OAKTON PLACE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION AT THE ARLI

8000 ARLINGTON CIRCLE, NAPLES, FL 34113 (239) 307-3000
For profit - Limited Liability company 44 Beds LIFE CARE SERVICES Data: November 2025 4 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
0/100
#539 of 690 in FL
Last Inspection: June 2024

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

Overview

Oakton Place Health and Rehabilitation at the Arli has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about its quality of care. It ranks #539 out of 690 nursing homes in Florida, placing it in the bottom half of facilities statewide and #7 out of 11 in Collier County, meaning there are only a few local options that are better. Unfortunately, the facility is worsening, with the number of issues increasing from 2 in 2023 to 8 in 2024. While staffing is a strength with a perfect score of 5/5 stars and a turnover rate of 35%, which is below the state average, the facility has faced a concerning $173,963 in fines, indicating serious compliance issues. Specific incidents highlight critical safety failures, such as staff not using proper techniques or equipment during transfers with mechanical lifts, which led to a resident falling and sustaining a serious injury, showcasing serious risks to residents' safety.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Florida
#539/690
Bottom 22%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Worse
2 → 8 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
35% turnover. Near Florida's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
⚠ Watch
$173,963 in fines. Higher than 93% of Florida facilities. Major compliance failures.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 98 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Florida nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
Violations
⚠ Watch
13 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
2023: 2 issues
2024: 8 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
  • 4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (35%)

    13 points below Florida average of 48%

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

The Bad

2-Star Overall Rating

Below Florida average (3.2)

Below average - review inspection findings carefully

Staff Turnover: 35%

11pts below Florida avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Federal Fines: $173,963

Well above median ($33,413)

Significant penalties indicating serious issues

Chain: LIFE CARE SERVICES

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 13 deficiencies on record

4 life-threatening
Jun 2024 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, resident and staff interviews the facility failed to implement measures to prevent the dev...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, resident and staff interviews the facility failed to implement measures to prevent the development and/or worsening of a pressure ulcer for 1 (Resident #34) of 2 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The findings included: Review of the clinical record revealed Resident #34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE]. Review of the 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with a target date of 5/30/24 noted Resident #34's cognition was moderately impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 08. The resident had a stage 4 pressure ulcer (Full thickness tissue loss) of the sacral region and a pressure-induced deep tissue damage of the right heel. Resident #34 used a manual wheelchair and required substantial/maximal assistance for mobility once seated in the wheelchair to wheel 50 feet and make two turns. The physician's orders dated 5/29/24 included, Offloading boots [redistribute pressure from vulnerable areas of the sole of the foot] to be worn at all times; except when ambulating and transferring. The care plan initiated on 5/6/24 noted the resident had an actual impairment to the skin, including a stage 4 pressure ulcer to the sacrum and a deep tissue injury to the right heel. The interventions included as of 5/30/24, Offloading boots to be worn at all times except when walking and transferring. The Certified Nursing Assistant [NAME] (Provides instructions for care) specified offloading boots to be worn at all times except when walking or transferring. On 6/11/24 at 11:33 a.m., and 2:26 p.m., Resident #34 was observed in her wheelchair in her room watching television. She had no sock on and was wearing slip-on loafers. Resident #34 was not wearing the offloading boots as per the physician's orders, and the care plan. On 6/11/24 at 2:30 p.m., in an interview Resident #34 said she did not have any boots for her feet. On 6/12/24 at 9:10 a.m., at 2:49 p.m., and on 6/13/24 at 8:31 a.m., Resident #34 was observed in her wheelchair in her room watching television. She did not have the offloading boots on. Resident #34 had no sock on and was wearing slip-on loafers. Review of the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) showed on 6/11/24, and 6/12/24, the nurse placed her initials for the day shift indicating the resident was wearing the offloading boots at all times, except when ambulating and transferring. On 6/13/24 at 9:25 a.m., Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Staff B said this was her first day caring for Resident #34. Staff B said she was not aware the resident was to wear offloading boots. She searched the resident's closet and drawers and said she was not able to find offloading boots. On 6/13/24 at approximately 9:40 a.m., Licensed Practical Nurse Staff A verified Resident #34 was in her wheelchair and not wearing the offloading boots as ordered. Staff A verified the resident should be wearing the offloading boots except when transferring or ambulating. She said, I will fix it. On 6/13/24 at 11:48 a.m., in an interview the Director of Nursing (DON) verified the physician's order specified for Resident #34 to have the offloading boots on except when ambulating or transferring. The DON verified the nurses signed the TAR indicating the resident was wearing the offloading boots when she was not.
CONCERN (E)

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, review of facility policy and procedure, clinical record review, resident representative and staff intervi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, review of facility policy and procedure, clinical record review, resident representative and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide the necessary care and services to maintain personal hygiene for 4 (Resident #20, #21, #25 and #35) of 5 residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The findings included: The facility policy Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Supporting implemented 2002 (revised 2018) documented, Residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living independently will receive the services necessary to maintain good, nutrition, grooming and personal hygiene and oral care . Appropriate care and services will be provided for residents who are unable to carry out ADL's independently, with the consent of the resident and in accordance with the plan of care. 1. Review of the clinical record revealed Resident #20 had an admission date of 4/23/23 with diagnoses including dementia with mood disturbance, depression and muscle weakness. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) (standardized assessment tool that measures health status in nursing home residents) with an assessment reference date of 4/7/24 documented Resident #20 was dependent on staff for personal hygiene and bathing. The MDS noted Resident #20's cognitive skills for daily decision making were severely impaired. On 6/10/24 at 10:50 a.m., Resident #20 was observed in her room in bed. Her hair was uncombed, and her fingernails extended approximately ¼ inch in length with a brown substance under the nails. In an interview, Resident #20's spouse who was at her bedside said, My wife does not make sense because of her dementia, and she fights with the staff because she doesn't understand. I think they are afraid because they don't want to do anything with her. No one comes into the room unless I ask for them to come. Resident #20's spouse said he visited his spouse every day from 8:00 a.m., until 10:00 p.m. Some days he takes her outside or around the facility in a wheelchair. When he leaves, he asks staff to put her to bed but they won't do it and he tells the nurse. He said, They act like they don't want to be bothered with her because she fights them. I feed her all three meals, they don't ask me if I want them to feed her, they assume because I'm here I should do everything but I'm [AGE] years old and she is 90 years. The spouse said Resident #20 has been at the facility for nine months because he could no longer take care of her but, but here I am, still doing it. I have never seen them give her a shower. I would like for her to get showered. There is a shower right there in the bathroom. On 6/11/24 at 8:03 a.m., Resident #20 was observed in a wheelchair in her room with her spouse. Her fingernails remained with a brown substance under the nails. Resident #20's spouse said staff got her up before he arrived and he fed her breakfast. He said the staff did not come in to see if she needed anything. The spouse said, I feel like I'm one of the staff and they should be paying me for providing all of the care. No one even comes to check on her unless I ask them to come. Review of the CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) task list showed Resident #20 preferred Bath schedule was Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, on the 7:00 p.m., to 7:00 a.m., shift. Review of the CNA Plan of Care Response History from 5/14/24 to 6/10/24 failed to show documentation Resident #20 received her showers as scheduled. The documentation showed the resident received a bed bath on 5/24/24, 5/27/24, 6/4/24, 6/5/24 and 6/10/24. On 5/29/24 the documentation noted, Resident refused. 2. Review of the clinical record revealed Resident #21 had an admission date of 7/24/23 with diagnoses including hemiplegia (paralysis) of the right side, seizures, and Alzheimer's disease. The Quarterly MDS assessment with a target date of 5/20/24 documented Resident #22 was dependent on staff for personal hygiene. The MDS noted Resident #21's cognitive skills for daily decision making were severely impaired. On 6/10/24 at 2:22 p.m., Resident # 21 was observed in his room in bed, dressed in a hospital gown with approximately three days of facial hair growth. The resident appeared disheveled. His mouth and lips were dry. On 6/11/24 at 10:03 a.m., Resident # 21 was observed in bed. CNA Staff M was assisting him with the morning meal. In an interview, Staff M said Resident #21 likes to be clean. She said she tries to shave him every day but she was off for two days and the day before (6/10/24) she did not have time to get to him to shave him. 3. Review of the clinical record revealed Resident #25 had an admission date of 5/20/24 with diagnoses including current COVID infection requiring in room isolation, hemiplegia of the left side and frequent falls. Review of the admission MDS with a target date of 5/24/24 revealed Resident #25 required substantial to moderate assistance with showers and was frequently incontinent of bladder. The MDS noted Resident #25's cognitive skills for daily decision making were moderately impaired. On 6/10/24 at 1:00 p.m., Resident #25 was observed in a wheelchair having lunch in his room. Resident #25 had approximately three days of facial hair growth. His fingernails were dirty with a brown substance underneath the nails. Resident #25 was not able to answer all simple questions appropriately and was not able to say if he received assistance with shaving. On 6/11/24 at 1:01 p.m., Resident #25's spouse, and a private duty sitter were observed in the resident's room. In an interview, Resident #25's spouse said she's either here or has a private duty care giver with him three times a week for four hours. She said, I can tell you no one comes into this room to assist my husband for care because they assume that we will do everything. He fell at home and is here to get therapy. They are not toileting him and there are times I come here, and he is soaked with urine, his clothing the sheets, it is terrible. She said she has not seen him get a shower. He took showers at home. She did not know why, but they told her he couldn't get a shower. She said, Sometimes he has a body odor that is not pleasant. Resident #25's private duty care giver said, I do everything for him because no one comes in here to do anything. I have never seen him take a shower. Review of the CNA Plan of Care Response History from 5/21/24 to 6/10/24 documented the resident's bathing schedule was on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays during the 7:00 p.m., to 7:00 a.m., shift. The only shower documented was on 6/4/24. Resident #25 received a bed bath on 5/21/24, 5/28/24, 5/31/24, 6/4/24, 6/6/24 and 6/8/24. 4. Review of the clinical record revealed Resident #35 had an admission date of 5/22/24. Diagnoses included current COVID infection requiring in room isolation, type 2 diabetes and urinary retention with indwelling catheter. Review of the admission MDS with an assessment reference date of 5/26/24 revealed Resident #35 required partial to moderate assistance with showers. Review of Resident #35's care plan initiated 5/29/24 specified shower days were Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays during the 7:00 a.m., to 7:00 p.m., shift. The care plan documented the resident preferred showers. On 6/10/24 at 10:37 a.m., Resident #35 was observed in bed in a hospital gown. The resident was not able to answer questions appropriately. Her fingernails extended approximately ¼ inch with a brown substance around and under the fingernails. Resident #35's family member present during the observation said he had not seen anyone shower her. On 6/11/24 at 8:28 a.m., Resident #35 was observed in bed wearing a hospital gown. The resident's fingernails remained with a brown substance around and under the nails which extended approximately ¼ inch. Resident #35's representative was at the bedside and said, They told me someone bathed her last night. Review of the CNA Plan of Care Response History from 5/23/24 to 6/10/24 documented Resident #35 received a shower on 5/27/24. No other shower was documented. Resident #35 received a bed bath on 5/24/24, 5/29/24, 5/31/24, 6/3/24, 6/5/24, 6/7/24 and 6/10/24. On 6/12/24 at 8:31 in an interview Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff A said, Daily shaving, and nail care are considered part of daily personal hygiene. On 6/12/24 at 2:23 p.m., in an interview, CNA Staff F said the shower list was located in each resident room on the white board and there was a shower list at the CNA charting desk. She said all residents get a shower three times a week. The CNA said if a resident refuses a shower, then she offers a bed bath and if they still refuse the shower after three times, she documents the refusal and lets the nurse know. When asked how staff know to give a shower or a bed bath the CNA replied, If they are a two person transfer or use a lift to transfer, then they get a bed bath. When asked to clarify, CNA Staff F said, Correct, if a resident is a two person transfer or requires the use of a mechanical lift for transfer, they get a bed bath. On 6/13/24 at 8:40 a.m., in an interview CNA staff K said, We follow the shower schedule at the desk and it is also on the white board in each resident's room. When asked how she would know if a resident was to receive a shower or a bed bath, Staff K replied, If the resident can't transfer or needs a lift, then they get a bed bath. A bed bath means we use the basin, soap and water and wash the face, hair the body and then we change the whole bed when we are done because it is wet. On 6/13/24 at 8:47 a.m., in an interview CNA Staff B said with showers we have a list here at the desk and it is on the board in the resident rooms. When asked how she knew if a resident required a bed bath or a shower she said, If they refuse a shower, I do a bed bath. They have showers in the rooms, but some don't like it so I take them to the bathroom if they can walk and I put them on the toilet. I was them on the toilet, I do the hair the whole body while they are on the toilet. I fill out the shower sheet and the nurse signs it. Staff B provided a copy of the shower sheet form but the form did not have a place to indicate if a shower or bed bath was provided or if the resident refused. The CNA said, I just write it in. Staff B said, Every day you brush the residents teeth, shave and do nails, but sometimes they don't want it. On 6/13/24 at 9:00 a.m., in an interview Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff L said there was a shower list at the desk and showers were written on the boards in the residents' rooms. The CNA task sheet lets the CNA know if the resident is to receive a shower or a bed bath. Staff L said personal hygiene, shaving, nail care and oral care is done daily. On 6/13/24 at 10:19 a.m., in an interview the Director of Nursing (DON) said she would expect the resident to get a shower on their scheduled shower day. The DON said she did not know why a resident would get a bed bath in place of a shower unless they wanted it, and it would be documented on the CNA task sheet. The DON said she did not know why the CNAs would say if a resident was a two person transfer or a required a lift they were given a bed bath. On 6/13/24 at 11:56 a.m., in an interview the DON said she spoke with the staff and the staff are to follow the resident's preference for showers. The expectation is for showers unless the resident wants a bed bath. The DON said the resident preference was located on the care plan or the CNA task list.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0847 (Tag F0847)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the binding arbitration agreement explicitly informed the residents of their right to rescind the agreement within 30 calendar...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the binding arbitration agreement explicitly informed the residents of their right to rescind the agreement within 30 calendar days of signing it for three (Residents #1, #26, and #97) of three residents reviewed. The findings included: On 6/13/24 review of the clinical records revealed Residents #1, #26, and #97 signed an arbitration agreement respectively on 5/14/24, 5/31/24, and 6/5/24. Review of the Resident and community arbitration agreement signed by Residents #1, #26, and #97 read, This arbitration clause binds all parties to this Agreement, their spouses, parents, heirs, legal representatives, executors, administrators, successors, as applicable, whether existing now or in the future. If this Agreement is cancelled in compliance with the terms of paragraph ten (10) of this Agreement, this Arbitration Agreement shall remain in effect for the resolution of all claims or disputes that arose prior to that date. Paragraph 10 of the arbitration agreement read, The arbitrator shall have the exclusive authority to resolve any dispute relating to the interpretation, applicability, enforceability, or formation of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, any claim that all or any part of this Agreement is void or voidable. The Parties agree that all of the provisions contained in this Agreement are severable. If any provision of the agreement, or portion thereof, is held to be void, voidable or otherwise invalid, this Agreement shall be interpreted as if the invalid provision or portion was not contained herein, and the remaining provisions of the Agreement will remain in full force and effect in order to effectuate the paramount intent of the Parties to resolve any disputes between them via binding arbitration. This Agreement to arbitrate will not fail because any part, clause or provision hereof is held to be indefinite or invalid. The signed arbitration agreement did not explicitly grant the residents or representatives the right to rescind the agreement within 30 calendar days of signing the document. On 6/13/24 at 12:05 p.m., in an interview the Administrator verified the arbitration agreement signed by Residents #1, #26, and #97 did not clearly explain Residents #1, #26 and #97's right to withdraw from or terminate the agreement within 30 calendar days of signing the document if they changed their mind. The Administrator said the arbitration agreement form was the one currently signed by residents upon admission to the facility.
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, policy review, and staff interview the facility failed to store food in a manner that complies with safe food handling practices. The findings included: Review of the facility p...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, policy review, and staff interview the facility failed to store food in a manner that complies with safe food handling practices. The findings included: Review of the facility policy titled Food Receiving and Storage last revised November 2022, revealed procedures for Refrigerated/Frozen Storage read, All foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer are covered, labeled and dated . Refrigerated foods are labeled, dated and monitored so they are used by their use-by date, frozen or discarded . On 6/10/24 at 9:35 a.m., during the initial tour of the kitchen with the Dietitian, Kitchen Supervisor Staff H, and Sous Chef Staff I the following were observed: A pan of gravy, and a pan of oatmeal stored in the walk-in refrigerator were not labeled with the date of preparation. A large, uncovered bucket of water containing peeled and diced potatoes and carrots was not dated. On 6/10/24 at 9:40 a.m., the Dietitian, Sous Chef Staff I and the Kitchen Supervisor Staff H said food items should have been labeled with the preparation, cooked or opened date. They also said the bucket of potatoes and carrots should not have been stored uncovered. On 6/10/24 at 9:50 a.m., in an interview Staff H said the pan of gravy and oatmeal were prepared the previous night and should have been labeled. Staff H said dietary staff are supposed to cover and label food items with the date prepared or opened before placing them in the walk-in refrigerator. On 6/12/24 at 9:32 a.m., during a second kitchen tour a large, opened Caesar salad dressing was observed in the walk-in refrigerator. The opened container was not labeled with the date opened. On 6/12/24 at 9:35 a.m., Sous chef Staff I, and the Dietitian verified the large Caesar salad dressing container was opened, had been used but was not labeled with the date opened. On 6/13/24 at 9:16 a.m., in an interview the Dietitian said food stored in the refrigerator must be dated at the time it is prepped or at the time the container is opened. She said the container of Caesar Salad dressing was opened and served the previous night. She said it should have been labeled with the date opened. She said all food items observed on 6/10/23 stored in the walk-in refrigerator should have been covered and/or labeled with the date prepared or the date the container was opened.
Feb 2024 4 deficiencies 4 IJ (3 affecting multiple)
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

Administration (Tag F0835)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record reviews, and interviews, the facility's Administration failed to utilize resources effectively to p...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record reviews, and interviews, the facility's Administration failed to utilize resources effectively to protect the residents' right to be free from neglect by failing to ensure staff were competent to safely use full body mechanical lifts and follow manufacturers safety instructions for the brand and size of slings. On 2/1/24 a dependent resident (Resident #1) fell during transfer using a mechanical lift and required transfer via EMS to the emergency room (ER) for evaluation and treatment for a head laceration. The facility's administration failure to ensure effective use of resources to ensure residents safety and prevent neglect created a likelihood of avoidable falls and accidents from mechanical lifts with a likelihood of serious injury, impairment or death of residents who use mechanical lifts and resulted in the determination of Immediate Jeopardy. On 2/23/24 at 5:35 p.m., the Executive Director was informed of the determination of immediate Jeopardy (IJ) and provided the IJ templates. The Immediate Jeopardy began on 2/1/24. On 2/25/24 at 3:45 p.m., after verification of an acceptable Immediate Jeopardy removal plan, the Immediate Jeopardy was removed as of 2/25/24. The scope and severity were reduced to no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not Immediate Jeopardy. The findings included: Cross reference F600, F689, and F726 The Administrator job description signed on 2/15/24 noted essential duties and responsibilities included to, Supervise assigned department directors . Monitor in-service education for employees . Ensure compliance with State and Federal regulations . The Director of Clinical Services (Director of Nursing) job description signed on 7/10/23 noted, The Director of Clinical Services is responsible for the overall supervision, provision, and quality of nursing care in the Health Center . He/she is responsible for the selection, training, discipline, and supervision for all nursing related Health Center personnel . Oversees completion of written orientation and annual evaluations of all nursing staff . Coordinates required and supplemental in-service education programs appropriate for nursing staff and acts as a resource for Facility staff to increase knowledge of competence and job skills for the benefit of staff and residents . The facility policy Safe Lifting and Movement of Residents revised in 2017, read, In order to protect the safety and wellbeing of staff and residents, and to promote quality of care, this facility uses appropriate techniques and devices to lift and move residents . Staff responsible for direct resident care will be trained in the use of . mechanical lifts . Only staff with documented training in the safe use and care of the machines and equipment used in this facility will be allowed to lift or move residents. Staff will be observed for competency in using mechanical lifts and observed periodically for adherence to policy and procedures regarding use of equipment and the safe techniques . The policy Lifting Machine, Using a mechanical revised 2017, read, Lift design and operation vary across manufacturers. Staff must be trained and demonstrate competency using specific machines or devices utilized in the facility. 1. On 2/21/24 at approximately 11:00 a.m., during a tour of the facility a Brand A full body mechanical lift was observed in use on the third floor and a Brand B full body mechanical lift was observed in use on the second floor. Review of the facility's investigations of allegations of neglect showed on 2/1/24 at 11:15 a.m., Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Staff B and CNA Staff C were transferring Resident #1 from bed to wheelchair with a mechanical lift (a device used to assist with transfers and movement of individuals who required support for mobility beyond the manual support provide by caregivers alone). Midway through the transfer Resident #1 slid out of the sling. One of the CNAs tried to grab Resident #1 as she saw her sliding out. The resident potentially hit her head on the side of the bed and potentially on the carpeted floor. The resident sustained a laceration to the top area on the right side of her head. Resident #1 remained conscious during emergency treatment and evaluation. The facility's investigation summary noted neglect was not substantiated. Resident #1 slid to the right side between the top and bottom sling rope toward the floor. The resident landed on the right side between the mechanical lift legs with the resident's left leg still in the sling which was attached to the lift. The mechanical lift and the sling used to transfer Resident #1 were inspected with no abnormalities found. The facility's investigation summary noted neglect was not substantiated. Resident #1 slid to the right side between the top and bottom sling rope toward the floor. The resident landed on the right side between the mechanical lift legs with the resident's left leg still in the sling which was attached to the lift. The mechanical lift and the sling used to transfer Resident #1 were inspected with no abnormalities found. The investigation did not document the brand of the mechanical lift or the brand and size of sling used to transfer Resident #1. On 2/21/24 at 2:15 p.m., the mechanical lift and sling used to transfer Resident #1 on 2/1/24 were observed with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). The mechanical lift was a Brand A full body mechanical lift and the sling was a Brand C size small four-point sling. The ADON verified on 2/1/24 a Brand A full body mechanical lift was used with a Brand C sling to transfer Resident #1. The ADON said the Certified Nursing Assistants undergo an annual competency which includes the use of mechanical lifts. She said on 2/1/24 the nursing staff was re-educated on transfers with mechanical lifts since the facility's investigation determined staff used the wrong size of sling to transfer Resident #1 causing her to fall. The facility's investigation did not include a review of the Brand A operating manual to ensure the Brand C sling was compatible to be used with the Brand A full body mechanical lift. Review of the operating manual for mechanical lift Brand A provided by the facility noted, ONLY (Brand A) slings must be used on (Brand A) mechanical lifts. The use of non-company (Brand A) slings could be unsafe and may result in injury to the patient or caregiver. Review of the Brand C manufacturer operating manual revealed under warning, [Brand C] slings may be used with [Brand C] lift only. Using other manufacturer's patients lifts with [Brand C] slings is also prohibited. Review of the competency evaluations for CNA Staff B and CNA Staff C revealed: On 1/26/24 Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff A validated CNA Staff B satisfactorily demonstrated the use of a mechanical lift. On 1/10/24 LPN Staff A validated CNA Staff C satisfactorily demonstrated the use of a mechanical lift. The skills checklist did not include a step-by-step demonstration of transfer with the mechanical lifts, or ensuring staff used the right size and brand of slings in accordance with each mechanical lift's operating manual. Review of LPN Staff A's training record showed an Annual Nurse Competency form dated 12/20/23. The competency form did not include the use of mechanical lifts. On 2/22/24 at 3:00 p.m., in an interview LPN Staff A verified she signed the skills checklist for CNAs Staff B and Staff C certifying the CNAs satisfactorily demonstrated the proper use of mechanical lifts. When asked to describe the process to verify competency, LPN Staff A said first she demonstrates the transfer with a mechanical lift for the CNA, then she has the CNA complete the task. LPN Staff A said she would only open the legs of the base when lowering the resident on the wheelchair. She said she would not open the base of the lift when it was placed under the bed. LPN Staff A was not able to describe how to select the correct brand or size of sling for each resident. She said she would use the weight of the resident. Review of Brand A mechanical lift operating manual instructions provided by the facility showed, ALWAYS, (except when lifting a patient from the floor) while lifting or lowering a patient, maintain the base unit legs spread to the widest position and ensure that the casters are unlocked. On 2/23/24 at 8:15 a.m., in an interview the Director of Nursing (DON) said she was not able to find documentation LPN Staff A was trained on the safe use of mechanical lifts and had the necessary skills set to teach and administer competency evaluations on the safe use of mechanical lifts. 2. Review of the in-service for Mechanical lift use dated 2/1/24 showed the facility used the policy and procedure Lifting Machine, Using a Mechanical for the in-service. The policy noted the purpose of the procedure was to establish the general principles of safe lifting using a mechanical lifting device and was not a substitute for manufacturer's training or instructions. The policy or the in-service did not include the manufacturer's safety specifications for the mechanical lifts (Brand A and Brand B) used at the facility. The in-service was not followed by a competency evaluation to verify staff understood the training and were competent to use the mechanical lifts and follow each manufacturer's safety protocol. On 2/21/24 at 1:30 p.m., CNAs Staff E and Staff C were observed transferring Resident #2 with a Brand A full body mechanical lift. The Director of Nursing (DON) and Unit Manager Staff D were present during the observation. The sling used to transfer the resident did not have a label, making it impossible to determine the brand or the size of the sling. A label affixed to the mechanical lift specified, Danger . Read the Lift User Manual and the sling instruction sheet before operating. Staff E was observed operating the lift. She closed the legs of the base and placed them under the bed. CNA Staff E did not open the legs of the base lift after placing them under the bed. CNAs Staff E and Staff C placed the resident in the sling. CNA Staff E pulled out the lift from under the bed. She did not open the legs of the base and wheeled the resident approximately three feet to the wheelchair. CNA Staff C tilted the wheelchair on its back wheels as CNA Staff E lowered the resident with the mechanical lift. While observing the CNAs transferring Resident #2 with the mechanical lift, Unit Manager Staff D said the sling used to transfer Resident #2 was not labeled making it impossible to tell the brand or the size of the sling. Unit Manager Staff D, and the DON did not intervene and did not correct the CNAs to ensure a safe transfer, and used the appropriate brand and size of sling to protect Resident #2 from avoidable fall or accident. Photographic evidence obtained. On 2/21/24 at 2:30 p.m., in an interview CNA Staff E verified she did not open the legs of the base as per the manufacturer's safety instructions. She said on 2/1/24 after Resident #1 fell from the lift, she was given a paper to read regarding mechanical lifts. Review of the In-Servicing Program log showed Staff E and Staff C both attended the in-service on 2/1/24. 3. On 2/21/24 at 2:15 p.m., The ADON said Central Supply Staff H was responsible for ensuring the correct sling was used for each resident. The ADON said Central Supply Staff H was currently on vacation and not available for a telephone interview. On 2/22/24 at 11:15 a.m., a joint interview was conducted with the Director of Rehabilitation, the Registered Nurse Senior Clinical Specialist, and the DON. The DON verified the facility used a Brand A full body mechanical lift to transfer Residents #1, #2, #3, and #4 who reside on the third floor and a Brand B full body mechanical lift to transfer Resident #5 who resides on the second floor. When asked if Resident #1 was reassessed after the fall on 2/1/24 for transfers using a full body mechanical lift, the Director of Rehabilitation said she would have to check her paperwork. On 2/22/24 at 12:30 p.m., a brand D medium size sling was observed in Resident #1's room (Third floor). In an interview, Resident #1's daughter said since the fall from the mechanical lift on 2/1/24 the facility has been using the Brand D medium size sling for transfers. Photographic evidence obtained. On 2/22/24 at 1:10 p.m., Resident #5, who resides on the third floor, was observed in bed. A Brand C, size large mesh sling was observed over the resident's wheelchair. In an interview Resident #5 said she had a smaller sling that did not fit between her legs. She said, They brought me this sling and it is too big. Resident #5 said, They don't know what they are doing, I was never measured for a sling. They were going by weight alone. On 2/22/24 at approximately 3:05 p.m., upon request the DON provided a list of Central Supply Staff H trainings. The training included one hour online in-service titled Transferring, Repositioning, and Lifting Residents safely. The training was dated 5/1/2016. The DON said she could not locate documentation Resident #1 was reassessed after the fall on 2/1/24 to ensure transfer with a full body mechanical lift was appropriate for the resident. She said the facility reassessed Resident #1 on 3/22/24 and provided the surveyor an evaluation dated 3/22/24. The DON did not provide the content of the in-service or a competency evaluation verifying Central Supply Staff H was trained and competent to evaluate each resident for the correct brand and size of sling according to each manufacturer's specification. The DON could not provide documentation Residents #1(Date of admission [DATE]), #2 (Date of admission 5/23/23), #3 (Date of admission 5/17/23) , #4 (Date of admission 8/29/22), and #5 (Date of admission [DATE]) were assessed for the correct brand and size of slings before or after Resident #1's fall from the mechanical lift on 2/1/24. On 2/23/24 at 11:00 a.m., in an interview the Medical Director said he attends all QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) meetings when available. He said he was told about the incident that occurred with the Mechanical lift roughly about the time it occurred but has not been updated as to what is being done since the incident. The Medical Director said he was not involved in determining the size of slings, the nurses were responsible to make sure the correct size of sling is used. On 2/23/24 at 1:30 p.m., in an interview the Administrator said he started employment at the facility on 2/15/24 and knew very little about Resident #1's fall from the mechanical lift. He said he just knew what the DON and Executive Director told him. He said he was aware a Federal Report was made because Resident #1 bumped her head, required sutures, and had to be sent to the hospital. He said, I do not know the root cause of the incident. On 2/25/24 at 3:45 p.m., the immediate actions implemented by the facility and verified by the surveyor included: On 2/22/24 the Clinical Equipment Repair company was contacted by Facility administrative Assistant to schedule monthly inspections of community Mechanical Lifts. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by documentation of the contract and interviews with administration. On 2/22/24 Interim Administrator instructed Maintenance Supervisor to obtain Brand F Lifts and Brand F slings from an additional resource a sister community and remove Brand A mechanical lift from service. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by observation and interviews with staff Brand F mechanical lift with appropriate slings was in use on the third floor of the facility. On 2/22/2024 Interim administrator instructed Maintenance Supervisor to inspect the Brand F lift and the Director of Nursing and RN manager to inspect Brand F slings upon arrival and before use per manufacture guidelines. The Clinical Equipment Repair company was contacted by Facility administrative Assistant to schedule monthly inspections of community Mechanical Lifts. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by observations and review of the contract with the Clinical Equipment company. A sticker was observed on the Brand F lift showing the date of the inspection. On 2/22/24 Nursing staff were educated and demonstrated competency, on the safety and proper use of mechanical lifts and slings in accordance with the facility policy Safe Lifting Movement of Resident, Brand F Lift/Sling manufacturer guidelines, and Brand B Sling guidelines by the Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing and RN Manager. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by observations of the slings on the lifts on the second and the third floor and interviews with the facility direct care staff. On 2/22/24 Resident #1 use of a mechanical lift for transfers was assessed for the correct size and brand of slings. Sizing completed by Director of Nursing and RN Nurse Manager in the presence of the Occupational Therapist. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by observation of Resident #1's sling and transfer using the mechanical lift, and review of assessment for correct size of sling. On 2/22/24 the four remaining residents who utilize the mechanical lifts were assessed for the correct size and brand of sling compatible with lift. Sizing/Measuring of slings was completed by Director of Nursing, Family Nurse Practitioner, Assistant Director of Nursing per manufacturer guidelines. Appropriate Slings were labeled and placed in resident rooms. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by review of documentation showing Residents on the third floor were sized to ensure the appropriate sling was in use to transfer each resident. This documentation was kept in a folder at the nurse's station with the lift operating manual. On 2/22/24 Ad-[NAME] (unplanned) QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) meeting held with Executive Director, Interim Nursing Home Administrator, Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing, RN Manager, AL/MC (Assisted Living/Memory Care) Director, Maintenance Director, HR (Human Resources) and Facility Administrator Assistant. An audit plan for following manufacture guidelines for mechanical lifts to prevent injury to residents was developed and approved by the committee. In addition, the meeting included the responsibility of the facility's administration to ensure safe practices for resident health and safety including the safe use of mechanical lifts. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the Ad-hoc meeting documentation and review of audit forms for the mechanical lifts on the second and third floor. On 2/22/24 An observation/audit of mechanical lifts to compatibility of slings utilized and sling sizing for all residents who utilize lifts were completed by the Director of Nursing, ADON and RN manager on 2/22/24 and is ongoing to ensure the proper sling is utilized with the compatible lift, that the transfer of resident using the mechanical lift meets the lift competency demonstrated by staff. Audits have a goal of 100% compliance. Audits are completed weekly for three months then monthly for nine months. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by review of the audits completed and residents evaluation for the correct brand and size of slings. On 2/23/24 and 2-24-2024 the Corporate Senior Clinical Specialist provided education to the Executive Director, Interim Administrator, Director of Nursing and ADON on Abuse, Neglect and Resident Rights Policies with a focus on ensuring goods and services are provided to the residents that are necessary to avoid physical harm, pain, mental anguish or emotional distress. This included the importance of ensuring resident health and safety including the use of mechanical lift devices. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the education, observations of staff using mechanical lifts and interviews with direct care staff. On 2/23/24 the Medical Director notified of four area of deficiency by the Director of Nursing. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by interviews with administrative staff. On 2/23/24 Mechanical Lift and Sling Competencies have been added to the general orientation packet for all nursing staff and will be completed upon hire prior to resident care and then completed quarterly. Competencies to be completed by Director of Nursing/qualified designee. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by reviewing the documentation created by administration and the 95% competencies completed with facility direct care staff. On 2/23/24 The Clinical Equipment Repair company inspected and found Brand F lift to function per manufacture guidelines. On 2/25/24 The surveyor verified by observation of the sticker applied to the lift by the clinical repair company. On 2/23/2024 Director of Nursing informed the Medical Director of the removal plan. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by an interview with the Director of Nursing. On 2/24/24 the Corporate Senior Clinical Specialist reviewed job descriptions with the Executive Director, Interim Administrator, Director of Nursing and ADON with the importance of following guidelines set forth by the regulations of the Federal and State requirements. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by reviewing of the Job descriptions. No changes noted. On 2/24/24 Brand F lift was received and inspected by Maintenance Tech and replaced the temporary sister facility lift on third floor. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by observation of the lifts. On 2/24/24 Executive Director contacted corporate purchasing and secured the order for two new Brand F mechanical lifts and manufacturer specified slings. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by interviews with the Director of Nursing.
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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record reviews, Policy reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record reviews, Policy reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from neglect by failing to ensure staff were competent to safely use full body mechanical lifts and by failing to ensure staff followed the manufacturer's safety instructions for the brand and size of slings and transfer techniques. Resident #1 was dependent on staff and used a mechanical lift for transfer. On 2/1/24, staff did not follow the manufacturer's instructions for the appropriate brand and size of sling during transfer with a mechanical lift. Resident #1 fell from the sling, struck her head on the bed and the floor. Resident #1 sustained a laceration to the right temporal area requiring an emergent transfer to an acute care hospital for evaluation and treatment. The facility's failure to ensure necessary structure and processes to prevent neglect placed other residents who use mechanical lifts for transfer at a likelihood of avoidable accidents and falls which could result in serious injury, impairment, or death, and resulted in the determination of Immediate Jeopardy. On 2/23/24 at 5:35 p.m., the facility's Executive Director was informed of the determination of immediate Jeopardy (IJ) and provided the IJ templates. The Immediate Jeopardy began on 2/1/24. On 2/25/24 at 3:45 p.m., after verification of an acceptable Immediate Jeopardy removal plan, the Immediate Jeopardy was removed as of 2/25/24. The scope and severity were reduced to no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not Immediate Jeopardy. The findings included: Cross reference F689, F726 and F835. The facility's policy and procedure titled, Abuse Prevention Program dated February 2020 noted, Neglect is defined as failure of the facility, its employees or service providers, to provide goods and services necessary to avoid physical harm, pain, mental anguish, or emotional distress . This community desires to prevent . neglect . by establishing a resident sensitive and resident secure environment. This will be accomplished by a comprehensive quality management approach including the following . Environmental assessment: At least annually, an interdepartmental team will both tour the community assessing the safety of the community environment . Staff supervision: On a regular basis, supervisors will monitor the ability of the staff to meet the needs of the residents, staff understanding of individual resident care needs . Any incident or allegation involving . neglect . will result in an abuse investigation . The facility's policy titled, Lifting Machine, Using a mechanical revised 2017, read, . Lift design and operation vary across manufacturers. Staff must be trained and demonstrate competency using specific machines or devices utilized in the facility . 1. Review of the clinical record for Resident #1 revealed an admission date of 10/1/21. Resident #1 scored 00 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status dated 1/5/24 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Resident #1's diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, stiffness of the right hip, left hip, and the left knee. Resident #1 was dependent on staff for transfers with a full body mechanical lift. Review of the progress notes revealed on 2/1/24 at 11:40 a.m., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff A documented, CNA Staff C informed her Resident #1 fell out of the sling while she was in a mechanical lift (a device used to assist with transfers and movement of individuals who required support for mobility beyond the manual support provide by caregivers alone). When she went in the room the resident was still in the sling and, her head was bleeding from the top right side. LPN Staff A documented CNA Staff C and CNA Staff B reported the sling did not come unattached from the lift. LPN Staff A wrote Resident #1's arms and legs were permanently contracted (fixed deformity of joints). The resident had a laceration to the right 10:00 a.m. laceration. Resident #1 was transferred to the hospital via EMS (Emergency Medical Services). Review of the facility's accidents and incidents investigations showed on 2/1/24 at 11:15 a.m., Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Staff B and CNA Staff C were transferring Resident #1 from bed to wheelchair with a mechanical lift. Midway through the transfer Resident #1 slid out of the sling. One of the CNAs tried to grab Resident #1 as she saw her sliding out. The resident potentially hit her head on the side of the bed and potentially on the carpeted floor. The resident sustained a laceration to the top area on the right side of her head. Resident #1 remained conscious during emergency treatment and evaluation. Resident #1 was transferred to the hospital via EMS (Emergency Medical Services). The facility's investigation summary noted Resident #1 slid to the right side between the top and bottom sling rope toward the floor. The resident landed on the right side between the mechanical lift legs with the resident's left leg still in the sling which was attached to the lift. The mechanical lift and the sling used to transfer Resident #1 were inspected with no abnormalities found. As part of their investigation, the facility obtained statements from CNA Staff B, and CNA Staff C who transferred the resident with the mechanical lift, and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff A who evaluated Resident #1 after the fall. On 2/1/24 CNA Staff B wrote in a statement Resident #1, slid off and came out from the sling on one side. My coworker (CNA Staff C) catch her but resident hit the floor. We called the nurse. On 2/1/24 CNA Staff C wrote in a statement, While transferring the resident from the bed to the wheelchair she slide [sic] out of the sling and her head hit the carpet floor. I tried to catch her but the action was so quick I couldn't. On 2/1/24 LPN Staff A wrote in a statement, The resident fell out of the [brand name] sling while being transferred to her wheelchair. The facility's conclusion noted, After a thorough investigation and review of the lifting machine policy & [and] procedure the facility could not substantiate neglect. As a precautionary measure each lift will be checked by an outside licensed contractor. Each staff member in the nursing department will get additional training on mechanical lift transfer. The facility's investigation did not include a review of the operating manual for each brand of mechanical lifts to staff followed the manufacturer's safety precautions when using the lift. On 2/21/23 at 10:00 a.m., CNA Staff C was interviewed with the assistance of Unit Manager Staff D translating in CNA Staff C's native language. CNA Staff C said on 2/1/24 she was on the opposite side of the bed when Resident #1 fell from the lift before she could get to the other side of the bed after the resident was lifted. She said CNA, Staff B had already moved the lift away from the bed and had started turning the resident. She stated the resident slid from the top of the sling and hit her head on the bed and the floor. CNA Staff C did not say the brand or size of sling used to transfer Resident #1. On 2/21/24 at 10:15 a.m., CNA Staff B was interviewed with the assistance of Minimum Data Set Staff I in CNA Staff B's native language. CNA Staff B said Staff C was coming around the bed and tried to catch the resident as she fell but the incident occurred to quickly. Staff B said Staff C threw her hands in the air and said she did not do it; she never touched the resident and it was not her fault. CNA Staff B did not say the brand or size of sling used to transfer Resident #1. On 2/21/24 at 2:15 p.m., an observation was made, in the presence of the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), of the lift and sling used to transfer resident #1 on 2/1/24. Observed were the lift (Brand A) and the sling (Brand C), at this time the ADON verified these were the lift and sling used to transfer Resident #1 on 2/1/24. The ADON reported that the facility's investigation determined that the wrong size sling had been used to transfer the resident which caused her to fall from the sling. She stated that on 2/1/24 after Resident #1 fell from the lift, the facility contacted Brand A mechanical lift manufacturer and found out some of the slings they were using were not the correct size slings. A review was conducted of the facility provided operating manual for mechanical lifts. Brand A revealed that ONLY (Brand A) slings must be used on (Brand A) mechanical lifts. The manual goes on to state that the use of non-company (Brand A) slings could be unsafe and may result in injury to the patient or caregiver. Review of the Brand C manufacturer operating manual revealed under warning, [Brand C] slings may be used with [Brand C] lift only. Using other manufacturer's patients lifts with [Brand A] slings is also prohibited. On 2/21/24 at 2:15 p.m., in an interview the ADON reported she went over the facility's policy titled, Lifting Machine, Using a Mechanical as part of the facility's investigation's corrective actions. The policy Lifting Machine, Using a Mechanical noted the purpose of the policy was to establish the general principles of safe lifting using a mechanical lifting device and was not a substitute for manufacturer's training or instructions. The in-service did not include the operating instructions, and safety warnings for the full body mechanical lifts (Brand A and B) used at the facility and did not include a competency evaluation. 2. Review of Brand A operating manual instructions showed, ALWAYS, (except when lifting a patient from the floor) while lifting or lowering a patient, maintain the base unit legs spread to the widest position and ensure that the casters are unlocked. On 2/21/24 at 1:30 p.m., CNAs Staff E and Staff C were observed transferring Resident #2 with a Brand A full body mechanical lift. The Director of Nursing (DON) and Unit Manager Staff D were present during the observation. The sling used to transfer the resident did not have a label, making it impossible to determine the brand or size. A label affixed to the mechanical lift specified, Danger . Read the Lift User Manual and the sling instruction sheet before operating. Staff E was observed operating the lift. She closed the legs of the base and placed them under the bed. CNA Staff E did not open the legs of the base after placing them under the bed. CNAs Staff E and Staff C placed the resident in the sling. CNA Staff E pulled out the lift from under the bed. She wheeled the resident in the lift approximately three feet to the wheelchair with the legs of the base closed. CNA Staff C tilted the wheelchair on its back wheels as CNA Staff E lowered the resident with the mechanical lift. While observing the CNAs transferring Resident #2 with the mechanical lift, Unit Manager Staff D said the sling used to transfer Resident #2 was not labeled making it impossible to tell the brand or the size of the sling. Unit Manager Staff D and the DON did not intervene, and did not correct the CNAs to ensure Resident #2's safety. Photographic evidence obtained. Review of the attendance log for the Mechanical Lift In-service conducted on 2/1/24 showed CNAs Staff C and Staff E both had attended the in-service. On 2/21/24 at 2:30 p.m., in an interview CNA Staff E verified she did not open the legs of the base as per the manufacturer's safety instructions. She said on 2/1/24 she was given a paper to read regarding mechanical lifts. 3. On 2/21/24 at approximately 11:00 a.m., during a tour of the facility a Brand A mechanical lift was observed in use on the third floor of the facility and a Brand B mechanical lift was observed in use on the second floor of the facility. On 2/21/24 at 2:15 p.m., The ADON said Central Supply Staff H was responsible for ensuring the correct sling was used for each resident. The ADON said Central Supply Staff H was currently on vacation and not available for a telephone interview. On 2/22/24 at 11:15 a.m., a joint interview was conducted with the Director of Rehabilitation, the Registered Nurse Senior Clinical Specialist, and the DON. The DON verified the facility used a Brand A full body mechanical lift on the third floor to transfer Residents #1, #2, #3, and #4, and a Brand B full body mechanical lift to transfer Resident #5 who resides on the second floor. On 2/22/24 at 12:30 p.m., a brand D medium size sling was observed in Resident #1's room on the third floor. In an interview, Resident #1's daughter said since the fall from the mechanical lift on 2/1/24 the facility has been using the Brand D medium size sling for transfers. Photographic evidence obtained. On 2/22/24 at 1:10 p.m., Resident #5 was observed in bed in her room on the third floor. A Brand C, size large mesh sling was observed over the resident's wheelchair. In an interview Resident #5 said she had a smaller sling that did not fit between her legs. She said, They brought me this sling and it is too big. Resident #5 said, They don't know what they are doing, I was never measured for a sling. They were going by weight alone. On 2/22/24 at approximately 3:05 p.m., upon request the DON provided a list of Central Supply Staff H trainings. The training included one hour online in-service titled Transferring, Repositioning, and Lifting Residents safely. The training was dated 5/1/2016. The DON did not provide the content of the in-service or a competency evaluation showing Central Supply Staff H was trained, competent and had the skills set to evaluate residents for the correct brand and size of sling according to each manufacturer's specification. The DON could not provide documentation Residents #1(Date of admission [DATE]), #2 (Date of admission 5/23/23), #3 (Date of admission 5/17/23) , #4 (Date of admission 8/29/22), and #5 (Date of admission [DATE]) were assessed for the correct brand and size of slings before or after Resident #1's fall from the mechanical lift on 2/1/24. On 2/23/24 at 11:00 a.m., in an interview the Medical Director said he attends all QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) meetings when available. He said he was told about the incident that occurred with the Mechanical lift roughly about the time it occurred but has not been updated as to what is being done since the incident. The Medical Director said he was not involved in determining the size of slings, the nurses were responsible to make sure the correct size of sling is used. On 2/25/24 at 3:45 p.m., the immediate actions implemented by the facility and verified by the surveyor included: On 2/2224 Brand F Lift and Brand F compatible slings were obtained from a sister community. The Maintenance Director inspected the Brand F lift. The Director of Nursing and Registered Nurse Manager examined slings per manufacture guidelines. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through observation of the Brand F mechanical lift and compatible Brand F slings, and interview with the Director of Nursing. On 2/22/24 Brand A mechanical lift was removed from service. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through observation of Brand A mechanical lift was removed from service. On 2/22/24 Resident #1 was sized with appropriate size of sling in accordance with manufacturer's instructions by Director of Nursing, RN Manager in the presence of the Occupational Therapist. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through observation of Resident #1's sling for proper size and brand. On 2/22/24 it was determined by the Director of Nursing, RN Manager and Occupational Therapist that the Brand F Large sling fit the resident the best utilizing the measurements and observation of the residents' positioning in the sling. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through observation of Resident #1's sling for adequate size and brand of sling. On 2/22/24 All current residents utilizing mechanical lifts were evaluated by the Director of Nursing and RN for appropriate Brand F sling to utilize with Brand F lift and Brand B sling and compatible slings to utilize with Brand B lift in accordance with manufacture guidelines by measurements, weight, and observation. Appropriate Slings were labeled with resident name and placed in resident rooms. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through observation of the slings for Residents #1, #2, #3, #4 and #5. On 2/22/24 nursing staff were educated on the safety and proper use of mechanical lifts and slings in accordance with the facility policy Safe Lifting Movement of Resident and Brand F Lift and Sling manufacture guidelines and Brand B manufacturer guidelines by Director of Nursing, ADON, RN Nurse Manager and FNP (Family Nurse Practitioner). Nursing Staff were notified by the Director of Nursing and ADON that they were not to utilize the mechanical lift until they have completed the Mechanical Lift Competencies with 100% compliance to competency. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the in-service education, competencies, and interview with four licensed Nurses and eight CNAs. All staff interviewed were able to verbalize the content of the in-service. On 2/22/24 Ad-hoc (unplanned) QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) meeting held with Executive Director, Interim Nursing Home Administrator, Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing, RN Manager, AL/MC (Assisted Living/Memory Care) Director, Maintenance Director, Director of Human Resources and Facility Administrative Assistant. An audit and direct care observation plan was developed and approved by the committee. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the QAPI meeting and audit care observation plan implemented. On 2/22/24 Audits/Observation for all residents who utilize Brand F and Brand B Lift were by completed by the Director of Nursing, ADON, RN Manager to ensure the proper sling is utilized for the compatible lift and that the staff competency was completed per manufacture guidelines. Audits have a goal of 100% compliance. Audits continue weekly for 3 months then monthly for 9 months. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the audit tool and interview with the DON and Executive Director. On 2/23/24 the Executive Director, Interim Nursing Home Administrator, Director of Nursing and Assistant Director of Nursing were educated regarding Abuse, Neglect, and Resident Rights by Corporate Senior Clinical Specialist. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the education and interview with the DON. On 2/23/24 the Director of Nursing and ADON educated Licensed Nurses and Certified Nursing Assistants on the Abuse, Neglect, and Resident Rights policies. On 2/23/24 a Root cause analysis completed by the Director of Nursing and reviewed by the Interim Administrator regarding Resident #1 incident. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the education and root cause. Four Licensed Nurses and eight CNAs were interviewed. All staff interviewed were able to verbalize the content of the in-service received. On 2/22/24 a Clinical Equipment Repair company was contacted by Facility administrative Assistant to schedule monthly inspections of community Mechanical Lifts. On 2/25/24 the surveyor reviewed the documentation provided to schedule monthly inspections of mechanical lifts. On 2/23/24 the Director of Nursing and Assistant Director of Nursing provided education to staff regarding Abuse, Neglect and Resident Rights. Director of Nursing and ADON notified staff to contact nursing administration prior to providing direct care of resident to receive Abuse, Neglect and Resident Rights education. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of education provided. On 2/23/24 the Director of Nursing verified model numbers of lifts and slings and obtained manufacture guidelines for equipment. Nursing staff were educated on location of Brand F Lift/slings manufacture guidelines located exclusively on the third floor and location of the Brand A Lift/slings manufacturer guidelines located exclusively on the second floor for staff to reference. Nursing Staff were notified by the Director of Nursing and ADON that they were not to utilize the mechanical lift until they have completed the Mechanical Lift Competencies which includes the location of the manufacture guidelines with 100% compliance to competency. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the education provided, and interview with four licensed Nurses and eight CNAs. All staff interviewed were able to verbalize the content of the in-service. On 2/24/24 the Maintenance Technician inspected Brand F lift. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of documentation of Mechanical Lift brand F inspection.
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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, review of facility policies and procedures, staff, resident, and resident representative in...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, review of facility policies and procedures, staff, resident, and resident representative interviews, the facility failed to implement processes to prevent accidents by failing to ensure staff followed manufacturer's safety recommendations for transfer with mechanical lifts. On 2/1/24 Staff used a full body mechanical lift to transfer Resident #1. Staff did not follow manufacturer's safety recommendations for the size and brand of sling used. Resident #1 fell from the lift, struck her head on the bed and on the floor. Resident #1 sustained a laceration to the right temporal area requiring an emergent transfer to an acute care hospital. The facility failure to ensure staff follow manufacturer's safety recommendations for brand and size of slings and safe transfer technique when using mechanical lifts created an unsafe environment of avoidable accidents or falls of residents who use mechanical lifts with a likelihood to result in serious injury (i.e. fracture, head injury), impairment or death and resulted in the determination of Immediate Jeopardy. On 2/23/24 at 5:35 p.m., the Executive Director was notified of the determination of Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) and provided the IJ templates. The Immediate Jeopardy began on 2/1/24. On 2/25/24 at 3:45 p.m., after verification of an acceptable Immediate Jeopardy removal plan, the Immediate Jeopardy was removed as of 2/25/24. The scope and severity were reduced to no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not Immediate Jeopardy. The findings included: Cross reference to F600, F726, and F835. Review of the clinical record for Resident #1 revealed an admission date of 10/1/21. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, stiffness of the right hip, left hip, right knee, and left knee. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with a target date of 1/5/24 noted the resident's cognition was severely impaired. Resident #1 was dependent on staff for chair to bed transfer (Helper does all of the effort. Resident does none of the effort to complete the activity). The care plan initiated on 1/23/23 noted the resident was at risk for falls related to Dementia/Alzheimer's, gait, and balance problems. The goal was for the resident not to sustain serious injury through the review date. Interventions as of 1/23/23 included to educate the family and care givers about safety reminders and what to do if a fall occurs, be sure the call light is within reach and encourage the resident to use it for assistance as needed, the resident needs prompt responses to all requests for assistance. The care plan dated 1/23/23 did not include the use of a mechanical lift for transfer. Review of the progress notes revealed on 2/1/24 at 11:40 a.m., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff A documented, CNA Staff C informed her Resident #1 fell out of the sling while she was in a mechanical lift (a device used to assist with transfers and movement of individuals who required support for mobility beyond the manual support provide by caregivers alone). When she went in the room the resident was still in the sling and, her head was bleeding from the top right side. LPN Staff A documented CNA Staff C and CNA Staff B reported the sling did not come unattached from the lift. LPN Staff A wrote Resident #1's arms and legs were permanently contracted (fixed deformity of joints). The resident had a laceration to the right side of the head with moderate amount of bleeding from the laceration. Resident #1 was transferred to the hospital via EMS (Emergency Medical Services). Review of the facility's accidents and incidents investigations showed on 2/1/24 at 11:15 a.m., Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Staff B and CNA Staff C were transferring Resident #1 from bed to wheelchair with a mechanical lift. Midway through the transfer Resident #1 slid out of the sling. One of the CNAs tried to grab Resident #1 as she saw her sliding out. The resident potentially hit her head on the side of the bed and potentially on the carpeted floor. The resident sustained a laceration to the top area on the right side of her head. Resident #1 remained conscious during emergency treatment and evaluation. The facility's investigation summary noted Resident #1 slid to the right side between the top and bottom sling rope toward the floor. The resident landed on the right side between the mechanical lift legs with the resident's left leg still in the sling which was attached to the lift. The mechanical lift and the sling used to transfer Resident #1 were inspected with no abnormalities found. As part of their investigation, the facility obtained statements from CNA Staff B, and CNA Staff C who transferred the resident with the mechanical lift, and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff A who evaluated Resident #1 after the fall. On 2/1/24 CNA Staff B wrote in a statement Resident #1, slid off and came out from the sling on one side. My coworker (CNA Staff C) catch her but resident hit the floor. We called the nurse. On 2/1/24 CNA Staff C wrote in a statement, While transferring the resident from the bed to the wheelchair she slide [sic] out of the sling and her head hit the carpet floor. I tried to catch her but the action was so quick I couldn't. On 2/1/24 LPN Staff A wrote in a statement, The resident fell out of the [brand name] sling while being transferred to her wheelchair. The facility's conclusion noted, After a thorough investigation and review of the lifting machine policy & [and] procedure the facility could not substantiate neglect. As a precautionary measure each lift will be checked by an outside licensed contractor. Each staff member in the nursing department will get additional training on mechanical lift transfer. The facility's investigation did not include a review of the operating manual for each brand of mechanical lifts to staff followed the manufacturer's safety precautions when using the lift. On 2/2/24 the facility updated Resident #1's care plan to include the use of a mechanical lift for transfers. The facility policy Safe Lifting and Movement of Residents revised in 2017, read, In order to protect the safety and wellbeing of staff and residents, and to promote quality of care, this facility uses appropriate techniques and devices to lift and move residents . Staff responsible for direct resident care will be trained in the use of . mechanical lifts . Only staff with documented training in the safe use and care of the machines and equipment used in this facility will be allowed to lift or move residents. Staff will be observed for competency in using mechanical lifts and observed periodically for adherence to policy and procedures regarding use of equipment and the safe techniques . The policy Lifting Machine, Using a mechanical revised 2017, read, Lift design and operation vary across manufacturers. Staff must be trained and demonstrate competency using specific machines or devices utilized in the facility. On 2/21/24 at 2:15 p.m., the mechanical lift and sling used to transfer Resident #1 on 2/1/24 were observed with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). The mechanical lift was a Brand A full body mechanical lift and the sling was a Brand C size small four-point sling. The ADON verified on 2/1/24 a Brand A full body mechanical lift was used with a Brand C sling to transfer Resident #1. Review of the operating manual for mechanical lift Brand A provided by the facility noted, ONLY (Brand A) slings must be used on (Brand A) mechanical lifts. The use of non-company (Brand A) slings could be unsafe and may result in injury to the patient or caregiver. Review of the Brand C manufacturer operating manual revealed under warning, [Brand C] slings may be used with [Brand C] lift only. Using other manufacturer's patients lifts with [Brand A] slings is also prohibited. The ADON said after a full investigation, the facility determined the wrong size of sling was used to transfer the resident which caused her to fall from the sling. The ADON said the CNAs undergo an annual competency which includes the use of mechanical lifts. Review of CNA Staff B's employee file revealed a Certified Nursing Assistant Training Program Skilled Checklist dated 1/26/24. The checklist included, Mechanical Lift in the skills satisfactorily demonstrated. Review of CNA Staff C's employee file revealed on 1/10/24 she satisfactorily demonstrated the use of a Mechanical lift. The skills checklist did not include a step by step demonstration of safe transfer with the mechanical lifts, including the right size and brand of slings in accordance with each mechanical lift's operating manual. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff A signed the forms verifying the CNAs successfully demonstrated the skills for Mechanical lifts. On 2/22/24 at 3:00 p.m., in an interview LPN Staff A verified she signed the skills checklist for CNAs Staff B and Staff C. When asked about the process to verify competency, LPN Staff A said she demonstrates the transfer with a mechanical lift for the CNA, then she has the CNA complete the task. When asked to describe the step by step process, LPN Staff A said she would only open the legs of the base when lowering the resident on the wheelchair. She said she would not open the base of the lift when it was placed under the bed. LPN Staff A was not able to describe how to select the correct brand or size of sling for each resident. She said she would use the weight of the resident. Review of Brand A mechanical lift operating manual instructions showed, ALWAYS, (except when lifting a patient from the floor) while lifting or lowering a patient, maintain the base unit legs spread to the widest position and ensure that the casters are unlocked. Review of LPN Staff A's training record showed an Annual Nurse Competency form dated 12/20/23. The competency form did not include the use of mechanical lifts. On 2/23/24 at 8:15 a.m., in an interview the Director of Nursing (DON) said she was not able to find documentation LPN Staff A was trained on the safe use of mechanical lifts and was competent to teach and administer a competency evaluation on safe use of mechanical lifts. 2. On 2/21/24 at 1:30 p.m., CNAs Staff E and Staff C were observed transferring Resident #2 with a Brand A full body mechanical lift. The Director of Nursing (DON) and Unit Manager Staff D were present during the observation. The sling used to transfer the resident did not have a label, making it impossible to determine the brand or the size of the sling. A label affixed to the mechanical lift warned to read the user manual before operating the lift. Photographic evidence obtained. Staff E was observed operating the lift. She closed the legs of the base and placed them under the bed. CNA Staff E did not open the legs of the base lift after placing them under the bed. CNAs Staff E and Staff C placed the resident in the sling. CNA Staff E pulled out the lift from under the bed. She did not open the legs of the base and wheeled the resident approximately three feet to the wheelchair. CNA Staff C tilted the wheelchair on its back wheels as CNA Staff E lowered the resident with the mechanical lift. While observing the CNAs transferring Resident #2 with the mechanical lift, Unit Manager Staff D said the sling used to transfer Resident #2 was not labeled making it impossible to tell the brand of the sling or the size of the sling. Unit Manager Staff D and the DON did not intervene to ensure the resident's safety from avoidable fall and accident from using the wrong sling and not following the mechanical lifts safety instructions for use. On 2/21/24 at 2:30 p.m., in an interview CNA Staff E verified she did not open the legs of the base as per the manufacturer's safety instructions. She said on 2/1/24 after Resident #1 fell from the lift, she was given a paper to read regarding mechanical lifts. Review of the in-services showed on 2/1/24 CNA Staff E and CNA Staff C attended the in-service for Mechanical lift use. On 2/21/24 at 2:15 p.m., the ADON said she used the facility's policy titled, Lifting Machine, Using a Mechanical. for the in-service on 2/1/24. The facility's policy and procedure Lifting Machine, Using a Mechanical. noted the purpose of the procedure was to establish the general principles of safe lifting using a mechanical lifting device, and was not a substitute for manufacturer's training or instructions. The in-service did not include the operating instructions, and safety warnings for manufacturer Brand A or B. There was no documentation that the in-service was followed by a competency evaluation. 3. On 2/21/24 at approximately 11:00 a.m., during a tour of the facility a Brand A mechanical lift was observed in use on the third floor of the facility and a Brand B mechanical lift was observed in use on the second floor of the facility. On 2/21/24 at approximately 1:35 p.m., Unit Manager Staff D said Central Supply Staff H places the slings in the residents' rooms. On 2/21/24 at 2:15 p.m., The ADON said Central Supply Staff H was responsible for ensuring the correct sling was used for each resident. The ADON said Central Supply Staff H was currently on vacation and not available for a telephone interview. On 2/22/24 at 11:15 a.m., a joint interview was conducted with the Director of Rehab, the Registered Nurse Senior Clinical Specialist, and the DON. The DON verified the facility used a Brand A full body mechanical lift on the third floor to transfer Residents # 1, #2, #3, and #4 who reside on the third floor. She said a Brand B full body mechanical lift is used on the second floor to transfer Resident #5 who resides on the second floor. On 2/22/24 at 12:30 p.m., a brand D medium size sling was observed in Resident #1's room. In an interview, Resident #1's daughter said since the fall from the mechanical lift on 2/1/24 the facility has been using the Brand D medium size sling for transfers. Photographic evidence obtained. On 2/22/24 at 1:10 p.m., Resident #5 was observed in bed. A Brand C, size large mesh sling was observed over the resident's wheelchair. In an interview Resident #5 said she had a smaller sling that did not fit between her legs. She said, They brought me this sling and it is too big. Resident #5 said, They don't know what they are doing, I was never measured for a sling. They were going by weight alone. On 2/22/24 at approximately 3:05 p.m., the DON provided a list of Central Supply Staff H trainings. The training included one hour online in-service titled Transferring, Repositioning, and Lifting Residents safely. The training was dated 5/1/2016. The DON did not provide the content of the in-service or a competency evaluation showing Central Supply Staff H was competent to assess and ensure each resident had the correct brand and size of sling according to each manufacturer's specification. The DON could not provide documentation Residents #1(Date of admission [DATE]), #2 (Date of admission 5/23/23), #3 (Date of admission 5/17/23), #4 (Date of admission 8/29/22), and #5 (Date of admission [DATE]) were assessed for the correct brand and size of slings before or after Resident #1's fall from the mechanical lift on 2/1/24. On 2/25/24 at 3:45 p.m., the immediate actions implemented by the facility and verified by the surveyor included: On 2/22/24 Brand A mechanical lift was removed from service. On 2/25/24 this was verified by interviews with staff and observations of the lifts on the second and third floors. On 2/22/24 The facility system for the Brand F and Brand B mechanical Lift maintenance was Repair company by the Facility Administrative Assistant. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified this with an interview with the DON and documentation of the repair company bill. On 2/22/24 Brand F Lift and Brand F compatible slings were obtained from a sister community. The Maintenance Director inspected the Brand F lift. Director of Nursing and RN Manager examined slings per manufacture guidelines. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through observation of the Brand F mechanical lift and compatible Brand F slings, and interview with the Director of Nursing. On 2/22/24 Resident #1 currently resides in the facility. Director of Nursing and RN Manager performed resident measurements for the Brand F lift sling to determine proper sizing per the Brand F manufacturer guidelines. This was observed by the Occupational Therapist. It was determined that the Brand F Large sling fit resident #1 the best utilizing the measurements and observation of the residents' positioning in the sling. On 2/25/24 it was verified by the surveyor that Resident #1 is now using a large size sling from Company F and is using Company F's mechanical lift on the third floor though observation, interview and record review. On 2/22/24 the nursing staff were educated by the Director of Nursing, ADON, RN Manager and FNP (Family Nurse Practitioner) on the safety and proper use of mechanical lifts and slings in accordance with the facility policy Safe Lifting Movement of Resident and Brand F Lift and Sling manufacture guidelines. Utilizing the Competency Assessment Lifting Machine, using a Mechanical Brand F Lift the DON, ADON, RN Manager and FNP educated nursing staff with return demonstration on use of the mechanical lift and slings according to manufacturer guidelines. Nursing Staff were notified by the Director of Nursing and ADON that they were not to utilize the mechanical lift until they have completed the Mechanical Lift Competencies with 100% compliance to competency. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the education and root cause. Four Licensed Nurses and eight CNAs were interviewed. All staff interviewed were able to verbalize the content of the in-service received. On 2/22/24 The Director of Nursing, ADON, RN Manager and FNP conducted a 100% audit of remaining residents who utilize the Brand F mechanical lift. These residents were evaluated and measured for appropriate size of Brand F Slings per manufacturer guidelines. Once measurement and sizing was determined the slings were labeled and placed in the resident rooms for use. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by observation of the mechanical lift manuals and folders at the nursing stations on the first and second floor. On 2/22/24, the Director of Nursing, ADON, RN Manager and FNP conducted a 100% audit of remaining residents who utilize Brand B mechanical lift. These residents were evaluated and measured per Brand A sling guidelines for accurate sizing and slings were labeled and placed in the residents' rooms. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by observation of the mechanical lift manuals and folders at the nursing stations on the first and second floor. Audits were reviewed and staff were interviewed. On 2/22/24, the nursing staff were educated by the Director of Nursing, ADON, RN Nurse Manager and FNP on the safety and proper use of mechanical lifts and slings in accordance with the facility policy Safe Lifting Movement of Resident and Brand F Lift and Brand B lift and sling manufacturer guidelines. Nursing Staff were notified by the Director of Nursing and ADON that they were not to utilize the mechanical lift until they have completed the Mechanical Lift Competencies with 100% compliance to competency. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of education documentation and interviews with all direct care staff on duty. On 2/22/24 the DON, ADON, RN Manager and FNP provided education to nursing staff Utilizing the Competency Assessment Lifting Machine, using a Mechanical Brand F Lift and the Brand B Mechanical Lift Competency with return demonstration on use of the mechanical lift and slings according to manufacturer recommendations 100% compliance to the competency. Nursing Staff were notified by the Director of Nursing and ADON that they were not to utilize the mechanical lifts until they have completed the Mechanical Lifts Competencies with 100% compliance to competency. On 2/25/24 two CNAs from the second floor and two CNAs from the third floor were observed by the surveyor demonstrating the appropriate use of the full body lift using Brand B and Brand F mechanical lifts. On 2/23/24 The Brand F Lift is used exclusively on the third floor. The manufacturer guidelines were placed at the third floor nurses station. The Brand B lift is used exclusively on the second floor. The manufacturer guidelines were placed at the second floor nurses station. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by observations of the lifts being used on the second and third floors. On 2/23/24 A Root Cause analysis was completed by the Director of Nursing on the accident related to the mechanical lift due to the failure to ensure that Lifts and Slings manufacturer guidelines were followed. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by review of documentation of the root cause and interview with the Director of Nursing. On 2/23/24 Mechanical Lift and Sling Competencies have been added to the general orientation packet for all nursing staff and are being completed upon hire prior to resident care and completed quarterly and observed periodically thereafter per policy. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by record review and interview with the Director of Nursing. On 2/22/24 The facility policy Safe Lifting Movement of Residents was reviewed by the Director of Nursing and found to meet professional standards. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the policy. On 2/22/24 Ad-hoc (unplanned) QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) meeting held with Executive Director, Interim Nursing Home Administrator, Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing, RN Manager, AL/MC (Assisted Living/Memory Care) Director, Maintenance Director, Director of Human Resources and Facility Administrative Assistant. An audit plan was developed and approved by committee and audit processes were initiated and will continue. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the Ad-hoc QAPI meeting and interviews with the Director of Nursing. On 2/22/24 Audits/Observation for all residents who utilize the Brand F and Brand B Lift was initiated by the Director of Nursing, ADON, RN Manager to ensure the proper sling is utilized for the compatible lift and that the resident was transferred by staff per manufacture guidelines. Audits have a goal of 100% compliance. Audits will be completed weekly for three months then monthly for nine months. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by observations of staff demonstrating the use of mechanical lifts according to manufacturer's operating manual, and observation of the manuals located at the nurse's station on the second and third floor. On 2/23/24 the Director of Nursing informed the Medical Director of the IJ and the removal plan. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the communication with the Medical Director.
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 F0726 (Tag F0726)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, facility's policies and procedures review, the facility failed to ensure the nursing staff...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, facility's policies and procedures review, the facility failed to ensure the nursing staff had the appropriate competencies and skills set to ensure residents' safety during transfers with mechanical lifts. Resident #1 was dependent on staff and used a mechanical lift for transfer. On 2/1/24 Resident #1 fell from the lift during transfer, struck her head on the bed and the floor. Resident #1 sustained a laceration to the right temporal area requiring an emergent transfer to an acute care hospital for evaluation and treatment. The failure to ensure staff had the appropriate training, competencies, and skills sets to safely use the mechanical lift created an unsafe environment of avoidable accidents or falls with a likelihood to result in serious injury (i.e. fracture, head injury), impairment or death of residents who use mechanical lifts for transfers and resulted in the determination of Immediate Jeopardy. On 2/23/24 at 5:35 p.m., the Executive Director was notified of the determination of Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) and provided the IJ templates. The Immediate Jeopardy began on 2/1/24. On 2/25/24 at 3:45 p.m., after verification of an acceptable Immediate Jeopardy removal plan, the Immediate Jeopardy was removed as of 2/25/24. The scope and severity were reduced to no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not Immediate Jeopardy. The findings included: Cross reference to F600, F689, and F835. Review of the facility's accidents and incidents investigations showed on 2/1/24 at 11:15 a.m., Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Staff B and CNA Staff C were transferring Resident #1 from bed to wheelchair with a mechanical lift. Midway through the transfer Resident #1 slid out of the sling. One of the CNAs tried to grab Resident #1 as she saw her sliding out. The resident potentially hit her head on the side of the bed and potentially on the carpeted floor. The resident sustained a laceration to the top area on the right side of her head. Resident #1 remained conscious during emergency treatment and evaluation. Resident #1 was transferred to the hospital via EMS (Emergency Medical Services). The facility's investigation summary noted Resident #1 slid to the right side between the top and bottom sling rope toward the floor. The resident landed on the right side between the mechanical lift legs with the resident's left leg still in the sling which was attached to the lift. The mechanical lift and the sling used to transfer Resident #1 were inspected with no abnormalities found. The facility's investigation conclusion noted, After a thorough investigation and review of the lifting machine policy & [and] procedure the facility could not substantiate neglect. As a precautionary measure each lift will be checked by an outside licensed contractor. Each staff member in the nursing department will get additional training on mechanical lift transfer. The investigation did not include verification staff used safe transfer techniques, or the right brand and size of sling to transfer Resident #1 with the mechanical lift. As part of their investigation, the facility obtained statements from CNA Staff B, and CNA Staff C, and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff A who evaluated Resident #1 after the fall. On 2/1/24 CNA Staff B wrote in a statement Resident #1, slid off and came out from the sling on one side. My coworker (CNA Staff C) catch her but resident hit the floor. We called the nurse. On 2/1/24 CNA Staff C wrote in a statement, While transferring the resident from the bed to the wheelchair she slide [sic] out of the sling and her head hit the carpet floor. I tried to catch her but the action was so quick I couldn't. On 2/1/24 LPN Staff A wrote in a statement, The resident fell out of the [brand name] sling while being transferred to her wheelchair. On 2/21/23 at 10:00 a.m., CNA Staff C was interviewed with the assistance of Unit Manager Staff D translating in CNA Staff C's native language. CNA Staff C said on 2/1/24 she was on the opposite side of the bed when Resident #1 fell from the lift before she could get to the other side of the bed after the resident was lifted. She said CNA, Staff B had already moved the lift away from the bed and had started turning the resident. She stated the resident slid from the top of the sling and hit her head on the bed and the floor. CNA Staff C did not say the brand or size of sling used to transfer Resident #1. On 2/21/24 at 10:15 a.m., CNA Staff B was interviewed with the assistance of Minimum Data Set Staff I in CNA Staff B's native language. CNA Staff B said Staff C was coming around the bed and tried to catch the resident as she fell but the incident occurred to quickly. Staff B said Staff C threw her hands in the air and said she did not do it; she never touched the resident and it was not her fault. CNA Staff B did not say the brand or size of sling used to transfer Resident #1. On 2/21/24 at approximately 11:00 a.m., during a tour of the facility a Brand A mechanical lift was observed in use on the third floor of the facility and a Brand B mechanical lift was observed in use on the second floor of the facility. On 2/21/24 at 2:15 p.m., the mechanical lift and sling used to transfer Resident #1 on 2/1/24 were observed with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). The mechanical lift was a Brand A full body mechanical lift and the sling was a Brand C size small four-point sling. The ADON verified on 2/1/24 a Brand A full body mechanical lift was used with a Brand C sling to transfer Resident #1. The ADON said the CNAs undergo an annual competency which includes the use of mechanical lifts. The ADON said after a full investigation, the facility determined the wrong size of sling had been used to transfer Resident #1 which caused her to fall from the sling, and on 2/1/24 the facility reeducated the nursing staff on the use of mechanical lifts, using the facility's policy titled, Lifting Machine, Using a Mechanical. The in-service did not include the manufacturer's safety specifications for Brand A mechanical lift even though the policy and procedure for Lifting Machine, Using a Mechanical specified the purpose of the procedure was to establish the general principles of safe lifting using a mechanical lifting device, and was not a substitute for manufacturer's training or instructions. The facility provided the manufacturer's operating manual for Brand A mechanical lift. The operating manual noted, ONLY (Brand A) slings must be used on (Brand A) mechanical lifts. The use of non-company (Brand A) slings could be unsafe and may result in injury to the patient or caregiver. The facility provided the manufacturer's manual for the Brand C sling used to transfer Resident #1 with the Brand A mechanical lift. The operating manual noted under warning, [Brand C] slings may be used with [Brand C] lift only. Using other manufacturer's patients lifts with [Brand C] slings is also prohibited. Review of the Operating Manual for Brand B mechanical lift noted, Warning! Using other manufacturers patient lifts with (Brand B) slings is prohibited. Review of CNA Staff B's employee file revealed a Certified Nursing Assistant Training Program Skilled Checklist dated 1/26/24. The checklist included, Mechanical Lift in the skills satisfactorily demonstrated. Review of CNA Staff C's employee file revealed on 1/10/24 she satisfactorily demonstrated the use of a Mechanical lift. The skills checklist did not include a step-by-step demonstration of safe transfer with the mechanical lifts, including the right size and brand of slings in accordance with each mechanical lift's operating manual. LPN Staff A signed the forms verifying the CNAs successfully demonstrated the skills for Mechanical lifts. On 2/22/24 at 3:00 p.m., in an interview LPN Staff A verified she signed the skills checklist for CNAs Staff B and Staff C. When asked about the process to verify competency, LPN Staff A said she demonstrates the transfer with a mechanical lift for the CNAs, then she has the CNA complete the task. When asked to describe the step-by- step process, LPN Staff A said she would only open the legs of the base when lowering the resident on the wheelchair. She said she would not open the base of the lift when it was placed under the bed. LPN Staff A was not able to describe how to select the correct brand or size of sling for each resident. She said she would use the weight of the resident. Review of Brand A mechanical lift operating manual instructions showed, ALWAYS, (except when lifting a patient from the floor) while lifting or lowering a patient, maintain the base unit legs spread to the widest position and ensure that the casters are unlocked. 2. On 2/21/24 at 1:30 p.m., CNAs Staff E and Staff C were observed transferring Resident #2 with a Brand A full body mechanical lift. The Director of Nursing (DON) and Unit Manager Staff D were present during the observation. The sling used to transfer the resident did not have a label, making it impossible to determine the brand or the size of the sling. A label affixed to the mechanical lift specified, Operating Instructions . Read User manual before operating. Staff E was observed operating the lift. She closed the legs of the base and placed them under the bed. CNA Staff E did not open the legs of the base lift after placing them under the bed. CNAs Staff E and Staff C placed the resident in the sling. CNA Staff E pulled out the lift from under the bed. She did not open the legs of the base and wheeled the resident approximately three feet to the wheelchair. CNA Staff C tilted the wheelchair on its back wheels as CNA Staff E lowered the resident with the mechanical lift. While observing the CNAs transferring Resident #2 with the mechanical lift, Unit Manager Staff D said the sling used to transfer Resident #2 was not labeled making it impossible to tell the brand of the sling or the size of the sling. Unit Manager Staff D did not intervene to ensure the CNAs used the right brand and size of sling or followed the manufacturer's safety instructions during the transfer. The DON did not intervene to ensure staff followed safe transfer technique according to the manufacturer's safety instructions. On 2/21/24 at 2:30 p.m., in an interview CNA Staff E verified she did not open the legs of the base as per the manufacturer's safety instructions. She said on 2/1/24 after Resident #1 fell from the lift, she was given a paper to read regarding mechanical lifts. Review of the in-service for Mechanical lift use showed CNA Staff E and CNA Staff C attended the in-service on 2/1/24. The facility's policy and procedure Lifting Machine, Using a Mechanical used for the in-service did not include the manufacturer's safety specifications for Brand A mechanical lift or Brand B mechanical lift and was not followed by a competency evaluation. 3. On 2/21/24 at approximately 11:00 a.m., during a tour of the facility a Brand A mechanical lift was observed in use on the third floor of the facility and a Brand B mechanical lift was observed in use on the second floor of the facility. On 2/21/24 at approximately 1:35 p.m., Unit Manager Staff D said Central Supply Staff H places the slings in the residents' rooms. On 2/21/24 at 2:15 p.m., The ADON said Central Supply Staff H was responsible for ensuring the correct sling was used for each resident. The ADON said Central Supply Staff H was currently on vacation and not available for a telephone interview. On 2/22/24 at 11:15 a.m., a joint interview was conducted with the Director of Rehabilitation, the Registered Nurse Senior Clinical Specialist, and the DON. The DON verified the facility used a Brand A full body mechanical lift on the third floor to transfer Residents # 1, #2, #3, and #4. She said a Brand B full body mechanical lift is used on the second floor to transfer Resident #5. On 2/22/24 at 12:30 p.m., a brand D medium size sling was observed in Resident #1's room (Third floor). In an interview, Resident #1's daughter said since the fall from the mechanical lift on 2/1/24 the facility has been using the Brand D medium size sling for transfers. Photographic evidence obtained. On 2/22/24 at 1:10 p.m., Resident #5 was observed in bed in her room on the third floor. A Brand C, size large mesh sling was observed over the resident's wheelchair. In an interview Resident #5 said she had a smaller sling that did not fit between her legs. She said, They brought me this sling and it is too big. Resident #5 said, They don't know what they are doing, I was never measured for a sling. They were going by weight alone. On 2/22/24 at approximately 3:05 p.m., the DON provided a list of Central Supply Staff H trainings. The training included one hour online in-service titled Transferring, Repositioning, and Lifting Residents safely. The training was dated 5/1/2016. The DON did not provide the content of the in-service or a competency evaluation showing Central Supply Staff H was trained, competent and had the skills set to evaluate each resident and determine the correct brand and size of sling according to each manufacturer's specification. The DON could not provide documentation Residents #1(Date of admission [DATE]), #2 (Date of admission 5/23/23), #3 (Date of admission 5/17/23), #4 (Date of admission 8/29/22), and #5 (Date of admission [DATE]) were assessed for the correct brand and size of slings before or after Resident #1's fall from the mechanical lift on 2/1/24. On 2/25/24 at 3:45 p.m., the immediate actions implemented by the facility and verified by the surveyor included: On 2/22/24 Brand F Lift and compatible slings were obtained from a sister community; Maintenance Director inspected The Brand F lift. Director of Nursing and RN Manager examined slings per manufacture guidelines. On 2/25/24 the surveyor observed Brand B lift was used by facility staff on the second floor, and Brand F on the third floor. On 2/22/24 Brand A mechanical lift used to transfer Resident #1 was removed from service. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through observation. On 2/22/24 Resident #1 currently resides in the facility. The Director of Nursing and RN Manager in the presence of the Occupational Therapist performed resident measurements for the Brand F lift sling to determine proper sizing per the Brand F manufacturer guidelines to utilize with the Brand F Lift. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified documentation of the evaluation for the right brand and size of sling for Resident #1 and observation of the sling in the resident's room. On 2/22/24, the Director of Nursing and Registered Nurse (RN) Management determined that Brand F large sling fit resident #1 the best utilizing the measurements and observation of the residents' positioning in the sling. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified by observation of the sling in the resident's room. On 2/22/24 The Director of Nursing, ADON, RN Manager and FNP (Family Nurse Practitioner) conducted a 100% audit of remaining residents who utilize the Brand F mechanical lift. These residents were evaluated and measured for appropriate size of Brand F slings per manufacturer guidelines. Once measurement and sizing were determined the slings were labeled and placed in the resident rooms for use. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the audits and evaluation of the residents for the right brand and size of sling. On 2/22/24, the Director of Nursing, ADON, RN Manager and FNP conducted a 100% audit of remaining residents who utilize Brand B mechanical lift. These residents were evaluated and measured for appropriate size of Brand B sling guidelines for accurate sizing and slings were labeled and placed in the residents' rooms. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the audits and evaluation of the residents for the right brand and size of sling. On 2/22/24, for the Brand F lift and slings that are exclusively utilized on the third floor and in the accordance with the facility policy Safe Lifting Movement of Resident and Brand F lift and sling manufacturer guidelines, the Director of Nursing, ADON, RN Manager and FNP conducting training to the nursing staff utilizing the Competency Assessment Lifting Machine, using a Mechanical Brand F Lift which included a return demonstration on use of the mechanical lift and slings according to manufacturer recommendations. Nursing Staff were notified by the Director of Nursing and ADON that staff are required to complete the training and competencies before their next shift. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of education and observation of staff using mechanical lifts in accordance with manufacturer's safety instructions. On 2/22/24 For the Brand B lift and slings that are exclusively utilized on the second floor and in accordance with the facility policy Safe Lifting Movement of Residents the DON, ADON, RN Manager and FNP provided education to nursing staff Utilizing the Competency Assessment Lifting Machine for the Brand B Mechanical Lift Competency with return demonstration on use of the mechanical lift and slings according to manufacturer recommendations. Nursing Staff were notified by the Director of Nursing and ADON that staff are required to complete the training and competencies before their next shift. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the competencies and observation of staff using mechanical lifts in accordance with manufacurer's safety instructions. On 2/22/24, the DON revised the mechanical lift competency training guide to include a more extensive step by step training which was reviewed and approved by the Administrator. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the competency training guide, step by step training and interview with the DON. On 2/22/24, a Root Cause analysis was completed on the accident by the Director of Nursing related to the mechanical lift due to the failure to ensure that Lifts and Slings manufacturer guidelines were followed. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the root cause analysis. On 2/22/24 Updated Mechanical Lift and Sling Competencies have been added to the general orientation packet for all nursing staff for completion upon hire prior to resident care, completed quarterly and observed periodically thereafter per policy. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified thorugh review of general orientation packet. The facility policy Safe Lifting Movement of Residents was reviewed by the Director of Nursing. The policy includes competency training of nursing personnel. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the facility's policy. On 2/22/24 Brand F Lift/Sling and Brand B Lift/Sling competency training tools were reviewed and updated by the Director of Nursing and ADON and approved by the Administrator. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the competency training tools. On 2/22/24, an Ad-hoc (unplanned) QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) meeting held with Executive Director, Interim Nursing Home Administrator, Director of Nursing, Assistant Director of Nursing, RN Manager, AL/MC (Assisted Living/Memory Care) Director, Maintenance Director, Director of Human Resources, and Facility Administrative Assistant on Mechanical Lift Competency Training. An audit and direct care observation plan was developed and approved by the committee. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the Ad-Hoc QAPI meeting and review of the audit forms. On 2/23/24, the Director of Nursing informed the Medical Director of the removal plan. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through interview with the DON. On 2/23/24, an observation of all residents who require a mechanical lift for transfer assistance is ongoing and will be completed by the Director of Nursing, ADON and RN manager to ensure the proper sling is utilized with the compatible lift, that the transfer of resident using the mechanical lift meets the lift competency demonstrated by staff. Audits have a goal of 100% compliance. Audits are completed weekly for three months then monthly for nine months. On 2/25/24 the surveyor verified through review of the audits and competency evaluations completed.
Apr 2023 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide oxygen therapy, in accordance with phys...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide oxygen therapy, in accordance with physician orders, for 1 (Resident #251) of 1 resident reviewed. Failure to follow prescribed oxygen therapy may result in inadequate oxygen treatment or an increased risk of respiratory complications. The findings included : Facility policy titled Oxygen Administration, Revised October 2010, stated the purpose of the procedure was to provide guidelines for safe oxygen administration. Preparation: 1. Verify that there is a physician order for this procedure. Review the physician's orders or facility protocol for oxygen administration. 2. Review the resident care plan to assess for any special needs of the resident. 3. Assemble the equipment and supplies as needed. A review of the medical record revealed Resident #251 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Asthma, and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. The physician's orders dated 4/6/23 included to administer oxygen at three liters via nasal cannula every shift. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] noted the resident's cognition was severely impaired. Resident #251 required extensive assistance of staff for all activities of daily living, including bed mobility and transfer. On 4/18/23 at 3:50 p.m., Resident #251 was observed sitting in a recliner. The oxygen concentrator was set on two liters and the nasal cannula was draped across the bed. Resident #251's wife said the oxygen was new since being in the hospital and Resident #251 was to wear it all the time. On 4/19/23 at 10:07 a.m., Resident #251 was observed in bed wearing the nasal cannula. The oxygen concentrator was set at two liters. On 4/19/23 at 1:21 p.m., resident #251 was observed sitting in his recliner wearing his oxygen. The oxygen concentrator was set at two liters. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the concentrator was set on two liters. She said the concentrator should be set at three liters as ordered by the physician. On 4/19/23 at 4:24 p.m., Registered Nurse (RN) Staff C, stated the nurse is to check the residents oxygen level/setting at the start of each shift. She did not realize the oxygen was at two liters.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0700 (Tag F0700)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, record review, staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to ensure 1 ( Resident #22), of 2 residents with bed rails were assessed for alternative interventions prior to ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to ensure 1 ( Resident #22), of 2 residents with bed rails were assessed for alternative interventions prior to the use of bed rails. The facility failed to provide documentation they had informed the resident and/or their representative of the risks and benefits of bed rails, obtain an informed consent prior to use of the bed rails and to conduct periodic maintenance of the bed rails to ensure they remained safe for residents use. The findings included: The facility's policy titled Bed Safety and Bed Rails, Revised August 2022 policy stated, Resident beds meet the safety specifications established by the Hospital Bed Safety Workgroup. The use of bed rails is prohibited unless the criteria for use of bed rails have been met. The Facility Policy interpretation and implementation further describes the circumstances for bed rail use. In total, 11 items are identified prior to use of bed rails. The residents sleeping environment is evaluated by the interdisciplinary team; Bed frames, mattresses and bed rails are checked for compatibility and size prior to use; Regardless of the mattress type, width, length and or depth, the bed frame, bed rail and mattress will leave no gap wide enough to entrap a residents head or body. Any gaps in the bed system are within the safety dimensions established by the FDA; Maintenance staff routinely inspects all beds and related equipment to identify risks and problems including potential entrapment risks; The use of bed rails or side rails, including temporarily raising the side rails for episodic use during care is prohibited unless the criteria for use of bedrails have been met, including attempts to use alternatives, interdisciplinary evaluation, resident assessment, and informed consent; Prior to the installation or use of a side or bed rail, alternatives to the use of side or bed rails are attempted. Alternatives may include, roll guards, foam bumpers, lowering the bed or the use of concave mattresses to reduce rolling off the bed. On 4/17/23 at 3:08 p.m., Resident #22 was noted to have quarter side rails elevated on both sides of the bed. On 4/18/23 at 3:59 p.m., Resident #22 stated she did not request side rails, they were on the bed when she was admitted . Both side rails were noted in the up position. Resident #22 stated she was not asked if she wanted them, no alternatives were attempted and did not sign any paperwork requesting side or bed rails. On 4/19/23 at 10:13 a.m., The Rehabilitation Director stated over the past three weeks, they began to assess new admissions to see if the resident would benefit from the use of side rails. Residents are not assessed for any interventions prior to requesting maintenance install the side rails. Resident #22 had not been assessed. On 4/19/23 at 10:44 a.m., the Director of Facility and Property Management stated the maintenance department does not check for entrapment or assess beds for side rails. Their only role is to put the rails on or take them off. The nursing department will make a maintenance request through the TELS system ( a system designed to enter and track maintenance requests) to either install or remove the bed rails. If there is not a nursing request entered through TELS, we do not touch them. On 4/19/23 at 1:35 p.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) stated the therapy department would complete an evaluation and indicate if the resident would benefit from side rails. If so then the nursing department will obtain a physician order, provide education to the resident and family to obtain their consent for the use of rails and understanding the risks associated with side rail use. The nurse will assess the mobility, purpose of the rails and make a determination if the side rails were indicated for the resident. It is therapy that determines what interventions would be attempted prior to side rails. The Director of Nursing confirmed Resident #22 did not have a consent or education regarding the safety and risks associated with bed rails until 4/19/2023. Alternative interventions had not been attempted and the resident bed had not been assessed for areas of entrapment. On 4/19/23 at 2:12 p.m., During a follow up interview, the facility Maintenance Director stated his department is only responsible for getting the work order and either installing or removing the bed rails. Maintenance does not do any assessment, evaluation or periodic inspection of the rail once installed. The maintenance director stated he did not have any history of requesting the side rails be installed or removed from the bed for Resident #22. Reviewed bed rail policy, which stated maintenance staff routinely inspect all bed and related equipment to identify risks and problems including potential entrapment risks. Maintenance director stated we do not do that. On 4/20/23 at 10:52 a.m., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff A, stated we used to get consents signed for everyone when a resident was admitted . Recently side rail use has been decreased so we don't offer siderails. The rails used to stay in place when a resident was discharged , but since the new company has taken over the process has been changed. On 4/20/23 at 10:57 a.m., Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Staff D, stated if a resident is assisted back to bed the side rails are placed in the up position. On 4/20/23 at 11:03 a.m., Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Staff G, stated when a resident is in bed the side rails are placed in the up position. On 4/20/23 at 12:39 p.m., the Assistant Maintenance Director stated an outside provided the facility with an annual assessment of facility equipment completed in October 2022, which included the beds for safety. The audit does not address specific resident needs or interventions for side rail use. The beds are assessed for safety and function but are not assessed for side rails, fit, gaps or compatibility with different mattresses. On 4/20/23 at 12:51 p.m., the Director of Nursing confirmed Resident #22 did not have a consent or education regarding the safety and risks associated with bed rails until 4/19/2023. Alternative interventions had not been attempted and the resident bed had not been assessed for areas of entrapment.
Aug 2021 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

MDS Data Transmission (Tag F0640)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete and transmit a discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment upon discharge for 2 (Resident #3 and #4) of 3 sampled discharged...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete and transmit a discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment upon discharge for 2 (Resident #3 and #4) of 3 sampled discharged residents. The findings included: 1. Review of the clinical record revealed Resident #3 had an admission date of 3/9/21. The interdisciplinary notes noted the resident was discharged to an assisted living facility on 3/31/21. The clinical record lacked documentation the facility completed and submitted a discharge MDS assessment as required. 2. Review of the clinical record revealed Resident #4 had an admission date of 3/4/21. Review of the interdisciplinary notes revealed the resident waived her 48 hours' notice of Medicare non-coverage and was discharged home on 3/31/21. The clinical record lacked documentation a discharge MDS assessment was completed and submitted as required. On 8/18/21 at 1:45 p.m., in an interview the MDS coordinator verified residents #3 and #4 were discharged on 3/31/21 and the facility did not complete a discharge MDS assessment as required. She said the facility had 14 days after discharge to complete and submit a discharge assessment.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, staff interview, and review of facility policies and procedure, the facility failed to identify and dispose of expired medications to prevent use in 3 of 4 medication carts and 1...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, staff interview, and review of facility policies and procedure, the facility failed to identify and dispose of expired medications to prevent use in 3 of 4 medication carts and 1 of 2 medication rooms reviewed for proper storage of medications. This has the potential for expired medications to be administered to residents. The facility failed to ensure 1 of 4 medication carts was locked when out of the direct supervision of the nurse. The findings included: The facility policy, Medication Storage in the Facility, Effective Date: March 2019 documented, Drugs dispensed in the manufacturer's original container will be labeled with the manufacturer's expiration date .The nurse will check the expiration date of each medication before administering it. No expired medication will be administered to a resident. All expired medications will be removed from the active supply and destroyed in the facility, regardless of amount remaining. On 8/16/21 at 9:40 a.m., during an observation on the second floor, the medication cart was not locked and was unattended. The medication cart remained unlocked and unattended for 4 minutes. **Photographic Evidence Obtained** On 8/16/21 at 9:45 a.m., Registered Nurse (RN) Staff C confirmed she had left the medication cart unlocked and unattended. On 8/16/21 at 10:01 a.m., observation of the 2nd floor medication cart #1 with Registered Nurse (RN) Staff A showed: One box of Mucinex 600 milligrams (mg) with the expiration date 5/2021. Two unidentified capsules in a pill card with no medication label. **Photographic Evidence Obtained** One bottle of pneumonia vaccine with a label indicating to keep refrigerated. **Photographic Evidence Obtained** One bottle of vitamin B12 with the expiration date 7/2021. **Photographic Evidence Obtained** One bottle of loratadine 10 mg tablets with the expiration date 6/2021. **Photographic Evidence Obtained** One bottle of zinc sulfate 50 mg with the expiration date 3/2021. **Photographic Evidence Obtained** The findings were verified by RN Staff A during the observation. **Photographic evidence obtained** On 8/16/21 at 10:48 a.m., observation of the 2nd floor medication cart #2 with RN Staff C showed: One bottle of Aspirin 81 mg with the expiration date 3/2021. **Photographic Evidence Obtained** One bottle of Melatonin 10 mg with the expiration date 6/2021. The findings were verified with RN Staff C at the time of the observation. **Photographic evidence obtained** On 8/16/21 at 10:54 a.m., observation in the 2nd floor medication room with RN Staff C revealed: Two boxes of Mucinex 600 mg with the expiration date 6/2021. 12 bottles of Vitamin C 500 mg with the expiration date 6/2021. **Photographic Evidence Obtained** The findings were verified with RN Staff C during the observation. On 8/16/21 at 11:30 a.m., observation of the 3rd floor medication cart #1 with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff B revealed: One bottle of Melatonin with the expiration date 6/2021. **Photographic Evidence Obtained** One bottle of vitamin B12 with the expiration date 7/2021. **Photographic Evidence Obtained** One bottle of Vitamin C with the expiration date 6/2021. **Photographic Evidence Obtained** The findings were verified with Licensed Practical Nurse Staff B during the observation.
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

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, observation, and record review, the facility failed to store and distribute food in a sanitary manner for 1...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, observation, and record review, the facility failed to store and distribute food in a sanitary manner for 1 (3rd floor) of 2 floors observed. The facility also failed to ensure proper cleaning and sanitization and prevent cross contamination of dishes and cookware. This has the potential to result in foodborne illness and affect 28 of 28 residents residing at the facility who consume an oral diet. The findings included: 1. On 8/16/21 at 9:50 a.m., during an initial tour of the second-floor kitchen with Sous Chef Staff E the following was observed: The inscription on the dishmachine data plate specified the wash and rinse for a high temp machine should be respectively 150 F (degrees Fahrenheit) and 180 F. Kitchen Assistant Staff G donned a pair of gloves, placed a tray of dirty plastic lids into the dishwasher and started the machine. The temperature gauges read 140 degrees F for the wash and 156 degrees F for the final rinse. Staff G removed the tray from the dishwasher with his gloved hands. Staff G gathered the lids against his uniform, placed them in a tray and transported them to the kitchen to be used. The dishwasher operation instructions read, Warm-up cycles: For a typical daily start-up, it may be necessary to run the machine through 3 cycles to ensure that all of the cold water is out of the system and to verify that the unit is operating correctly . Review of the 24-5 Minute Weekly Training Script (December 2010) read, If you have a hot water sanitizing machine . the dishmachine's final rinse step kills germs on dish surfaces-this is the sanitizing step. In order for the water to sanitize properly it has to be 180 degrees as measured on the temperature gauge. Check the gauge at least once daily to make sure the water is hot enough. Be sure to log the temperature on the dishmachine temperature log. Review of the dishmachine temperature log for August 2021 failed to reveal documentation the temperature was checked on 8/16/21. The sprayer hose for the sink in front of the dishwasher was had a large accumulation of caked debris. **Photographic evidence obtained** The rinse agent bottle above the sink had large amount of black substance on the bottle and label. **Photographic evidence obtained** On 8/16/21 at 10:00 a.m., observation of the dry storage room in the second-floor main kitchen with Sous Chef Staff E revealed the following: Six cardboard boxes containing foam cups, foam containers, and lids were stored on the floor. **Photographic evidence obtained** A lunch box with a bottled water was stored on the shelf with the dry food supplies. Staff E removed the lunch box which he said belonged to Staff G who was operating the dishwasher. He instructed Staff G to take his lunch box to the employee lounge. On 8/16/21 at 10:15 a.m., the walk-in refrigerator was observed with Sous Chef Staff E. An unlabeled container of thick, red sauce which Staff E identified as barbeque sauce was stored uncovered in the refrigerator. Staff E said it should never have been stored uncovered. A container of coffee cake extract had a label which read, use by 8/14/21. 2. On 8/16/21 from 12:00 p.m., to 1:00 p.m., observed the meal distribution on the 3rd floor. The food arrived from the second-floor kitchen in an electric hot box. Server Staff H kept containers of sweet potatoes, broccoli, cauliflower, and ground beef on the stove top au [NAME]-[NAME] (Pots of food placed in larger pot of hot water). He placed a packet of soft slices of cheese on the counter next to the stove. Staff H did not take the temperature of the food when it arrived from the kitchen. Staff H washed his hands and donned a pair of gloves. He was observed touching the handle of the hot box, the refrigerator, the microwave, resting his hands on the counter and returning to the line to serve lunch. Staff H used the same gloved hands to prepare 3 cheese steak sandwiches with the cheese on the counter and microwaved the sandwiches. He continued to plate food, rearrange steamed cauliflower and broccoli on the plates with his gloved hands. He removed the gloves, washed his hands for approximately 10 seconds and donned a clean pair of gloves. Staff H continued to go from the hot box to the refrigerator and the microwave, touch the counter, a dish rag and plate food with his gloved hands. He peeled sweet potatoes, continued to rearrange steamed broccoli and cauliflower on the plates and prepare sandwiches with his gloved hands. He did not change his gloves, wash, or sanitize his hands after touching work surfaces. Server Staff H was observed preparing a peanut butter sandwich with his gloved hands. A resident's private assistant walked into the meal preparation area, handed him a tray with leftover food from a resident's room. Server Staff H took the tray, placed it on a table. He did not remove the gloves, wash, or sanitize his hands and continued to prepare the peanut butter sandwich. On 8/16/21 at 12:25 p.m., in an interview, Server Staff H said he came in at 11:55 a.m., and did not get a chance to take the temperature of the food since he had to get ready to serve the food. He said he would take the temperature of the leftovers after all the residents had been served. Server Staff H verified he touched the food with the gloved hands after touching contaminated surfaces. He said, I understand. It's for bacteria and stuff. On 8/16/21 at 12:55 p.m., Staff H said now that everyone had been served, he would take the temperature. The soft cheese on the counter was 70 F. Server Staff H said, It's not cold enough. On 8/16/21 at 1:30 p.m., in an interview, the Front House Supervisor Staff I said the expectation was for the server to take the food temperature once it reached the floor to make sure the food was still at the proper temperature. If not, the food needed to be reheated. He said the cheese should never be left out on the counter and needed to stay cold to avoid the danger zone. He explained cold food items need to be kept under 40 degrees F. He said the danger zone was from 41 F to 141 F when bacteria grew on the food. He said the cheese should have been kept on ice. He said the servers were expected to wear gloves when handling the food but needed to wash their hands and change the gloves when going from one item to the next. He said it was not acceptable for the servers to touch surfaces and not wash their hands or change their gloves. The Front House Supervisor Staff I said the servers were trained frequently on sanitation, food service, use of gloves, and handwashing but the facility did not keep a record of the training. Review of the meal temperature policy (date of issue January 1, 2021) noted, . When food is transported to a remote serving location such as a household, neighborhood, etc., final cook temperatures are taken and recorded in the kitchen; temperatures are taken and recorded again once transported to service location and prior to serving. If temperatures are not optimal at the receiving location, respond accordingly to correct. Record ending temperatures or at one hour intervals during service. Temperatures below or above standards may indicate procedural and/or equipment problems. Address any concerns noted . Review of the safety and sanitation glove usage policy with a revision date of February 2018 read, Disposable gloves shall be utilized as necessary during food service operations when handling ready to eat foods and when preparing food for use. To assure safe sanitary conditions in the preparations and service of the food for patients/residents and customers of the facility. To prevent contamination of food products from bacteria and to prevent the possibility of foodborne illness. Single use gloves shall be used for only one task, and then discarded. Single use gloves should always be changed when moving from one task to another. Remove gloves when: Moving to another new task or work area . Going into walk-in or reach in coolers. Touching soiled food contact areas . 3. On 8/18/21 at 10:10 a.m., through 10:30 a.m., observed Kitchen Staff K operating the dishwasher and process loads of dishes. He donned a pair of gloves, scraped food from the dirty dishes, placed them in a rack and put them through the dishwasher. Staff K used the same gloves to remove the clean dishes from the machine. The wash temperature of the first and second load was respectively 130 F and 140 F. On 8/18/21 at 10:25 a.m., Kitchen Staff K said the facility used a high temp dishwasher and the heat was the sanitizing agent. He said the machine needed to reach 180 F to sanitize the dishes. He said they ensured the dishes reached the proper temperature by placing a heat strip on the surface of the dishes. Once sanitized properly, the heat strip turned black. Staff K continued to scrape food from plates, put them through the dishwasher and remove the clean plates with the same gloves. On 8/18/21 at 10:30 a.m., Chef Staff L intervened and told Staff K he had just cross contaminated all the clean dishes. On 8/18/21 at 10:35 a.m., the heat strip on a clean cup from a load of clean dishes remained clear, it did not turn black. Staff K said the machine may not be functioning properly even though the rinse temperature reached 180 F. He said the heat strip should have turned black. The label on the strip indicated it would turn black once the temperature reached 160 F. On 8/18/21 at 10:35 a.m., shared observation of the dishwasher conducted on 8/16/21 during the initial tour of the kitchen when the temperature gauge read 140 F for the wash and 156 F for the final rinse with Chef Staff L. He said he will have the dishwasher serviced. On 8/18/21 at 1:00 p.m., the Assistant Director of Dining Services said the vendor who supplied the chemical for the dishwasher was at the facility on 8/16/21 and checked the dishwasher. He provided a report which he said was from 8/16/21. The report noted the final rinse temperature was only reaching 171 F, however the thermal label turned black on first run. Review of the preventive maintenance instructions for the dishwasher read in part, . a common problem has to do with temperatures being too low. Verify that the water temperatures coming to your dishmachine match the requirements listed on the machine data plate. There can be a variety of reasons why your water temperature could be too low, and you should discuss it with a qualified service agency to determine what can be done . 4. On 8/18/21 at 10:40 a.m., observation of the three compartments (wash, rinse and sanitize) sink showed the facility used Quaternary as their sanitizing agent. The cleaning procedures posted on the wall above the sink read in part, Pre-scrape, wash, rinse, sanitize 1 minute, air dry. The Quaternary Sanitizer testing procedures posted on the wall above the sink read in part, . Testing must be done in sanitizer solution that is clean, fresh and at room temperature 75 F . Tear off a 1 ½ -2-inch strip of test paper . Hold the test strip in the solution for 10 seconds . Do not move the test paper around, as this will give a false high concentration reading. Remove test strip from solution . Hold test strip up against the color chart on the side of the test strip container. Always refer to the color range on the QT-10 Test Kit for accurate color matching of strips. The correct reading must be 200-400 ppm (part per million). If the solution test does not meet the 200-400 ppm requirements, test again. Take corrective action if the reading remains out of range. The policy and procedure Sanitizing food contact surfaces (F018) with a revision date of 1/18 read, . Pot sink: Immerse items in sanitizing solution (third sink) for a minimum of 60 seconds. complete Pot-sink Sanitizer concentration log daily at each meal period. On 8/18/21 at 10:45 a.m., Kitchen Staff F was observed using the three-compartments sink to wash cooking pots and pans. She filled the third sink halfway with a sanitizing solution. She did not check the concentration of the sanitizing solution. She scrubbed pots and pans, rinsed, and placed them in the sanitizing solution. She did not completely submerge the pots and pans in the solution to ensure all surfaces were sanitized. Kitchen Staff F removed the pots and pans from the sanitizing solution and said they were clean and would now let them air dry. On 8/18/21 at 10:57 a.m., in an interview Staff F said she measured the concentration of the sanitizer by measuring the water temperature. She took a digital thermometer, placed the probe in the water and immediately removed it. She held the thermometer in the air as the temperature was decreasing. She said she was waiting for screen to stop blinking to read the temperature of the water. When asked to test the sanitizing solution, she took a piece of the test strip and placed in the water that measured 134.6 F. She shook the strip in the water and placed it against the label and said it read 400 and was fine. On 8/18/21 at 11:35 a.m., in an interview Chef Staff L verified Staff F did not follow the proper procedure to test the concentration of the sanitizing agent of the three compartments sink. He said he was sure Staff F was trained but could not locate the training.
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
  • • 35% turnover. Below Florida's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 4 life-threatening violation(s), $173,963 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 13 deficiencies on record, including 4 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $173,963 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 has 4 Immediate Jeopardy findings. Serious concerns require careful evaluation.

About This Facility

What is Oakton Place At The Arli's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns OAKTON PLACE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION AT THE ARLI 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 Oakton Place At The Arli Staffed?

CMS rates OAKTON PLACE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION AT THE ARLI's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 35%, compared to the Florida average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care. RN turnover specifically is 55%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Oakton Place At The Arli?

State health inspectors documented 13 deficiencies at OAKTON PLACE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION AT THE ARLI during 2021 to 2024. These included: 4 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 9 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 Oakton Place At The Arli?

OAKTON PLACE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION AT THE ARLI 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 LIFE CARE SERVICES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 44 certified beds and approximately 37 residents (about 84% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in NAPLES, Florida.

How Does Oakton Place At The Arli Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, OAKTON PLACE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION AT THE ARLI's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (35%) 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 Oakton Place At The Arli?

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 Oakton Place At The Arli Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, OAKTON PLACE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION AT THE ARLI 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 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 Oakton Place At The Arli Stick Around?

OAKTON PLACE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION AT THE ARLI has a staff turnover rate of 35%, which is about average for Florida nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Oakton Place At The Arli Ever Fined?

OAKTON PLACE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION AT THE ARLI has been fined $173,963 across 2 penalty actions. This is 5.0x the Florida average of $34,818. 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 Oakton Place At The Arli on Any Federal Watch List?

OAKTON PLACE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION AT THE ARLI is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.