interview with the breakfast cook (Staff E) at the time of the observation noted to state that the approved breakfast menu for 08/28/24 was not reviewed prior to the preparation of the breakfast meal and that she was unaware that the Pureed Diet included Pureed Grits and Pureed Eggs. Staff E cease serving Regular Grits and Scrambled Eggs, pureed the Grits and Scrambled Eggs that were to be served to Pureed Diets. Staff E proceeded to puree the Regular Scrambled Eggs to the proper pureed consistency however stated to the surveyor that the Grits were the Regular Grits and would be fine for Pureed Diets. The surveyor stated to Staff E that that resident with physician orders for Pureed Diet and a diagnoses of Dysphagia have the possibility of chocking/aspiration of regular consistency foods. Review of the Diet Census dated 08/26/24 noted that there were currently 10 facility residents with physician orders for Pureed Diet and had a diagnoses of Dysphagia. Further review noted that the 10 residents included sampled Residents #17, #45, #193, #211, and #301. Review of the facility's Policy and Procedure for Thickened Liquids that was requested by the surveyor on 08/28/24 and was submitted by the Director of Nursing on 08/28/24, the following was noted: Policy: Thickened liquids shall be prescribed by the attending Attending Physician /Practitioner. Procedure: * Residents on thickened liquids should not have liquids kept at bedside. * A qualified Speech Therapist may be determine the appropriate consistency that is safe for the resident and communicate the findings to the attending physician.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0808 (Tag F0808)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to follow the diet orders as per Physicians' orders fo...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to follow the diet orders as per Physicians' orders for one of 7 residents reviewed for nutrition (Resident #84). The findings: In an observation conducted on 08/28/24 at 8:03 AM, Resident #84 was in his room with the breakfast tray. The meal ticket showed no concentrated sweets (NCS), no added salt, and a (NAS) diet with double portions (no fortified meals noted on the meal ticket). The breakfast tray revealed oatmeal, eggs (regular serving), muffin, and a glass of 4-ounce juice. The breakfast meal did not have the double portions and the fortified foods as per doctor's orders. In this observation, Resident #84 told this Surveyor that he wanted more meat and that what they served him this morning was not enough. Resident #84 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Type 2 Diabetes and Iron Deficiency. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] showed that Resident #84 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which is cognitively intact. A review of the Physician's orders showed an order for double portions for all meals 3 times a day for dietary demands dated 03/5/24. Fortified foods at all meals every shift which was dated 03/05/24. In an observation conducted on 08/28/24 at 12:20 PM, Resident #84's meal ticket showed doubled portions (no fortified meals noted on the meal ticket). The lunch meal plate was pointed out with the following: chopped roast pork (regular portion), spinach with onions, potatoes, a slice of bread, and juice. The lunch meal did not have any fortified foods on the tray or double portions as ordered by the Physician. An interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 10:27 AM; the Dining Manager stated that the following food items are fortified: fortified oatmeal for breakfast, fortified soups for lunch, and fortified pudding for dinner. For any residents on fortified foods, it will show on the actual meal tickets for the kitchen staff members. The Clinical Dietitian will write the order on a communication slip and bring it down to the kitchen for any residents who have orders for fortified foods. It is then placed in the electronic system for residents with double portions, which will usually provide double portions of the protein for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. A review of the Dietary Information meal tickets provided by the Dining Manager revealed that nine residents were on fortified meals, which did not include Resident #84 in the list for fortified meals. The Dietary Manager did not know that Resident #84 had an order for Fortified Meals.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0810 (Tag F0810)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide special eating equipment (Divided Plate) 5 of (Resident's #16, #30, #34, #42, and #45) sampled...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide special eating equipment (Divided Plate) 5 of (Resident's #16, #30, #34, #42, and #45) sampled residents who need them when consuming meals. The findings included: During the observation of the lunch meal conducted in the second floor dining room on 08/26/24, it was noted that the meal tray ticket for Resident #16 and Resident #19 both documented that a Divided Plate be provided with the meal. Further observation noted that that the no Divided Plate was provided for either resident and further noted that the resident's attempt to eat independently and the use of a Divided Plate would assist the resident with self feeding. On 08/27/24 at 7:30 AM a second observation of the breakfast meal was conducted in the second floor dining room. It was noted again that the meal tray tickets documented a Divided Plate be provided, however the adaptive plate was not included on the resident's meal tray. Following the 08/27/24 observation the surveyor interviewed kitchen staff concerning resident's whop require adaptive equipment and specifically a Divided Plate. Interviews conducted with dietary staff (A, B, C and D) and the Certified Dietary Manger stated that there were no residents with physician orders for adaptive equipment that included Divided Plate's. It was noted during the staff interviews that there was 1 Adaptive Divided Plate located in the serving area of the kitchen, and staff stated that is the only adaptive eating equipment in the dietary department. Following the interviews the clinical records of Resident's #16 and #30 were reviewed. The record review noted no current physician orders for a Divided Plate to be provided for all meals. Following the record review the Director of Skilled Therapy was interviewed on 08/27/24 concerning the Divided Plate issues and it was requested by the surveyor a list of residents who requires adaptive eating equipment (Divided Plate) and provided according physician orders. On 08/28/24 the Director of Skilled Therapy provided a list of resident's who have been assessed by Occupation Therapist to require adaptive eating equipment. A review of the list documented that 5 facility resident's required a Divided Plate for all meals that included resident's #16, 30, #34, #42, and and #45. The director also provided provided documentation concerning each resident that included skilled therapy assessment and physician orders for the Divided Plate. A review of the resident documentation included the following: Resident #16: Therapy Screening Form dated 03/21/22 documented patient assessed for adaptive equipment (Plate Guard/Divided Plate) for feeding skills. Physician order dated 04/04/22 documented recommendation for for a 3-Compartment /Divided Plate for 3 meals per day. Resident #30: Therapy Screening Form dated 01/24/19 documented a Divided Plate to be provided for breakfast , lunch, and dinner to facilitate self feeding. Physician order dated 03/11/19 documented to provide patient with divided plate for breakfast, lunch, and dinner to facilitate self feeding. Resident #34: Therapy Screening Form dated 06/18/24 documented to continue to provide with divided plate for breakfast, lunch, and dinner to facilitate self feeding. Physician order dated 08/16/08 documented - Clarification: Divided Plate to be provided for B-L-D (breakfast, Lunch, Dinner) to improve self feeding skills. Resident #42: Occupational Therapy (OT) - Evaluation dated 3/3/22 documented efficient use of adaptive equipment - divided plate for meals. Physician order dated 04/27/24 documented Discharge from skilled OT services - Divided plate to be provided at all meals. * Resident #45; Therapy Screening Form dated 06/16/18 documented continue with divided plate for breakfast, lunch, and dinner to facilitate feeding. Physician order dated 05/19/21 documented a 3-Compartment Plate with meals to facilitate self feeing. Following the documentation provided to the surveyor by the Director of Skilled Therapy it was noted that she was not aware of the current physician orders did not document the physician orders for the Divided Plates. It was further noted that the resident's ( Resident #16, #30, #34, #42, and #45) still required the use of Adaptive Divided Plates to facilitate self feeding skills and that the attending physician's would be contacted for clarification of the order.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Garbage Disposal (Tag F0814)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation , interview, it was determined that the facility failed to dispose of garbage and refuse properly. The findings included: Observation tour of the outside garbage/refuse area on 0...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation , interview, it was determined that the facility failed to dispose of garbage and refuse properly. The findings included: Observation tour of the outside garbage/refuse area on 08/26/24 at 9:45 AM noted the following: (a) A large body of stagnant water was noted to be located between garbage dumpster and cardboard recycling dumpster. Further observation noted that the area was approximately 10-12 feet wide and approximately 12 inches deep in the center. Further observation noted large areas of stagnant algae in the water along with what appeared to be medical waste that included medication bottles, medication inhaler tubes, disposable gloves, disposable masks, disposable gowns, and other unidentifiable waste. The area also contained numerous large and small piece of garbage and trash. The areas behind the dumpster and the walkway to and around the rear of the building were also noted to be littered with the same type of medical waste and garbage /trash. Also located next to the dumpster's were 4 large tires which were filled with stagnant water and a potential source of insect and rodent activity. The large area around the tires was littered with garbage and trash. On 08/27/24 at 9:00 AM a meeting was held by the surveyor with facility Administrator to discuss the garbage /refuse area. The administrator acknowledged she was aware of the area and the seriousness of the potential of infection control and pest activity. The administrator stated that the large area of stagnant water must be removed via pump and the clogged ground drains be cleared.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that are complete and ac...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that are complete and accurately documented for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for closed record (Resident #104). The findings included: Record review for Resident #104 revealed the resident was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a readmission on [DATE] and left against medical advice (AMA) on 08/07/24. Review of the Minimum Data Set for Resident #104 dated 07/20/24 documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score was 15 indicating a cognitive response. Review of the BIMS Evaluation for Resident #104 dated 08/07/24 documented a BIMS score of 14 indicating a cognitive response. Review of the AMA form for Resident #104 revealed the resident signed the form on 08/07/24. Review of the Nursing notes for Resident #104 from 08/06/24 to 08/07/24 revealed no documentation the family being notified of resident leaving the facility and signing himself out AMA. During an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 9:45 AM with the Assistant Director of Nursing who stated she personally notified the family member but acknowledged she forgot to document the discussion with family member about Resident #104 signing out AMA. During a telephone interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 10:00 AM with the Emergency Contact #1 for Resident #104 who stated the relationship to the resident is her uncle. She stated she was told her uncle signed himself out, she did not feel he had the mental capacity to sign himself out. She went on to say her uncle will sometimes go off of his medication, then get in a mood and want to take off, he has done this in the past. When asked if the facility contacted her to inform her the resident left the facility against medical advice (AMA), she said yes and was able to confirm the date as 08/07/24.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0883 (Tag F0883)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to offer influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations for Resident #72 an...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to offer influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations for Resident #72 and to properly document immunization records for 3 of 5 residents reviewed for immunizations (Resident #72, Resident #89, and Resident #210). The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Influenza Vaccine, dated 09/25/23, included the following: Residents who have no medical contraindications will be offered the influenza vaccine annually to encourage and promote the benefits associated with vaccinations against influenza. Procedure: 1. Between October 1st and March 31st each year, the influenza vaccine shall be offered to residents. 4. A resident's refusal of the vaccine shall be documented in the medical record. Review of the facility's policy titled, Pneumonia Vaccine, dated 09/07/23, included the following: Procedure: 1. Prior to or upon admission, residents are assessed for eligibility to receive the pneumococcal vaccine series, and when indicated, are offered the vaccine series within thirty (30) days of admission to the facility unless medically contraindicated or the resident has already been vaccinated. 2. Assessments of pneumococcal vaccination status are conducted within five (7) working days of the resident's admission if not conducted prior to admission. 5. Residents/representatives have the right to refuse vaccination. If refused, appropriate information is documented in the resident's medical record indicating the date of the refusal of the pneumococcal vaccination. 1)Record review for Resident #72 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. No documentation of the influenza and pneumococcal immunizations was found in the electronic medical records nor in Resident #72's paper chart. Further review of Resident #72's paper chart and the electric medical records revealed no consent of refusing the influenza and pneumococcal vaccines since admission. During an interview conducted on 08/30/24 at 4:00, the ADON acknowledged looking thru the paper chart as well as the electronic records for Resident #72 and was unable to locate any immunization documentation. 2) Record review for Resident #89 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During an interview conducted on 08/30/24 at 11:30 AM with the DON and Infection Preventionist (IP) revealed that he offered Resident #89 the Influenza vaccine on 02/24/24 and on 04/17/24 spoke over the phone with Resident #89's father and he refused the vaccine, however, no consent was signed by the resident's father, nor the refusal was documented in Resident #89's electronic medical record. In addition, the DON/IP noted that Resident #89 is [AGE] years old, and he was not sure Resident #89 can receive the pneumonia vaccine. 3) Record review for Resident #210 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During an interview with the DON/IP, he stated that upon admission the residents are asked about their immunizations by the admission nurse. He stated that any resident that had vaccines prior to admission are documented in the electronic medical record, however, if the resident did not have the vaccines, the admission nurse will offer the influenza and pneumococcal vaccines. Review of Resident #201's immunization record revealed no record of influenza and pneumococcal vaccines documented and no refusal consents on file.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0917 (Tag F0917)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide each resident with individual closet space ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide each resident with individual closet space in the resident room and ensure closets had privacy doors for 5 out of 43 sampled residents (Resident #79, Resident#20, Resident #15, Resident #212 and Resident #90). The findings included: In a tour of the facility conducted on 08/28/24 at 3:00 PM, the following were noted: 1. room [ROOM NUMBER] had Resident #79 by the door with a closet that did not have a door for privacy, and his roommate, Resident #81, did not have a closet on his side of the room. In this observation, Resident #79 said that he was sharing his closet with just about everyone on the floor and that his roommate did not have his own closet. 2. room [ROOM NUMBER] had Resident #20 by the door, with a closet that did not have a door for privacy, and his roommate Resident #211, who did not have a closet on his side of the room. In this observation, Resident #20 said that his roommate did not have a closet on his side of the room. 3. Resident #102 in room [ROOM NUMBER] had a closet with a door, and his roommate, Resident #15 near the window, had a closet without a door for privacy. 4. room [ROOM NUMBER] had Resident #83's closet with a door and Resident #212's closet by the window, which had no door for privacy. 5. room [ROOM NUMBER] had Resident #84, who had a closet with a door, and Resident #9, who was by the door, with a closet that had no door for privacy. In an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 4:13 PM with Staff CC, a Registered Nurse, she was asked why some closets do not have doors, and she said, You will have to ask Maintenance. She further acknowledged that room [ROOM NUMBER] by the window did not have an individual closet. In an interview on 08/28/24 at 4:15 with Staff DD, Certified Nursing Assistants, she was asked about the closets, and she stated that every resident has their own individual closet and that they never have to share a closet and if for some reason they had to share a closet it would be divided. She acknowledged that Rooms 342 (window) and 344 (door) did not have closet doors. She then proceeded to follow this Surveyor to room [ROOM NUMBER]'s window and acknowledged that Resident #211 did not have a closet. She then said Resident #211 only wears gowns and has no belongings, so he did not need to have a closet space.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0924 (Tag F0924)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure handrails are securly affixed to wall on 1 of 3 floors (3rd ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure handrails are securly affixed to wall on 1 of 3 floors (3rd floor hallway). The findings included: On 08/26/24 from 9:45 AM to 11:00 AM during an initial tour of the facility, the handrails on 3rd floor were found to be loose at the following locations: Next to room [ROOM NUMBER] (Photographic Evidence Obtained). Next to the 3rd floor elevator near nursing station (Photographic Evidence Obtained). Next to room [ROOM NUMBER]. Across from room [ROOM NUMBER]. Across from room [ROOM NUMBER]. During an interview conducted on 08/30/24 at 1:00 PM with the Administrator who was informed of the loose handrails on the 3rd floor, she stated, they had had an issue with the handrails on the 2nd floor and those had been secured to the wall.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0576 (Tag F0576)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provided 6 non-sampled resident's and 1 of 1 (Resident #62) residents reasonable access to the use of a phone and in a...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provided 6 non-sampled resident's and 1 of 1 (Resident #62) residents reasonable access to the use of a phone and in a place in the facility where calls can be made without being overheard. The findings included: During the screening of residents on the second floor on 08/26/24 at 10:00 AM it was noted that 6 residents who resided on the second floor were using the facility telephone located at the nurses station desk. Further observation noted these residents just walking up to the phone and dialing without any staff intervention to use a phone in a private area. The resident's conversations could be overheard by numerous staff and residents located within the nurses station area. Random observations conducted on 08/8//27/24 noted residents again utilizing the facility nurses station phone, however in addition it was noted that outside calls were being routed into the nurses station and residents were brought to the nurses station to voice aloud in a non -private setting. On 08/28/24 at 12:30 PM it was noted that Resident #62 was noted to walk up to the second floor nurses station and began dialing the facility's phone. For the next 30 minutes it was noted the the resident put the phone speaker on and was speaking with his local banking institution. It was noted no less than 4 times the resident and bank could be clearly heard the baking account number and credit card numbers with numerous staff, visitors, and residents in the area. At no time did staff intervene to bring Resident #62 to a private area to use a phone. During the observation the surveyor requested to the Director of Nursing and Registered Nurse (Staff G) of the situation. The surveyor asked the Director and Staff G why the residents' are not being brought to a private area (room or office) to have private phone conversation, and if the nurses station is equipped with a remote cordless phone for residents use in private areas/room. The staff answered that they were unaware that residents conversations on phone should be conducted in a private setting and that the nurses station not equipped with a private cordless phone. An interview with the Corporate Maintenance Director conducted at the time of the staff interviews stated to the surveyor that the nurses station has 2 private cordless phones available for resident's private phone calls. The Director proceeded to open a desk drawer at the nurses station and it was noted a cordless phone inside, however the the phone was not charged and the charging connection were not available. On 08/29/24 at 7:30 AM it was noted that the cordless phone was located at the nurses station, however the not charged for resident use and the charging cords were still not available. Continuous observation conducted on the second floor Nurses Station on 08/29/24 from 7 AM - 3 PM noted numerous residents (5 non-sampled) using the station phone without staff intervention. Resident noted to be speaking loudly with family and friends concerning various topics. Resident #62 noted to use the station telephone at least 4 times and was noted to have the phone speaker on while discussing medical condition with his personal physician and his church.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain housekeeping and maintenance services...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain housekeeping and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior that included observation of 2 of 2 residential room areas (second floor and third floor), 1 of 2 dining room (second floor) areas, 1 of I elevators, and 4 of 4 wheelchairs Resident's #7, #9, #17, and #54. The findings included: During the resident screening performed by the surveyors on 08/26/24 to 08/27/24 and the Environment Tour conducted with the Administrator and Corporate Maintenance Director on 08/28/24 at 2:00 PM and on 08/29/24 at 1:00 PM, the following were noted: The Elevator's interior floors and walls were noted to be heavily soiled and stained. Exposed sharp piece of plastic noted near the handrails. The entry/exit door to the elevator was noted to be heavily soiled and stained. The metal handrail to the side of the elevator entry/exit was heavily worn down to the bare metal surface. Observation on the Second Floor revealed: The Second Floor Nurses Station floor was noted to have a heavy build-up of dirt and dust throughout. The exterior of the trash barrel was heavily soiled and stained. The Nurses Station Bathroom floor was heavily soiled and had black matter throughout, and floor tiles lifting. Dining Room (Second Floor): Heavily soiled and black stains throughout. Equipment: Soiled commercial floor cleaning machines (2) and cleaning equipment (brooms, dust pans, etc,) stored in corner of the dining room. Dining Room Tables: One of five tables (top) noted to be in disrepair with a large sharp wooded piece exposed. Dining Room Tables: Two of five tables bases noted to have soiled and large areas of peeling paint. The Hallway from Resident Rooms #221 to #237 the floors were heavily soiled and had black stains throughout entire hallway. The exterior walls were heavily soiled, stained and in disrepair throughout. There was offensive urine odor throughout. The Hallway from Resident Rooms #238 to #251): the floors were heavily soiled and had black stains throughout the entire hallway. Exterior walls were heavily soiled, stained and in disrepair throughout. Offensive urine odor throughout. On Hallway #1: The Fire door (1) noted to have large areas of peeling paint. room [ROOM NUMBER]-bathroom floors and baseboards were soiled and stained throughout. The Door (D) and Window (W) bed wardrobe closets are open, and no closures provided. room [ROOM NUMBER] had a large crack in room's floor tiles (approx. 15 feet), the room's ceiling was leaking (3 days), and W-bed resident complain of leak not repaired, bathroom toilet requires re-caulking to the floor, and the over-commode portable seat is heavily worn and soiled. room [ROOM NUMBER] noted with bed linen sheet covering the room's window (W-bed resident states waiting too long for replacement), room floor soiled and black stains throughout, exterior over-bed table in disrepair and sharp edges, over commode portable seat heavily stained and worn, and exterior of room dresser in disrepair and heavily worn. room [ROOM NUMBER] had an offensive urine odor throughout, over commode portable seat stained and heavily worn, room floors had yellow stains, room walls and baseboards heavily soiled and stained. room [ROOM NUMBER] noted with one of two wardrobe closets missing door/privacy curtain, and wardrobe kick plate missing at the bottom. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Privacy curtain soiled and stained (D-bed), room floor heavily soiled and black stains noted, bathroom ceiling tiles bulging down and falling from the ceiling, over commode portable seat heavily stained and worn, and room window curtains in disrepair. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Privacy curtain stained and soiled (W-bed), no over-bed table (W-bed), and room floors soiled and black stains throughout. The Linen Room/ Closet: Room floor heavily soiled and stained. The Soiled Utility Room/Closet: Ceiling vent noted with black with mold type matter, and room floor heavily soiled and noted with black stains. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Large hole in room wall, dresser drawers not shutting properly (2). room [ROOM NUMBER]: Room floor and baseboards soiled and black stains throughout, missing drawers (2) in wardrobe closet, and bathroom walls and baseboards soiled and in disrepair. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Wall mounted bulletin board heavily soiled with dried matter (2), and room floors and baseboards heavily soiled and stained throughout. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Offensive urine odor (3 days), trash container located in corner of room filled with urine (1.5 gallons), large blood type stain on room floor, large black mold like stains across entire floor of room, and room floor heavily soiled and stained. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Bathroom door exterior heavily worn with sharp exposed wood edges; bathroom floor caulking in disrepair, room [ROOM NUMBER]: Bathroom door exterior heavily worn and in disrepair with sharp wood edges exposed, wall mounted bulletin board soiled, bathroom wall soiled and in disrepair, and room floor heavily soiled and black stained throughout. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Bathroom toilet tiles caulking to the floor in disrepair, room floor heavily soiled and black stains throughout, bathroom door in disrepair, bathroom floor soiled and stained, metal bed frame heavily rusted (W-bed),, and exterior of over-bed table (W-bed) rust laden. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Room floor heavily soiled and black stains throughout. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Window blinds in disrepair and will not close/open properly. Resident #7's Geri chair arm rests heavily worn and torn (Left & Right sides). Resident #54's Left wheelchair arm rest missing and right arm worn and torn. Resident #9's Wheelchair arm rests missing. Resident #17's Wheelchair arm rests missing. Observation on the Third Floor: room [ROOM NUMBER]: Shower handle leaking water, and water coming up though tiles near the wall air-conditioning unit. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Bathroom walls and shower tiles soiled and stained. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Privacy curtain soiled and stained (D-bed). room [ROOM NUMBER]: Resident complaining of roach sightings. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Room floor heavily soiled and black stains throughout, and residents complaining of roach sightings. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Resident #100 complaining of bed too small to fit body frame. Room#327: Bathroom not providing sufficient lighting for use. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Nightstand broken and drawers not operational, and room floor heavily soiled and black stains throughout.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment, reflective of...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment, reflective of the resident's status at the time of the assessment observation period of the Minimum Data Set (MDS), the observation period (also known as the Look-back period) is the time period over which the resident's condition or status is captured by the MDS for 3 of 3 residents sampled for resident assessment (Residents #48, #100, and #59). The findings included: 1) Resident #48 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with most recent readmission on [DATE] with diagnoses that included in part: Cardiac Arrythmia Unspecified, Atherosclerotic Heart Disease of Native Coronary Artery Without Angina Pectoris, Epilepsy, Cognitive Communication Deficit, and Dementia. Review of the MDS for Resident #48 dated 07/13/24 documented in a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Documented in Section N under High-Risk Drug Classes: Use and Indication 1. Is taking -Check if the resident is taking any medication by pharmacological classification, not how it is used, during the last 7 days or since admission/entry or reentry if less than 7 days; 2. Indication noted- If column 1 is checked, check if there is an indication noted for all medications in the drug class. E. Anticoagulant documented in column 1 under is taking was marked and under column 2 marked indication noted. Antiplatelet was not documented as taking or indication noted. To summarize, this indicated the resident was ordered/receiving anticoagulant and not ordered/receiving an antiplatelet. Review of the Physician's Orders for Resident #48 revealed an order dated 03/07/24 for Aspirin EC (An Antiplatelet) tablet Delayed Release 325mg, give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for CAD/DVT (Coronary Artery Disease/Deep Vein Thrombosis). Review of the Physician's Orders for Resident #48 revealed an order dated 03/07/24 for Eliquis tablet 5mg (Apixaban) (An Anticoagulant) give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for AFIB (Atrial fibrillation). 2) Resident #100 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included in part: Cerebral Infarction, Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis Following Cerebral Infarction Affecting Left Non-Dominant Side, Transient Cerebral Ischemic Attack, and Difficulty in Walking. Review of the MDS for Resident #100 dated 06/03/24 documented a BIMS score of 15 indicating a cognitive response. it was indicated in the high risk medications that the resident was receiving an anticoagulant and not receiving an antiplatelet. Review of the Physician's Orders for Resident #100 revealed an order dated 06/01/24 for Aspirin EC (An Antiplatelet) Tablet Delayed Release 325mg give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for HTN (Hypertension). Review of the Physician's Orders for Resident #100 revealed an order dated 06/01/24 for Clopidogrel Bisulfate (An Antiplatelet) tablet 75 mg give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for blood clot prevention. Review of the Physician's Orders for Resident #100 revealed no order active or discontinued for an anticoagulant. 3) Record review for Resident #59 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including in part: Atherosclerotic Heart Disease of Native Coronary Artery with Unspecified Angina Pectoris, Unspecified Atrial Fibrillation, and Nicotine Dependence Unspecified. Review of the MDS for Resident #59 dated 06/10/24 documented a BIMS score of 15 indicating a cognitive response. Documented in Section N for medications under High-Risk Drug indicated the resident was receiving an anticoagulant and not receiving an antiplatelet. Review of the Physician's Orders for Resident #59 revealed an order dated 03/02/24 for Aspirin (An Antiplatelet) 81 mg Oral Tablet Chewable give 1 tablet y mouth one time a day for CAD (Coronary Artery Disease). Review of the Physician's Orders for Resident #59 revealed an order dated 03/02/24 for Clopidogrel Bisulfate (An Antiplatelet) Oral Tablet 75 mg give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for DVT (Deep Vein Thrombosis). Review of the Physician's Orders for Resident #59 revealed no order for an anticoagulant. During a telephone interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 4:33 PM with Staff VV Minimum Data Set (MDS) Coordinator who stated she has worked at the facility for over 1 year. When asked how she determines if a medication is high risk what drug classification it is, Staff VV stated that she looks at the order for aspirin or Plavix (Clopidogrel Bisulfate) and what the indication is on the order, if it is for something related to the heart like CAD, she classifies it anticoagulant under high risk medications in Section D of the MDS. During a telephone interview conducted on 08/28/24 05:25 PM with facility's Consultant Pharmacist (CP) with Staff VV also on the telephone, the CP was asked if aspirin is antiplatelet, she stated it is antiplatelet and inhibits coagulation. When asked if aspirin was an anticoagulant, the CP stated no it is not . When asked about Clopidogrel she stated it is a reducing platelet activation and aggregation and is not considered an anticoagulant. The CP does not look at aspirin and Clopidogrel, or Plavix as an anticoagulant, because they work differently. The CP stated the mediations that would be classified as an anticoagulant would be Warfarin, Eliquis, Heparin, etcetera. Staff VV stated that after listening to the CP she acknowledged she had documented incorrectly the high class medications for anticoagulant and antiplatelet for Residents #48, #100, and #59.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan for smoking was revised by the in...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan for smoking was revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments for 1 of 1 residents sampled for smoking (Resident #59). The findings included: Review of the Facility's policy titled, Care Plan - Comprehensive with an effective date of 09/01/22 included in part the following: An individualized comprehensive care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychological needs is developed for each resident. Assessments of residents are ongoing, and care plans are revised as information about the resident and the resident's condition change. Record review for Resident #59 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included in part: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Other Lack of Coordination, Muscle Weakness, Need for Assistance with Personal Care, and Nicotine Dependence. Review of the Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 15 indicating a cognitive response. Review of the Smoking Safety Evaluation for Resident #59 dated 05/06/24 revealed the resident utilizes tobacco. Supervision will be required for all residents during designated smoking times. This evaluation will be utilized for the Resident's smoking care plan on admission and as indicated. Review of the Care Plan for Resident #59 dated 09/01/23 with a problem/need of Resident is a smoker related to resident choice. The Goal was for resident to comply with facility smoking rules through next review date (Target Date of 12/01/23). The interactions/Approaches included the following: Educate on facility smoking policy. Educate resident on designated smoking area. Assess resident for smoking safety. Supervision for smoking. Encourage cessation. This revealed the care plan was not reviewed and revised since 12/01/23. During an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 1:31 PM with Resident #59 who stated she is a smoker. During an interview conducted on 08/30/24 at 2:00 PM with the Medical Records Personnel who stated she has worked at the facility for 3 years. When asked about the Interdisciplinary Care Plan Conference Records provided to surveyors who asked for Care Plans for residents, the Medical Records Personnel stated she thought the Interdisciplinary Care Plan Conference Records were the care plans. During an interview conducted on 08/30/24 at 4:30 PM with the Assistant Director of Nursing and the Director of Nursing, who were asked about the Care Plans being revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments, they both acknowledged the paper care plans have not been revised and there are no electronic care plans for Resident #59 except for the advanced directive care plan.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0725 (Tag F0725)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review interviews and observations, the facility failed to ensure minimum nursing staff was provide daily related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review interviews and observations, the facility failed to ensure minimum nursing staff was provide daily related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, as determined by resident assessments and individual plans of care and considering the number, acuity and diagnoses of the facility's resident population affecting resident census of 111 out of 120 bed facility . 1) Review of the facility's State Minimum Nursing Staffing from 06/23/24 to 08/24/24 revealed on 06/30/24 the daily average for nursing (Registered Nurses and Licensed Practical Nurses) was 0.9899 (below the minimum 1.0). On 08/30/24 at 3:00 PM the administrator provided updated Minimum Nurse Staffing forms. During an interview conducted 08/27/24 at 11:00 AM with the Administrator who stated she is the person responsible for completing the Nurse Staffing Calculations. When asked what the minimum should be, she said the daily average total Nursing hours should be 1.0, the daily average CNA 2.0 , and the weekly average of combined Nursing, CNA, and Direct Care Staff should be 3.6. When asked about 06/30/24 with the daily average for nursing being 0.9899, and 08/04/24 with the daily average for nursing being 0.9967 she said the nurses must have punched in late. The DON was asked about food/nutrition service staff, she said those are the hours for all food service staff including the prep and cooking. She was informed the hours are for direct care only. She said she would revise the forms and provide revised forms to the surveyor. Observation on 08/28/24 at 4:08 PM several residents were noted on the smoking patio, with Staff NN Certified Nursing Assistant who was present on the inside of the facility watching residents on the smoking patio through the window. During an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 4:10 PM with Staff NN, CNA. When asked if she is the responsible staff member at this time to observe residents smoking, she said yes. When asked why she was inside the facility, she said they watch from the inside and just gets up to go outside from time to time when residents are outside, she said not while she was inside. When asked if she always performs this duty by herself, she said they take turns and usually there are 2 staff present, but not today they are a little short staffed. An interview was conducted on 08/28/24 at 5:02 PM with Staff ZZ. She stated she feels that the facility is short staffed,but we all work together to get the work done.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Staffing Information (Tag F0732)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to post Nurse Staffing Data daily with current date and in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors. The findings includ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to post Nurse Staffing Data daily with current date and in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors. The findings included: On 08/26/24 from 10:00 AM to 11:00 AM during an initial tour of the facility, an observation was made on the second floor. The nurse staffing data posted was dated 08/23/24 (Photographic Evidence Provided). There was no other nurse staffing data posted in the facility. During an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 11:25 AM with Staff CC Registered Nurse. When asked if there is nursing staffing data posting in the facility with the number of all staff and all nurses, she said no, and she only knows about her floor (3rd), and they just have the white board that they write the assignments for this floor.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3) Record review for Resident #16 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Anx...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3) Record review for Resident #16 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Anxiety Disorder; Other Specified Depressive Episodes; Delusional Disorder; Unspecified Psychosis not due to Substance or Known Physiological Condition. Review of the Physician's Orders showed that Resident #16 had an order dated 03/19/24 for Clonazepam oral tablet 1 mg, give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime for Anxiety. Review of the August Medical Administration Record (MAR) showed that Resident #16 was administered one tablet of Clonazepam 1 mg on 08/28/24 at bedtime. Review of the Medication Monitoring/Control Record (Reconciliation) revealed that Resident #16 was administered 2 tablets of Clonazepam on 08/28/24. 4) Record review for Resident #42 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Schizoaffective Disorder; Other Specified Depressive Episodes. Review of the Physician's Orders showed that Resident #42 had an order dated 03/20/24 for Clonazepam oral tablet 1 mg, give 1 tablet by mouth three times a day for Anxiety. Review of the August 2024 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed the nurses signed on 08/21/24, 08/28/24, and 08/29/24 for Clonazepam 1 mg tablet was administered to Resident #42. Review of the Medication Monitoring/Control Record (Reconciliation) revealed that the order sticker on the form states: Clonazepam tablet 1 mg, one tablet by mouth twice daily. Resident #42 received Clonazepam 1 mg tablet 3 times daily except on 08/21/24, 08/28/24 and 08/29/24, which he received Clonazepam 2 times daily (not 3 times daily as per physician's orders. 5) Record review for Resident #54 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Unspecified Dementia. Review of the Physician's Orders showed that Resident #54 had an order dated 08/21/24 for Clonazepam oral tablet 1 mg, give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for Anxiety. Review of the August 2024 MAR revealed Resident #54 was administered Clonazepam 1 mg 2 times daily as per physician's orders including 08/22/24, 08/26/24, and 08/27/24. Review of the Medication Monitoring/Control Record (Reconciliation) revealed that Resident #54 received Clonazepam 1 mg tablet only once on 08/22/24, 08/26/24, and 08/27/24 instead of twice daily as per physician's orders. Based onrecord reviews and the facility failed to administer medications in a timely manner for 1 of 5 residents sampled for medication administration (Resident #70) and failed to ensure medications administered as ordered for 1 of 6 residents sampled for medication reconciliation (Resident #52) and failed to ensure drug records are in order and that an account of all controlled drugs is maintained and periodically reconciled for 4 of 6 residents sampled for medication reconciliation (Residents #52, #54, #16, #42). The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration Policy - General with an effective date of 08/07/23 included in part the following: Procedure: 3.7 Verify that the medication name and dose are correct when compared to the medication order on the medication administration record. 4. Verify each time a medication is administered that it is the correct medication, at the correct dose, at the correct route, at the correct rate, at the correct time, for the correct resident, as set forth in the facility's medication administration schedule. 4.1 Confirm that the MAR (Medication Administration Record) reflects the most recent medication order. Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Reconciliation with an effective date of 08/07/23 included in part the following: Medications shall be administered in a timely manner, and as prescribed. Procedure: 2. The Director of Nursing will supervise and direct all nursing personnel who administered medications and/or have related functions. 3. Medications must be administered in accordance with the orders, including any required time frames. 4. Medications must be administered within one (1) hour of their prescribed time, unless otherwise specified (for example before and after meals). 1) Record review for Resident #70 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but not limited to: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with Other Specified Complication, Acquired Absence of Right Leg Below Knee, Bipolar II Disorder, and Anxiety Disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #70 dated 07/13/24 documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 15 indicating a cognitive response. Review of the Medication Administration Audit Report for Resident #70 from 08/15/24 to 08/26/24 Revealed the following. On 08/15/24 the following medications were scheduled for 9:00 PM and given as follows: Novolog Injection Solution 100 unit/ml inject per sliding scale before meals and at bedtime administered on 08/16/24 at 12:51 AM Levetiracetam 500 mg (milligram) tablet administered on 08/16/24 at 12:49 AM Protein Oral Liquid 15 ml (milliliters) administered on 08/16/24 at 12:51 AM Famotidine 10 mg tablet administered on 08/16/24 at 12:49 AM Gabapentin 100 mg capsule administered on 08/16/24 at 12:49 AM Atorvastatin Calcium 400mg tablet administered on 08/16/24 at 12:48 AM Quetiapine Fumarate 50mg tablet administered on 08/16/24 at 12:51 AM Basaglar KwikPen Solution 100 unit/ml inject 22 units subcutaneously administered on 08/16/24 at 12:51 AM On 08/16/24 the following medications were scheduled for 9:00 AM and given as follows. Losartan Potassium 100mg 1 tablet was administered on 08/16/24 at 12:41 PM Trulicity Solution Pen-Injector 4.5 mg/0.5 ml (Dulaglutide) inject 4.5 mg subcutaneous was administered on 08/16/24 at 12:41 PM On 08/16/24 the following medications were scheduled for 9:00 PM and given as follows: Novolog Injection Solution 100 unit/ml inject per sliding scale before meals and at bedtime administered on 08/17/24 at 12:15 AM Famotidine 10mg tablet administered on 08/17/24 at 12:14 AM Protein Oral Liquid 15 ml administered on 08/17/24 at 12:15 AM Levetiracetam 500mg tablet administered on 08/17/24 at 12:14 AM Gabapentin 100 mg capsule administered on 08/17/24 at 12:14 AM Atorvastatin Calcium 400mg tablet administered on 08/17/24 at 12:14 AM Quetiapine Fumarate 50mg tablet administered on 08/17/24 at 12:15 AM Basaglar KwikPen Solution 100 unit/ml inject 22 units subcutaneously administered on 08/17/24 at 12:14 AM On 08/17/24 the following medications were scheduled for 9:00 PM and given as follows: Tivicay 50mg tablet administered on 08/17/24 at 10:02 PM Folic Acid 1 mg tablet administered on 08/17/24 at 10:02 PM Finasteride 5mg tablet administered on 08/17/24 at 10:02 PM Clopidogrel Bisulfate 75 mg tablet administered on 08/17/24 at 10:01 PM Buspirone HCL 10mg tablet administered on 08/17/24 at 10:01 PM Protein Oral Liquid 15 ml administered on 08/17/24 at 10:02 PM Dapagliflozin Propanediol 10mg tablet administered on 08/17/24 at 10:01 PM Levetiracetam 500mg tablet administered on 08/17/24 at 10:47 PM Losartan Potassium 100mg tablet administered on 08/17/24 at 10:47 AM On 08/19/24 the following medications were scheduled for 9:00 PM and given as follows: Levetiracetam 500mg tablet administered on 08/19/24 at 11:04 PM Protein Oral Liquid 15 ml administered on 08/19/24 at 11:04 PM Famotidine 10mg tablet administered on 08/19/24 at 11:04 PM Gabapentin 100 mg capsule administered on 08/19/24 at 11:04 PM Atorvastatin Calcium 40 mg tablet administered on 08/19/24 at 11:04 PM Quetiapine Fumarate 50mg tablet administered on 08/19/24 at 11:04 PM Basaglar KwikPen Solution 100 unit/ml inject 22 units subcutaneously administered on 08/19/24 at 11:04 PM Novolog Injection Solution 100 unit/ml inject per sliding scale before meals and at bedtime administered on 08/19/24 at 11:13 PM On 08/20/24 the following medications were scheduled for 9:00 PM and given as follows: Novolog Injection Solution 100 unit/ml inject per sliding scale before meals and at bedtime administered on 08/20/24 at 11:53 PM Famotidine 10mg tablet administered on 08/20/24 at 11:53 PM Protein Oral Liquid 15 ml administered on 08/20/24 at 11:53 PM Levetiracetam 500mg tablet administered on 08/20/24 at 11:53 PM Gabapentin 100 mg capsule administered on 08/20/24 at 11:53 PM Atorvastatin Calcium 40 mg tablet administered on 08/20/24 at 11:52 PM Quetiapine Fumarate 50mg tablet administered on 08/20/24 at 11:53 PM Basaglar KwikPen Solution 100 unit/ml inject 22 units subcutaneously administered on 08/20/24 at 11:53 PM On 08/21/24 the following medications were scheduled for 9:00 PM and given as follows: Novolog Injection Solution 100 unit/ml inject per sliding scale before meals and at bedtime administered on 08/22/24 at 12:19 AM Protein Oral Liquid 15 ml administered on 08/22/24 at 12:19 AM Famotidine 10mg tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 12:19 AM Gabapentin 100 mg capsule administered on 08/22/24 at 12:19 AM Atorvastatin Calcium 40 mg tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 12:19 AM Quetiapine Fumarate 50mg tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 12:19 AM Basaglar KwikPen Solution 100 unit/ml inject 22 units subcutaneously administered on 08/22/24 at 12:19 AM Levetiracetam 500mg tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 12:19 AM On 08/22/24 the following medications were scheduled for 9:00 AM and given as follows: Daily-Vite tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 10:03 AM Tivicay 50mg tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 10:03 AM Losartan Potassium 100mg tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 10:03 AM Buspirone HCL 10mg tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 10:03 AM Clopidogrel Bisulfate 75 mg tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 10:03 AM Folic Acid 1 mg tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 10:03 AM Finasteride 5mg tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 10:03 AM Ascorbic Acid 500mg administered on 08/22/24 at 10:03 AM Dapagliflozin Propanediol 10mg tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 10:03 AM Protein Oral Liquid 15 ml administered on 08/22/24 at 10:03 AM Levetiracetam 500mg tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 10:03 AM On 08/24/24 the following medications were scheduled for 9:00 AM and given as follows: Daily-Vite tablet administered on 08/24/24 at 10:35 AM Losartan Potassium 100mg tablet administered on 08/24/24 at 10:35 AM Tivicay 50mg tablet administered on 08/24/24 at 10:35 AM Buspirone HCL 10mg tablet administered on 08/24/24 at 10:35 AM Clopidogrel Bisulfate 75 mg tablet administered on 08/24/24 at 10:35 AM Folic Acid 1 mg tablet administered on 08/24/24 at 10:35 AM Finasteride 5mg tablet administered on 08/24/24 at 10:35 AM Ascorbic Acid 500mg administered on 08/24/24 at 10:35 AM Dapagliflozin Propanediol 10mg tablet administered on 08/24/24 at 10:35 AM Protein Oral Liquid 15 ml administered on 08/24/24 at 10:35 AM Levetiracetam 500mg tablet administered on 08/24/24 at 10:35 AM On 08/24/24 the following medications were scheduled for 9:00 PM and given as follows: Novolog Injection Solution 100 unit/ml inject per sliding scale before meals and at bedtime administered on 08/25/24 at 12:19 AM Famotidine 10mg tablet administered on 08/25/24 at 12:19 AM Protein Oral Liquid 15 ml administered on 08/25/24 at 12:19 AM Gabapentin 100 mg capsule administered on 08/25/24 at 12:19 AM Atorvastatin Calcium 40 mg tablet administered on 08/25/24 at 12:19 AM Quetiapine Fumarate 50mg tablet administered on 08/25/24 at 12:19 AM Basaglar KwikPen Solution 100 unit/ml inject 22 units subcutaneously administered on 08/25/24 at 12:19 AM Levetiracetam 500mg tablet administered on 08/22/24 at 12:19 AM On 08/25/24 the following medications were scheduled for 9:00 PM and given as follows: Novolog Injection Solution 100 unit/ml inject per sliding scale before meals and at bedtime administered on 08/26/24 at 4:08 AM Protein Oral Liquid 15 ml administered on 08/26/24 at 4:08 AM Famotidine 10mg tablet administered on 08/26/24 at 4:08 AM Gabapentin 100 mg capsule administered on 08/26/24 at 4:08 AM Atorvastatin Calcium 40 mg tablet administered on 08/26/24 at 4:08 AM Quetiapine Fumarate 50mg tablet administered on 08/25/24 at 4:08 AM Basaglar KwikPen Solution 100 unit/ml inject 22 units subcutaneously administered on 08/26/24 at 4:08 AM Levetiracetam 500mg tablet administered on 08/26/24 at 4:08 AM In summary from 08/15/24 to 08/26/24 Resident #70 was administered his medication more than 1 hour late on 89 times including 57 times the medication was administered 2 to 6 hours late During an interview 08/26/24 at 12:59 PM with Resident #70 who said the nurses give him his meds late, sometimes he has to remind them to give him his meds because they forget to bring all of his meds that are due at the same time, he said they almost always forget to give him his protein supplement, and he has a wound and needs it to help his wound heal. When asked how often this happens, he said pretty much daily. During an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 5:00 PM with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) who was asked about medication administration times, she said medications should be given within 1 hour of the scheduled time. When asked about Resident # 70, she acknowledged the medications are not given timely. 2 Record review for Resident #52 revealed the resident was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with most recent readmission on [DATE] with diagnoses that included in part the following: Encephalopathy, Anxiety Disorder, and Parkinson's Disease with Dyskinesia Without Mention of Fluctuations. Review of the MDS for Resident #52 dated 08/25/24 documented a BIMS score of 12 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Review of the Physician's Orders for Resident #52 revealed an order dated 08/07/24 for Clonazepam oral tablet 0.5 mg give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for seizure was discontinued on 08/07/24 at 2:37 PM. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #52 from 08/08/24 to 08/15/24 for the medication Clonazepam 0.5 mg revealed no documentation of the medication being administered during this time. During a 3rd floor west med cart review conducted on 08/29/24 at 6:02 AM with Staff H Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) included Resident #52 Medication Clonazepam 0.5 mg. Staff H LPN verified with the surveyor there were 11 pills of Clonazepam 0.5 mg for Resident #52 in the cart and listed as remaining on the Medication Monitoring/Control Record. Review of the Medication Monitoring/Control Record for Resident #52 for the medication Clonazepam 0.5 mg from 08/09/24 to 08/15/24 documented the medication had been signed out 08/9/24, 08/9/24, 08/10/24, 08/11/24, 08/14/24, and 08/15/24 with each day as the amount given 1 tablet leaving a remaining number of tablets as 11. During an interview conducted on 08/29/24 at 6:05 PM with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) who was asked about the Clonazepam 0.5 mg for Resident #52, the ADON acknowledged it appears according to the Monitoring/Control Record the medication was signed out and given to the resident after the medication had been discontinued on 08/07/24.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0757 (Tag F0757)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure behaviors were adequately monitored for resi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure behaviors were adequately monitored for residents on psychotropic medications for 4 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #76, Resident #306, Resident #307, and Resident #56). The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Behavior Monitoring, dated 09/01/23, included the following: Residents who have not used psychotropic medications are not given these medications unless the medication is necessary to treat a specific condition as diagnosed, documented in the clinical record and per physician order. Procedure: 1.Resident(s) receiving psychotropic medication should have specific condition documented indications in the medical record. 4. Monitor behavior and side effects every shift utilizing the electronic Behavior Monitoring Flow Record. 11. Care plan to include person centered goals and non-pharmaceutical interventions. Update Care Plan as indicated. 1) Record review for Resident #76 revealed the resident's initial admission was 04/28/23 and was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent, Severe with Psychotic Symptoms; Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder; Anxiety Disorder Due To Known Physiological Condition. Review of the Physician's Orders showed that Resident #76 had an order dated 06/18/24 for Risperdal oral tablet 2 mg, give 1 tablet via Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) Tube two times a day for Psychosis; observe closely for side effects of Antipsychotic medication including dry mouth, constipation, blurred vision, disorientation or confusion, difficulty urinating, hypotension, dark urine, yellow skin, nausea or vomiting, lethargy, drooling, EPS (Extrapyramidal symptom) symptoms (tremors, disturbed gait, increased agitation, restlessness, involuntary movement of mouth or tongue) every shift Document: 'Y' if monitored and none of the above observed. 'N' if monitored and any of the above was observed, select chart code 'Other/ See Nurses Notes' and progress note findings. Review of the behavior notes and health status notes for Resident #76 for August 2024 revealed no notes related to behaviors or symptoms. Review of the Behavior Monitoring Record for Resident #76 for August 2024 revealed only a check mark each day on each shift (morning, evening and night) for each day. The documentation did not indicate a Y or N as ordered. Review of the CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) Task for Monitor - Behavior Symptoms for Resident #76 for August 2024 documented the resident had no symptoms. 2)Record review for Resident #306 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Dementia, Unspecified Severity; Depression. Review of the Physician's Orders showed that Resident #306 had an order dated 08/15/24 for Observe closely for side effects of Antipsychotic medication including dry mouth, constipation, blurred vision, disorientation or confusion, difficulty urinating, hypotension, dark urine, yellow skin, nausea or vomiting, lethargy, drooling, EPS symptoms (tremors, disturbed gait, increased agitation, restlessness, involuntary movement of mouth or tongue) every shift Document: 'Y' if monitored and none of the above observed. 'N' if monitored and any of the above was observed, select chart code 'Other/ See Nurses Notes' and progress note findings. Review of the behavior notes and health status notes for Resident #306 for August 2024 revealed no notes related to behaviors or symptoms. Review of the Behavior Monitoring Record for Resident #306 for August 2024 revealed only a check mark each day on each shift (morning, evening and night) for each day. The documentation did not indicate a Y or N as ordered. Review of the CNA Task for Monitor - Behavior Symptoms for Resident #306 for August 2024 documented the resident had no symptoms. 3) Record review for Resident #307 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Bipolar Disorder; Other Specified Depressive Episodes; Anxiety Disorder; Paranoid Schizophrenia. Review of the Physician's Orders showed that Resident #307 had an order dated 08/14/24 tor observe closely for side effects of Antipsychotic medication including dry mouth, constipation, blurred vision, disorientation or confusion, difficulty urinating, hypotension, dark urine, yellow skin, nausea or vomiting, lethargy, drooling, EPS symptoms (tremors, disturbed gait, increased agitation, restlessness, involuntary movement of mouth or tongue) every shift Document: 'Y' if monitored and none of the above observed. 'N' if monitored and any of the above was observed, select chart code 'Other\See Nurses Notes' and progress note findings. Review of the behavior notes and health status notes for Resident #307 for August 2024 revealed no notes related to behaviors or symptoms. Review of the Behavior Monitoring Record for Resident #307 from 08/14/24 to 08/27/24 revealed only a check mark each day on each shift (morning and night) for each day. The documentation did not indicate a Y or N as ordered. Review of the CNA Task for Monitor - Behavior Symptoms for Resident #307 for August 2024 documented the resident had no symptoms. 4. A record review showed that Resident #56 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of Alzheimer's, Anemia, and Anxiety Disorder. A review of the Medication Administration Record revealed an order for Seroquel (antipsychotic medication), one tablet by mouth two times a day for psychosis, which was dated 04/07/24-Mirtazapine (antidepressant medication) 30 milligrams (mg) at bedtime which was dated 03/19/24. Monitor for the following behaviors (specify): itching, picking at skin, restlessness, agitation, hitting, increase in complaints, biting, kicking, spitting, foul language, elopement, stealing, delusions, hallucinations, psychosis, aggression, and refusal of care. every shift for Mirtazapine 15 mg Document: 'Y' if monitored and none of the above observed. 'N' if monitored and any of the above was observed, select chart code 'Other' See Nurses Notes' and progress note findings, which was dated 03/19/24. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #56 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 08, which is moderate cognitive impairment. A review of the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for August 2024 revealed that from August 1st to August 22nd, an N was written in each box indicating that behaviors were observed. A continued review did not show a section for 'Other' indicating the type of behaviors that were observed. In an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 11:10 AM with the Assistant Director of Nursing stated that when a N is marked in the TAR, nurses are supposed to select the code 9 for Other and documents in the nursing progress notes the behaviors that they observed which they have not been doing. In an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 4:55 PM with Staff BB, a Registered Nurse stated that he monitors Resident #56's behaviors and documents in the Treatments Administration Record. Once you see a behavior, he documents a Y for behaviors observed and a N for no behaviors observed. For any behaviors observed he will go ahead and write a note regarding the behaviors observed in the progress notes. When asked to clarify the monitoring orders he stated that he was under the impression that a Y meant that behaviors were observed, and N meant that behaviors were not observed.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3) During a wound care observation conducted on 08/28/24 at 2:48 PM, Staff XX, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated she has bee...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3) During a wound care observation conducted on 08/28/24 at 2:48 PM, Staff XX, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated she has been working at the facility for 3-4 months as the wound care nurse. Staff XX was observed gathering supplies from the wound care cart for the wound treatment. She entered the resident's room and set-up all the supplies on the overbed table. Further observation revealed Staff XX left the wound care cart unlocked in the hallway and the surveyor observed two residents in their wheelchairs pass by and stopping by the wound care cart. During the wound treatment Staff XX ran out of supplies and went back to the wound care cart to gather more supplies. She was observed again leaving the wound care cart unlocked. During an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 3:00 PM, Staff XX was asked why she left the wound care cart unlocked, she stated that she does not have the keys to the wound cart. She further added that the floor nurses have the keys to the wound care cart therefore, she leaves it open not to bother the nurses on the floor. Based on observations, interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure medications were secured at bedside for 1 of 43 sampled residents (Resident #28), failed to secure medications in 1 of 1 clean linen closet located on 2nd floor, and failed to secure wound treatment cart for 2 of 2 wound treatment carts. The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Storage with an effective date 12/08/23 included in part: The facility shall store all drugs and biologicals in a safe, secure and orderly manner. Procedure: 4. The facility shall not use discontinued, outdated, deteriorated drugs or biologicals. All such drugs shall be returned to the dispensing pharmacy or destroyed. 7. Compartments (including, but not limited to, drawers, cabinets, rooms, refrigerators, carts and boxes) containing drugs and biologicals shall be locked when not in use, and trays or carts used to transport such items shall not be left unattended if open or otherwise potentially available to others. Review of the facility's policy titled, Self-Administration of Medications with an effective date of 08/01/23 included in part the following: As part of their overall evaluation, the staff and practitioner will assess the resident's mental and physical abilities, to determine whether a resident is capable of self-administering medications for those residents who express a desire to self-administer medications. Procedure: 5. Self-administered medications must be stored in a safe and secure place, which is not accessible by other residents. If safe storage is not possible in the resident's room, the medications of residents permitted to self-administer will be stored on a central medication cart or in the medication room. Nursing will transfer the unopened medication to the resident when the resident requests them. 1) On 08/26/24 at 10:41 AM an observation was made of 3rd floor clean utility closet located across from the nursing station next to respiratory room; inside the unlocked, closet was a bottle of Dakin's solution for a resident who no longer resides in the facility (Photographic Evidence Obtained). During a side-by-side observation of 3rd floor clean utility closet with the Director of Nursing (DON) who was asked about the bottle of Dakin's solution, he said I think someone must have emptied the bottle and filled it with water he did acknowledge it should not be in the closet. 2) On 08/26/24 at 12:55 PM an observation was made of Resident # 28 sitting in wheelchair next to her bed with several items neatly placed on her bed including 2 tubes of Cortisone cream (Photographic Evidence Obtained). During an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 12:55 PM with Resident #28 who was asked what she does with the Cortisone cream, she said she uses it for her skin cancer cells, when asked how long she has been doing this, she said for a long time. Record review for Resident # 28 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Chronic obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Delusional Disorders. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #28 dated 06/06/24 in documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 10 indicated a moderate cognitive impairment. Review of the Physician Orders for Resident #28 revealed no order for Cortisone cream. Record review of Resident #28's chart revealed no self-administration of medication evaluation. During an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 7:30 PM with the Director of Nursing (DON). When asked if they have any residents who can self-administer medications, the DON said no. The DON said for any resident to be able to self-administer meds they would need to be evaluated, and the medication would need to be secured at all times. When asked if Resident #28 can self-administer medications, he said no, why do you ask? When the DON was informed of Resident #28 noted with 2 tubes of Cortisone cream on her bed, the DON acknowledged she should not have any medications at the bedside. 3) On 08/28/24 at 06:20 PM an observation was made of a wound treatment cart left unlocked and unattended at the 3rd floor nursing station. Inside the wound treatment cart was scissors and various medications, including creams and solutions. Staff ZZ Registered Nurse (RN) approached the Surveyor and the unlocked/unattended wound treatment cart. During an interview conducted on 08/28/24 at 6:25 PM with Staff ZZ RN; when asked about the unlocked/unattended wound treatment cart, she acknowledged the various medications and scissors in the unlocked/unattended treatment cart. Staff ZZ RN was asked who is responsible for the wound treatment cart, she said the wound care nurse. When asked where the wound care nurse was, she said she may have gone to the second floor but was not on the third floor. Staff ZZ RN acknowledged the wound treatment cart should be locked at all times.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0800 (Tag F0800)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide 107 of 111 facility residents with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meet dieta...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide 107 of 111 facility residents with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meet dietary needs and taking into consideration of food preferences of the residents. The findings included: 1) During the observation of the Breakfast meal of 08/28/24 at 7:30 AM, it was noted that all resident meal trays include a 4 ounce serving of a light colored pink liquid. A review of numerous resident meal tray tickets were noted to have documentation of a preference of a Orange Juice serving. A review of the approved menu for the breakfast meal of 08/28/24 noted documentation of a 6 ounce portion of Vitamin C Juice to be served. On 08/28/24 at 9:30 AM the surveyor went into the main kitchen to investigate the juice that was served for the 08/28/24 breakfast meal. During an interview with the Diet Aide's (Staff C & D) a container of Tropical Punch (63 ounce powder) was given to the surveyor. The staff stated that 6-7 scoops of the powder is mixed with approximately 1 gallon of water, poured into a 4 ounce cup and served to the residents. The staff stated that they have been using the same open container for the last 3 days for the breakfast meals. The container that was being used was noted to be 1/2 full (30 ounces) of the powder with the scoop directly embedded into the powder. Further examination of the container noted that the lid was documented as being opened on 08/24/24. Further review of the Nutrition Facts listed on the label noted that a whole container provides 69 - 12 ounce servings per drink and 100 calories/ 25 grams of sugar, and 13 mg (15%) of Daily value. This analysis would indicated that the serving provided to the resident's would provide only 50 calories, 12.5 grams Sugars, and 6.5 mg (7.5 % Daily Value - DV) of Vitamin C. The calculations also revealed that in order to provide at least 110 residents with a 6 ounce portion of punch that 3 whole containers 189 ounces of the punch powder) would have to be utilized for the preparation of the breakfast juice. Photographic Evidence Obtained * Note that a 4 ounce serving of natural Orange Juice would provide 60 calories and and 75% of Vitamin C Daily Value. Interview with the Certified Dietary Manager during the review noted that Orange Juice has not been available to the residents over the last 2 days and hoped that a delivery would be coming on 08/29/24. It was also stated that there were no other Citrus Juice ( Apples Juice, or Cranberry Juice) It was also confirmed that the Punch directions for mixing were not being followed and watered down version of the punch was being provide. At the request of the surveyor a list of residents requesting a juice preference of Orange Juice with the breakfast meal was provided. The list noted that 43 residents requested Orange Juice with the breakfast meal, 3 residents' requested Orange/Cranberry/or Apple Juice with the breakfast meal, and 14 resident's requesting just Juice. 2) During the observation of the breakfast meal in the main kitchen on 08/27/24 at 7:00 AM, it was noted that the approved menu for the breakfast meal of 08/27/24 documented that Sausage Links (2 links per serving) to be served to Regular and No Concentrated Sweets Diet. Review of the Diet Census for 08/26/24 noted that there were 71 residents with physician ordered Regular Consistency Diet. Observation of the breakfast meal noted that only 50 sausage links were prepared for the breakfast meal (25 portions). Continued observation of the breakfast meal in the main kitchen and on the second and third floors noted that many residents received only 1 sausage link or received no sausage link at all on the main entree plate. Numerous residents were noted to only receive only a serving of cereal, and toast (1 slice ) for the breakfast meal. 3) During the observation of the breakfast meal in the main kitchen on 08/27/24 at 7:00 AM, it was noted that the approved menu for the breakfast meal of 08/27/24 documented a Banana (1 each) be served to all regular and therapeutic diets. Review of the Diet Census for 08/26/24 noted that 107 of the 11 facility residents were to be served a fresh Banana. Observation of the breakfast meal in the main kitchen on 08/27/24 at 7:30 AM noted that fresh Bananas were not available for the meal as per the approved menu. Further observation noted that a nutritional substitute for the Banana was not planned or served. Interviews conducted with diet staff (A, B, C, and D) at the time of the meal observation noted to state the Bananas are not available on a regular basis.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Menu Adequacy (Tag F0803)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review, observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to prepare in advance and follow the approved menu menu for 107 of the facility's 111 residents. The find...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to prepare in advance and follow the approved menu menu for 107 of the facility's 111 residents. The findings included; 1) During the review of the approved menu for the lunch meal on 08/26/24, the following were noted to be served to Regular, Mechanical Soft, Pureed, and No Concentrated Sweets Diets: * Homemade Chili (6 ounce portion = 2 ounce protein) * Watermelon Cubes (#8 scoop = 1/2 cup) * Cornbread (1 piece) Observation of the lunch meal in the main kitchen on 08/26/24 at 11:30 AM noted the following were being serve to the facility residents: * Homemade Chill - (#10 scoop - 2 ounce portion was being served) * Watermelon Cubes (no water melon available - canned pineapple substituted) * Cornbread ( pureed regular bread served to the pureed diets) Interview with the facility cook ( Staff A) at the time of observation; Staff A noted to state that she did not review the approved menu for the lunch meal of 08/26/24 and thought that a 2 ounce portion be served and was also not aware that pureed cornbread was to be served to Pureed Diets. Further stated that Watermelon is never purchased according to the approved menu. 2) Review of the approved menu for the breakfast meal of 08/27/24 noted the following to be served to the residents with physician ordered Regular, Mechanical Soft, Pureed , and No Concentrated Sweets diets. * Banana (1 each) * Sausage Link (2 links = 1 ounce Protein) During the observation of the breakfast meal conducted in the main kitchen on 08/27/24 at 7:30 AM, the following were noted: * Banana (no Banana's available/purchased) * Sausage Links ( Only 50 sausage links prepared - noted many reside received on 1 sausage link and numerous did not receive any sausage links) Interview with the facility cook (Staff E) at the time of the observation; Staff E revealed Bananas are never purchased or served according to the approved menu and that an insufficient supply of sausage Links was purchased. A review of the facility's Diet Census for 08/26/24 noted that there were 71 residents with physician ordered Regular consistency diets, 10 residents with physician ordered Pureed diet, and 20 residents with physician ordered Mechanical Soft.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0804 (Tag F0804)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to prepare foods by the use of standardized recipes to ensure nutritive value, flavor, appearance, and fo...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to prepare foods by the use of standardized recipes to ensure nutritive value, flavor, appearance, and food that is attractive and appetizing for 107 of the facility's 111 residents. The findings included: During the review of the approved menu for the lunch meal on 08/27/24 noted documentation for the entree, Turkey Burger Patty Melt to be served as the entree for Regular, Mechanical Altered (Mechanical Soft and Pureed), and No Concentrated Sweets Diets. A review of the resident's Diet Census for 08/26/24 noted 107 of there facility's 111 residents were to receive Regular, Mechanical Altered, and No Concentrated Sweets Diets. At the request of the surveyor a copy of the facility's standardized recipe for Turkey Burger Patty Melt was requested from the Dietary Manager (CDM). A review of the standardized recipe noted the following: Turkey Burger Patty Melt (recipe) Ingredients: Turkey Burgers Margarine Sautéed Onions Swiss Cheese Bread Directions: 1) Arrange burgers on sheet pan and cook 350 F for 10-12 min. 2) Arrange a single layer of bread on lined and greased sheets 3) Top each bread slice with cooked turkey burger, 2 Tablespoons sautéed onions and a slice of Swiss. Cheese 4) Cover with remaining slice of bread 5) Arrange on baking sheet in a single layer 6) [NAME] 8-10 min, flipping and halfway through cooking to evenly brown bread 7) [NAME] until bread is golden brown 8) Hold at 135 degrees F During the observation of the lunch meal in the main kitchen on 08/27/24 at 11:30 AM noted the Turkey patty Melt was prepared and served in the following manor: The steam table contained a deep pans of cooked turkey burgers that were not brown in color (white), and appeared uncooked. A single turkey burger was put onto a slice of white bread with a slice of American Cheese and covered with another slice of white bread and served on a ungarnished plate to the facility's residents. Interview with the Lunch [NAME] (Staff D) at the time of the above observation, Staff D stated she has never seen or utilized the facility's standardized recipe for the preparation of the Turkey Patty Melt. Further stated that no onions are ever available and sautéed, and no Swiss cheese was available for the sandwich and she was unaware that the sandwiches were to be cooked until golden brown in the oven.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

QAPI Program (Tag F0867)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to demonstrate effective plan of actions were implemented to correct identified quality deficiencies in the problem area related...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to demonstrate effective plan of actions were implemented to correct identified quality deficiencies in the problem area related to repeated deficient practices for F584 Safe/clean/comfortable/homelike environment, F755 Pharmacy Srvcs/Procedures/pharmacist/records, F867 Qapi/qaa Improvement Activities, and F925 Maintains Effective Pest Control Program. These deficiencies have the potential to affect 111 residents residing in the facility at the time of survey. The findings included: Record review of the facility's survey history revealed, during a recertification survey with exit dated 05/19/2023, F755 Pharmacy Srvcs/Procedures/pharmacist/records, F867 Qapi/qaa Improvement Activities, and F925 Maintains Effective Pest Control Program and a complaint survey with exit date 10/03/2023 F584 Safe/clean/comfortable/homelike environment were cited. Review of the Policy and procedures revealed; The Center organization has a comprehensive, date-drive Quality Assurance Performance Improvement Program that focuses on indicators of the outcomes of care and quality of life. Procedure: Program Design and Scope The center's QAPI program is on-going comprehensive review of care and services provided to residents. May include but not limited to: - Medical care, Clinical care, Rehabilitation, Pharmacy Services, Dining Services, Social Services, Community Life Services, Hospitality Services, Environmental Services, Admissions, Business Office, Medical Records. 2. Important functional areas may include but are not limited to: - Residents rights and responsibilities, admission process, Resident assessment, Quality of care, Quality of life, Potential Adverse Events, Continuity of care, Infection control, Plant technology and safety management, Information management, Human resources, Leadership and credentialing, Resident/family education, Allegations of abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property. 3. Review of activities may include but not limited to: - Infection control, Incident/accident reports, Resident/family complaints/satisfaction, Interdisciplinary care planning, Medication use, Environment of care/safety, Restraint reduction, Wound care/prevention, Staff orientation, in-service and competence, Weight Program, Psychotropic Drug Reduction, Fall prevention, medical record, Physician services. 4. The program is a coordinated effort among departments and services with the organization that involves leadership working with input from Center staff, residents and families. 5. The Quality Assessment and Assurance Committee (QAA) meeting are at least quarterly but may be held more frequently as appropriate. Performance Indicators: The center will utilize performance indicator to establish goals, identify opportunities for improvement, and evaluate progress towards goals. They will evaluate performance indicators at least annually for updates. The center may develop performance indicators using the following but not limited to: National benchmark, State benchmark, Company established benchmark. Systematic Analysis and Action: The center will establish and utilize a systematic approach to identify underlying causes of problems, including but not limited to: Root cause analysis, and Failure Mode Effect Analysis. The center will develop corrective actions based on the information gathered and review effectiveness of the actions. Performance Improvement Projects: The center utilizes performance improvement projects to improve a systematic problem or improve quality in the absence of a problem. Performance Improvement Projects: a. The PIP should focus on high-risk or problem prone areas, Identified by the center. b. The team may consist of one or more team members c. The team will complete the following functions: i. Collect and analyze data ii. Determine Root Cause iii. Determine steps for resolution iv. Implement Corrective action(s) v. Evaluate effectiveness of action(s) vi. Report progress to QAPI Committee
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0919 (Tag F0919)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents have functioning communication sys...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents have functioning communication system to call for staff assistance from their room (including bathroom) to a centralized staff work area for 5 of 43 residents reviewed for call lights (Resident #6, Resident #9, Resident #19, Resident #83, and Resident #88). The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Call Lights, dated 09/01/23, included the following: The purpose of this policy is ensuring residents' requests and needs are responded to. Procedure: 2. Answer the resident's call as soon as possible. 5. Report malfunctioning call lights to Maintenance, ED, and/or DON promptly. 6. Offer stationary bells and/or round frequently on residents if the call light system is malfunctioning. 1)Record review for Resident #6 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Multiple Sclerosis; Generalized Anxiety Disorder; Need for Assistance with Personal Care. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #6 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 15, which indicated that she was cognitively intact. Resident #6 was dependent on staff for toilet hygiene and substantial/maximal assistance for personal hygiene. During an interview conducted on 08/26/24 11:14 AM, Resident #6 stated that she has been soaking wet since this morning, but her call light does not work. In addition, she noted this is not the first time she has been left soaking wet in the bed and forced to wait for the staff. Resident #6 stated staff is aware that the call light doesn't work, however, nothing has been done about it. She acknowledged that the facility is short staff and therefore she waits until is her turn to get changed. 2)Record review for Resident #9 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Hemiplegia, Muscle Weakness, and Gout. Review the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #9 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated that she was cognitively intact and able to communicate. Resident #9 could wheel at least 150 feet in a corridor or similar space once she is seated in a wheelchair. During an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 11:24 AM, Resident #9 stated that her call light has not worked for over 6-months now; and she has complaint to the staff, and they have not done anything about it. She noted that maintenance has worked on the call light, however the call light works for a few days and then it stops working again. She acknowledged having 2 Call bells (this a manual call bell that you tap on top and it is only auditory), however the staff told her that they cannot hear them, so she doesn't bother to use them. Resident #9 stated that she will call 911 if she sees herself in an emergency; this is not right; we pay for everything to work at the facility. She noted that she only sees the staff during meal trays and medication administration, the staff doesn't come to check on the residents. 3)Record review for Resident #19 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Hemiplegia, unspecified affecting Left Nondominant Side; Generalized Anxiety Disorder; Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #19 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated that he was cognitively intact. Resident #19 required supervision from staff for toilet transfer and shower/bath self; Resident #19 uses a wheelchair. During an observation conducted on 08/26/24 at 11:43 AM, Resident # 19 stated that his call light has not worked for over a month. He noted that maintenance staff told him that it was an issue with the electrical outlets, however, the maintenance staff stated that he was not an electrician. He acknowledged wheeling himself in his wheelchair out of his room to get the staff's attention when he needs assistance. 4)During an inspection of the call light system in Resident #19's bathroom revealed that the call light when activated would not light up in the bathroom or outside of the resident's room to notify staff that Resident #16 required assistance. Further observation revealed that while the bathroom call system was activated, no auditory was heard at the nurses' station. During an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 11:43 AM, Resident #19 stated that he can wheel himself in his wheelchair to the bathroom and use the sink and toilet. During an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 11:21 AM Staff O, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), stated that she has been working at the facility for 6 months. She acknowledged that the call lights have not been working since she has been working at the facility. 5. A chart review revealed that Resident #83 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which is cognitively intact. This was taken from the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE]. In an interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 9:55 AM, Resident #83 stated that the call light had not been working for a long time. Resident #83 then proceeded to press the call light button noted at the end of the call light cord. No light was noted outside Resident #83 ' s room, indicating that the call light was used in the room. No light was noted in the nurse ' s station, indicating to staff that the call light was used in Resident #83 ' s room. Further observation did not see any staff coming into Resident #83 ' s room. No staff came into the room [ROOM NUMBER] minutes later at 10:25 AM, and no staff came into the room an hour later at 10:55 AM. This Surveyor attempted to use the call light inside Resident #83 ' s room at 11:00 AM. No light was noted outside Resident #83 ' s room, indicating that the call light was used in the room. No light was noted in the nurse ' s station, indicating to staff that the call light was used in Resident #83 ' s room. Further observation from 11:00 AM to 11:50 AM showed no staff coming into Resident #83 ' s room. An interview conducted on 08/26/24 at 11:55 AM with Staff YY Certified Nursing Assistant stated that she has been working in the facility for the last nine years. When a resident uses the call light to call for assistance, a light will go on outside the room, indicating that the resident needs help. She further said that the light would also go on at the nurse ' s station, indicating the room number that the call light was used. 6. In an observation conducted on 08/26/24 at 10:50 AM, in Resident #88 ' s room, this Surveyor used the call light noted on the bed to call for assistance. No light was noted outside the room to notify staff that the call light was used to call for assistance. Further observation revealed no light in the nurse ' s station, indicating to staff that the call light was used in Resident #88 ' s room In an interview conducted on 08/27/24 at 1:50 PM, the Administrator stated that someone came in this morning to work on the call lights, but it is not something that can be done in a day and needed to be completed next week at some point and that they are waiting on specific parts.
CONCERN (F)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for potentially 107 facility residents. the findings included: 1) During the initial kitchen/food service observation tour conducted on 08/26/24 at 8:50 AM, the following were noted: (a) The exteriors of 2 kitchen utility carts were noted to be heavily soiled, stained, and areas of peeling paint. * Photo Evidence Obtained (b) Large areas of the kitchen floor and walls were cracked stained, and in disrepair. * Photo Evidence Obtained (c) The floor area of the dry/canned food storage area was heavily soiled, stained, and areas of rust. * Photo Evidence Obtained (d) Staff clothing and purses (2) were noted to be stored directly onto clean food storage shelving. * Photo Evidence Obtained (e) A chemical test of 3 of 3 cleaning cloth buckets noted extremely high concentration of Quaternary Chemical * Photo Evidence Obtained (f) The entry door of the walk-in refrigerator was noted to have a build-up of black mold type substance around the gasket area. The gasket was noted to have a large tear (12) and was in need of replacement. * Photo Evidence Obtained (g) The exteriors of 6 food storage shelves located within the walk-in refrigerator were noted to be soiled and rust laden. The shelving was noted to be in need of replacement and potential for food contamination of falling rust into foods. * Photo Evidence Obtained (h) The cooling fan unit located in the walk-in refrigerator was noted to be steadily dripping into a bin pan. The pan was noted to be half full of dripping condensation and was a potential for food contamination. * Photo Evidence Obtained (i) The exterior of the commercial bench mounted can opener was noted to be rust laden throughout the stem and the blade housing unit. It was also noted that the blade was heavily soiled and a build-up of black mold like type matter. The unit was not being properly cleaned and sanitized daily basis and the blade required replacement. * Photo Evidence Obtained (j) The exteriors of the base and lid shelving carts (2) were noted to be soiled and rust laden. * Photo Evidence Obtained (k) The ceiling frame and tiles located with in the dish machine room were noted soiled and rust laden. The ceiling and frames were not being properly maintained to prevent soiling and rust. * Photo Evidence Obtained (l) The exteriors of 8 of 8 aluminum sheet pans were noted to have a heavy build-up of black carbon and a potential of food contamination. * Photo Evidence Obtained (m) The internal conveyor belt of the commercial toaster was noted to be heavily soiled and rust laden. The unit was old and not properly maintained. * Photo Evidence Obtained 2) Second observation tour of the kitchen /food service conducted on 08/26/24 at 11:15 noted the following: (a) Numerous small flying insects were noted in the dish room area and in the food preparation/serving area. (b) The 3-shelf rack where clean food preparation equipment were being stored and noted to be rust laden. Three large commercial cooking skillets were noted to be covered with a thick layer of black carbon. 3) On 08/27/24 at 7:30 AM accompanied with the facility Administrator during the observation of the breakfast meal in the main kitchen the surveyor requested that temperatures be taken of hot and cold foods located in on the steam table and foods located on food transportation carts (4) located near the steam table. The food temperatures were taken by the use of the facility's calibrated digital food service thermometer. The temperature testing noted that cold foods were not being held at the regulatory temperature of 41 degrees F or below as evidenced by the following: Individual 8 ounce portions (60) of milk = 62 degrees F Individual 4 ounce portions (60) of Orange Juice = 60 degrees F It was discussed with the diet aide (Staff ) at the time of the observation that the portions of milk and juice were being placed on the residents' trays too early (30 minutes at room temperature) prior to be sending to the residents floor.
CONCERN (F)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0882 (Tag F0882)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the facility designated Infection preventionist who is responsible for the facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPC...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the facility designated Infection preventionist who is responsible for the facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) had completed specialized training in infection prevention and control. The findings included: Review of the facility's job description titled, Infection Preventionist, included the following: The primary purpose of your job position is to plan, organize, develop and direct the overall operation of our Infection Control and Prevention Program in accordance with current federal, state, and local standards, guidelines, and regulations that govern our center and as may be directed by the Medical Director or Director of Nursing to ensure that the center provides a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent and control the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Experience: Certification in Infection Control as specified by Appendix PP at 880 is required or must obtain within the first 90 days of employment. Record review of the infection Preventionist (IP) job description revealed that on 10/31/23 the Director of Nursing (DON) signed and dated the document as the Infection Preventionist for the facility. An interview was conducted on 08/26/24 at 2:50 PM with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). They both stated that they were both the Infection Preventionist (IP), however, when asked who the lead for Infection Control was, the DON noted that he was the lead as the infection preventionist. An interview was conducted on 08/30/24 at 11:45 AM with the DON/IP. He stated he has worked at the facility since 10/31/23 and that he was not aware that he was assigned as the infection preventionist until 2 months ago when the Administrator informed him to start the infection preventionist modules. When asked if he had completed the entire IPCP training program and had a certificate, he stated that he started the modules but has not finished and has not obtained a certificate. The DON/IP stated that he was hired as the ADON back in October 2023, but within 2 weeks he was moved to the DON position. He acknowledged that he did not know who was the infection preventionist, however he has been pushing to get an infection preventionist hired. An interview was conducted on 08/30/24 at 4:03 PM with the ADON. She stated that the DON was the one assigned to handle infection control. The ADON stated that when she came onboard with the facility, the DON was taking care of the infection control. She noted that 2 months ago, the Administrator provided log-in information for the infection preventionist training modules to both the DON and herself. She acknowledged finishing the modules and getting her certificate on 08/29/24. She noted that she has not signed the agreement to be the IP because she mentioned to the administrator that the DON has been taking care of infection control and that he was the lead.
Aug 2024 1 deficiency 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews, observation,and interviews, the facility failed to prevent the neglect of one (Resident #1) out of six ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews, observation,and interviews, the facility failed to prevent the neglect of one (Resident #1) out of six residents sampled documented for elopement risk. The facility's failure in ensuring an adequate alert monitoring system was in place and staff's negligence in ensuring supervision and failure in implementing measure to prevent the elopement of Resident #1 who was care planned as an elopement risk. Resident #1's exited the facility undetected on 07/17/2024 through the facility's laundry room door that was not latched by staff. Resident #1 who was last seen between 7:00 PM and 7:30 PM was located at approximately 2:30 AM by local law enforcement at the county dump site one and a half miles (1.5) from the facility). The facility is a three-story building with residents rooms on the second and third floor; located in an area that has high traffic volume, busy intersections and is in a residential area. The county dump site (1.5 miles from the facility) has 2-way traffic, with a 40 miles per hour speed zone traffic. The resident has risk factors that that could likely have resulted in an adverse outcome based on the resident's clinical diagnoses The findings included. Records reviewed revealed on 07/17/2024 Resident #1 who has exit seeking behavior and wanders was not adequately supervised and left his room on the second floor, took the elevator to the first-floor laundry room and exited the facility through the unlocked door in the laundry room. On 07/29/2024 at 10:25 AM Resident #1 was observed in his room seated on his wheelchair in his room watching television with assigned one to one (1:1) Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Staff A. Interview on 07/29/2024 at 10:26 AM; Staff A reported the resident is not agitated and she will take the resident to activities. On 07/30/2024 at 10:45 AM; Resident#1 was sleeping, and no distress was noted. Staff A reported the resident requested to be in bed and at lunch time she will wake up the resident. Review of Resident #1's clinical records revealed, an initial admission to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Clinical diagnoses include, but not limited to, Alzheimer's Disease with Late Onset; Altered Mental Status; Dementia; Restlessness and Agitation. Resident #1 who was listed as an elopement risk had was being monitored for behaviors that were being documented on the Medication Administration Records (MAR) by the day and night shift. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 07/05/2024 documentation indicated a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 00 out of 15 to suggest the resident has severe cognitive impairment; Section E for Behaviors documented the resident exhibited wandering behaviors. Review of Resident #1's Care Plan initiated on 2/21/2024 with next review date 10/5/2024 revealed: The resident is an elopement risk/wanderer related to History of Elopement, Dementia, Disoriented to Place, History of Attempts to Leave Facility Unattended, Impaired Safety Awareness, Resident Wanders Aimlessly, Significantly Intrudes Privacy or Activities. Goal: The resident will not leave facility unattended through the review date. The residents' safety will be maintained through the review date. Interventions: Distract residents from wandering by offering pleasant diversions, structured activities, food, conversation, television, book. Identify pattern of wandering: Is wandering purposeful, aimless, or escapist? Is resident looking for something? Does it indicate the need for more exercise? Intervene as appropriate. Increased supervision (Resident is on 1:1 supervision always). Monitor location frequently. Document wandering behavior and attempted diversional interventions. Place resident's picture, and information in Elopement Book. Review of the Federal Report #644710 revealed: On 07/17/2024 between 7:00 PM to 7:30 PM Resident #1 was seen by Staff D Certified Nursing Assistant, after she provided care for him. She reported she took the resident downstairs from the third floor to the second floor to get him ready for bed, after she gave him care, she left, and he left his room shortly afterwards. He usually can be found walking up and down slowly on the second-floor hallway. He sometimes wanders into other resident rooms, but he is easily redirected when that occurs. He sometimes sits on the floor and was once found hiding in a closet in a resident room. When the nurse went to give him his medications between 8:00 PM and 8:30 PM she noticed that he was not in his room, and she began to look for him throughout the second floor. When he could not be located, she called the third floor and asked for them to look for him. 9:00 PM Staff were looking for the resident for 30-40 minutes. Once everywhere was checked and he still could not be located, the nurse notified the Registered Nurse (RN) Supervisor who was onsite at around 9:00 PM. The RN supervisor then began to search for him. He looked in every room, bathroom, office, dining room, break room, daycare, laundry, therapy, etc. He then got in his car and drove around the area. The facility then called the police and notified the resident's son and physician. The police showed up at around 12:00 AM. While onsite the police got a call over the radio at about 2:30 AM that he was located at the county dump. The security guard at the dump observed him enter the property on foot. He approached him and noticed the resident was confused. The security guard asked the resident his name and Resident # 1 gave his name the security guard gave the police officer the name. The police already had patrol cars in the area looking for him, so they went there and picked him up. They brought him back to the facility at about 2:45 AM. During an interview on 07/29/2024 at 3:40 PM the Chief Nursing Officer revealed, the Administrator texted her on 07/17/2024 at 11:17 PM. The Administrator informed her one resident was missing and all-staff member were looking for him, they were looking in all rooms in the facility, the lobby dining rooms etc. The Administrator called the police department, and a police officer arrived at the facility; and the resident was found around one and a half miles from the facility at the county dump site. The police took the resident back to the facility. The Administrator informed her when the resident was taken back to the facility. The administrator decided to send the resident to the hospital for further evaluation. She stated the resident come back from the hospital on the same date with no injuries, Interview with Staff C Registered Nurse/Supervisor (RN) on 07/29/2024 at 3:56 PM. He reported the nurse approached him and informed him [Resident # 1] was missing they started to search for the resident on every floor. They search all rooms, under the bed and in the closets because the resident has a tendency to hide under the beds and inside the closets. When they finished looking for the resident on the second and third floors, they came down to the lobby and realized the laundry room was not latched. They went to the laundry room and saw the exit door open, that exit door goes to the parking lot and the street. He then called the Director of Nursing and the Administrator. They search around the area outside the facility. When the resident was not found the police was called and the resident was reported missing. Interview on 08/01/2024 at 3:45 PM the Director of Nursing (DON) reported; the Nurse Supervisor called him at approximately 10:00 PM and he was informed that a resident was missing, and staff were looking for the resident in all areas of the facility, and outside the facility. When he arrived at the resident eloped through the laundry room door that was not latched. The DON reported he went around the area in his car looking for the resident. The police found the resident and took him back to the facility around 2:45 AM and the resident was transferred to the hospital for evaluation. The back to the facility the same date with no injuries. He reported Immediate Jeopardy removal plan included unannounced elopement drills every other day in different shifts and in-services education for the staff. All residents were reassessed for risk of elopement initiated 7/17/2024 and completed 7/18/2024. There was a facility wide head count of current residents completed 7/17/2024. One resident eloped and was unaccounted for until 7/18/2024. All the facility doors were immediately checked to ensure proper functioning by the Administrator on 7/17/2024. All doors are checked 7 days a week to ensure proper functioning by a department head initiated 7/18/2024. The resident was placed on 1:1 supervision as of 7/18/2024 and will remain on 1:1 supervision until further assessment by the physician and psych services. The laundry staff who did not latch the door properly was educated by the Administrator 7/18/2024. Residents at risk for elopement have names and photos in a binder at the front desk and nursing stations are at 100% as of 7/17/2024. Care Plans were reviewed for current residents at risk for elopement and will have individualized interventions as of 7/17/2024. There is a dedicated staff member to monitor the front lobby area 24 hours 7 days a week with documentation that was initiated on 07/17/2024 and ongoing, hourly checks are being done for all elopement risk residents initiated 7/18/2024. The department manager will complete a head count of all residents upon arrival and before leaving five times a week to ensure all residents are accounted for was initiated on 7/18/2024. A screamer alarm was placed on the identified laundry room door 7/18/2024. The facility's Immediate Jeopardy Removal Plan was verified through records reviewed and interviews. The removal plan included: The immediate actions taken to remove the Immediate Jeopardy related to F600 based upon root cause analysis: 1-100% of all current residents reassessed for risk of elopement initiated 7/17/2024 and completed 7/18/2024. 2-100% facility head count of current residents completed 7/17/2024. One resident eloped and was unaccounted for until 7/18/2024. 3-All facility doors were immediately checked to ensure proper functioning by the Administrator on 7/17/2024. 4-Doors are checked 7 days a week to ensure proper functioning by a department head initiated 7/18/2024. 5-Resident was placed on 1:1 supervision as of 7/18/2024 and will remain on 1:1 supervision until further assessment by the physician and psych services. 6-Facility to conduct unannounced drills 4 x a week to include off shifts and weekends initiated 7/17/2024. 7- Laundry staff who did not latch the door properly was educated by the administrator 7/18/2024. 8-Residents at risk for elopement have names and photos in a binder at the front desk and nursing stations are at 100% as of 7/17/2024. 9-Care Plan reviewed and current for residents at risk for elopement to include individualized interventions as of 7/17/2024 10-Dedicated staff member to monitor the front lobby area 24/7 with documentation initiated 07/17/2024 and ongoing. 11-Hourly checks for all elopement risk residents initiated 7/18/2024. 12-A department manager to complete a head count of all residents upon arrival and before leaving five times a week to ensure all residents are accounted for initiated 7/18/2024. Staff to be educated upon hire, annually and as indicated based on facility need related to the Elopement and Abuse / Neglect policies. Quote initiated for a keypad type system for the elevator 7/29/2024. [Wander management alarm] vendor contacted, and initial phase of quotes and equipment needed initiated 7/31/2024. Residents identified as at risk for elopement will be monitored by the electronic tracking system. The Quality Improvement Performance Committee will continue to hold weekly meetings to review and discuss the results of the ongoing quality monitoring r/t the above listed elements of F600 Abuse and Neglect to maintain compliance. The findings of these quality reviews are to be reported to the Quality Assurance/Performance Improvement Committee weekly. Quality Review schedule modified based on findings. Verification of the facility's education related to the elopement revealed all staff members were educated Licensed Nurses 100 percent (%) of 07/8/2024 received education. Certified Nursing Assistant 100% as of 7/18/ 2024 Dietary 100% as of 7/18/2024 Maintenance 100% as of 7/18/ 2024 Environment 100% as of 7/18/ 2024 Laundry 100% as of 7/18/ 2024 Therapy 100% as of 7/18/ 2024 Department Heads 100% as of 7/18/ 2024 Review of the facility's Policies and Procedures for Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation effective date 11/30/2014 revised on 11/29/2017 revealed: Policy It is inherent in the nature and dignity of each resident at the center that he/she be afforded basic human rights, including the right to be from abuse, neglect, mistreatment, exploitation and or misappropriation of property. The management of the facility recognizes these rights and hereby establishes the following statements, policies and procedures to protect these rights and to establish a disciplinary policy, which results in the fair and timely treatment of occurrences of resident abuse. Employees of the center are charged with a continuing obligation to treat residents, so they are free form abuse, neglect, mistreatment, and /or misappropriation of property. No employee may at any time commit an act of physical, psychological, or emotional abuse, neglect, mistreatment, and/or misappropriation of property against any resident. Violation of this standard will subject employees to disciplinary action, including dismissal, provided herein. Neglect: is the failure of the center, its employees or service providers to provide goods and services to a resident that are necessary to avoid physical harm, pain, mental anguish or emotional distress. Examples include, but are not limited to. Failure to adequately supervise a resident known to wander form the facility without the staff knowledge.
Oct 2023 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 10/3/23 at 10:44 AM, the bathroom near the dining room was locked. Staff A, Certified Nursing Assistant (C N A) was asked to ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 10/3/23 at 10:44 AM, the bathroom near the dining room was locked. Staff A, Certified Nursing Assistant (C N A) was asked to observe the bathroom, Staff A, opened the door with a plastic utensil. Staff A was asked, the reason a plastic utensil was used and whether maintenance staff were notified. Staff A stated, There is no key and yes. Observation of the restroom revealed, there were two toilet paper rolls on top of the paper towel dispenser. There were metal and plastic eating utensils behind the sink knobs. A piece of the toilet seat was broken off. [See photo evidence] Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide housekeeping and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior for second floor resident rooms. The findings included: Observation on the Second Floor 10/03/2023 from 8:02am to 9:15am revealed: Rooms #221 - Under the sink a container, the toilet paper holder was on the floor, the shower floor was dirty, and on the ceiling a water marks. The cover sheet under air conditioner (AC) unit was collecting the moisture and was wet. Water was running from the shower head on the bathroom floor. room [ROOM NUMBER] - At the entrance there was a dead roach, bathroom walls were in disrepair, the shower was observed to rusty and dirty. In the hallway across from room [ROOM NUMBER] another roach was observed. Room#223 - Under the Air Conditioner unit, there was a blanket to collect the moisture. In the bathroom a live roach was observed and the wall was in disrepair. Room#229 - At the entrance of the room, a dead roach was observed, on the wall next to the AC unit, there were 2 dead roaches and a large hole on the wall. Room#225 - The bathroom walls needed painting, and appeared dirty. Room#226 - The bathroom walls were dirty, the floor base tiles were missing, some were dirty. Room#227 - The bathroom walls were dirty, floor base tiles were missing and some were dirty, there was a hole on the wall, and painting was needed. Room#229 - A dead roach was on the floor, a paper to catch roaches was under the table with several roaches on it and there were dead roaches in the lamp cover. Room#230 - The room wall needed painting, there was one dead roach at the entrance and another a live roach was under the night table. Room#231 - The base board was peeling off the wall, and there was a hole. Room#233 - The bathroom walls had holes and were dirty. Room#234 - The toilet paper holder was broken, and the ceiling had a black substance on it. In the bathroom near the dining room there were two live roaches observed. *For all these observations there is photographic evidence* Policies and Procedures-Physical Environment-Room Repairs Policy: The center will ensure the residents have a safe, homelike, environment free from physical hazards. Procedure: 1. To ensure a safe, homelike environment, the Maintenance Director, or Designee, will complete room rounds 2-4 times per month. Findings from these rounds will be prioritized and repair made as indicated. Apart from completing room rounds, a maintenance log is kept at the nurse's station for any repair staff find need to be completed throughout the day. Staff are to put the maintenance request in the log, the maintenance department will check the log throughout the day to complete those tasks. Any repairs requiring immediate attention are to be reported directly to the Maintenance Director or Administrator.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0925 (Tag F0925)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review. The facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so that ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review. The facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so that the facility is free of pests as evidenced by live roaches, dead roaches and small black bugs observed in eleven different locations in the facility. The findings included: On 10/3/23 at 8:02 AM to 9:15AM, during an observation of the facility's second floor the following was observed: The second-floor dining room: There were seven residents in total and five were in a wheelchairs. There was a live roach crawling on the wall. room [ROOM NUMBER]: A dead roach was near Bed A. [See photo evidence]. room [ROOM NUMBER]: A live roach was seen crawling in the bathroom. [See photo evidence]. room [ROOM NUMBER]: 2 dead roaches were seen and smashed into the wall. [See photo evidence]. room [ROOM NUMBER]: A dead roach was found in front of Bed B in the room. room [ROOM NUMBER]: One live roach was seen crawling on the wall. room [ROOM NUMBER]: Multiple roaches were found stuck to a glue traps underneath the window bed furniture. [See photo evidence]. room [ROOM NUMBER]: A live roach was seen near a yellow-stained sheet on the floor. On 10/3/23 at 09:17 A.M., the bathroom near the second-floor dining room had one live roach on the door frame and one on the wall. [See photo evidence] On 10/3/23 at 11:19 AM: A roach was observed crawling out of room [ROOM NUMBER] into the hallway. On 10/3/23 at 11:25 AM: At the nursing station, a flat body round insect walked on the counter. In review of Policy and procedures titled Maintenance - Plumbing, [Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning] HVAC and related systems. The purpose of this procedure is to guide the sanitary handling of plumbing, heating, ventilation, air conditioning, and related systems within the facility. Under the section titled, general guidelines, 19. The pest control vendor should spray monthly (or as necessary) for insects and rodents.
May 2023 5 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure dignity during dining for one (Resident #81)...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure dignity during dining for one (Resident #81) out of 28 residents who need assistance with eating. As evidenced by one facility staff member standing while feeding the resident. The findings included: In an observation on 05/16/23 at 12:02 PM. In the dining room, there were 12 residents and 2 staff sitting down while assisting residents to eat lunch. Staff I, a Registered Nurse was seen pulling resident up in the chair. Staff I, fed resident #81 from his regular diet tray, while standing and resident #81 was observed feeding himself at times. On 05/16/23 at 02:35 PM, during an interview with Staff I, Registered Nurse, when asked, How was lunch for resident #81 and the reason for standing while feeding the resident? Staff I stated, The resident was sliding down in the chair. I'm supposed to be sitting when I'm feeding a resident. When asked, The reason for not sitting down? Staff I stated, I'm an active person, I walk around, I feel more comfortable standing. I want to see everyone, and I don't want my back turned. I like to be aware of the environment and what is going on with other residents in the dining room. When asked, What is your facility's policy regarding dining? Staff I stated, I'm usually tending to residents in the room for 1 to 1. Usually, it's one certified nursing assistant (C.N.A.) that supervises everyone in the dining room. Today, I was to supervise and see residents being fed properly. When asked, Does the facility allow you to stand while feeding the resident? Staff I stated, I usually sit down to feed residents. Today, the resident was lying limp, I pulled him up to sit him properly to feed him. I was stimulating him so that he could eat for himself. When asked, Where can you get chairs to be able to sit? Staff I stated, I can pull one from nursing station and from other rooms. Record review of resident #81's medical records documented a readmission on [DATE]. The current admission was on 12/7/22. The Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] for a Quarterly assessment documented, Brief interview of mental status was not completed. Cognitive skills for daily decision making were severely impaired. Eating was supervision with one-person physical assist. No swallowing disorders. No weight loss or weight gained. No speech therapies. During review of the residents care plan, dated 1/3/23 revealed, the Resident's activities of daily living self-care deficit documented, Supervision to extensive assist related to functional decline and depression. The goal was the resident will receive the level of assistance required to maintain or improve present level. Interventions/Approaches ensure all needs are met. Target date is 6/16/23. In the facility's Policy titled, Assistance with Meals. In Section 1, C it is documented, Residents who cannot feed themselves will be fed with attention to safety, comfort and dignity, for example: (C1) documented, Not Standing over residents while assisting them with meals.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0688 (Tag F0688)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide adequate and appropriate health care, related ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide adequate and appropriate health care, related to restorative therapy services for one (Resident # 7) out of one resident who needs to have splints on both hands. This practice has the potential to increase the risk of negative resident outcomes and to affect all in-house residents residing in the facility who need to wear splint devices. The findings included: Observation of Resident # 7 on 05/16/2023 at 09:03 AM. The resident was observed with both hands contracted and not wearing splints or hand rolls. Observation of Resident # 7 on 05/17/2023 at 10:15 AM. The resident was observed lying in his bed. The resident was not wearing splints or hands rolls in his contracted hands. Observation of Resident # 7 on 05/18/23 at 10:31 AM. The resident was observed lying in his bed. The resident was observed with both hands contracted. The resident was not wearing any splint or devices. The resident was not able to respond to questions asked. Observation of Resident on 05/18/23 at 02:20 PM. The resident was observed wearing splints in both hands. Observation of Resident #7 on 05/19/23 at 12:12 PM. The resident was observed wearing the splint in both hands. Record review of the clinical records for Resident #7 revealed, the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Clinical diagnoses included but were not limited to, Chronic Respiratory Failure, Unspecified whether with Hypoxia or Hypercapnia; Encounter for Attention to Tracheostomy; Encounter for Attention to Gastronomy; Contracture, Right Hand; Contracture, Left Hand; Contracture of Muscle, Right Hand; Contracture of Muscle, Left Hand. Record review of Physician Orders dated 03/16/2023 revealed, the resident had an order for Right and Left Resting Hand Wrist Hand Finger Orthosis (BMI-WHFO) splint to be donned during AM, removed during PM. Check skin integrity prior to applying splint and after removing splint. Record review of Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Section C, Cognitive Patterns dated 03/18/2023 revealed, the residents Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) summary score was 00 out of 15. Review of the Quarterly MDS Section G, Functional Status dated 03/18/2023 the resident needed total dependence with two-persons physical assistance for bed mobility, transfer, and toilet use. The resident needed total dependence with one-person physical assistance for locomotion, dressing, eating and personal hygiene. Review of the Quarterly MDS Section O, Special Treatments, Procedures and Programs dated 03/18/2023 revealed, the resident had physical/occupational therapy from 01/17/2023 through 03/16/2023. Record review of the Care Plan initiated on 10/15/2020 and the next review date 06/18/2023 revealed, the resident wascare planned for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) self-care deficit related to Dementia/Post Status Cerebrovascular/Dementia-Contractures. Goal: Resident will be kept clean and with neat appearance; and will have needs met daily through the next review date. Approach: Assist with ADLs daily and encourage participation in simple tasks if able. Praise all attempts. Reorient to the environment as needed. Keep call light within easy reach and encourage use of call light. Document and report any deterioration/changes in status to physician/rehabilitation and restorative nursing. Rehabilitation to screen treatment if ordered. Position in wheelchair properly, provide assistive device as per rehabilitation recommendation. Interview with Staff A, a Registered Nurse (RN) on 05/18/2023 at 10:40 AM. She stated, the resident had to wear splints in both hands, after care in the morning to care in the afternoon. She stated, that she does not know why the resident was not wearing splints on both hands. Interview with Staff B, a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) on 05/19/2023 at 12:25 PM. She stated, that CNAs were the ones in charge of putting the splints in both hands of the resident after care in the morning and removed after care in the afternoon. She stated, that she did today after finishing the morning care to the resident. Interview with Staff C, a Physical Therapy Assistant (PTA) on 05/19/2023 at 1:49 PM. She stated, the facility had no restorative department. The CNAs were responsible for putting the devices on the residents. She stated, the resident had physical/occupational therapy started on 01/17/2023 and finished on 03/16/2023. The splints for the resident were ordered for CNAs to put on after morning care. Record review of the Policies and Procedures for Resident Mobility and Range of Motion not dated, revealed Policy Statement: 1-Residents will not experience an avoidable reduction in range of motion (ROM). 2-Residents with limited range of motion will receive treatment and services to increase and/or prevent a further decrease in ROM. 3-Residents with limited mobility will receive appropriate services, equipment, and assistance to maintain or improve mobility unless reduction in mobility is unavoidable. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 2-e) Contractures. 3-d) Conditions that limit or immobilize movement of limbs or digits (e.g., splints)
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 05/18/23 at 02:25 PM, during an observation of the third floor's west medication cart with Staff A, Registered Nurse (R.N). A...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 05/18/23 at 02:25 PM, during an observation of the third floor's west medication cart with Staff A, Registered Nurse (R.N). A blue and [NAME] green capsule determined to be Fluoxetine 20 mg and a broken piece of a white pill was found on the bottom of the medication cart drawer. Staff A placed the pills in a drug buster. On 05/18/23 at 03:54 PM, when asked to Staff A, R.N, What is the facility's policy regarding cleaning carts? Staff A R.N stated, We are to clean the cart after our shift. Record review of Resident #22's recent minimum data set. In Section C for Cognitive Pattern documents, unable to complete brief interview of mental status interview. In Section I, for Active Diagnosis documented, includes Depression and Schizophrenia. Section N for medications stated, Resident #22 received antipsychotic and antidepressant in the last 7 days. Review of the physician orders for Resident #22 revealed, orders for Fluoxetine 20mg capsule - give one (1) capsule by mouth once daily for Depression. Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure pharmaceutical procedures were followed during medication administration and medication storage observation for two (3) out of four (4) medication carts observed and 3 residents observed for medication administration with 28 opportunities. This affected Residents #22, #32 and #73. There were 81 residents residing in the facility at the time of this survey. The Findings Included: During medication administration observation on 05/17/2023 at 8:30 AM with Registered Nurse (Staff I) on unit two (2) west medication cart, the medication Calcitriol Capsule 0.25 Microgram (MCG)-one (1) capsule by mouth once daily was not available to be given to Resident #73, the medication was last signed out in the Medication Administration Record (MAR) as given on 05/16/2023 at 9AM. Interview on 05/17/2023 at 8:30AM with Registered Nurse, Staff I, when asked about the policy on reordering the medication for resident's Staff I stated, I reordered the medication yesterday, it is just not here. Review of the medical records for Resident #73 revealed, the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Clinical diagnoses included but were not limited to: End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD). Review of the Physician's Orders Sheet for May 2023 revealed, Resident #73 had orders that included but were not limited to: Calcitriol Capsule 0.25 Microgram (MCG)-one (1) capsule by mouth once daily related to ESRD. Record review of Resident # 73's Comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed: Section C for Cognitive Patterns documented Brief Interview for Mental Status Score is 12 on a 0-15 scale, indicating the resident is moderately impaired cognitively. Record review of Resident #73 's Care Plans with a Reference Date of 01/31/2020 revealed: Resident requires Hemodialysis. Interventions up to and including -Administer medications as ordered, and monitor labs as ordered. During the Medication Administration Observation on 05/17/2023 at 9:06AM with Graduate Nurse (Staff E) on unit three (3) east/west cart, Staff E signed out all medications in the Medication Administration Record by writing her initials on each medication prescribed for 9AM for Resident #32 before administering the medications to Resident # 32. Staff E left the East/West medication cart unlocked in the hallway close to resident #32's room while administering the medications in the resident's room. Interview on 5/17/23 at 9:06AM with Graduate Nurse, Staff E, when asked why she signed off on the medications before administering to the resident, Staff E stated, I know the resident is going to take the medications when asked, what the facility's policy is on signing off on medications, Staff E stated, we are supposed to sign off on the medications after they are given to the resident. Staff E was shown that her medication cart was left unlocked, Staff E stated, I forgot to lock the cart. During the Medication storage observation on 05/18/23 at 11:19 AM on Unit two (2) East Cart with Registered Nurse (Staff F), two (2) white round pills were found on the bottom of the shelf in the second drawer of the cart. Staff E acknowledged the location of the pills when they were found by the surveyor and disposed of the two (2) pills in the sharps container attached to the cart. Interview on 05/18/2023 at 11:19AM with Registered Nurse, Staff F, Staff F stated the carts are cleaned daily on every shift and the facility's policy is to clean the medication carts daily on every shift. When asked how the nurses are supposed to dispose of loose medications, Staff F stated, we place the loose medications in the sharps containers. Interview on 05/19/23 at 09:38 AM with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) it was stated, after being told by surveyor about the issues observed during the medication administration and medication storage observations, the ADON stated when Resident #73's medication arrived from the pharmacy, it was given to the resident, the resident's physician gave an order for the medication to be administered on arrival. The medication was given on 5/17/23 at 12pm. The nurse (Staff I) said she ordered the medication for the resident that was missing his medications the day before. We are going to in-service our nurses concerning all the information you gave me on loose pills on the cart, the medication cart being unlocked, signing off on medications before giving to the resident, medication disposal and making sure we order medications on time to make sure we do not run out. Review of the facility's policy and procedures titled, Medication Administration-General Guidelines dated May 2022 states: Medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with good nursing principles and practices and only by persons legally authorized to do so. Personnel authorized to administer medications do so only after they have been properly oriented to the facility's medication distribution system (procurement, storage, handling, and administration). Review of the facility's policy and procedures titled, Storage of Medications dated May 2022 states: Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly, following manufacturers recommendations or those of the supplier. Procedure except for those requiring refrigeration or freezing, medication intended for internal use are stored in a medication cart or other designated area. Review of the facility's policy and procedures titled, Ordering and Receiving non-controlled Medications from the Dispensing Pharmacy dated May 2022 states: Procedure 2-Reordering of medications is done in accordance with the order and delivery schedule developed by the pharmacy provider(s). Reorder medication in advance of need, as directed by the pharmacy order and delivery schedule, to assure an adequate supply is on hand. Review of the facility's policy and procedures titled, Discarding and Destroying Medications. Revision date April 2022 states: Medications will be disposed of in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations governing management of non-hazardous pharmaceuticals, hazardous waste and controlled substances.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0839 (Tag F0839)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Graduate Practical Nurse met the qualifications required for the job title. There were 81 residents residing in the f...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Graduate Practical Nurse met the qualifications required for the job title. There were 81 residents residing in the facility at the time of this survey. The Findings Included: On 5/17/23 at 9:06AM, prior to the medication administration observation, the surveyor introduced herself to Graduate Nurse (Staff E) at the medication cart, Staff E stated, her name and title as a graduate nurse. Staff E stated, there is a program here in the facility for graduate nurses. On 05/18/23 at 02:32 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) was asked about Staff E's graduate nurse qualifications, it stated Staff E was hired as a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNAs), I am aware that she has a certificate stating she can sit for the nursing state boards as a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). I will find out from Human Resources (HR) when Staff E graduated from nursing school and if she has a Graduate Practical Nurse letter from the State of Florida. On 05/18/23 at 04:00 PM, received from the NHA, Staff E's Authorization to test form with a date range of February 8, 2023-August 7, 2023. On 05/19/23 at 08:21 AM, received from NHA, Staff E's Graduation certificate dated June 18, 2016. On 05/19/23 at 08:56 AM, the NHA administrator stated, Staff E stated, she will be taking her test in June 2023 and she had never taken the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) nursing exam before. The NHA stated, I was unaware of Staff E nursing school graduation date. The NHA stated, Staff E asked on 2/20/23 if she could work as a graduate nurse, I told her she needed to provide proof that she could take the exam and that she did not already take the exam and failed. She provided the test date and told me she had never taken the exam. Since 2/20/23 she has worked as a graduate LPN periodically, she also has her CNA license and works as a CNA. Based on the information I received about the graduate nurse job description from HR yesterday, I will sit down with her (Staff E), the Director of Nursing (DON) or Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) and HR and let her know if we cannot get the necessary information needed she can no longer work as a graduate nurse and she can continue to work as a CNA at the facility. Review of the facility's Graduate nurse job description documented: The Graduate Nurse Position is time limited. A person may remain in the Graduate Nurse position until one of the following occurs: 1) They become an LPN, licensed in the state of Florida, at which time they will be transferred to the LPN position, OR 2) They receive a failing score on the nurse licensure exam, at which time they will no l longer be able to work as an LPN, OR 3) They failed to become an LPN in the state of Florida within the required timeframe, at which time their employment will be terminated. Record review of the facility's Agency for Healthcare Administration (AHCA) roster documented Staff E was hired as a CNA on 09/06/2012. Record review of Staff E's Human Resources (HR) documentation revealed, Staff E Graduated Nursing School on June 18, 2016. Florida Board of Nursing Authorization to practice as Graduate Practical Nurse PN-Not available. Previous Test Dates-Unknown Staff E Will be taking LPN exam -7/2023. Graduate Nurse Competency Training completed-03/10/2023 facilitated by DON. CNA License Status-Clear/Active, Expiration 05/31/2024 Authorization to Test the National Council Licensure Examination for Practical Nurses (NCLEX-PN) NCSBN ID: . Authorization Number: Test Validity: February 8, 2023-August 7, 2023 Nursing Regulatory Body: North Carolina Board of Nursing Program: T College, B ., N., US Review of the facility's policy and procedures titled, Job Description revision date October 2010 states: Our facility has developed a written description for each position within our facility. A written job description has been developed for each position within our facility. Job descriptions are criteria based and reflect the skills required for each position. Each job description defines the following categories: a. Duties and responsibilities b. Working conditions c. Educational requirements d. Experience e. Specific requirements f. Physical and sensory requirements g. Acknowledgements: and h. Job description analysis information
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

QAPI Program (Tag F0867)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record Review and interview, the facility failed to demonstrate effective plans of action were implemented to correctly identify quality deficiencies in the problem area related to repeated d...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record Review and interview, the facility failed to demonstrate effective plans of action were implemented to correctly identify quality deficiencies in the problem area related to repeated deficient practices for F550 Resident Rights/Exercise of Rights and F688 Increased/Prevent Decrease in Range of Motion/Mobility. This practice has the potential to increase the risk of negative resident outcomes that could affect all 81 residents residing in the facility at the time of this survey. The finding included: Record review of the facility's survey history revealed, during a recertification survey with exit 3/10/2022, Resident Rights/Exercise of Rights was cited related to the facility failed to treat 1 out of 24 sampled residents in a dignified manner. Moreover, Increase/Prevent Decrease in ROM/Mobility was cited related to the facility failed to provide adequate care and treatment for one resident with a contracture as evidenced by the facility's failure to apply elbow extension and splint devices as per physician's order. During record review of the quarterly meeting sign-in sheet, it was revealed that the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance Committee (QAA) is comprised of the following: Administrator, Risk Manager, Medical Director, Director of Nursing, Dietary Director, Social Service Director, Minimum Data Set Director, Care Plan Coordinator, and Director of Therapy. During an interview on 05/19/2023 at 04:11 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator revealed that the facility has the following Performance Improvements Plans (PIPs) open: Care Plan due to turn over in the Minimum Data Set department, documentation and omissions on residents' charts, labs and missed appointments as labs were not transcribed correctly and missed appointment for the residents refusing to not go to their appointments were not documented in charts, Wheelchairs identified as being dirty and missing parts to be replaced, furniture and privacy curtains needed to be replaced, pest in the facility and around the facility, missing physical Minimum Data Set copies from file cabinet as we found that some residents had only three assessments, and some had 15 months of assessments, Resident finger and toenail clipping, and Missing clothing. Review of the facility document titled, THE QUALITY ASSURANCE PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT PLAN revealed, I. Goals Our organization's overall goal of the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement Program is to have an ongoing internal review of our care and service practices as a way of assessing the quality of the care and services provided. We will seek and assess how to implement evidence-based best practices and explore the use of technology to improve quality of care and services. Quality Assurance Performance Improvement activities will be used to assess, gather data, and use the best available evidence to define and measure goals. II. Scope Practice areas assessed as needing improvement or change will be addressed in a performance improvement action plan using a SMART formula for setting the goal of the plan, root cause analysis to find the systemic cause of why the practice area is in need of improvement or change and feed back from all stakeholders to ensure the safety and high quality of all clinical interventions emphasize autonomy and choice in the daily life of residents. III. Feedback, Data Systems, and Monitoring Our organization will be using data from the following sources to monitor care and services: a. Survey results b. Results of QIS Comparative Activities Information from the above sources will be reviewed at least monthly at the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement meetings and at any other time that an issue arises and needs to be addressed. Information will be analyzed against benchmarks/absolute thresholds that have been established by QIS Survey protocols and accepted by the organization. The information on the outcomes of the Performance Improvement projects will be disseminated to the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement leadership, Resident Council and employees, through written reports and meeting groups. IV. Guidelines for Performance Improvement Projects Topics for Performance Improvement Projects will be identified through deficient practices that impact the quality of services delivered to our residents. Our organization will develop projects on an as needed basis or as soon as an area of concern is identified. The project will be assembled by the project manager and include at least three members from affected and unaffected departments to ensure that an interdisciplinary approach.
Mar 2022 10 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to treat 1 out of 24 sampled residents ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to treat 1 out of 24 sampled residents in a dignified manner. Resident # 26 was observed without food on two occasions while residents near him were eating. The findings included: Observation in the third-floor dining room during lunch on 03/07/2022 at 12:08 PM, Resident # 26 called the Agency for Health Care Administration surveyor over to his table and reported that, another resident at his table has eaten all his food and he does not have nothing. An unidentified staff person in the room assisting the residents with setting up their trays told Resident # 26, his food was coming. Resident # 26, reported again, this gentleman ate all the food off the plate. Resident #26's tablemate was observed to be eating his lunch at the table, but Resident # 26 did not have his lunch tray. On 03/07/22 at 12:13 PM, Resident # 26 was observed to be served his lunch tray and his tablemate had left the dining room before his lunch tray arrived. On 03/7/22 at 12:25 PM, Resident # 26 had eaten approximately 80 % of his lunch. Resident # 26 reported, he was hungry. During observation on 03/09/22 at 04:56 PM in Resident # 26's room, Resident # 26's roommate, (Resident # 50) was observed sitting in his wheelchair eating dinner. His dinner meal appeared to be fish, yellow rice and greens. Upon entering Resident # 26's section of the room located next to the window, Resident # 26's name was called and Resident # 26 called out, dinner. The resident was observed to have his eyes closed and the privacy curtain was observed to be drawn/closed between the door and window bed. Resident #26 was asked how he was doing, and he reported he was okay. Resident # 26 dinner tray was not in the room and no staff member was observed bringing Resident # 26 his dinner tray, while his roommate continued to eat his dinner. Resident # 26's dinner tray was not observed to be served as of 5:14 PM, when the surveyors left the third-floor unit. During the review of Resident # 26's medical record it was noted that the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 3 out of 15 indicating the resident had severely impaired cognition. The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included but were not limited to, Diabetes Mellitus Type 2, Congestive Heart Failure and Dementia. On 03/10/22 at 11:30 AM, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) was asked, how the meals are served, and she reported, they serve everyone at the same time. The facility's policy was requested for how they served meals. The NHA was informed about the observation of Resident # 26 sitting at the table without food on 03/07/22 and about the observation on 03/09/22 during dinner. On 03/10/22 at 04:47 PM, the NHA was asked for the policy on how they serve their residents and she reported, they didn't have a policy for serving residents meals.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0554 (Tag F0554)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to assess 1 out of 24 sampled residents (Resident 74) fo...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to assess 1 out of 24 sampled residents (Resident 74) for self-administration of medication prior to leaving a medication at the resident's bedside. The finding included: During observation on 03/08/22 at 09:13 AM, Resident #74 was observed in bed asleep. A white pill was observed in a cup on the over bed table. During an interview on 03/08/22 from 12:08 PM to 12:52 PM with Resident #74, it was observed that the white pill was still on the resident's over bed table. The resident was asked about the pill and she reported that, the nurse left the antacid ( Simethicone) for her and she would take it after she ate lunch. On 03/10/22 at 11:45AM, Staff H, a Licensed Practical Nurse, was asked if Resident #74 self-administers medications, she reported, no. Staff H was asked, what was the process for self-administration of medications at the facility. She reported, they must have a physician's order for this. On 3/10/22 at 11:50 AM, Staff K, the Pharmacy Nurse Consultant, asked whether she could assist. Staff K was asked, what is the process for self-administration of medications. Staff K reported, there has to a physician's order and an assessment. The facility's policy for self-administration of medications was requested. During an interview on 03/10/22 at 12:03 PM, with the Director of Operations, Staff J, the Pharmacy Consultant, and Staff K, the finding were discussed related to the self-administration of medication for Resident #74 During the review of the facility's policy for ID3: Bedside Medication Storage, the policy was dated April 2017, it was noted the facility did not follow this policy. The facility's policy documented in part: Bedside Medication Storage is permitted for residents who wish to self-administer medications, upon the written order of the prescriber and once self-administration skills have been assessed and deemed appropriate in the judgement of the facility's interdisciplinary resident team. Procedures: A. A written order for the bedside storage of medication is present in the residents medical record. B. Bedside storage of medications is indicated on the residents medication administration record (MAR) and in the care plan for the appropriate medications. C. For residents who self-administer medications (See IIA 10: Self-Administration of Medications) the following conditions are met for bedside storage to occur: 1) The manner of storage prevents access by other residents. Lockable drawers or cabinets 2) The medications provided to the resident for bedside storage are kept in the containers dispensed by the provider pharmacy 3) The bedside medication record is reviewed on each nursing shift . D. The resident is instructed in the proper use of the bedside medication E. At least once per shift, the nursing staff checks for usage of the medication by the resident . F. All nurses and aides are required to report to the charge nurse on duty any medications found at the bedside not authorized for bedside storage . G. Medications stored at the bedside are reordered in the same manner as other medications . H. Bedside medication storage is routinely monitored by the medication nurse or consultant pharmacist . I. When the interdisciplinary team determines that bedside or in-room storage of medications would be a safety risk to other residents, the medications of residents permitted to self-administer are stored in the central medication cart or medication room . During the review of Resident #74's medical record, it was noted that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The residents diagnoses included but was not limited to Osteoarthritis, Polyneuropathy, Unsteadiness on feet, lack of coordination, history of falls, and Bipolar Disorder. The residents Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 15 noting the residents cognition is intact. During the review of Resident #74's Medication Administration Record (MAR), there was no documentation found that indicated the resident was approved to self-administer medications. The MAR included an order for Simethicone 125 mg(milligram) chew one tablet by mouth after meals, the medication was scheduled to be given at 8:00 AM, 1:00 PM and 6:00 PM; for a diagnosis of Painful Gas. During the review of Resident #74's care plans, there was no care plan for self-administration of medications.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0558 (Tag F0558)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 03/07/22 at 09:10 AM, Resident # 58 was observed asleep in bed. The call light was observed on the floor. (Photographic evide...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 03/07/22 at 09:10 AM, Resident # 58 was observed asleep in bed. The call light was observed on the floor. (Photographic evidence). Observation on 03/08/22 at 09:28 AM, revealed Resident # 58 lying in bed watching television. The call light was observed on the floor. (Photographic evidence). On 03/07/22 at 09:25 AM, Resident # 29 was observed sleeping. The call light was observed wrapped and hanging from the bed out of the resident's reach. On 03/08/22 at 10:42 AM, Resident # 29 was observed awake in bed, the call light was observed wrapped around the bed rail and hanging from the bed. (Photographic evidence). Observation on 03/07/22 at 09:28 AM, Resident # 80 was observed sitting up in bed. Resident #80 was nonverbal. The call light was observed on the floor. (Photographic evidence). Observation on 03/08/22 at 09:31 AM, Resident # 80 was observed in bed sleeping. The call light was observed on the floor. (Photographic evidence). On 03/10/22 at 02:59 PM, Resident # 80 was observed lying in bed, awake. The call light was observed wrapped around the bed rail and hanging from the bed. During an interview with Staff G, a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) on 03/10 2022 at 4:50 PM. Staff G stated that the call light should be within the residents' reach. If the resident has a non-dominant side the call light should be placed on the opposite side. The call light should be within residents reach even for residents that are cognitively impaired. Staff G revealed that she did not know what happened with those residents, that the call lights were not within the residents' reach. Record review of the facility's policies and procedures with revision dated October 2010 revealed Purpose: The purpose of this procedure is to respond to the resident's requests and needs. General guidelines item number 5- When the resident is in bed or confined to a chair be sure the call light is within easy reach of the resident. Based on observations, interviews and records reviewed, the Facility failed to honor residents' rights to ensure reasonable accommodation of needs, as evidenced by failure to ensure call lights remained within reach for four (4) Residents (Resident #45, Resident #58, Resident #29 and Resident #80) out of 24 sampled Residents. The Resident census at the time of this survey was 90. The Findings Included: Observation of room [ROOM NUMBER] on 03/07/22 at 09:03 AM revealed, Resident #45's call light was on the floor, behind the residents' bed. Resident # 45 was in his bed, asleep at the time. (Photographic evidence obtained). Observation of room [ROOM NUMBER] on 03/08/22 at 9:29 AM revealed Resident #45 in bed. Resident # 45's call light was observed under the resident's bed. The call light was tangled with the call light that belonged to bed B. (Photographic evidence obtained) Observation with the Maintenance Director and Corporate staff on 3/10/22 at 9:52 AM, revealed, Resident #45's call light remained under the resident's bed tangled up with the call light that belonged to bed B in the same position noted in the above mentioned observation (Photographic evidence obtained). The Maintenance director moved the bed and untangled the call light cords for bed A and bed B that were caught around and under the leg of bed A. The Maintenance Director agreed that residents' call lights should remain within residents' reach.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a homelike environment, free of hazards that cou...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a homelike environment, free of hazards that could potentially lead to accidents for two out of two beds in room [ROOM NUMBER]. As evidenced by bed remotes noted in disrepair. The Findings included. Observation in room [ROOM NUMBER] on 03/07/22 at 09:21 AM revealed, the electrical cord for bed #349 B was in disrepair. The outer wire casing harness that covered the bed remote was torn, exposing the electrical wires within. (Photo taken). Further observation on 03/08/22 at 11:08 AM revealed electrical cords for the remotes that controlled Bed A and Bed B in room [ROOM NUMBER] were in disrepair. The cords were frayed and both cords showed the wires exposed. The exposed wires for Bed A cord were partially wrapped with black tape (Photos) During an interview on 03/10/2022 at 9:37 AM, the Maintenance Director reported that the department's role included doing daily rounds first thing in morning; during our rounds, we go inside the rooms, we look at the doors, call lights, do bathrooms check . The Maintenance Director added that he also checked the bed and cords for the bed remote. He explained that if a cord for the bed remote broke, and he did not have the parts to fix the issue, his team would replace the bed. He later reported it was not the facility practice to use tape and wrap around a broken cord; He would replace any cords in disrepair. During the interview, the Maintenance Director agreed to observe room [ROOM NUMBER]. Observation and interview with Maintenance Director on 3/10/22 at 9:51 AM revealed, the cords on both Bed A and Bed B in room # 349 remained in disrepair as mentioned above; and agreed they needed to be corrected. Record review of the facility's policy and procedures titled, Safety and Supervision of Residents, dated 2001, Revised 12/2007, revealed, Our facility strives to make the environment as free from accident hazards as possible. Resident safety and supervision and assistance to prevent accidents are facility wide priorities. Facility -oriented approach to safety included: 2. Safety risks and environmental hazards are identified on an ongoing basis through a combination of employee training, employee monitoring and reporting processes; Q&A reviews of safety and incident/accident reports; and facility - wide commitment to safety at all levels of the organization.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to implement care plan for restorative devices for one...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to implement care plan for restorative devices for one of three residents (Resident #8) This facility practice has the potential to have an adverse effect on 12 residents in the facility with contractures. The findings included: Record review of the face sheet for Resident # 8 revealed his original admission dated 09/07/2012, Resident # 8 was readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #8's diagnoses included but not limited to contracture left hand; hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side. Record review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #8, dated 12/01/202, and revealed that the resident had a score of 14 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), which indicated that the resident was not cognitively impaired. Further review of the MDS revealed that the resident had clear speech patterns, understood and was able to understand others. Functional status for ROM (Range of Motion) limitation: upper and lower extremity showed impairment on one side. The resident required total assistance of two persons for transfers. Observation on 03/07/22 at 10:15 AM revealed, Resident #8 was in his bed asleep. Resident # 8's hands appeared contracted. His left forearm was bent up toward the left shoulder, no hand roll or restorative devices noted in place. During dining observation at approximately 12:30 PM on 03/07/22 Resident #8 remained in bed for dining observation, no restorative devices noted. Observation and interview on 03/08/22 at 11:08 AM revealed, Resident #8 remained in bed, appeared alert, and oriented. Resident #8 reported he was unable to move his left hand. He had no hand rolls and received no treatment. Observation on 03/09/22 at 10:30 AM revealed, no hand rolls nor restorative treatments noted. Interview on 03/10/22 at 3:46 PM Staff C, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) reported she was familiar with Resident #8 for about two years. Staff C stated: His condition remains the same since I've been here. He's barely able to move his left side, he got CVA. When asked the LPN explained; The way we take care of him is to wash it, provide range of motion exercises, and give him like a hand roll to keep the area open. The Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) provides him with range of motion when providing care. During the interview, Staff C agreed to review Resident #8's physician orders. Record review of Treatment Records for Resident #8 revealed the Flow Record dated 03/01/22 through 03/31/22. The orders included skin checks, apply left elbow extension, and apply hands splints; FYI apply left elbow extension and left-hand splint during AM, remove in PM as tolerated. Apply left elbow extension and left-hand sprints during AM as tolerated. The flow record showed no signatures to indicate the facility staff applied Resident #8's elbow extension and or hand splints as ordered. Staff C LPN explained that no signatures were required for the FYI orders to apply the restorative devices; Staff C explained that the CNAs applied restorative devices on the residents. Observation and interview on 3/10/2022 at 3:50 PM revealed, Resident #8 remained in bed, no restorative devices in place. Staff C, L P N explained that the restorative device remained in the resident's wheelchair because the resident kept refusing to get out of bed (photo taken); The CNAs know how to use the splint and how to put it on the resident Staff C insisted that the reason Resident #8 did not receive the mentioned restorative treatments was because he stayed in bed all day. When asked if the restorative devices can be applied while in bed, Staff C LPN stated that the resident refused. During the observation, Resident #8 reported that the facility staff did not offer said treatments, the splint device noted in his room was a fake, they do not put it on. Staff C was not able to show documentation to demonstrate that the resident refused said treatment. During the interview and record review of the clinical records Medication Administration Records (MAR) and nurses' notes showed no documentation that indicated the restorative treatments were offered or that Resident #8 refused. The Director of Operations continued the above-mentioned interview and reported that the residents' refusal of care was care planned. Record review of care plan during the interview showed no documentation to show that Resident #8 refused restorative treatments. Further review of the above-mentioned flow record showed the order: Check skin integrity prior to and after applying splint. The order showed no nurses' signature to indicate it was followed on three out of 10 days (on March 1st, 7th, and 8th 2022, Shifts; 7:00 AM to 3:00P M and 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM). Record review of Resident #8's Clinical Record showed the Care Plan dated 09/07/21 with target dated 06/09/22 documented Problem/Need: Resident requires the use of splints to the following locations. 1. Left elbow extension and L hand splints during AM as tolerated. Related to: Risk for Contractures, Actual Contractures. Risk/ Challenges: Impaired skin, Loss of joint range of motion. Goals: Improve range of motion to affected joints. Lessens contracture progression . to wear current splints comfortably without complications. Be free of complications associated with wearing splint. The care plan showed the following: Interactions/Approaches: Provide hand hygiene prior to application and after removal of hand splint. Insert hand rolls after hand split removal. Check skin condition under splint and report areas of concern. Monitor for and report pain issues related to splint application. Refer to therapy as needed.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to revise and update the care plan for eating assistan...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to revise and update the care plan for eating assistance for 2 (Resident #82 and Resident #9) of 24 sampled Residents. The findings included: . 1. During an observation conducted on 03/07/22 at 12:15 PM, Resident #82 was observed in her room eating her lunch with no assistance from staff. Closer observation showed a lunch plate with pasta and green beans and Resident #82 eating with her fingers. At 12:27 PM, Resident #82 ate 30% of her lunch meal and no staff was noted at the bedside. Record review showed that Resident #82 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Dysphagia and Unspecific psychosis. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] showed that under section G for eating, Resident #82 needs total dependence with one person assist for eating. Section C showed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 which is cognitively intact. The care plan initiated on 01/03/22 showed that Resident #82 needs assistance with her Activities of Daily Livings (ADLs) and to assist with dining as needed. In an interview conducted on 03/08/22 at 12:27 PM, Staff A, Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA) stated that Resident #82 needs help with all her meals and that staff needs to be in the room at all times to assist her during dining. A review of the facility's policy titled Assistance with Meals revised in February 2014, showed that residents shall receive assistance with meals in a manner that meets the individual needs of each resident 2 .Chart review showed that Resident #9 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of Dementia and Osteoporosis. A review of the MDS dated [DATE] showed that for section G under-eating, Resident #9 was coded needing limited assistance with the one-person physical assist. Further review showed no BIMS score for Resident #9. The care plan dated 03/27/21 showed that Resident #9, is at risk for a decline in nutritional status, and to assist with dining as needed and observe resident's food intake. In an observation conducted on 03/07/22 at 12:17 PM, Resident #9 received his lunch tray at the bedside while staff left the room to provide trays to other residents. Resident #9 was observed eating the food with his bare hands. At 12:23 PM, he ate 20% of his meal, and the tray was taken out of the room by at 12:30 PM by staff. No assistance or encouragement was noted by staff during the entire mealtime (photographic evidence Obtained). In an observation conducted on 03/08/22 at 12:20 PM, Staff brought the lunch tray into Resident #9's room and left the room. At 12:25 PM, Resident #9 was observed eating on his own. At 12:32 PM, Resident #9 was in the room with no assistance from staff. At 12:42 PM, the lunch tray was observed to be 15% consumed by Resident #9. In an observation conducted on 03/09/22 at 8:05 AM, Resident #9 was noted in bed with the breakfast tray and no staff in the room to assist him with his breakfast meal. Closer observation showed that the tray was 25% consumed. In an interview conducted on 03/09/22 at 8:08 AM, Staff E, Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA) stated that Resident #9 needs total assistance with his personal needs and his meals. Staff E further said that Resident #9 needs encouragement and assistance during mealtime. In an interview conducted on 03/10/22 at 9:48 AM, Staff F, Minimum Data Set Coordinator (MDS), reported that Resident #9 was coded as needing limited assistance with one person assist for eating. Staff F further stated that when a resident is coded as limited assistance with one person assist, they can feed themselves but not entirely. Staff may need to come to the room periodically to ensure they are eating and encourage them or help if needed. Staff F stated that she gets her information on a resident by speaking to staff or observing the residents during dining.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0688 (Tag F0688)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate care and treatment for one residen...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate care and treatment for one resident with contracture (Resident #8) out of three residents reviewed for concerns with Range of Motion (ROM). Evidenced by the facility's failure to apply elbow extension and splint devices as per physician's order. This facility practice has the potential to have an adverse effect on 12 residents in the facility with contractures. The Facility census was 90. The Findings Included: Record review of the face sheet for Resident # 8 revealed his original admission dated 09/07/2012, Resident # 8 was readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #8's diagnoses included but not limited to contracture left hand; hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side. Record review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #8, dated 12/01/202, and revealed that the resident had a score of 14 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), which indicated that the resident was not cognitively impaired. Further review of the MDS revealed that the resident had clear speech patterns, understood and was able to understand others. Functional Status for ROM (Range of Motion) limitation: upper and lower extremity showed impairment on one side. The resident required total assistance of two persons for transfers. Observation on 03/07/22 at 10:15 AM revealed, Resident #8 was in his bed asleep. Resident # 8's hands appeared contracted. His left forearm was bent up toward the left shoulder, no hand roll or restorative devices noted in place. During dining observation at approximately 12:30 PM on 03/07/22 Resident #8 remained in bed for dining observation, no restorative devices noted. Observation and interview on 03/08/22 at 11:08 AM revealed, Resident #8 remained in bed, appeared alert, and oriented. Resident #8 reported he was unable to move his left hand. He had no hand rolls and received no treatment. Observation on 03/09/22 at 10:30 AM revealed, no hand rolls nor restorative treatments noted. Interview on 03/10/22 at 3:46 PM Staff C, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) reported she was familiar with Resident #8 for about two years. Staff C stated: His condition remains the same since I've been here. He's barely able to move his left side, he got CVA. When asked the LPN explained; The way we take care of him is to wash it, provide range of motion exercises, and give him like a hand roll to keep the area open. The Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) provides him with range of motion when providing care. During the interview, Staff C agreed to review Resident #8's physician orders. Record review of Treatment Records for Resident #8 revealed the Flow Record dated 03/01/22 through 03/31/22. The orders included skin checks, apply left elbow extension, and apply hands splints; FYI apply left elbow extension and left-hand splint during AM, remove in PM as tolerated. Apply left elbow extension and left-hand sprints during AM as tolerated. The flow record showed no signatures to indicate the facility staff applied Resident #8's elbow extension and or hand splints as ordered. Staff C LPN explained that no signatures were required for the FYI orders to apply the restorative devices; Staff C explained that the CNAs applied restorative devices on the residents. Observation and interview on 3/10/2022 at 3:50 PM revealed, Resident #8 remained in bed, no restorative devices in place. Staff C, L P N explained that the restorative device remained in the resident's wheelchair because the resident kept refusing to get out of bed (photo taken); The CNAs know how to use the splint and how to put it on the resident Staff C insisted that the reason Resident #8 did not receive the mentioned restorative treatments was because he stayed in bed all day. When asked if the restorative devices can be applied while in bed, Staff C LPN stated that the resident refused. During the observation, Resident #8 reported that the facility staff did not offer said treatments, the splint device noted in his room was a fake, they do not put it on. Staff C was not able to show documentation to demonstrate that the resident refused said treatment. During the interview and record review of the clinical records Medication Administration Records (MAR) and nurses' notes showed no documentation that indicated the restorative treatments were offered or that Resident #8 refused. The Director of Operations continued the above-mentioned interview and reported that the residents' refusal of care was care planned. Record review of care plan during the interview showed no documentation to show that Resident #8 refused restorative treatments. Further review of the above-mentioned flow record showed the order: Check skin integrity prior to and after applying splint. The order showed no nurses' signature to indicate it was followed on three out of 10 days (on March 1st, 7th, and 8th 2022, Shifts; 7:00 AM to 3:00PM and 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM). Record review of Resident #8's Clinical Record showed the Care Plan dated 09/07/21 with target dated 06/09/22 documented Problem/Need: Resident requires the use of splints to the following locations. 1. Left elbow extension and L hand splints during AM as tolerated. Related to: Risk for Contractures, Actual Contractures. Risk/ Challenges: Impaired skin, Loss of joint range of motion. Goals: Improve range of motion to affected joints. Lessens contracture progression . to wear current splints comfortably without complications. Be free of complications associated with wearing splint. The care plan showed the following: Interactions/Approaches: Provide hand hygiene prior to application and after removal of hand splint. Insert hand rolls after hand split removal. Check skin condition under splint and report areas of concern. Monitor for and report pain issues related to splint application. Refer to therapy as needed.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0692 (Tag F0692)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status a...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status and failed to provide nutritional supplements in a timely manner for 2 of 8 residents (Resident #32 and Resident #53) reviewed for nutrition. The findings included: 1. Review of Resident #32's chart showed that Resident #32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of adult failure to thrive, heart disease, and chronic kidney disease. Resident #32 was discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. In an interview conducted with Resident #32 on 03/07/22 at 9:20 AM, Resident #32 stated that he lost weight but is unsure how much. Resident #32 further reported poor appetite and that he is not getting the food choices he likes on the meal trays. In an observation conducted on 03/07/22 at 12:23 PM, Resident #32 was in his room with the lunch tray at the bedside. When asked why he was not eating the lunch meal, Resident #32 stated that he does not like the choices he was given for lunch. Closer observation of the meal tray showed pasta with chicken and green beans. No nutritional supplements were noted on the meal tray. A review of the hospital records dated 01/12/22 showed that Resident #32 has poor PO (oral) intake and anorexia, likely from worsening dementia. It further showed that Resident #32 was on a high protein and calories diet and needed consultation from nutrition. A review of the medical chart dated 03/07/22 showed a Nutrition assessment dated [DATE], completed by the facility's Dietitian 10 days after Resident #32 was admitted . In this assessment, the Dietitian recommended nutritional supplements, no salt added 120 milliliters (ml) three (3) times a day, snacks three (3) times a day, and weekly weights to be taken until stable. Further review of the Dietitian's progress notes showed that a follow-up note was done on 01/18/22 and 01/28/22. Record review revealed Resident #32 was readmitted again on 01/13/22, and no Initial Nutrition Assessment was conducted. The next follow-up note was not done until 01/18/22, which was completed by the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM). In this note, the CDM reported that Resident #32 is receiving Med Pass (supplement) 2.0 120 ml three times a day and snacks three times a day. The CDM further recommended continuing with the plan of care. A review of the Medication Record for January 2022 showed that Resident #32 did not receive the nutritional supplement 2.0 three times a day and did not receive the snacks three times a day (photographic evidence obtained). Review of the Physician's order dated 01/13/22 showed an order written for Med pass 2.0 ml three times a day and for Snacks three times a day and record percentage consumed. This was not followed by the nursing staff, and an order was written on 01/24/22 to clarify supplements for nutritional supplements 120 ml three times a day and snacks three times a day. A review of the weights showed that Resident #32 had an admission weight recorded on 01/10/22, which was ten days after his admission, and did not show any recorded weights weekly after his readmission on [DATE]. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] showed that Resident #32 has a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 out of 15, which mean the resident is cognitively intact. Review of the medical chart dated 03/09/22 showed a follow-up note dated 01/24/22, which the facility's Dietitian completed on the same page as the follow-up note written on 01/18/22 (photographic evidence obtained). A review of the care plan initiated on 01/10/21 showed that Resident #32 is underweight with poor PO(oral) intake. It further showed that follow-up progress notes were done on 01/18/22 and 01/28/22 and did not include the follow-up note that was done on 01/24/22. During an interview conducted on 03/09/22 at 12:03 PM the facility's Clinical Dietitian stated that she only comes into the facility every other week for a total of 16 hours a month. Since all the nutrition notes are handwritten, she cannot remotely follow up on the residents. She further stated that the Food Service Director, who is also the CDM, makes some follow-up nutrition notes until she can come into the facility to see the residents. The Dietitian reported that residents ' weights are taken weekly for four weeks and once a month upon admission. When asked about the policy for timing of nutrition assessment, she said, I think it is up to 7 days. When the surveyor asked about the follow-up nutrition note dated 01/24/22 that was not in the chart on 03/07/22, the Clinical Dietitian stated, I don't know, I wrote the note. The Dietitian stated that Resident #32 was seen by her on 01/10/22 when she was in the facility and could not do another Nutrition Assessment until she came again on 01/24/22. 2. Review of clinical records revealed Resident #53 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include but not limited to Lupus and End-Stage liver Disease diagnoses. A review of the MDS dated [DATE] showed that Resident #53's BIMS score was 12 out of 15, meaning the resident is cognitively intact. Section O of the MDS showed that Resident #53 is also receiving dialysis. During an interview conducted on 03/09/22 at 10:00 AM, Resident #53 stated that she goes to dialysis three times a week early in the morning, around 4:00 AM and further stated that she misses the breakfast meals on dialysis days; but came back for the lunch meal. A review of the readmission Nutrition assessment dated [DATE] showed that Resident #53 will be provided with double portions of protein, liquid protein 30 ml, and Med pass 120 ml twice a day. Review of the Physician's order dated 01/24/22 showed an order for liquid protein 30 ml double protein with meals but did not show an order for the Med pass 120 ml twice a day. A review of the Dietitian's follow-up note dated 02/28/22 showed that a follow-up note was made 35 days after the readmission on [DATE]. In this note, Resident #53 was noted with significant weight loss of 6 percent in 30 days and 11.8 percent in 90 days. It further showed that the weight fluctuation was due to the dialysis treatments. A review of the medication records for February 2022 did not show that Med Pass 120 ml was given to Resident #53. A continued review of the Nutrition progress note dated 02/28/22 showed that Resident #53 is also receiving Nepro 1 can nutritional supplement to help with the needs. The Medication Administration Record from 02/01/22 to 02/28/22 did not show that the Nepro was given daily to Resident #53.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0639 (Tag F0639)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents' Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments completed with...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents' Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments completed within the previous 15 months were in the resident's active record and readily available and accessible for review by the survey team for nineteen (Resident #9, Resident # 18, Resident #21, Resident # 22, Resident # 23, Resident # 26, Resident # 29, Resident #32, Resident # 48, Resident # 53, Resident # 55, Resident # 58, Resident # 59, Resident # 69, Resident # 74, Resident # 78, Resident # 82, Resident # 83 and Resident # 89) out of twenty four sampled residents. The findings included: Record review showed that Resident #82 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Dysphagia and unspecific psychosis. A review of the MDS in the paper chart did not show the most updated MDS assessment that was completed. Chart review showed that Resident #9 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of Dementia and Osteoporosis. A review of the MDS in the paper chart did not show the most updated MDS assessment readily available in the chart. A chart review showed that Resident #32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of adult failure to thrive, heart disease, and chronic kidney disease. He was discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of the MDS in the paper chart did not show the most updated MDS assessment readily available in the chart. In an interview conducted on 03/09/22 at 10:00 AM, with Staff E, Minimum Data Set Coordinator (MDS), she was asked to provide a paper copy of the most updated MDS for Residents #82, #32, and #9. She further said, let me know which resident most updated MDS you need, and I will make a copy for you. On 03/08/22 at 1:30 PM, the MDS Coordinator was asked about the MDS assessments for resident #26. The MDS Coordinator reported, they have 15 months worth of MDS at the facility and they're in the process of placing the latest MDS in the chart, but they haven't completed this process. Resident #26 had an MDS Significant Change assessment in the medical record dated 09/22/2021, but the quarterly MDS dated [DATE] was not in the medical record. On 3/10/2022 at 1:30 PM, during the review of resident #74's medical record included on the 2/4/2022 MDS annual. The MDS coordinator was contacted to request the remaining MDS assessments. On 3/10/2022 at 1:45 PM, the MDS Coordinator brought the 11/11/2021 quarterly assessment and brought the 8/20/2021 quarterly assessment. On 03/10/2022 at 1:30 PM, during the review of resident #69's medical record included the 01/27/2022 quarterly MDS assessment. The MDS Coordinator was contacted to request the remaining MDS assessments. On 3/10/2022 at 1:45 PM, the MDS Coordinator brought the 02/04/2022 annual MDS, the 11/11/2021 quarterly assessment and the 08/20/2021 quarterly assessment. Further record review by the survey team revealed, all MDS assessments for the previous 15 months were not in the residents active charts for the following residents: Resident # 18 admission date 09/05/2014 Resident # 21 admission date 06/24/2013 Resident # 22 admission date 09/28/2020 Resident # 23 admission date 09/11/2009 Resident # 26 admission date 10/01/2020 Resident # 29 admission date 06/19/2020 Resident # 48 admission date 02/01/2020 Resident # 53 admission date 06/24/2013 Resident # 55 admission date 02/01/2019 Resident # 58 admission date 10/26/2021 Resident # 59 admission date 07/28/2020 Resident # 69 admission date 09/23/2013 Resident # 74 admission date 03/08/2019 Resident #78 admission date 02/17/2020 Resident # 83 admission date 03/14/2019 Resident # 89 admission date 07/01/2021 During an interview with the MDS Coordinator on 3/10/22 at 4:00 PM, when asked about the residents' MDS assessments and why they are not in the active charts. The MDS Coordinator stated, I have been in the process of getting the most recent updated MDS in each resident's medical chart. I am almost finished; I just have a small stack left on my desk. In the charts on the floor, I only file the most recent MDS and the rest of MDS going back 15 months are in my office in a file cabinet for each resident, that is how I have been doing it because there is just no space in the chart to put 15 months of MDS assessments.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0808 (Tag F0808)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to follow physician's orders for therapeutic diet (mec...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to follow physician's orders for therapeutic diet (mechanical soft) for Residents #10, #3, and #82. This had the potential to affect 23 residents on a mechanical soft diet. The findings included: 1. In an observation conducted on 03/07/22 at 12:22 PM, Resident #10 was observed with the lunch tray and a meal ticket for a mechanical soft diet. Closer observation showed long pasta strands that were not chopped or grounded, pieces of chicken, and green beans of various sizes with some longer than 1 inch (photographic evidence obtained). 2. In an observation conducted on 03/07/22 at 12:30 PM, Resident #3 was observed with the lunch tray and a meal ticket for a regular no added salt diet. Closer observation showed long pasta strands that were not chopped or grounded, pieces of chicken, and green beans of various sizes with some longer than 1 inch (photographic evidence obtained). In both observations of the regular diet and the mechanical soft diet, the consistency of the foods looked the same. A review of the Monday, week 1 menu, under the section for Mechanical soft diet showed: Ground chicken fettuccine with green beans. 3. In an observation conducted on 03/08/22 at 12:08 PM, the meal cart arrived on the unit and was placed in the hallway. At 12:13 PM, the meal tray was placed in Resident #82's room, at the bedside, and staff walked out. At 12:21 PM, the tray was still untouched at the bedside. Continued observation showed that at 12:25 PM, staff A, Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA), came into the room to assist Resident #82 with her lunch meal. Closer observation of the lunch meal showed a diet for mechanical soft diet with large chicken pieces not chopped or grounded at various sizes,yellow rice and blackeye peas. The surveyor measured the chicken pieces that were on Resident #82's plate. Some of the pieces were measuring more than 2 inches long. Record review showed that Resident #82 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Dysphagia and Unspecific psychosis. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] showed that under section G for eating, Resident #82 needs total dependence with one person assist for eating. Section C showed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 out of 15 which meant the resident is cognitively intact. A review of the Nutrition assessment dated [DATE] showed that Resident #82 is on a mechanical soft diet that was downgraded by a Speech-language Pathologist. In an interview conducted on 03/08/22 at 1:00 PM, the facility's Administrator was asked to look at Resident #82's lunch plate The surveyor pointed out that the chicken pieces were too large to be provided on the mechanical soft diet and that the chicken pieces were not an appropriate consistency for the mechanical soft diet. In an interview conducted on 03/08/22 at 1:05 PM, the facility's Administrator stated that Resident #82 did not want her chicken and asked for a turkey sandwich. The kitchen will not send a turkey sandwich because it was not on the alternate menu for the day but will send a chicken sandwich for Resident #82. In an observation conducted on 03/08/22 at 1:21 PM, Resident #82 was in bed holding the chicken sandwich plate on her lap. Staff A, CNA, sitting at the bedside, stated that Resident #82 was eating the chicken sandwich and had started choking on the sandwich. Staff A reported that she stopped Resident #82 from eating the chicken sandwich and gave her a sip of the milk that was at the bedside. In this observation, Resident #82 refused to let go of the sandwich plate on her lap and said to Staff A, I do not like you. Staff A then said, I saved your life. Staff A then turned to Surveyor and said, it was so dangerous. Continued observation showed Staff B, a Certified Nursing Assistants, asked Staff A what happened. Staff A told Staff B that Resident #82 choked on the chicken sandwich and it was dangerous, while Resident #82 was still holding on to the Chicken sandwich on her lap (photographic evidence obtained). In an observation conducted on 03/08/22 at 1:25 PM, The Corporate Nurse walked into the room and told Staff A to remain at the bedside and wait for Resident #82 to maybe fall asleep and take the lunch plate away when she does. In an interview conducted on 03/08/22 at 1:28 PM, the Corporate Nurse was told by surveyor that the chicken pieces inside the sandwich were too large and not appropriate for the mechanical soft diet. The Corporate Nurse acknowledged all findings. In an interview conducted on 03/08/22 at 1:32 PM, the Food Service Director was asked if the chicken sandwich provided for Resident #82 was appropriate for a mechanical soft diet consistency. The Food Service Director revealed that the chicken is soft but not chopped as needed for the mechanical soft texture. The Food Service Director then said: Maybe Resident #82 can have a regular diet consistency, but I need to look at the medical chart. In an interview conducted on 03/10/22 at 7:30 PM, with the Corporate Nurse, she reported that they are 23 residents in the facility who are currently on a Mechanical soft diet texture. A review of the facility's policy titled Mechanically Altered Diets and Thickened Liquids no date, showed the following: Mechanically altered diets are prepared and served as prescribed by the attending physician. It further showed that is a Mechanical soft chopped diet and a Mechanical soft ground diet. A review of the Nutrition Care Manual under section Dysphagia Level 3: Advanced or Mechanical Soft, showed the following: no hard sticky or crunchy foods, foods should be moist, meat cut up and chopped, food particles are served in bite-sized pieces and less than 1 inch. (https://www.nutritioncaremanual.org/topic.cfm?ncm_toc_id=273657).
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • 26% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 22 points below Florida's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 4 life-threatening violation(s), Special Focus Facility, 1 harm violation(s), $277,745 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 60 deficiencies on record, including 4 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $277,745 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Florida. Major compliance failures.
  • • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: This facility is on CMS's Special Focus list for poor performance. Consider alternatives strongly.

About This Facility

What is Gardens Nursing And Rehab Center's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns GARDENS NURSING AND REHAB CENTER an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within Florida, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.

How is Gardens Nursing And Rehab Center Staffed?

CMS rates GARDENS NURSING AND REHAB CENTER's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 26%, compared to the Florida average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Gardens Nursing And Rehab Center?

State health inspectors documented 60 deficiencies at GARDENS NURSING AND REHAB CENTER during 2022 to 2025. These included: 4 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, and 55 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Gardens Nursing And Rehab Center?

GARDENS NURSING AND REHAB CENTER is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by ELIYAHU MIRLIS, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 120 certified beds and approximately 108 residents (about 90% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in MIAMI, Florida.

How Does Gardens Nursing And Rehab Center Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, GARDENS NURSING AND REHAB CENTER's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (26%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Gardens Nursing And Rehab Center?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.

Is Gardens Nursing And Rehab Center Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, GARDENS NURSING AND REHAB CENTER has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 4 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility is currently on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes nationwide). The facility has a 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Florida. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Gardens Nursing And Rehab Center Stick Around?

Staff at GARDENS NURSING AND REHAB CENTER tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 26%, the facility is 20 percentage points below the Florida average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly.

Was Gardens Nursing And Rehab Center Ever Fined?

GARDENS NURSING AND REHAB CENTER has been fined $277,745 across 6 penalty actions. This is 7.7x the Florida average of $35,856. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.

Is Gardens Nursing And Rehab Center on Any Federal Watch List?

GARDENS NURSING AND REHAB CENTER is currently an SFF Candidate, meaning CMS has identified it as potentially qualifying for the Special Focus Facility watch list. SFF Candidates have a history of serious deficiencies but haven't yet reached the threshold for full SFF designation. The facility is being monitored more closely — if problems continue, it may be added to the official watch list. Families should ask what the facility is doing to address the issues that led to this status.