AVENTURA AT THE BAY

10300 4TH ST N, SAINT PETERSBURG, FL 33716 (727) 576-1025
For profit - Partnership 274 Beds AVENTURA HEALTH GROUP Data: November 2025 7 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
0/100
Last Inspection: August 2025

Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.

Overview

Aventura at the Bay has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. With no ranking in Florida or Pinellas County, it suggests that there are no better options available in the area. The situation is worsening, as the facility's issues increased from 22 in 2024 to 24 in 2025. Staffing is a major concern, with a turnover rate of 63%, significantly higher than the state average, and the facility has less RN coverage than 75% of Florida facilities. Additionally, the facility has accumulated $592,514 in fines, which is concerning and points to repeated compliance problems. Specific incidents include a failure to provide adequate nursing staff, which led to serious injuries and lack of proper care for multiple residents. In another critical finding, the facility poorly managed an evacuation during a hurricane, resulting in unsafe conditions for residents. While there may be some strengths, the overall indicators point to significant weaknesses that families should consider carefully.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Florida
#112/223
Top 50%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Worse
22 → 24 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
63% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
○ Average
$592,514 in fines. Higher than 55% of Florida facilities. Some compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 30 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Florida. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
59 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
☆☆☆☆☆
0.0
Overall Rating
☆☆☆☆☆
0.0
Staff Levels
☆☆☆☆☆
0.0
Care Quality
☆☆☆☆☆
0.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 22 issues
2025: 24 issues

The Good

  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record

Facility shows strength in fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 63%

17pts above Florida avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Federal Fines: $592,514

Well above median ($33,413)

Significant penalties indicating serious issues

Chain: AVENTURA HEALTH GROUP

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

Staff turnover is elevated (63%)

15 points above Florida average of 48%

The Ugly 59 deficiencies on record

7 life-threatening 2 actual harm
Aug 2025 20 deficiencies 2 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision and interventions were p...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision and interventions were provided 1) to prevent major injuries for two residents (#213 and #81); and 2) to maintain a hazard free environment for one resident (#55) out of six residents sampled for falls and hazards. Findings included: 1) During an interview on 8/25/25 at 9:05 a.m. Resident #213’s Resident Representative (RR) stated being upset with the facility at the lack of treatment and identification of concerns regarding Resident #213’s falls and answering of call lights. The RR noted on a visit to the facility Resident #213 had a swollen hand and upon notifying the staff, the staff stated, “we did not notice.” The RR stated not being made aware of any recent falls. A review of Resident #213’s admission Record showed an admission date of 11/3/23 and readmissions on 3/16/25 and 7/9/25 with the following diagnosis: Parkinson’s disease, unspecified dementia, adjustment disorder anxiety, unsteadiness on feet, muscle weakness, hypotension, psychotic disorder with delusions due to known physiological condition, age related osteoporosis without pathological fractures, and other co-morbidities. A review of Resident #213’s care plan record revealed: · Care plan focus: The staff have identified that I am at risk for falls because of these risk factors: muscle wasting, impaired cognition, unaware of safety needs, dementia, history of falls, hypotension. I place myself on the floor, states “prefers to be on the floor”. Date initiated 11/6/23. Goal: My risk for falls and fall related injuries will be minimized with nursing interventions daily through the next review dated. Date Initiated: 11/6/23. · Interventions revealed: o 11/6/23 initiated the following: § Anticipate residents’ needs. § Encourage and assist resident to toilet before and after meals and at bedtime. Offer urinal as indicated. § I should have sneakers, shoes, slippers with rubber soles or nonslip socks when I am out of bed. § Keep frequently used items within reach: TV remote, tissues, water glass over bed stand and my water glass (unless I need thickened liquids or can’t have anything by mouth). § Keep my call light within reach so I can call for assistance. § Offer/assist with nonskid socks as resident allows. o 11/14/23 initiated the following: Floor mats to right and left side while in bed in lowest position as resident allows. o 12/12/23 initiated the following: maintain bed in lowest position except during care. o 1/15/24 initiated the following: Remind and encourage resident to use call light. o 3/20/24 initiated the following: medication review, psychological evaluation – resolved: 6/30/25. o 5/14/24 initiated the following: encourage resident to be in common areas while OOB [out of bed] o 5/16/24 initiated the following: family education r/t [related to] not leaving resident unsupervised in the room. o 6/3/24 initiated the following: § encourage use of footrest while in wheelchair § floor mat(s) to side of bed on floor. (repeat intervention) o 6/5/24 initiated the following: wheelchair modifications as per orders. o 12/9/24 initiated the following: § bolsters on while in bed, scoop mattress § encourage rest period after breakfast o 12/10/24 initiated the following: non-slip surface to wheelchair cushion o 12/18/24 initiated the following: PT [physical therapy] evaluation and treatment prn (as needed). o 12/24/24 initiated the following: encourage resident to be OOB while restless o 1/1/25 initiated the following: assist resident with ambulating short distance during periods of restless. o 3/4/25 initiated the following: will discuss with wife the use of antiroll backs to wheelchair. resolved: 6/30/25 o 3/10/25 initiated the following: toileting before getting in bed (repeat intervention) o 3/21/25 initiated the following: Offer toileting after dinner (repeat intervention) o 4/3/25 initiated the following: Environmental review of wheelchair r/t brake function o 5/26/25 initiated the following: § encourage and assist resident to common areas when out of bed. (repeat intervention) § Therapy eval (evaluation) for balance testing r/t Parkinson’s diagnosis. Resolved: 6/30/25 o 6/30/25 initiated the following: offer and assist to bed after visits from family. (repeat intervention) Review of the progress notes revealed: · 3/03/25 at 8:53 p.m. Summary for Providers note revealed: Fall, no major injury and provider recommendations: continue to monitor neurological checks; post fall assessment with score of 95 indicated: High Risk (Score 45 and higher) no further notes were found. · 3/20/25 at 6:30 p.m. Summary for Providers note revealed: Fall no major injury; Resident was sitting in wheelchair in front of room, then suddenly stood up while holding onto wheelchair and sat back down, when prompted. Resident attempted to stand up again and slid to the floor onto the buttocks. Resident’s head did not hit the floor or met any hard surface. Resident does have a history of falling. No injuries assessed. Vital signs within normal limits. post fall assessment completed with score of 75 indicated high risk. No other documentation was found. Intervention added to care plan was a repeated intervention of offer toileting. · 3/29/25 at 9:30 a.m. Summary for Providers note revealed: Observed resident lying on back on floor near wheelchair. Resident assessed and assisted back to wheelchair. Resident is alert and awake. Laceration noted above left eye. Notifications made. Physician requested for resident be sent to the hospital for evaluation. Returned at 12:28 p.m. No change to the care plan, no notes regarding review of the care plan or note from IDT. · 4/02/25 at 6:38 p.m. Summary for Providers note revealed: resident was found on floor in room, assessed resident and obtained vitals. No complaints of pain and no injuries. fall scale completed score 75 – High Risk, neuro checks started. Care plan updated 4/3/25 to review the wheelchair for function. · 5/1/25 at 6:20 p.m. Progress note revealed: writer was called into room; resident was lying on right side in front of his wheelchair. Resident was fully dressed including shoes. RR said resident leaned forward and just rolled out of wheelchair and did not hit head. Range of motion in all extremities as before. No injuries noted. At 6:32 p.m. progress note: vitals were taken and were within normal range. Physician contacted, RR was present in room with resident during fall. Plan of care on going. 5/2/25 Progress note: Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) met and reviewed r/t fall interventions to include therapy to eval for balance testing. (resident was on therapy case load since 3/5/25). · 5/25/25 at 10:40 a.m. Summary for Providers note revealed: Fall: Provider/RR notified. 10:47 a.m. Progress note: Nurse was notified by the aid immediately that the resident fell on the floor after they were done toileting them. When nurse arrived, the resident was found on floor on the right side between the dresser and bed. Resident did not hit head per nurse aid. Resident was on right side and right wrist has a skin tear, forearm, and elbow has an abrasion. Resident complained immediately about pain on right side. Bruise on upper back on the left noted. Family came in within 30 minutes and was given report on what happened, physician notified and new orders/diagnostics ordered. · 5/27/25 at 7:54 a.m. Summary for Providers note revealed: Fall Provider/RR notified and order to monitor changes. 12:56 p.m. Progress Note revealed: IDT met 5/26/25 and reviewed fall and interventions to encourage/assist resident to common areas when out of bed. (repeated intervention) · 6/8/25 at 8:45 p.m. Summary for Providers note revealed: skin condition. Provider notified/RR present. 8:35 p.m. progress note revealed: RR informed writer resident had a wound on left heel. Writer went to resident’s room and noted left heel with blister like wound. Wound was cleansed with normal saline and topical antibiotic ointment applied and left open to air. No other skin issues were noted. · 6/28/25 at 8:10 p.m. progress note revealed: writer noted resident was on floor in dining room lying on left side, with face on floor. Resident was assessed and no injuries noted. No open wound noted. Vitals were taken. Physician notified and ordered resident to hospital for evaluation due to unwitnessed fall. RR notified. 8:30 p.m. Summary for Providers note revealed: writer found resident lying on floor in dining room. No open wound noted on resident. Vitals were taken. No complaint of pain. Resident was sent to hospital for evaluation. RR notified. Resident returned 6/29/25. · 7/1/25 at 8:19 p.m. Progress note revealed: resident seen sitting on floor in front of chair, no injuries noted, vitals within normal limits, neuro checks initiated, physician notified. 8:54 p.m. Summary for Providers note revealed: Physician notified with no new orders. · 7/2/25 at 1:29 p.m. progress note revealed: patient is status post fall, as needed pain medication administrated, patient took all meds as ordered and is performing at baseline. Area to knee cleansed and dressed as ordered, vitals are within range. Patients assisted with meals, transfers and peri-care. · 7/5/25 at 12:10 p.m. Progress note revealed: RR notified nurse of hand swelling. Writer noted left hand swelling and discoloration. Physician notified of injury by an unknown etiology and ordered x-ray series. Ice pack was given to resident. Discomfort noted on touch. Will continue to monitor. · 7/6/25 at 3:55 p.m. progress note revealed: Resident left via ambulance to hospital. · 7/9/25 at 7:07 p.m. progress note revealed: Resident returned to facility from hospital via stretcher. Review of hospital records revealed: -x-ray report dated 7/6/25 at 5:47 p.m. revealed: acute mildly displaced intra-articular fracture at the base of the thumb proximal phalanx extending into the MCP (metacarpophalangeal) joint. Resident had a left thumb fracture status post closed reduction and pinning on 7/7/25. -x-ray report dated 7/6/25 at 7:13 p.m.: subacute nondisplaced right sixth through eighth lateral rib fractures. These are single site rib fractures. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 2:22 p.m. the Minimum Data Set Coordinator (MDS-C) stated the care plan is updated the following morning during an IDT meeting. The MDS-C stated not being familiar with Resident #213 and therefore does not want to comment on the resident’s care plan. The MDS-C stated the care plan should be reviewed and updated after each fall. A note should be entered into the residents’ chart indicating this has been completed, especially if the care plan does not have any changes needed. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 2:30 p.m. the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated not being familiar with Resident #213 as being new to the facility. The ADON stated the process the nurses complete when a fall occurs is as follows: nurse is notified of the fall and ensures the safety of the resident. Complete an assessment of the resident documents and ensures proper notifications are completed. The nurse should speak with staff/resident/witnesses regarding what happened and document. Complete incident documentation and any other assessments needed, i.e Neuro checks. Then update the care plan. The following day the IDT reviews the information and discusses to ensure interventions are appropriate and document the information. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 2:46 p.m. the facility Risk Manager (RM) stated the expectations for when a resident has an incident is as follows: nurse completes the incident report to include as much information as possible. The care plan is updated at this time. The following day the IDT reviews the information and ensures the care plan is appropriate and documents this review. Sometimes, the nurse does not update the plan of care, and the IDT will need to do this. The care plan is also reviewed during a standard of care (SOC) meeting on a weekly basis. Any resident who has fallen is added to this meeting for follow up for 4 weeks. The SOC would review of the care plan, document discussion and update as needed. The RM stated being familiar with Resident #213. The RM reviewed Resident #213’s care plan and confirmed several of the interventions were repeated on different occasions and the absence of a care plan update on 7/1/25. The RM stated the root cause for Resident #213’s falls was the resident’s Parkinson’s and impulsivity. During the interview the RM stated interventions should be added after each fall to reduce the risk of further falls and reduction of potential for injury with the fall. 2) On 8/25/25 at 11:56 a.m. Resident #81 was observed lying in bed at approximately knee height. Resident #81 was groomed and clean, non verbal with interaction at this time, no movement was occurring. During an interview on 8/25/25 at 12:00 p.m. Resident #81’s alert and oriented roommate stated resident is bed bound and has not been out of bed since the fall. The facility had Resident #81’s RR take the resident’s wheelchair home. A review of Resident #81’s admission Record showed an admission date of 1/1/22 and readmissions on 3/14/25 with the following diagnosis: unspecified intracranial injury with loss of consciousness of unspecified duration, traumatic brain injury, moderate protein calorie malnutrition, spastic hemiplegia affecting right dominant side, functional quadriplegia, post traumatic seizures, vitamin d deficiency, and other co-morbidities. A review of Resident #81’s medical record from 1/1/25 to 2/16/25 did not reveal any incidents. A review of Resident #81’s nurse progress note dated 2/17/25 revealed: Writer was notified by CNA that resident had a skin issue to the left lateral leg. Writer observed yellow bruising around the resident’s knee and a blue/purple bruise to the lateral left thigh. Resident did not show any signs of pain when assessing the area. UM (Unit Manager) notified. Writer notified the physician no new orders. Writer called POA no answer. Writer left VM (Voice Mail) to callback. A review of Resident #81’s nurse progress note dated 2/18/25 revealed: resident seen for follow up related to bruising left lateral knee/thigh. yellow discoloration noted to left medial thigh/ knee and purple bruising 17.0x4.5cm to left lateral thigh. resident moves extremities without difficulty. no s/s of pain or discomfort expressed at this time. A review of Resident #81’s nurse progress note dated 2/21/25 revealed: Edema noted to resident's left lower extremity accompanied by redness, area is warm to touch. Norco administered this shift for pain. In house ARNP notified and order received for left lower extremity venous doppler. Requested for doppler. notification with no answer, message left. Will continue to monitor. A review of Resident #81’s Physician/Provider progress note dated 2/21/25 revealed: chief complaint/History Present Illness (HPI) relating to this visit: Patient is a poor historian due to cognitive/psychiatric impairment: Chief complaint/Reason for this visit: Follow up visit r/t edema and erythema to left leg. HPI Relating to this Visit: Long-term resident admitted to the facility in January of 2000 dx intracranial injury w/ (loss of consciousness) LOC. Resident seen today at the request of staff. Resident's left leg is warm to the touch and slightly edematous. Resident is largely non-verbal and unable to provide any history as to if an injury occurred. Skin intact without bruising. … Assessment and Plan: Peripheral edema: Ultrasound of left leg to rule out DVT (deep vein thrombosis)… Orders for this Visit: Ultrasound of left leg A review of Resident #81’s Physician/Provider progress note dated 2/23/25 the provider note revealed: chief complaint/HPI relating to this visit: Patient is a poor historian due to cognitive/psychiatric impairment: Chief complaint/Reason for this visit: Follow up visit r/t edema and erythema to left leg. HPI Relating to this Visit: Long-term resident admitted to the facility in January of 2000 dx intracranial injury w/LOC. Resident seen today at the request of staff. Resident's left leg is warm to the touch and slightly edematous. Resident is largely non-verbal and unable to provide any history as to if an injury occurred. Skin intact without bruising. Ordered ultrasound of left leg. Results were unremarkable. Contacted resident's POA who is aware. No acute issues at this time. … Assessment and Plan: Peripheral edema: US (ultra sound) results unremarkable Will monitor … A review of Resident #81’s nurse progress note dated 2/27/25 revealed: Weekly skin evaluation completed. Findings are as follows: Resident's color is normal. Skin is Warm / Dry. Skin Turgor is good. Edema is not present on assessment. It is noted that the resident has skin integrity concerns. The resident does not have any skin issues on bony prominences. The resident does not have any skin issues on the right buttocks. The resident does not have any skin issues on the left buttocks. The resident does not have any skin issues on the right heel. The resident does not have any skin issues on the left heel. A review of Resident #81’s progress notes dated 3/6/25 at 20:43 revealed: Skin progress note: Weekly skin evaluation completed. Findings are as follows: Resident's color is normal. Skin is Warm / Dry. Skin Turgor is good. Edema is noted as present. It is noted that the resident has skin integrity concerns. Resident has noted bruise(s). A review of Resident #81’s provider note dated 3/7/25 revealed: … chief complaint/Reason for this visit: Follow up visit r/t edema and erythema to left leg. History Present Illness (HPI) relating to this visit: Long-term resident admitted to the facility in January of 2000 dx intracranial injury w/LOC. Resident seen today at the request of staff. Resident seen previously for assessment of erythema and swelling to left leg. Ultrasound performed, result unremarkable. Resident seen again today at the request of staff. Her left knee is still edematous and tender to touch. Resident is largely non-verbal and cannot provide an accurate history of the injury. … Assessment and Plan: Peripheral edema: Ok per POA to have x-ray of left knee. Review of the hospital x-ray report dated 3/8/25 at 5:30 p.m. revealed: indication: knee swelling, outside x-ray knee partially viewed femur fracture. Findings: displaced distal third diaphyseal femur fracture. The fracture extent seems to extend into the medial femoral condyle, not well characterized. Recommend dedicated plain film views of the knee as well. The tibia and fibula appear intact. Review of the hospital emergency room physician report dated 3/8/25 revealed: eyes open and grimaces in pain only, … Left upper extremity: … limited range of motion (ROM) left shoulder, elbow, wrist, and hand; with no crepitation or deformity noted some contractures …, Right Upper Extremity: … limited ROM right shoulder, elbow, wrist and hand; with no crepitation or deformity noted some contractures, … Left Lower Extremity: … contracture of the knee bruising about the left thigh I; … right lower extremity: … limited ROM right hip, knee, ankle and foot; … Assessment/Plan: Resident #81 is a [AGE] year old female that is bed ridden with a history of traumatic brain injury nursing home resident that was noted to have a deformity about her left thigh. The left lower extremity is contracted a flexion position. X-rays are completed showed a left distal femur fracture. The family wish operative treatment stabilization of the left femur fracture. Review of the pre-operative report dated 3/10/25 revealed: Operative Indications: Patient is a [AGE] year-old female with a 30-year history of traumatic brain injury. The patient is non-ambulatory and requires maximum assistance for mobilization. Patient currently resides in a skilled nursing facility. Approximately 4 weeks ago the patient potentially fell onto her left lower extremity. The patient exhibited pain and underwent evaluation. … Attempted closed management was performed however the patient had persistent complaints of pain and the patient ultimately presented to the emergency department on March 8th, 2025. … treatment option given the patient's current state of pain and difficulty with motion of the left lower extremity, patient is indicated for surgical fixation of the left femur. … During an interview on 8/27/25 at 3:49 p.m. Staff MM, Certified Occupational Therapy Assistant (COTA) and Staff NN, Physical Therapy Assistant (PTA) both stated not being familiar with Resident #81. Staff MM, COTA stated resident was last on case load for therapy in 12/24. During an interview on 8/27/25 at 4:22 p.m. Staff OO, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) stated being familiar with Resident #81. Stated recalling hearing resident #81 fell out of the wheelchair but does not recall anything else regarding the incident. Staff OO, stated not actually seeing Resident #81 fall. Staff O stated not knowing Resident #81 to be restless or move around a lot. Staff OO, CNA worked on 3/6/25. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 8:10 a.m. Staff W, CNA stated not being aware of how Resident #81 was hurt, although hearing the fracture occurred during a transfer. It is very hard with all the new staff; they are unfamiliar with the residents. Staff W, CNA worked on 3/6/25. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 8:15 a.m. Staff PP, CNA stated “oh goodness, I know about the incident, I was almost blamed for it.” Staff PP continued to state, having just been reassigned to the unit Resident #81 resides and a CNA who no longer works here reported a bruise on Resident #81. The Director of Nursing (DON) at the time asked me if Resident #81 had fallen, nothing else was inquired. Staff PP stated only hearing about a fall Resident #81 had prior to arrival to the unit. Resident #81’s RR told me the orthopedic physician at the hospital told Resident #81’s RR the fracture had to occur with a fall. Staff PP stated Resident #81 does not move around in the bed. Resident #81 has not gotten out of the bed since return from the hospital. Was not on the schedule of 3/6/25. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 8:22 a.m. Staff QQ, CNA stated not recalling anything, although it is odd as Resident #81 is total care. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 8:35 a.m. Staff S, Registered Nurse (RN) stated being quite familiar with Resident #81 as being the resident’s primary nurse. Staff S, RN states not recalling anything, I don’t even recall Resident #81 hurting the leg. Staff S, RN stated Resident #81 does not move much. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 8:24 a.m. Staff U, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated Resident #81 is dependent for all care. Staff U, LPN stated not being employed at the facility for long, and Resident #81 had the fracture before Staff U, LPN started. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 8:38 a.m. Staff T, LPN stated Resident #81 is dependent for all care needs and is bed bound now and does not move much. Staff T, LPN stated not being aware of any prior incidents. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 8:40 a.m. Staff RR, CNA stated not caring for Resident #81 primarily although is familiar. States Resident #81 is totally dependent for care and had heard about the fracture and no one had spoken with Staff RR, CNA about anything, no questions at all. During an interview on 8/26/25 at 5:37 p.m. Staff SS, CNA stated being familiar with Resident #81. Staff S, CNA stated, not knowing directly what happened although did hear Resident #81 fell. On 8/27/25 at 1:26 p.m. Resident #81’s RR was left a voice mail message to return call regarding Resident #81. During an interview on 8/27/25 at 4:28 p.m. Staff TT, CNA stated being familiar with Resident #81 and has provided care for resident. Resident #81 is dependent for all care and does not move much as is contracted. Staff TT, CNA stated Resident #81 used to get up in a wheelchair but does not any longer, “odd if you were to ask me”. Staff TT, CNA states not knowing anything about what happened. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 9:29 a.m. the RM stated as the RM role April 25 and therefore is not directly familiar with Resident #81’s incident. The RM did review the facility’s file regarding Resident’s 81’s fracture. The facility had completed an investigation regarding the bruise to resident #81’s leg 2/17/25, the bruise was reported on the left lateral side of the back of the knee. The facility determined the bruise was from spastic left sided hemiplegia. No statements or other documents were available for review. The facility closed the investigation on 2/24/25. The RM stated another investigation was completed in 3/25. The RM stated Resident #81 started taking pain medication around the time the bruise was noted, then stopped them a few days later. The RM stated Resident #81 started to take pain medications again and x-rays were ordered with results the resident had a fracture. Resident #81 was sent to the hospital. The RM stated the investigation started in 3/7/25 when the fracture was reported to the facility and was a major injury. The RM stated the staff interview questions were in regards to a fall. One staff interview revealed: DON notified and stated not reportable. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 2:30 p.m. the DON stated just starting and has no knowledge of Resident #213 or #81. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 6:30 p.m. the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) stated just starting and has no knowledge of Resident #213 or #81. A review of the facility’s policy and procedure titled Reporting Accidents and Incidents dated 8/1/2024 showed: INTENT: It is the policy of the facility to report Accidents and Incidents in accordance with State and Federal regulations. PROCEDURE: 1. The Accident and Incident Reporting System will include a comprehensive process which will allow for: a. Collection of the accident and incident occurrence b. Investigation of accidents and incidents c. Evaluation of injuries of unknown source (IUS) d. Tracking and trending of accidents and incidents 2. The Incident Report will be completed by the Nurse assigned to the resident at the time of the event. 3. The Investigation will be completed by the Nurse Manager, or designee, within 72 hours from the event. 4. The IUS Tool will be completed by the Nurse Manager, or designee, within 72 hours from the event. 5. The Director of Nursing Services, or designee, will add the investigation results into the Risk Management system. 6. The Director of Nursing Services, or designee, will track accidents and incidents on the facility surveillance log to determine patterns and trends. 7. Monthly during the facility Risk Management Quality Assurance Meeting, the results of the Accident and Incident Tracking System will be evaluated. 8. The facility will ensure that: a. The resident environment remains as free from accident hazards as is possible. b. Each resident receives adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents. … 9. The facility will provide an environment that is free from accident hazards over which the facility has control and provides supervision and assistive devices to each resident to prevent avoidable accidents. This includes: a. Identifying hazard(s) and risk(s); b. Evaluating and analyzing hazard(s) and risk(s); c. Implementing interventions to reduce hazard(s) and risk(s); and d. Monitoring for effectiveness and modifying interventions when necessary. 10. The facility will identify each resident at risk for accidents and/or falls, and adequately plan care and implement procedures to prevent accidents. 11. The facility will ensure each resident receives adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents. … 13. The facility will develop and implement an accident and incident reporting system that will report adverse incidents to the Administrator, or to his or her designee. 14. The reporting system will consist of: a. Report all alleged violations and all substantiated incidents to the state agency, and to all other agencies as required, and take all necessary corrective actions depending on the results of the investigation; b. Report to the State nurse aide registry or licensing authorities any knowledge it has of any actions by a court of law which would indicate an employee is unfit for service; and c. Analyze the occurrences to determine what changes are needed, if any, to policies and procedures to prevent further occurrences. d. Report the results of all investigations to the administrator or his or her designated representative and to other officials in accordance with State law, including to the State Survey Agency, within 5 working days of the incident, and if the alleged violation is verified appropriate corrective action must be taken. … 16. The facility will conduct an internal risk management and quality assurance program to include the use of incident reports to be filed with the risk manager and facility administrator. The risk manager shall have free access to all resident records of the licensed facility. The incident reports are part of the work papers of the attorney defending the licensed facility in litigation relating to the licensed facility and are subject to discovery but are not admissible as evidence in court. 17. A person filing an incident report is not subject to civil suit by virtue of such incident report. As part of the internal risk management and quality assurance program, the incident reports shall be used to develop categories of incidents which identify problem areas. Once identified, procedures shall be adjusted to correct the problem areas. 18. The facility will, for purposes of reporting to the agency, use the t
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Deficiency F0806 (Tag F0806)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure food allergies and preferences were honored f...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure food allergies and preferences were honored for four residents (#169, #71, #171, #172) out of six sampled for dietary concerns. Findings included: 1) An interview was conducted on 8/25/25 at 11:02 a.m. with Resident #169. Resident #169 stated he/she was allergic to fish and about a week ago he/she was served a fish sandwich. The resident said the tray card did not say what the meal was, and it did not look like fish. Resident #169 stated he/she took two bites of the sandwich before feeling his/her throat start to close. The resident said the nurse had to come and administer the epinephrine (epi) pen that is ordered for life threatening allergies. Resident #169 said a nurse practitioner (NP) also came in and provided care. The resident states he/she also was not supposed to have tomatoes because of a significant history of ulcers. Review of admission Records showed Resident #169 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including heart failure, myasthenia gravis, presence of a cardiac pacemaker, and dependence on supplemental oxygen. Review of the facility’s Allergy Report, Resident #169’s food allergies were listed as crab, fish and seafood, peanuts, and shrimp. Review of Resident #169 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], Section C, Cognitive Patterns, showed a brief Interview for mental (BIMS) score of 15, indicating she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #169’s progress notes showed: 8/15/25 4:16 p.m. Nursing note by Staff EE, Registered Nurse (RN). “SN [Skilled Nurse] was informed by the CNA [Certified Nursing Assistant] that the patient was c/o [complaining of] having SOB [shortness of breath] due to eating some fish from lunch; informed the CNA that she hadn't ate fish in 20 years and that she had a allergy to fish & c/o having SOB. SN immediately went to assess to the patient. Once entering the pt room she was sitting in her chair at the bedside still alert and talking. She c/o having SOB. SN checked pt [patient] orders for Epi-Pen and gave injection - Epinephrine 0.3mg for anaphylaxis to left thigh; and applied 2L/min via NC [nasal cannula] PCP [primary care provider] & Family were notified. New order received by [NAME], APRN [Advanced Practice Registered Nurse] who also was present during the incident; to apply 02 @ 2L/min. Allergy list has been updated; SN also informed the patient to not eat anything in the future that she has a allergy to; per the son the pt stated that it didn't look like fish. Pt has been doing fine s/p [status post] bEpi injection. Staff will continue to monitor the pt.” Review of Resident #169’s physician orders showed: -Epinephrine Solution Auto-injector 0.3 mg/0.2 ml. Inject 1 application intramuscularly as needed for anaphylaxis until 9/9/25. Administration: press firmly against the outer thigh until you hear it click. Hold in the thigh for 10 seconds. Can be given through clothing. Dated 8/9/25. Review of Resident #169’s August 2025 Medication Administration Record (MAR) showed epinephrine was administered 8/15/25 at 11:28 a.m. and it was documented as effective at 12:43 p.m. An interview was conducted on 8/26/25 at 3:36 p.m. with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON said Resident #169 had not told the facility she was allergic to fish, and they did not know. She said the resident ate the entire fish sandwich and did not have a reaction. The DON said Resident #169 only complained of itching on her arms. She said the doctor was called and the epi pen was administered “to make her feel better.” The DON said Resident #169 did not have an anaphylactic reaction and did not have to go to the hospital. Review of Resident #169’s hospital records from 8/4-8/9/25, provided by the facility, listed allergies including crab, fish, lactose, peanuts, shrimp, and tomatoes. Review of Resident #169’s Primary Care Provide note, dated 8/11/25, listed allergies included crab, fish flavor, lactose, peanut, shrimp, and tomatoes. The Primary Care Provider note, dated 8/18/25 noted Resident #169’s “only concern is that of [his/her] meal preference and allergies not being addressed by Dietary.” An observation was conducted on 8/25/25 at 12:21 p.m. of Resident #169’s lunch. The resident was observed to have stewed tomatoes on her lunch tray. An interview was conducted on 8/28/25 at 10:16 a.m. with Staff EE, RN. Staff EE said he/she was assigned Resident #169 on 8/15/25 when she had an allergic reaction. Staff EE said a CNA came down and said it appeared Resident #169 was short of breath. The nurse said the resident was having a hard time taking a good deep breath but did not have any other symptoms. Staff EE said she went to the resident’s room and the NP that was on the unit went with as well. Staff EE said the epi pen was administered to the resident quickly and the resident had relief. Staff EE said allergies are listed on the resident’s tray cards and the assumption was that the kitchen checked to make sure the residents were not served food they were allergic to. Staff EE said he/she was not aware of a process in place to check the tray for allergies on the unit. An interview was conducted on 8/28/25 at 1:57 p.m. with Staff FF, NP. Staff FF confirmed he/she was on the unit when a CNA said Resident #169 was having an allergic reaction. Staff FF said the nurse told her there was an emergency. The CNA said Resident #169 had eaten fish and was allergic to it. Staff FF said he/she entered the room with the nurse. Staff FF said the resident was having a difficult time breathing and said he/she felt like their throat was closing. Staff FF said the nurse administered the epi pen and had a second epi pen available if the resident needed it. Staff FF said the nurse was told to administer the second epi pen if the resident had any further breathing issues. 2) An observation was conducted on 8/25/25 at 4:47 p.m. of Resident #71’s dinner. The resident was observed sitting on the side of the bed. The dinner tray had been delivered to his/her room. Resident #71 was observed opening the container and inside was a whole beef steak with rice and round carrots. The tray card on the resident’s tray had “Alerts: CUT MEAT IN BITE SIZE PIECES” The resident complained the food was cold, a nurse came to the room and took the tray to heat it up, then returned the tray to the resident with the beef steak still whole. Review of admission Records showed Resident #71 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including intraarticular fracture of lower end of left radius, nondisplaced fracture of left ulna styloid process, dysphagia, gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) without esophagitis, mild cognitive impairment, and cognitive communication deficit. Review of Resident #71’s 7/3/25 admission MDS, Section C, Cognitive Patterns, showed a BIMS score of 15 indicating he/she was cognitively intact. Section GG, Functional Abilities, showed the resident needed partial/moderate assistance for eating. Review of Resident #71’s care plan showed a focus area of risk for alteration in nutritional status related to left radius fracture, diabetes mellitus type 2, hypertension, GERD, dysphagia, weakness, chronic kidney disease, atherosclerosis, major depression, head injury, hyperlipidemia, epilepsy, anemia, cognitive impairment, osteoporosis, elevated body mass index, obesity status. Gradual weight loss therapeutic/desired, dated 6/23/25. Interventions included serve diet as ordered, monitor intake and record every meal, and provide assistance with all meals as needed. Review of Resident #71’s Nutrition Risk Assessment, dated 6/23/25 noted chewing difficulties due to missing teeth. Interventions were “recommend mechanical altered diet.” A follow-up interview was conducted on 8/28/25 at 12:15 p.m. with Resident #71. The resident stated he/she often received food that was not cut up in small pieces. Resident #71 said he/she needs assistance due to a broken left wrist as well as difficulty swallowing. The resident said he/she occasionally had a hard time swallowing the food that was delivered from the kitchen. Resident #71 said when he/she struggles with the food she will ask staff for something else, “if they will listen.” The resident said he/she had asked multiple staff members to have the dietician come discuss his/her diet and making sure they are getting something they can eat. Resident #71 said it would be very helpful if the diet was fixed and food came up that he/she could eat. An interview was conducted on 8/28/25 at 1:32 p.m. with the Registered Dietician (RD). He said he did Resident #71’s Nutrition Risk Assessment on 6/23/25. He said he remembered the resident talking about having difficulty swallowing. He said he recommended a mechanically altered diet. The RD said he would expect the kitchen to be cutting the resident’s food into small bites if that is the instructions on her tray card. He said if a resident had swallowing issues, he would often request a speech therapy evaluation, but he does not recall if he did for Resident #71. The RD followed up on 8/28/25 at 3:34 p.m. and said he reviewed the resident’s record and said his/her meat was to be cut up in small pieces due to her missing some teeth and having difficulties cutting with a broken wrist. An interview was conducted on 8/28/25 at 1:53 p.m. with Staff HH, Physical Therapy Assistant (PTA). Staff HH reviewed Resident #71’s therapy records and said he did not see any record of the resident being seen for speech therapy. A follow-up interview was conducted on 8/28/25 at 2:35 p.m. with the DON. The DON said no education was completed or processes changed related to meal service and allergies after the incident on 8/15/25 with Resident #169 because the facility didn’t know she had a fish allergy. The DON said, “We don’t know not to give them something if they don’t tell us they have an allergy.” When the DON was told Resident’s hospital records and provider notes both showed the resident’s fish allergy she stated “I don’t read his notes. There are 200 residents here.” The DON reviewed Resident #169’s medication record and confirmed both the hospital record and provider note was in Resident #169’s medical record at the facility prior to the incident on 8/15/25. The DON said she would expect the facility to know the resident had a fish allergy if it was in the medical record. The DON also said she would expect the kitchen staff to know what is in the food that is served. Regarding Resident # 71 the DON reviewed the photo of the meal when the resident was served a full piece of meat and said she would expect the food to be served right. 3) On 8/25/25 at 10:12 a.m., an observation of Resident #171 revealed she was laying down in bed. She said she wanted choices with meals. She said she received chicken on most days of the week. She said she does not get the option of choosing a substitute for the main meal. Resident #171 stated she has told staff and, “Nothing happens.” She said she’d like a hot dog or hamburger. She confirmed that staff have talked to her about her food preferences and dislikes. On 8/25/25 at 12:05 p.m., an observation of Resident #171’s lunch meal was conducted. The resident said she received gravy when her meal ticket indicated a dislike of gravy. She opened the Styrofoam to-go-box which had mashed potato and gravy on top. Further observations of the tray revealed a meal ticket which had gravy under dislikes. Resident #171 gave permission to take photo evidence of her meal and meal ticket. On 8/27/25 at 12:09 p.m., an observation of Resident #171 revealed she was sitting up in bed with the bedside table in front of her. Resident #171 said she was supposed to get a chef salad today and it’s on her meal ticket. She said she told the CNA about ten minutes ago but had not received the salad yet. An observation of Resident #171’s meal ticket revealed the following, “Standing Orders: … 3oz[ounce]/2c[cup] Chef Salad (Mo, We, Fr) [Monday, Wednesday, Friday] …” Resident #171 opened the Styrofoam to-go-box to reveal it was not a salad. She gave permission to take photo evidence of her meal and meal ticket. A review of Resident #171’s admission record revealed an admission date of 3/5/24. Further review of the admission record revealed diagnoses to include type 2 diabetes mellitus with unspecified complications, morbid (severe) obesity due to excess calories, and atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery without angina pectoris. A review of Resident #171’s quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, cognitively intact. A review of Resident #171 orders revealed, dietary consult to discuss food preferences as needed for pt [patient] request dietary consult,” with an order date of 5/21/25. A review of Resident #171’s progress notes and forms/assessments, after 5/21/25, revealed no documentation of a nutrition or dietary consultation regarding the resident’s food preferences. 4) On 8/27/25 at 12:11 p.m., an observation of Resident #172 revealed he was laying down in bed with a meal tray on the bedside table next to him. He said he received gravy today and it was on his dislikes. He said this has happened before and he had told staff about it. Resident #172 said he does not eat gravy because it bothered his stomach. Resident #172 gave permission to take photo evidence of his meal and meal ticket. A review of Resident #172’s admission record revealed an original admission date of 6/7/24 and re-admission date of 5/23/25. Further review of the admission record revealed diagnoses to include atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery without angina pectoris, morbid (severe) obesity due to excess calories, diverticulitis of intestine, part unspecified, without perforation or abscess without bleeding, and hyperlipidemia. A review of Resident #172’s comprehensive MDS, dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS score of 15, cognitively intact. A review of Resident #172’s meal ticket revealed the following under dislikes, “Gravy, Sausage, Beans (Pinto Beans), Greens (Turnip).” On 8/26/25 at 5:17 p.m., an interview was conducted with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM). He said the residents’ likes and dislikes are on their meal ticket. The CDM said there is no other form used such as a preference sheet. He confirmed the food committee meets once a month. He said he had three months of food committee minutes. The CDM said he gave them to the previous administrator and doesn’t know if the facility has record of them. A review of food committee minutes revealed the following: - 3/4/25, “… 7) We are still getting tickets wrong. Need to make sure that we check them better …” - 4/1/25, “… 7) We are still getting tickets wrong. Need to make sure that we check them better …” - 6/10/25, “ … 1) Reviewed the minutes from April 1th [first] Meeting. The residents talked about the issues that still are happening … 7) We are still getting tickets wrong. Need to make sure that we check them better. Did inservice with tickets again … “ - 7/1/25, “… 1) Reviewed the minutes from June 10th Meeting. The residents talked about the issues that still are happening. … 7) We are still getting tickets wrong. Need to make sure that we check them better. Did inservice with tickets again …” - 8/5/25, “… 7) We are still getting tickets wrong. Need to make sure that we check them better. Did inservice with tickets again. … ” A review of an in-service, provided by the CDM, that was conducted on 7/1/25 revealed it was regarding ticket and tray accuracy with notes to include the following: “Allergies: … Always double check trays for potential allergy foods! … Dislikes: … Be sure preferences are always followed! … Before sending the tray: 1. Right Diet? 2. Right Liquids? 3. Allergies reviewed and compared? 4. Food preferences reviewed and compared? Remember: if a resident receives a wrong diet, or something that’s an allergy, it could be their last meal. Do you want to be responsible for that mistake?” On 8/28/25 at 1:30 p.m., a follow-up interview was conducted with the CDM. He confirmed there are specific concerns that are repetitive every month in the food committee meetings. He said he tried to honor the residents’ requests of food choices. The CDM said if a resident doesn’t want the main entrée, there is an always available menu, and the resident has to tell the CNA. He stated if a resident has a certain preference and/or dislikes, he will resolve it, “If he gets the message.” He confirmed he is aware of meal ticket accuracy concerns and has conducted audits. The CDM said the last meal ticket and tray accuracy audit was conducted about four months ago. He discussed the recent incident with Resident #169. He said her meal ticket previously had shellfish and crab as an allergen. The CDM said Resident #169’s meal ticket now has fish listed as an allergen, but it previously did not. The CDM said he looked at the ingredients after the incident and found out the fish sandwich that was provided had [NAME], salmon, [NAME], [NAME], squid, and New Jersey bluefish. He said he did not know squid was considered shellfish, and thought the meal had no shellfish. The CDM said he was the one serving during that meal and recalled the dietary aid calling out the food and allergen. He said he found out the next day Resident #169 had an allergic reaction that required the use of an EpiPen. The CDM confirmed he has spoken to the resident before and after the incident. He said Resident #169 has a long list of dislikes, but he is waiting on her family member to provide that information. He confirmed the resident should not have been provided that meal because of the shellfish allergy. The CDM said he has provided in-services and re-education to staff. He said he has the staff on the tray line read the meal ticket back to him and tries to position staff in a way that the end person catches any discrepancies. He said the main issues with meal tray accuracy are residents not receiving condiments or salad dressing but no salad. The CDM said he brings up those issues to the staff member who checks the meal tickets and tray items. He said he thinks the dietary staff are making mistakes or not paying attention when on the tray line. He said he needed to do another ticket audit to make sure the residents are getting items they want and are not getting their disliked food items. A review of the facility’s policy titled, “Tray Identification,” dated 6/2025, revealed the following under policy interpretation and implementation, “…2. The Food Services Manager or designee will check trays for correct diets before the food carts or meal trays are transported to their designated areas. 3. Nursing staff shall check each food tray for the correct diet before serving the residents. 4. If there is an error, Nursing will notify the Dietary Department immediately so that the appropriate food tray can be served.” A review of the facility’s policy titled, “Food and Nutrition Services,” dated 10/2017, revealed the following, “Each resident Is provided with a nourishing, palatable, well- balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs, taking into consideration the preferences of each resident.” Further review of the policy, under policy interpretation and implementation, revealed the following, “…4. Reasonable efforts will be made to accommodate resident choices and preferences. … 7. Food and nutrition services staff will inspect food trays to ensure that the correct meal is provided to each resident, the food appears palatable and attractive, and it is served at a safe and appetizing temperature. a. If an incorrect meal is provided to a resident, or a meal does not appear palatable, nursing staff will report it to the Food Service Manager so that a new food tray can be issued. …” A review of the facility’s policy titled, “Food Allergies and Intolerances,” dated 8/2017, revealed the following, “Residents with food allergies and/or intolerances are identified upon admission and offered food substitutions of similar appeal and nutritional value. Steps are taken to prevent resident exposure to the allergen(s).” Further review of the policy, under assessments and interventions, revealed the following, “1. Residents are assessed for a history of food allergies and intolerances upon admission and as part of the comprehensive assessment. 2. All resident reported food allergies and intolerances are documented in the assessment notes and incorporated into the resident’s care plan. … 5. Residents with food intolerances and allergies are offered appropriate substitutions for foods that they cannot eat. …” A review of the facility’s policy titled, “Resident Food Preferences,” dated 7/2017, revealed the following, “Individual food preferences will be assessed upon admission and communicated to the interdisciplinary team. Modifications to diet will only be ordered with the resident’s or representative’s consent.” Further review of the policy, under policy interpretation and implementation, revealed the following, “1. Upon the resident’s admission (or within twenty-four (24) hours after his/her admission) the Dietitian or nursing staff will identify a resident’s food preferences. 2. When possible, staff will interview the resident directly to determine current food preferences based on history and life patterns related to food and mealtimes. 3. Nursing staff will document the resident’s food and eating preferences in the care plan. …”
CONCERN (D)

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure dignity was maintained for residents during dining related to serving residents at a single table meals at the same ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure dignity was maintained for residents during dining related to serving residents at a single table meals at the same time in one out of four dining rooms observed. Findings included:An observation was conducted on 08/25/2025 at 12:25 p.m. in the D-unit dining room, two tables were pushed together with six residents seated. Four of the residents had their meals and were eating while the fifth and sixth residents did not have any food or drink. Staff V, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was sitting in a chair at the far end of the table, looking at her hands while holding an electronic device. During an interview on 08/25/2025 at 12:53 p.m. Staff V, CNA stated staff were still passing the trays and the staff pass the trays in room order only. Staff V, CNA stated all residents should be served at the same time at one table, but I am only to watch them. An observation was conducted on 08/28/2025 at 8:00 a.m. in the D-unit dining room, five residents were seated around a table. Three residents had empty Styrofoam containers in front of them and two residents had no food or drink in front of them. Staff W, CNA called to another staff member to bring the two resident trays. At 8:08 a.m. Staff W, CNA served the two residents their trays. During an interview on 08/28/2025 at 8:10 a.m. Staff W, CNA stated the residents should all be served at the same time, but the trays come out in room order. During an interview on 08/28/2025 at 8:35 a.m. Staff S, Registered Nurse (RN) stated residents should be served at the same time when they are seated at the same table.Review of the facility policy and procedure titled Preparing the Resident for a Meal, revised September 2010, revealed the following: Purpose: The purpose of this procedure is to prepare the resident and the environment in order to help make meal time pleasant for the resident.Review of the facility policy and procedure titled Resident Rights, undated, revealed the following: Purpose: To ensure the preservation of every resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, and communication with and access to persons and services inside and outside the facility. Policy: It is [Facility Name] (the Facility) policy that any all owners, directors, officers, clinical staff, employees, independent contractors, consultants, and others working for the Facility (Associates) must treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality. Procedure: . V. Respect and dignity. Every resident has a right to be treated with respect and dignity, including: .
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0645 (Tag F0645)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) assessmen...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) assessments were accurate and failed to submit a Level II PASRR for one resident (#8) out of three residents sampled.Findings included:Review of Resident #8's admission Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include mood disorder, insomnia, dementia and bipolar disorder.Review of the Level I PASRR, dated 7/04/2024, showed in Section II: Other Indications for PASRR Screen Decision-Making, questions 1 through 7 were marked No. A level II PASRR evaluation must be completed if the individual has a primary or secondary diagnosis of dementia or related neurocognitive disorder (including Alzheimer's disease), and a suspicion or diagnosis of a Serious Mental Illness. Section IV: PASRR Screen Completion, Individual may be admitted to a Nursing Facility (check one of the following): No diagnosis or suspicion of Serious Mental Illness or Intellectual Disability indicated. Level II PASRR evaluation not required was marked.An interview was conducted on 8/28/25 at 4:27 p.m. with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). The ADON said the facility had started a PASRR audit. The ADON stated they have been going through each PASRR to see what is missing or a new diagnosis added. The ADON said outside of audits she has not done anything with existing residents. The ADON said a resident with schizoaffective disorder, schizophrenia, or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) would need a level II submission. For Resident #8, the ADON said she just updated the PASRR level I but did not submit for level II. The ADON said she would submit a level II for Resident #8 for psychosis, but not for bipolar, dementia, or insomnia.A policy for PASRR was requested. The facility does not have a PASRR policy.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the revision and/or implementation of a comprehensive care plan was completed for one resident (#213) out of five residents sampled...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the revision and/or implementation of a comprehensive care plan was completed for one resident (#213) out of five residents sampled for falls.Findings included: During an interview on 8/25/2025 at 9:05 a.m. Resident #213's representative (RR) stated being concerned with the facility's lack of identification of concerns and follow up on Resident #213's plan of care. Review of the admission Record for Resident #213 revealed an admission date of 11/28/24 with diagnoses to include: Parkinson's disease without Dyskinesia (involuntary erratic movement), without mention of fluctuations; difficulty in walking; unsteadiness on feet; recurrent falls; unspecified Dementia, severe, with other behavioral disturbance; and other co-morbidities. Review of Resident #213's care plan revealed: Focus: date initiated: 11/6/2023 - The staff have identified that I am at risk for falls because of these risk factors: muscle wasting, Impaired cognition, Unaware of safety needs, Dementia, History of falls, Hypotension. I place myself on the floor, states prefers to be on the floor.Goal: date initiated: 11/6/2023 My risks for falls and fall related injuries will be minimized with nursing interventions daily through the next review date. Interventions: 11/6/2023 - Dated initiated:o Encourage and assist resident to toilet before and after meals and at bedtime. Offer urinal as indicated.o I should have sneakers, shoes, slippers with rubber soles or non slip socks when I am out of bed.o Keep frequently used items with in reach: TV remote, tissues, water glass over bed stand and my water glass (unless I need thickened liquids or can't have anything by mouth).o Keep my call light with in reach so I can call for assistance.o Anticipate resident's needs.o Offer/assist with non-skid socks as resident allows 12/12/2023 Date Initiated:o Maintain bed in lowest bed except care. 01/15/2024 Date Initiated:o Remind and encourage resident to use call light. 04/16/2024 Date Initiated:o therapy referral, encourage use of breaks on wheelchair 05/14/2024 Date Initiated:o encourage resident to be in common areas while OOB (out of bed) 05/16/2024 Date Initiated:o family education r/t (related to) not leaving resident unsupervised in the room. 05/26/2025 Date Initiated:o Therapy eval for balance testing r/t Parkinson's Resolved Date: 06/30/2025 06/03/2024 Date Initiated:o encourage use of footrest while in wheelchair o Floor mat(s) to side of bed on floor. 06/05/2024 Date Initiated:o wheelchair modifications as per orders 12/09/2024 Date Initiated:o Bolsters on while in bed scoop mattress o Encourage rest period after breakfast 12/10/2024 Date Initiated:o dyscem to wheelchair cushion 12/18/2024 Date Initiated:o PT eval and tx (treat) prn (as needed) 12/24/2024 Date Initiated:o encourage resident to be OOB while restless 01/01/2025 Date initiated: o assist resident with ambulating short distance during periods of restless. 03/04/2025 Date Initiated:o Will discuss with wife the use of antiroll backs to wheelchair Resolved Date: 06/30/2025 03/10/2025 Date Initiated:o toileting before getting in bed 03/21/2025 Date Initiated:o Offer toileting after Dinner 04/03/2025 Date Initiated:o Environmental review of wheelchair r/t brake function 05/26/2025 Date Initiated:o encourage and assist resident to common areas when out of bed 06/30/2025 Date Initiated:o offer and assist to bed after visits from family Review of Resident #213's medical record from March 2025 to current revealed the following falls: 3/3/2025 at 20:53 - no injury noted - care plan was updated on 3/4/2025. 3/20/2025 18:30 - no injury noted - The care plan intervention implemented on 3/21/25 to toilet after dinner was a duplicate intervention from 11/2023. No new intervention was found. 3/29/2025 09:58 - small laceration above eye - sent to emergency room (ER) - No new care plan intervention was added nor documentation showing care plan review was found. 4/2/2025 18:38 - no injury noted - The care plan was updated on 4/3/25 to check the wheel brakes for function. 5/1/2025 18:20 - no injury noted - No new care plan intervention was added nor documentation showing care plan review was found. 5/25/2025 10:47 - right wrist skin tear, abrasion to right elbow and forearm and bruising to the left upper back, and pain to right side. The care plan intervention implemented on 5/26/2025 was a duplicate intervention from 5/14/2024, and 12/24/2024. No new intervention was found. 5/27/2025 07:54 - no injury noted- No new care plan intervention was added nor documentation showing care plan review was found. 6/28/2025 20:10 - resident sent to ER - The care plan intervention implemented on 6/30/25 was to offer and assist to bed after family visit. 7/1/2025 20:19 - no injury noted- No new care plan intervention was added nor documentation showing care plan review was found. During an interview on 08/28/2025 at 2:22 p.m. Staff GG, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)/ Minimum Data Set (MDS) Coordinator confirmed responsibility for ensuring the MDS is complete and assists in the care plan coordination. Staff GG stated being a new employee at the facility but thinks the nurse on the floor will initiate an intervention after a fall, the following work day the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) will review the fall and ensure the care plan update is completed and accurate; although, I am not sure of how exactly care plans are updated in between assessments. Staff GG referred me to the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). During an interview on 08/28/2025 at 2:26 p.m. the ADON stated the IDT discuss the incidents during the morning clinical meeting and ensures an intervention was added. Stated the entire care plan is not reviewed. During an interview on 08/28/2025 at 2:46 p.m. the Risk Manager (RM) stated the IDT meets the following morning after an incident occurs. The incident is reviewed and the care plan is updated to reflect the current situation. The RM continued to state a resident who has fallen is added to the facility's weekly Standard of Care (SOC) meeting for review and continued follow up for four weeks. The care plan should be reviewed at this time to ensure interventions are appropriate. The RM reviewed Resident #213's care plan and fall history and verified interventions were not added to Resident #213's fall care plan after each fall and a couple of the interventions added were duplicates of a prior intervention. The RM confirmed this could mean no new intervention was added. Review of the facility's policies and procedures titled Care Plans, undated, revealed the following: Intent: It is the policy of the facility to create Care Plans in accordance with State and Federal regulations. Definitions: Resident care plan means a written plan developed, maintained, and reviewed not less than quarterly by a registered nurse, with participation from other facility staff and the resident or his or her designee or legal representative, which includes a comprehensive assessment of the needs of an individual resident, the type and frequency of services required to provide the necessary care for the resident to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being, a listing of services provided within or outside the facility to meet those needs, and an explanation of service goals. Procedure: . a. Reviewed no less than once every 3 months; b. Reviewed promptly after a significant change, which is a need to stop a form of treatment because of adverse consequences (e.g., an adverse drug reaction), or commence a new form of treatment to deal with a problem in the resident's physical or mental condition; and, c. Revised as appropriate to assure the continued accuracy of the assessment. 7. The care plan will describe the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and social wellbeing.
CONCERN (D)

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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to 1) provide adequate catheter care for Resident # 10, and 2) ensure...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to 1) provide adequate catheter care for Resident # 10, and 2) ensure documentation of catheter care was completed for Resident #125, out of three residents sampled for catheter care.Findings Included: 1) During an interview with Resident #10 on 08/25/2025 at 9:45a.m., the resident voiced concerns regarding lack of care for her suprapubic catheter. The resident stated no one had cleaned the site or changed the dressing on her catheter for three days. Resident #10 voiced a concern of her catheter care not being done correctly since a nurse who previously did most of her care resigned from the facility. A follow-up interview was conducted on 08/26/2025 at 10:20 a.m. where the resident stated she had still not received care for her catheter. Resident #10 stated she did ask a nurse if the catheter was going to be replaced as previously it had been replaced every 30 days, but the nurse told her there was no order for that. Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a primary diagnosis of Paraplegia, unspecified, Pressure Ulcer Of Left Buttock, stage 4, Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Type, Neuromuscular Dysfunction Of Bladder, Unspecified, Chronic Kidney Disease, stage 3 unspecified. Review of resident’s quarterly Minimum Data Set ( MDS) dated [DATE] revealed resident’s Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) revealed a score of 15 out of 15 indicating no cognitive impairments. Section GG indicated impaired range of motion for her lower extremities and that resident was dependent for all care areas. Section H indicated resident had an indwelling catheter and was frequently incontinent of bowels. Section I indicated resident had anemia, renal insufficiency, neurogenic bladder, diabetes mellitus, paraplegia. A review of Resident#10’s Care Plan dated 06/13/2025 revealed the following: A focus of resident needing assistance with activities of daily living because of weakness/Paraplegia, altered skin integrity, mood disorders with goals of staff helping the resident all of her ADL (activities of daily living) needs so that she appeared neat and tidy with absence of foul body odor through next review and interventions of staff assisting resident with toileting needs promptly when asked and bilateral siderails/enablers for bed mobility. A focus of resident having incontinence of bowel, indwelling catheter r/t Neuromuscular Dysfunction Of Bladder with goals to monitor indwelling catheter through next review, manage UTIs (urinary tract infections) with early detection and treatment through next review with interventions of staff to irrigate catheter as per orders, monitor for incontinence frequently and provide prompt care, and monitor for urinary retention and signs/symptoms of UTI, Obtain and monitor lab/diagnostic work as ordered. Report results to MD (medical doctor) and follow up as indicated, Provide catheter care every shift and as needed. During an interview with Staff CC, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) on 08/27/2025 at 12:18 p.m., the LPN stated resident #10 was supposed to have her suprapubic catheter site cleaned and the dressing changed during the night shift, but upon irrigating the resident’s suprapubic catheter the LPN noticed it had not been cleaned and the dressing had not been changed on the previous shift. During an interview with Staff Z, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) on 08/27/2025 at 10:01AM. The CNA stated Resident #10 got her suprapubic catheter changed and taken care of by the nurses and the CNAs were only responsible for emptying the catheter bag. The CNA stated CNAs were not responsible for looking at or cleaning the suprapubic catheter site as part of their job duties. 2. An interview was conducted on 8/27/25 at 3:15 p.m. with Resident #125. She stated her catheter care is done but not necessarily every shift like it supposed to be. Review of admission Records showed Resident #125 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including pulmonary embolism and ventral hernia. Review of Resident #125 BIMS, dated 7/29/25, showed a score of 13 indicating she is cognitively intact. Review of Resident #125’s order listing showed an order for “Indwelling Urinary Catheter care every shift with soap and water,” dated 8/20/25. Review of Resident #125’s August 2025 Treatment Administration Record (TAR) showed catheter care was not signed off as completed on 8/5/25 evening shift, 8/7/25 day shift, 8/17/25 evening shift, and 8/18/25 night shift. Review of Resident #125’s lab results revealed a urinalysis collected on 8/19/25 indicating the resident had a urinary tract infection (UTI). Review of Resident #125’s orders showed an order, dated 8/22/25, for Ciprofloxacin HCL 500 mg. 1 tablet by mouth twice a day for a UTI for 7 days. A review of the facility policy titled Catheter Care, Urinary, revised August 2022, revealed the following: PurposeThe purpose of this procedure is to prevent urinary catheter-associated complications, including urinary tractinfections.Preparation1. Review the resident's care plan to assess for any special needs of the resident.2. Assemble the equipment and supplies as needed.General Guidelines1. Follow aseptic technique when inserting a urinary catheter.2. Maintain a closed drainage system when possible.3. Empty the collection bag at least every eight (8) hours using a separate, clean collection container foreach resident. Avoid splashing, and prevent contact of the drainage spigot with the nonsterile container.4. Ensure that the catheter remains secured with a securement device to reduce friction and movement atthe insertion site.Catheter Evaluation1. Review and document the clinical indications for catheter use prior to inserting.2. Nursing and the interdisciplinary team should assess and document the ongoing need for a catheter thatis in place. Use a standardized tool for documenting clinical indications for catheter use.3. Remove the catheter as soon as it is no longer needed.Perineal Care1. Use soap and water or bathing wipes for routine daily hygiene. Antiseptic wipes for daily cleansing arenot recommended.2. Clean the area under the foreskin in uncircumcised males daily.Infection Control1. Use aseptic technique when handling or manipulating the drainage system.2. Be sure the catheter tubing and drainage bag are kept off the floor.Input/Output1. Observe the resident's urine level for noticeable increases or decreases. If the level stays the same, orincreases rapidly, report it to the physician or supervisor.2. Follow the facility procedure for measuring and documenting input and output.Maintaining Unobstructed Urine Flow1. Check the resident frequently to be sure he or she is not lying on the catheter and to keep the catheterand tubing free of kinks.2. Unless specifically ordered, do not apply a clamp to the catheter.3. Position the drainage bag lower than the bladder at all times to prevent urine from flowing back into theurinary bladder. 4. If the catheter material contributes to obstruction, notify the physician and change the catheter if instructed to do so.5. Catheter irrigation may be ordered to prevent obstruction in residents at risk for obstruction.Changing Catheters1. Do not change indwelling catheters or drainage bags at routine, fixed intervals.2. Change catheters and drainage bags based on clinical indications such as infection, obstruction, or when the closed system is compromised.3. Residents who form encrustations that can quickly lead to an obstruction need more frequent catheter changes (i.e., weekly or twice weekly) at intervals specific to the individual resident. The catheter should be changed before blockage is likely to occur.4. When changing a long-term indwelling catheter, leave the catheter out for at least 1 hour, but no longer than 2 hours, to allow the urethral glands to drain . DocumentationThe following information should be recorded in the resident's medical record:1. The date and time that catheter care was given.2. The name and title of the individual(s) giving the catheter care.3. All assessment data obtained when giving catheter care.4. Character of urine such as color (straw-colored, dark, or red), clarity (cloudy, solid particles, or blood), and odor.5. Any problems noted at the catheter-urethral junction during perinea! care such as drainage, redness, bleeding, irritation, crusting, or pain.6. Any problems or complaints made by the resident related to the procedure.7. How the resident tolerated the procedure.8. If the resident refused the procedure, the reason(s) why and the intervention taken.9. The signature and title of the person recording the data.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0697 (Tag F0697)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide effective pain management in a timely manne...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide effective pain management in a timely manner for one resident (#179) out of one resident sampled for pain management. Findings included:An interview was conducted on 8/25/2025 at 9:30 a.m. with Resident #179. The resident stated she/he was not receiving adequate pain medication and had to wait for hospice. The resident was observed in a wheelchair, dressed in appropriate clothes. The resident stated she/he has a lot of back pain. The resident stated staff can't give anything else, she/he is waiting for hospice. The resident appeared to be wincing in pain.An observation and interview were conducted on 8/27/2025 at 10:41 a.m. The resident was observed in a wheelchair next to the bed, dressed in appropriate clothes. The resident is still reporting a lot of pain in the back. The resident stated she/he wakes up and gets into the wheelchair and doesn't go back to bed because she/he is in so much pain. The resident was observed wincing in pain pointing to the same area of the back. The resident stated hospice was there yesterday 8/26/2025, they prescribed something different for the pain but was told by staff they don't have it from pharmacy yet.Review of Resident #179's admission Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include: pulmonary fibrosis, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and end stage renal disease.Review of Resident #179's Order Summary revealed the following order:- Baclofen Oral Tablet 10 MG {milligram} (Baclofen)Give 1 tablet by mouth every 8 hours as needed for Muscle spasm Hospice orderPharmacy-Active 8/26/2025 13:15Review of the August 2025 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed the following pain levels:8/25/2025-1:11 a.m. pain level 2/10; 1:07 p.m. pain level 9/10;8/26/2025- 4:37 a.m. pain level 6/10; 10:28 a.m. pain level 9/10; 8/27/2025- 5:20 a.m. pain level 7/10; 11:25 a.m. pain level 5/10; 7:07 p.m. pain level 5/10Further review of the MAR revealed the Baclofen oral tablet 10 MG was not documented as administered until 8/28/2025 at 3:48 a.m.Review of Resident #179's active Care Plans revealed the following:-Focus: I have a risk for discomfort/pain due to decrease in mobility, end of life care-hospice r/t interstitial lung disease. with interventions to include: - Administer analgesic as per orders; - Evaluate the effectiveness of pain interventions, alleviation of symptoms, dosing schedules and resident satisfaction with results, impact on functional ability and impact on cognition; - Instruct and reinforce to resident regarding what pain medications are available to him/her, dose and frequency; - Notify physician if interventions are unsuccessful or if current complaint is a significant change from resident's past experience of pain -Focus: {Resident} have elected to have end of life care due to {resident} is receiving Hospice services due to terminal prognosis, decline is anticipated and unavoidable in all areas as disease process progresses r/t interstitial lung disease. With an intervention of: Observe resident closely for signs of pain, administer pain medications as ordered, and notify physician immediately if there is breakthrough pain.An interview was conducted on 8/27/2025 at 10:43 a.m. with Staff LL Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). Staff LL stated they can contact hospice if we need anything. The staff member was not sure where the medication Baclofen was, as it was not located on the medication cart and stated maybe it hasn't been delivered from pharmacy yet. Staff LL inquired with Staff A, Unit Manager (UM). Staff A stated they can pull the medication from the emergency drug kit (EDK).An interview was conducted on 8/27/2025 at 10:50 a.m. with Staff A, (UM). Staff A stated she/he contacted hospice on Monday 8/25/2025 and received a call back on Tuesday 8/26/2025. Hospice prescribed Baclofen 10MG on 8/26/2025. UM stated she/he is having a different UM to pull the medication since she/he doesn't have access to the EDK.An interview was conducted on 8/27/2025 at 2:44 p.m. with Staff CC, LPN. Staff CC was the primary nurse of Resident #179 on 8/26/2025. The staff member stated the resident complained of pain and the resident expressed she/he wanted the baclofen. Staff CC stated Staff A, UM put the order in, but the medication never came from the pharmacy.An interview was conducted on 8/28/2025 at 2:17 p.m. with the Director of Nursing (DON). Regarding pain medication, the DON stated once the order is in, if it is in the cart-they can get it or they can get it from the EDK. Regarding Resident #179, DON stated the resident should have gotten the baclofen when it was ordered. The DON agreed the staff could have called the medical director to get an order on Monday 8/25/2025 while waiting for hospice to return the call.A medication administration policy was requested but not provided.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0725 (Tag F0725)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure sufficient staff were available to meet the...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure sufficient staff were available to meet the needs of the residents on four units (A, B, C and D) out of four units in the facility. Findings included: An interview was conducted on 8/25/25 at 10:42 a.m. with Resident #216. He/she said when the call light is pressed it can be an hour to an hour and half before someone comes to assist. Resident #216 said he/she had to call the receptionist at the front desk and ask them to call the nurses’ station to get help. The resident said even then, it took another 20 minutes before a staff member made it to the room to assist. The resident said he/she is unable to do anything without assistance. Review of admission Records showed Resident #216 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction. Review of Resident #216’s Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), dated 8/25/25, showed a score of 15, indicating he/she was cognitively intact. An interview was conducted on 8/25/25 at 11:03 a.m. with Resident #169. He/she said call lights are not answered quickly, and he/she often had to wait 40-50 minutes until someone came to assist. Review of admission Records showed Resident #169 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including angina pectoris, heart failure, unsteadiness on feet, and dependence on supplemental oxygen. Review of Resident #169 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], Section C, Cognitive Patterns, showed a BIMS score of 15, indicating he/she was cognitively intact. An interview was conducted on 8/25/25 at 5:01 p.m. with Resident #52. The resident said he/she had to wait two hours for assistance going to the bathroom. Resident #52 said it didn’t make them feel very good and was aggravating. He/she said they almost had an accident having to wait so long. Resident #52 said he/she often had to sit in the chair because there was not enough staff to assist her to bed. Review of admission Records showed Resident #52 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including displaced fracture of upper end of left humerus, muscle weakness, difficulty walking, unspecified fall, and need for assistance with personal care. Review of Resident #52’s BIMS, dated 8/13/25, showed a score of 9, indicating moderately impaired cognition. An observation was conducted on 8/28/25 at 10:56 a.m. in the C-wing television (tv) room. Three residents were observed sitting in the tv room with no staff present. One resident was observed attempting to stand up out of her wheelchair and was very unsteady. A second resident was observed trying to leave the tv room by self-propelling his wheelchair, however the wheels were locked, and he struggled to move. No staff were present to assist these residents, however, two staff members passed by the tv room in a hurry and did not stop to assist the residents. Review of the Resident Council (RC) meeting minutes revealed: - RC meeting was held on 3/12/2025 at 10:25 a.m. New Business: Call lights are not being answered. - RC meeting on 4/10/2025 at 10:20 a.m. revealed: Old Business: Social Service Consultant “Discussed advice for residents to ask the CNA who comes in & is NOT their CNA to please keep the call light on so the correct CNA knows to answer it. Discussed that ALL CNAs are able to assist w/ [with] care to any resident!” - RC meeting on 5/7/2025 at 2:01 p.m. revealed: Old Business: Call lights still an issue. - RC meeting on 6/11/2025 at 2:00 p.m. revealed: Old Business: Call lights still an issue. During an interview on 8/25/25 at 9:05 a.m. Resident #213’s Resident Representative (RR) stated being upset with the facility at the lack of treatment and identification of concerns regarding Resident #213’s falls and answering of call lights. Resident #213’s RR stated call lights especially on the weekends would go unanswered for long periods of time for someone to respond. During an interview on 8/27/25 at 4:22 p.m. Staff OO, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) stated we are used to the staffing challenges, “it is what it is”, hard to get everything completed, especially on the weekends. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 8:10 a.m. Staff W, CNA stated trying to accomplish tasks is difficult with staffing the way it is, never know how many residents you have to take care of etc. There are a lot of call offs. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 8:15 a.m. Staff PP, CNA stated staffing is “hit or miss, you just never know.” During an interview on 8/28/25 at 8:40 a.m. Staff RR, CNA stated staffing has been an issue here for a while, we just get used to it. During an interview on 08/25/2025 at 12:53 p.m. Staff V, CNA stated not having enough staff to accomplish our tasks, especially with meal pass. During an interview with the Staffing Coordinator (SC) on 8/28/25 at 2:31 p.m. stated being responsible for assisting in scheduling staff for the facility. The NHA and DON has instructed me to staff the facility predominately by numbers. The SC stated if the facility is not going to have the staff available, “I tell the DON and sometimes we don’t meet the requirements, especially on weekends.” During an interview on 8/28/25 at 3:55 p.m. the DON stated the facility is staff on a daily basis to meet the needs of the residents, mostly by numbers for CNAs. The DON stated the facility meets the per patient day (PPD) levels, although we struggle at times especially with the 3 p.m. to 11 p.m. shift, we utilize agency so the numbers are not an issue. The facility reviews staffing daily with the NHA and SC to discuss any staffing concerns. The DON stated not being aware of any staffing concerns. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 4:45 p.m. the NHA stated the SC reports the daily how the scheduling of the facility is doing. The NHA stated only the SC and DON participate in the meeting to determine if the facility is being staffed appropriately. A review of the facility's policy and procedure titled Staffing with a revised date of 8/2022 revealed: Policy Statement: Our facility provides sufficient numbers of staff with the skills and competency necessary to provide care and services for all residents in accordance with resident care plans and the facility assessment. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. Licensed nurses and certified nursing assistants are available 24 hours a day to provide direct resident care services. 2. Staffing numbers and the skill requirements of direct care staff are determined by the needs of the residents based on each resident’s plan of care. 3. Other support services (e.g., dietary, activities/recreational, social, therapy, environmental, etc.) are also staffed to ensure that resident needs are met. 4. Direct care staffing information per day (including agency and contract staff) is submitted to the CMS payroll-based journal system on the schedule specified by CMS, but no less than once a quarter. 5. Inquiries or concerns relative to our facility’s staffing should be directed to the administrator or his/her designee.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0887 (Tag F0887)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to ensure two residents (#23, #90) were offered the COVID-19 vaccine ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to ensure two residents (#23, #90) were offered the COVID-19 vaccine out of 5 residents sampled for COVID-19 immunizations.Findings included:1. A review of Resident #23's admission Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE].Further review of the medical record revealed Resident #23 was sent to the Emergency Department on 8/15/2025. The resident tested positive for COVID-19 at the Emergency Department and was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE].A COVID-19 vaccine consent or refusal was not found in the medical record prior to 8/15/2025.2. A review of Resident #90's admission Record revealed Resident #90 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].Further review of the medical record revealed the resident was sent to the Emergency Department on 08/17/2025 and was diagnosed with COVID-19. The resident was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE].A COVID-19 vaccine consent or refusal was not found in the medical record prior to 8/17/2025.An interview was conducted on 8/28/2025 1:42 p.m. with the Infection Preventionist (IP). The IP stated both residents were not offered covid vaccines upon admission, but they should have been since that is part of their admission process. The IP went on to state she/he is unsure why it wasn't done.A review of the Policy titled Vaccination of Residents with a revision date of August 2025 revealed the following: Policy: All residents are offered recommended vaccines unless the vaccine is medically contraindicated. Policy interpretation and Implementation: 1. Upon admission residents are evaluated for current vaccine status and potential clinical contraindications for receiving vaccines.
CONCERN (E)

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure clean and sanitary resident spaces, to inclu...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure clean and sanitary resident spaces, to include resident rooms and bathrooms and clean and safe resident equipment, during three of four days observed (8/25/2025, 8/26/2025, and 8/28/2025) and in four of four units (A, B Memory Unit, C, and D).Findings included: 1. During a facility tour on 8/25/2025 at 9:50 a.m., 8/26/2025 at 8:10 a.m. and on 8/28/2025 at 8:20 a.m. the following was observed: Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed with a sliding glass door that is not unlockable. The bottom track of the door was observed with a very large water logged white and with rusted spots clogging what appeared to be a water leak. The towel which was heavily water logged, appeared to be in this position for a long period of time. Photographic evidence was taken. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] bathroom shower stall observed with bio growth on shower tiles and grouting. Photographic evidence was taken. The cubby sitting area in between resident rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] was observed with two chairs blocked by a wheelchair and a mechanical lift. Photographic evidence was taken. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed with a half full quart of store bought milk positioned on the floor near the closet. Observations were made at 8:10 a.m. and 8:50 a.m. with the quart of milk in the same place. Resident was not in room at the time of both visits. Photographic evidence was taken. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER]a over the bed table was observed with three of the four corners peeled up and leaving non cleanable surfaces. Photographic evidence was taken. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] bathroom was observed with heavily stained floor tiles at and surrounding the toilet base. The metal piping was observed heavily oxidized and rusting. Photographic evidence was taken. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER]b was observed with a dark red/maroon in color fall floor mat that was peeling and had tears and chunks torn away. This mat was non cleanable. Photographic evidence was taken. The C wing porch area outside room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed with a fabric chair with the fabric either peeled away, torn away or worn away; leaving a non cleanable surface. Photographic evidence was taken. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER]a was observed with a fall floor mat on the right side of the bed that had rips and tears and chunks torn away leaving a non cleanable surface. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER]b was observed with a fall floor mat on the right side of the bed that had rips and tears and chunks torn away leaving a non cleanable surface. The C wing community shower room was observed with one of three plastic shower chairs with black and pink bio growth on the plastic joints of the lower legs. Photographic evidence was taken. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] bathroom was dimly lit and not emitting bright light. It was revealed the light bulb needed changing. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed with a ceiling vent upon entering the room. There was a loud metal clicking that was constant and with a very loud noise during all days observed. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER]a was observed with a fall floor mat on the right and left side of the bed and had gouges, rips and tears and with surface separation, and leaving a non cleanable surface. The bathroom shower stall was observed with bio growth on the floor and wall tiles/grout lines. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] shower room stall was observed with yellow and black bio growth on the floor tiles and grout lines. Photographic evidence was taken. The B wing community shower room was observed with one of three plastic shower chairs with pink, black and yellow bio growth on all four of the plastic legs. Photographic evidence was taken. The B wing “cubby” area between resident rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] was observed with two chairs blocked by unused wheelchairs and mechanical lifts. The B wing is a secured memory unit that has residents who are cognitively impaired and who walk through the hallways unassisted. Photographic evidence was taken. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER]b was observed with a fall floor mat on the right side of the bed that was torn and ripped, leaving a non cleanable surface. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER]a was observed with a fall floor mat on the right side of the bed that was torn and ripped, leaving a non cleanable surface. On 8/25/2025 at 10:30 a.m. an interview with the 200 memory unit Manager revealed all direct care staff and even housekeeping are responsible for observing resident rooms and spaces on a daily basis for cleanliness, maintenance and safety. She revealed all staff are to report broken items, soiled areas, unsafe equipment to the floor nurse, report it to the Maintenance department though electronic work order system and also report to her as the Unit Manager. She was able to confirm all the above areas noted and was not aware of those concerns. She did not know why staff when in resident rooms would not have identified the concerns. The Unit Manager did stated she believed Housekeeping staff were responsible for the cleaning and maintenance of resident wheelchairs. She was not sure if Housekeeping or other departments were responsible for upkeep and changing of broken and or cracked/torn armrests. On 8/28/2025 at 10:13 a.m. an interview with the facility’s Maintenance Director revealed he has four maintenance staff that work full time at the facility and the building is very large in nature with two stories and four units. The Maintenance Director revealed if there are any issues with the resident rooms, equipment and general upkeep of the building, staff are educated to submit a work order through the electronic work order system. He revealed the work orders are then addressed by priority and most work orders can be fixed and completed right away. He revealed he and his maintenance staff will try to round the building through the day but he nor his maintenance staff do daily room checks. He revealed there are many rooms and the direct care staff and nursing staff, as well as housekeeping staff should report work orders when they find things wrong. The Maintenance Director revealed he and his department are responsible for the general maintenance of resident wheelchairs to include changing of armrests, responsible for over the bed tables and will replace as need, and Central Supply department is responsible for the maintenance of fall floor mats. The Maintenance Director revealed he has not received any work orders from staff, nor has he or his maintenance staff seen any wheelchairs that need maintenance or fall floor mats that need replacing. The Maintenance Director confirmed observations of wheelchair armrests that needed to be changed due to rips and tears per observations on 8/28/2025. He did not have any type of maintenance logs related to wheelchair maintenance. 2. On 8/25/25 at 10:20 a.m., an interview with the residents in room [ROOM NUMBER] revealed the air conditioning (a/c) is loud. Resident #172 said he would rather have the portable fan on and the a/c off because it’s very loud and disrupts his sleep. He said he has told staff about it but does not think anything had been done. An oscillating pedestal fan was observed in the room, and it was on. An observation of the ceiling, by the door where the a/c unit and filter are, revealed a large crack and bubbled paint. On 8/25/25 at 11:41 a.m., an observation of the hallway between rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] revealed droplets of water were spattering on the floor forming a small puddle. Observations of the ceiling tiles revealed water marks and stains. A review of open, completed and cancelled work orders in the last two months revealed the following: - “quad [four rooms] work orders 133/134 water leaking from ceiling/ slip & [and] fall risk. … open date 8/6/25 closed date 8/6/25 …” - “134 – ceiling leaking in corridor A wing … open date 8/20/25 closed date 8/20/25 …” - “water leaking from ceiling quad rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] … open date 8/23/25 closed date 8/25/25 …” - no documentation regarding the a/c unit in room [ROOM NUMBER]. On 8/28/25 at 9:52 a.m., an interview was conducted with the Director of Maintenance (DOM). A review of closed work orders regarding the room [ROOM NUMBER] and 134 corridor was conducted with the DOM. He said the pan under the a/c unit is not draining properly. The DOM said he was not sure what was completed for the work order, but thinks the pan was vacuumed. He stated, “During the hot months, it [the a/c] runs excessively, the pan fills up, and it leaks over into the ceiling tiles.” The DOM stated a long-term solution to fix the issue could be, “We can get up there and jet the line to fix it.” The DOM confirmed each room has their own a/c unit. He said the residents can turn it on or off. He said the residents have control of the fan in the a/c unit. The DOM said if the a/c is loud, it could be an issue with the unit, but he would have to look at it. The DOM was not aware there was a concern with the a/c being loud in room [ROOM NUMBER]. 3. An observation was conducted on 8/25/25 at 4:44 p.m. in room [ROOM NUMBER]. The privacy curtain between the beds had a brownish red substance splattered in multiple places on the curtain. An observation was conducted on 8/26/25 at 10:27 a.m. in room [ROOM NUMBER]. The privacy curtain by bed A had a brown substance stuck on the curtain in multiple locations. 4. During the course of the survey on 08/25/2025 to 08/27/2025 at varying times, the following was observed: - room [ROOM NUMBER], and 409 observed the raised toilet seat mechanically attached to the bowl. The mechanical attachments had brown oxidation and the raised toilet seat extension had a brown substance on surrounding the base of seat. - room [ROOM NUMBER]B – wall paint was pealing around the call light function box directly above the resident’s head. - room [ROOM NUMBER] bathroom floor was stained with a brown at the base of the toilet and surrounding the cove base. - room [ROOM NUMBER]A – assist rail had brown substance - room [ROOM NUMBER] bathroom observed the cabinet door leaning on the faucet not in the cabinet. - room [ROOM NUMBER] bathroom observed the toilet seat to be discolored and pealing, the show floor tiles had a brown stains below the faucet and surrounding the base tiles. - Soiled Utility room door near room [ROOM NUMBER] would not close. - room [ROOM NUMBER] shower chair seat was stained with brown, orange and yellow colors; under the sink was a build up of a black/brown substance, the wall under the sink had a brown substance in multiple locations; below the light switch, next to the soap dispenser was a section of wall not painted with brown area pealing and small holes. Review of the facility’s policy and procedure titled Cleaning and Disinfecting Residents’ Rooms, dated August 2013, revealed the following: Purpose: The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidelines for cleaning and disinfecting residents' rooms. General Guidelines: 1. Housekeeping surfaces (e.g., floors, tabletops) will be cleaned on a regular basis, when spills occur, and when these surfaces are visibly soiled. 2. Environmental surfaces will be disinfected (or cleaned) on a regular basis (e.g., daily, three times per week) and when surfaces are visibly soiled. 4. Walls, blinds, and window curtains in resident areas will be cleaned when these surfaces are visibly contaminated or soiled. … Review of the facility’s policy and procedure titled Departmental (Maintenance) – Plumbing, HVAC and Related Systems, dated June 2011, revealed the following: Purpose: The purpose of this procedure is to guide the sanitary handling of the plumbing, heating, ventilation, air conditioning, and related systems within the facility. … General Guidelines: … 11. Inspect air-conditioning unit drains and filters weekly. Change filters at least monthly during use. Discard soiled filters. 12. Air-conditioning units should have major cleaning and maintenance performed in the spring and fall before the system is changed over. During the summer months check the unit daily for proper drainage of condensate. Promptly investigate reports of condensation appearing where it doesn't belong. 13. Clean or discard filters in individual air-conditioning units in the resident rooms at least monthly during the summer. Vacuum and maintain units as necessary. 14. Clean air vents and air handling units at least annually. Maintain exhaust fans at least every six (6) months. …
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility did not ensure grievances were documented and/or resolved for the Resident C...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility did not ensure grievances were documented and/or resolved for the Resident Council, the Food Committee, and six residents (#8, #171, #172, #213, #169, #125) out of thirty-eight residents sampled. Findings included: 1. On 8/25/25 at 10:12 a.m., an observation of Resident #171 revealed she was laying down in bed. She said she wanted choices with meals. She said she received chicken on most days of the week. She said she does not get the option of choosing a substitute for the main meal. Resident #171 stated she has told staff and, “Nothing happens.” She said she would like a hot dog or hamburger. She confirmed that staff have talked to her about her food preferences and dislikes. On 8/25/25 at 12:05 p.m., an observation of Resident #171’s lunch meal was conducted. The resident said she received gravy when her meal ticket indicated a dislike of gravy. She opened the Styrofoam to-go-box which had mashed potato and gravy on top. The meal ticket revealed gravy under dislikes. Resident #171 gave permission to take photo evidence of her meal and meal ticket. On 8/27/25 at 12:09 p.m., an observation of Resident #171 revealed she was sitting up in bed with the bedside table in front of her. Resident #171 said she was supposed to get a chef salad today and it was on her meal ticket. She said she told the certified nursing assistant (CNA) about ten minutes ago but had not received the salad yet. An observation of Resident #171’s meal ticket revealed the following, “Standing Orders: … 3oz[ounce]/2c[cup] Chef Salad (Mo, We, Fr) [Monday, Wednesday, Friday] …” Resident #171 opened the Styrofoam to-go-box to reveal it was not a salad. She gave permission to take photo evidence of her meal and meal ticket. On 8/27/25 at 12:11 p.m., an observation of Resident #172 revealed he was laying down in bed with a meal tray on the bedside table next to him. He said he received gravy today and it was on his dislikes. He said this has happened before and he had told staff about it. Resident #172 said he does not eat gravy because it bothered his stomach. Resident #172 gave permission to take photo evidence of his meal and meal ticket. A review of Resident #171’s admission record revealed an admission date of 3/5/24, with diagnoses to include Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with unspecified complications, morbid (severe) obesity due to excess calories, and atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery without angina pectoris. A review of Resident #171’s quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. A review of Resident #171’s orders included the following: - “dietary consult to discuss food preferences as needed for pt [patient] request dietary consult,” with an order date of 5/21/25. A review of Resident #171’s progress notes and forms/assessments, after 5/21/25, revealed no documentation of a nutrition or dietary consultation regarding the resident’s food preferences. A review of grievances for Resident #171 revealed documentation of a grievance filed on 6/5/25 for, “Dining experience,” which was about temperature and the resident not liking the food. A review of Resident #172’s admission record revealed an admission date of 6/7/24 with diagnoses to include atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery without angina pectoris, morbid (severe) obesity due to excess calories, diverticulitis of intestine, part unspecified, without perforation or abscess without bleeding, and hyperlipidemia. A review of Resident #172’s comprehensive MDS, dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS score of 15, cognitively intact. A review of resident council minutes from 3/2025 to 8/2025 revealed no documentation of concerns related to food choices, meal ticket accuracy, and/or honoring meal preferences/dislikes. A second review of grievances revealed from 3/2025 to 8/2025 there were no documented grievances from the food committee meetings and one documented on 3/3/25 from a resident council meeting about ice cream. On 8/25/25 at 2:15 p.m., an interview was conducted with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA). She said the facility only had 2025 grievances, starting in January. She said the facility was not keeping a log of grievances prior to 2025. She said with the new team, including herself, they are documenting grievances. On 8/26/25 at 5:17 p.m., an interview was conducted with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM). He said he only had three months of food committee minutes. He said he gave them to the previous administrator and does not know if the facility has record of them. A review of food committee minutes revealed the following: - 3/4/25, “… 7) We are still getting tickets wrong. Need to make sure that we check them better …” - 4/1/25, “… 7) We are still getting tickets wrong. Need to make sure that we check them better …” - 6/10/25, “ … 1) Reviewed the minutes from April 1th [first] Meeting. The residents talked about the issues that still are happening … 7) We are still getting tickets wrong. Need to make sure that we check them better. Did inservice with tickets again … “ - 7/1/25, “… 1) Reviewed the minutes from June 10th Meeting. The residents talked about the issues that still are happening. … 7) We are still getting tickets wrong. Need to make sure that we check them better. Did inservice with tickets again …” - 8/5/25, “… 7) We are still getting tickets wrong. Need to make sure that we check them better. Did inservice with tickets again. … ” On 8/28/25 at 1:30 p.m., a follow-up interview was conducted with the CDM. He confirmed there are specific concerns that are repetitive every month in the food committee meetings. He said he tried to honor the resident’s requests of food choices. He said he takes into consideration the residents and food committee’s menu suggestions and tries to get it on the menu within seven days. The CDM said if a resident does not want the main entrée, there is an always available menu, and the resident has to tell the CNA. He stated if a resident has a certain preference and/or dislikes, he will resolve it, “If he gets the message.” He confirmed he is aware of meal ticket accuracy concerns and has conducted audits. He said he has provided in-services and re-education to staff. He said he is going to start writing down grievances but had not done it previously. The CDM stated, “I need to get better at documenting.” He said he needed to do another ticket audit to make sure the residents are getting items they want and are not getting their disliked food items. On 8/28/25 at 2:33 p.m., a follow-up interview was conducted with the NHA about grievances. She said grievances are discussed in their daily stand-up meetings. She said they receive the grievance, the department directors will handle it, she takes note of it and gets a copy, and she follows up every day on the resolution of the grievance. She said she expected an update on grievances. She said if they don’t resolve the grievance immediately, then within five days the grievance should be resolved. The NHA said resident council grievances are handled the same way. Their grievances are brought to morning meeting and given to the appropriate department head. She said the Activities Director runs the resident council meetings and emails the department heads their grievances. She said if they see multiple grievances with the same concerns, they complete an in-service as it’s an identified theme. The NHA said the CDM runs the food committee meetings. She said the CDM shares the minutes and if there is a grievance, that is given to Social Services. She said moving forward the food committee’s concerns will be documented. The NHA confirmed those grievances were not documented previously. 2. During resident council meeting on 08/27/2025 at 11:00AM, Residents # 3 and #131 voiced concerns about the grievance process not being followed properly by the facility. Resident #3 stated when a grievance was ongoing the Resident Council was not kept updated on the grievance and were continuously told it was being worked on. Example given by Resident #131 was at multiple resident council meetings residents voiced their concern with the staff being on personal phones at work while providing resident care. She stated the activities director told them a grievance would be made, but it was never followed up on with the resident council. 3. An interview was conducted on 8/28/2025 at 9:30 a.m. with Resident #8’s Healthcare Surrogate (HCS). The HCS stated she/he sent an email with three separate issues to the Social Service Coordinator, (SSC) on 6/13/2025 and has not been followed up with. A review of the grievance log revealed a grievance for 6/13/2025 which indicated an air-conditioning problem and was marked as resolved. An interview was conducted on 8/28/2025 at 2:13 p.m. with the SSC. The SSC verified receipt of the grievance sent by Resident #8’s HCS on 6/13/2025 which included multiple issues. SSC stated she/he did not write the grievance for the nursing section but would try to find it. SSC stated Resident #8’s grievances are valid. No grievance was provided. 4. An interview was conducted on 8/25/25 at 11:02 a.m. with Resident #169 who stated he was not supposed to have tomatoes because of a significant history or ulcers. Resident #169 said he had talked to multiple staff members about concerns with food. The grievance log was reviewed and no grievances were found related to Resident #169’s dietary concerns. Review of admission Records showed Resident #169 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including heart failure, myasthenia gravis, presence of a cardiac pacemaker, and dependence on supplemental oxygen. Review of Resident #169 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], Section C, Cognitive Patterns, showed a brief Interview for mental (BIMS) score of 15, indicating she was cognitively intact. An observation was conducted on 8/25/25 at 12:21 p.m. of Resident #169’s lunch. The resident was observed to have stewed tomatoes on her lunch tray. 5. During an interview on 8/25/2025 at 9:05 a.m. Resident #213’s resident representative (RR) stated having several concerns with the facility with no resolutions and problems just continue and now Resident #213 has died. Review of the grievance logs for Resident #213 revealed: - On 3/26/25 for staff not checking the diet slip. Bugs/ants in room. Lack of follow up on prior grievances. Dishwasher broken and Styrofoam being utilized for too long. Floor not being cleaned. Corrective actions: dietary/Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) educated on reading diet slips. No bugs were seen in the room. Confirmed many grievances were not follow up on. Dietary Manager will provide a divided plate instead of Styrofoam. Confirmed floor was dirty. Housekeeping to clean floor. Completion dated 4/2/25. - On 4/2/25 grievance revealed staff member who continues to be scheduled with resident after verbal altercation. Confirmed staff member still assigned to Resident #213. Corrective action: CNA schedule changed. - On 4/9/2025 missing hearing aids. Education to staff on storage of hearing aids. Completed 4/10/25. - On 4/24/25 grievance revealed diet slips not being followed. Confirmed and education to the staff completed on 4/30/25. - On 6/1/25 grievance revealed: old water cup in room. Confirmed. Educated staff on hydration policy. Completed 6/6/25. - On 6/3/25 family concerned resident not being assisted with meals. Investigation did not support allegation. Corrective action: monthly meeting with RR and care team. Completed 6/6/25. - On 6/27/25 family concerned as found Resident #213 soaked and stained with urine. Grievance confirmed. Education provided to staff. Completed 6/27/25. - No other grievance were found or provided before for Resident #213. During an interview on 8/28/2025 at 3:41 p.m. the Facility Risk Manager (RM) stated the RR of Resident #213 consistently has concerns and they were valid. Review of the Resident Council (RC) meeting minutes revealed: -RC meeting was held on 3/12/2025 at 10:25 a.m. Old Business: Still seeing bugs and insects on “A” and “D” Units. New Business: Resident states ice cream is melted; Missing clothes or not receiving them in a timely manor. Call lights are not being answered. D-Unit concerned staff not giving baths. -RC meeting on 4/10/2025 at 10:20 a.m. revealed: Old Business: Social Service Consultant advised residents to ask the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) who comes in to the room to answer the call light and is not the assigned CNA to please keep the call light on so the correct CNA knows to answer it. … New Business: no new concerns. -RC meeting on 5/7/2025 at 2:01 p.m. revealed: Old Business: Call lights still an issue. New Business: Bugs on D-Unit, showers not occurring as scheduled. -RC meeting on 6/11/2025 at 2:00 p.m. revealed: Old Business: Call lights still an issue. Showers still a concern. New Business: D Unit porch screen needs to be replaced. -RC meeting on 7/9/2025 at 2:15 p.m. revealed: Old Business: showers are still an issue; bugs still on D-Unit; CNAs still on phones while providing care. New Business: CNAs not providing privacy during resident care. Lifts need to be cleaned. Clothing missing. -RC meeting on 8/6/2025 at 2:00 p.m. revealed: Old Business: went over last month grievances and discussed the education and in-services for staff to correct issues. Resident agreed things were “getting a little better.” - the lifts machines are still not very clean. Staff are still on cell phones. New Business: Clothing missing; Staff eating in resident areas; Review of the Grievance Logs revealed: - Grievance on 3/12/2025 from RC revealed: Call lights not answered. Resolution revealed: Call light audits completed, and lights answered timely. Date written decision was issued: 3/12/2025. - Grievance on 3/12/2025 from RC revealed: Not enough staff. Resolution revealed: Unit is staff according to acuity, facility policy, and regulatory requirement. No other information was completed on the form. - No Grievance from RC meeting on 4/10/2025 was listed on the grievance log nor was a grievance for the April RC meeting provided as requested prior to the exit of the survey on 8/28/2025. - Grievances on 5/8/2025 revealed: RC reports CNAs are on their phones and using earbuds and they don’t answer. Grievance was confirmed. Corrective action taken or to be taken: Nursing management team educated on ensuring staff is not using cell [NAME] in resident care areas. dated 5/15/25. - No Grievance from RC meeting on 6/11/2025 was listed on the grievance log nor was a grievance for the June RC meeting provided as requested prior to the exit of the survey on 8/28/2025. - Grievance on 7/10/2025 from RC meeting reveals: lifts need to be cleaned. Grievance was confirmed. Corrective action taken or to be taken: Education provided of cleaning of equipment per policy. Dated 7/18/25. - Grievance on 7/10/2025 from RC meeting reveals: RC reports privacy not being given during care. Grievance was confirmed. Corrective action taken: Staff educated on care and dignity while providing care. dated 7/15/25. - Grievance on 7/10/2025 from RC meeting revealed: CNAs are still using cell phones while providing care. Grievance confirmed. Corretive action: Education provided to staff on use of cell phone. Dated 7/18/25. - No Grievance from RC meeting on 8/6/2025 was listed on the grievance log nor was a grievance for the August RC meeting provided as requested prior to the exit of the survey on 8/28/2025. During an interview on 08/28/2025 at 2:03 p.m. the Social Service Director (SSD) said anyone can complete a grievance. A resident does not have to write the form out. If a resident has a concern that is voiced to a staff member the staff member should complete the form. The form is given to me or the NHA for follow up and tracking. The SSD confirmed no grievances from RC for April, June and August 2025. The SSD stated the grievances appear to be recurring. During an interview on 08/28/2025 at 2:13 p.m. the Social Service Coordinator (SSC) stated Resident #8 usually emails and drops off a copy of the email to document Resident #8’s grievances. Confirmed the grievance is not on the log for July and no further documentation was provided prior to survey exit on 8/28/25. Review of the facility’s policy and procedure titled Resident and Family Concerns and Grievances, undated, revealed the following: Purpose: To provide for the prompt resolution of medical and non-medical grievances while maintaining confidentiality, in accordance with applicable federal and state statutes and regulations. Policy: [Facility Name] (the Facility) is committed to providing its residents with exceptional care and services. To ensure the continued provision of such exceptional care and services, the Facility and any and all owners, directors, officers, clinical staff, employees, independent contractors, consultants, and others working for the Facility (Associates), have an established grievance process to address resident and family member concerns or dissatisfaction about the Facility's provision of care and services. Procedure: I. Filing of Grievances A. Residents or their family members, guardian, or representative may voice a grievance to the Facility staff in person, by telephone, or via written communication. B. Should a resident require assistance in voicing a grievance, the Facility Associates shall provide any needed assistance to the resident. C. The Facility shall provide the attached Grievance Report Form to facilitate the voicing of a grievance if requested by a resident or family member. Il. Documentation of Grievances A. The Facility's Compliance and Ethics Officer or a designated Associate will document and keep a log of all grievances expressed either orally and/or in writing on the day that it is received or as soon as possible after the event or events that precipitated the grievance. III. Investigation of Grievances The Facility's Compliance and Ethics Officer shall notify the management or supervisory staff responsible for the services or operations which are the subject of the grievance. The management or supervisory staff will commence a formal investigation of the grievance as soon as is practicable. IV. Responses to and Resolution of Grievances A. The Facility will follow up with resident or their family members, guardian, or representative within 72 hours of the filing of the grievance. B. The Facility will make reasonable efforts to ensure that all grievances are adequately resolved within thirty (30) calendar days from the day the grievance is received. C. The Facility will advise the resident of the outcome of the grievance investigation and shall make reasonable efforts to contact the resident's family members to advise them of the outcome of the grievance investigation. D. The Facility will provide the resident with a written Grievance Decision, which shall include: a. the date the grievance was received; b. a summary statement of the resident's grievance; c. the steps taken to investigate the grievance; d. a summary of the pertinent findings or conclusions regarding the resident's concern(s); e. a statement as to whether the grievance was confirmed or not confirmed; any corrective action taken or to be taken by the Facility as a result of the grievance; and g. the date the written decision was issued. E. In the event that the Facility cannot resolve the grievance within thirty (30) calendar days, the Facility will notify the resident, their family members, guardian, or representative of the status and estimated completion date of the grievance resolution. F. The Facility will document all steps of the grievance resolution in the Facility's records, including whether or not the resident/family was satisfied with the resolution. The documentation will be kept for a minimum of 3 years. V. Notification of Grievance Policy A. The Facility will notify residents, individually or through postings in prominent locations throughout the Facility, of the right to file a grievance. The notification (CCG 00506b) must include the following information: a. Grievances may be filed orally or in writing, and may be anonymous; b. Contact information of the grievance official; c. A reasonable expected time frame for completing the review of the grievance; d. Filers have the right to obtain a written decision regarding a grievance; e. Contact information or the relevant state agency or Ombudsman program for filing a complaint.
CONCERN (E)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure oxygen was administered per physician orders ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure oxygen was administered per physician orders for four residents (#179, #117, #65, and #6) out of six reviewed for oxygen therapy. Findings included: 1. An observation and interview was conducted on 8/25/25 at 10:47 a.m. of Resident #117. Resident #117 was in bed resting with a nasal cannula (n/c) in place. The oxygen (O2) concentrator was observed to be running at 4 liters/minute (L/min). The resident said she does not mess with the oxygen; the nurse does that. Review of admission Records showed Resident #117 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and dependence on supplemental oxygen. Review of Resident #117 Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), dated 8/6/25, showed a score of 15 indicating she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #117’s Care Plan showed a focus area of oxygen therapy as needed related to ineffective gas exchange, dated 8/25/25. Interventions included O2 settings via n/c per order. Review of Resident #117’s physician orders showed: -O2 at 2 L/minute (min) via n/c to keep O2 equal or more than 92% as needed for hypoxia, dated 8/23/25. -O2 at 3L/min per n/c as needed (PRN) to maintain pulse ox >92%, dated 8/18/25 and discontinued 8/27/25. -O2 at 2L/min via n/c continuously, dated 7/24/25 and discontinued 7/25/25. Review of Resident #117’s August 2025 Treatment Administration Record (TAR) showed PRN oxygen administration had not been signed off as being administered from 8/18-8/28/25. Another observation was conducted on 8/27/25 at 2:25 p.m. of Resident #117 in his room lying in bed with nasal cannula in place and the oxygen concentrator running at 2 3/4 L/min. On 8/27/25 at 3:28 p.m. the resident was sleeping in bed with the nasal cannula in place and the oxygen concentrator remained running at 2 3/4 L/min. An interview was conducted on 8/28/25 at 2:17 p.m. with the Director of Nursing. She reviewed pictures of Resident #117’s oxygen concentrator and confirmed each of the three observations the concentrator was not running at the ordered 2 L/min. When asked if the nurses knew how to properly read the oxygen concentrator flowmeter she shrugged her shoulders. 2. An observation was conducted on 8/25/2025 at 9:30 a.m. of Resident #179. The resident was observed sitting in a wheelchair next to the bed wearing oxygen via a nasal cannula (n/c) set at 2.5 liters (L) on the oxygen (O2) concentrator. A second observation and interview with Resident #179 was conducted on 8/27/2025 at 2:20 p.m. The resident stated she/he is on 2.5 L/min of oxygen. The resident’s O2 concentrator was observed to be set at 2.5 L/min. A review of the resident’s admission record revealed she/he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include pulmonary fibrosis, atrial fibrillation, and hypertension. A review of Resident #179’s active orders revealed the following order: - “Oxygen - May remove oxygen for transports and showers; No directions specified for order.” A review of Resident #179’s active care plan revealed the following: -Focus: “I have impaired respiratory status…” with an intervention of: “Oxygen 2.5L/min {minute} via nasal cannula continuously.” -Focus “I need assistance with activities of daily living…” with an intervention of: “oxygen 4L/min via nasal cannula continuously.” -Focus: “The resident has oxygen therapy…” with an intervention of: “oxygen settings 2L/min via nasal cannula.” An interview was conducted on 8/27/2025 at 2:25 p.m. with Staff LL, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). The staff member stated she/he thinks Resident #179 is on 2L of oxygen. Upon checking the order, Staff LL was unable to locate the oxygen parameters. An interview was conducted on 8/27/2025 at 2:39 p.m. with Staff A, Unit Manager (UM) and Staff LL. Staff A stated Resident #179 should be on 2-2.5L of oxygen. Staff A stated the order was not in the system correctly. An order was put in after this interview. The order revealed the following: -“Oxygen at 2L via NC continuous -May remove oxygen for transports and showers No directions specified for order. Other-Active 8/27/2025” 3. An observation was made on 08/27/2025 at 9:05AM. Resident #6 was on 3L of oxygen (picture provided) connected to a tracheostomy tube (trach) through a humidifier machine. A review of the resident's physician's orders showed no order regarding how many liters of oxygen, order showed 28% humidified oxygen through trach. Interview was conducted with Staff X, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) on 08/28/2025 at 9:18a.m. She voiced she was not sure how many liters of oxygen resident #6 was supposed to be on but she knew she had humidified oxygen through her trach. She then looked on her computer to find the orders and was unable to locate them. LPN walked into the residents room and confirmed the oxygen was at 3 liters, however she could not find it in the resident's orders. LPN agreed it would be difficult to know if the resident was on the right amount of oxygen without being able to see the order. She stated she would need to ask the RN manager as she could not find it anywhere. Interview with Staff Y, Registered Nurse (RN) manager was conducted on 08/28/2025 at 9:22a.m., RN stated Respiratory Care handles all of the tracheostomy care for the resident and she would have to reach out to them to find out how many liters it was supposed to be on. Stated someone from Respiratory Care came once a week to handle all of the tubing, settings, etc. for resident's trach. On 08/28/2025 at 10:15a.m., Staff DD unit manager showed on the humidifier for the oxygen the label showing 28% humidified oxygen--2.5L. She confirmed the oxygen was set to 3L, and confirmed she felt that was the appropriate setting for the resident. A review of the medical record for Resident #6 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of Unspecified Diastolic (Congestive) Heart Failure, Need For Assistance With Personal Care, Tracheostomy Status, 2 Diabetes Mellitus With Unspecified Complications, Muscle Weakness (Generalized), Cognitive Communication Deficit. A review of the MDS showed a BIMS score of 00 suggesting significant cognitive impairment. Section GG revealed resident was dependent in all applicable care areas. Section O shows resident was receiving oxygen therapy, tracheostomy care, IV medication, and IV access. A review of Resident #6 orders showed orders: [Respiratory Care] RT to change trach every 90 days, every day shift every 90 day(s) dated 07/29/2025 Trach- Change suction cannister and tubing, Trach- Change trach mask and tubing, Trach- Change trach ties- every day shift every Mon AND as needed for infection control-dated 07/28/2025 Trach- Continuous humidified oxygen 28% via trach mask. Monitor oxygen saturation-every shift-dated 03/26/2025 Trach- Maintain Ambu bag at bedside. Maintain replacement trach of equal size and one size smaller at bedside. If decannulation occurs, reinsert spare trach. If unable to reinsert, call 911-every shift-dated 03/26/2025 Trach- Trach care with sterile saline. Change inner cannula- Trach- Trach care with sterile saline. Change inner cannula-every night shift AND as needed for obstruction prevention/infection control-03/25/2025 A review of resident #6s care plan revealed focus of “Resident has the potential for respiratory complications due to tracheostomy, respiratory failure with goal of Airway will remain patent and complications will not develop secondary to having a tracheostomy thru next review, and interventions Assess lung sounds, change inner cannula as per orders, Change trach ties, trach mask, suction cannister and tubing as per orders, Enhanced barrier precautions, HOB 45 degrees at all times• HUMIDIFIED TRACH COLLAR as per orders• Maintain Trach replacement size 6 shiley XLT at bedside as per orders • Monitor skin integrity under and around trach. Notify MD of any changes• Suction as ordered • Trach care as per orders. 4. An observation and interview was conducted on 8/25/25 at 11:29 a.m. of Resident #65. Resident #65 was sitting up, on the side of the bed, dressed and receiving oxygen from a concentrator via a nasal canula. The oxygen (O2) concentrator was observed to be running at 1.5 liters (L). The resident said he/she doesn’t mess with the oxygen; the nurse does that. Review of admission Records showed Resident #65 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); acute respiratory failure with hypoxia; other disorders of lung; and other co-morbidities. Review of Resident #65’s Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), dated 8/27/25, showed a score of 12/15 indicating moderate cognitive impairment, suggesting the individual has significant but not severe deficits in their cognitive abilities. Review of Resident #65’s Care Plan showed: - A focus area of oxygen therapy related to shortness of breath, dated 9/26/24. Interventions included O2 settings as per orders. - A focus The resident has altered respiratory status/difficulty breathing related to COPD, acute respiratory failure and other disorders of the lung dated 5/17/24. Interventions included oxygen as per order. Review of Resident #65’s physician orders showed: -O2 at 4 L/minute (min) via n/c to as needed to keep O2 below 92% as needed for low O2, dated 2/28/25 and discontinued 8/27/25. -Portable O2 therapy via n/c at 2L/min as needed (PRN) while patient is ambulating as needed for COPD, dated 6/11/25 and discontinued 8/27/25. Review of the facility’s policy and procedure titled Oxygen Administration with a revision date of October 2010 showed the following: Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to guide prevention of infection associated with respiratory therapy tasks and equipment, including ventilators, among residents and staff. Preparation 1. Review the resident's care plan to assess for any special circumstances or precautions related to the resident. 2. Assemble the equipment and supplies needed. General Guidelines 1. Distilled water used in respiratory therapy must be dated and initialed when opened, and discarded after twenty-four (24) hours. 2. Condensate in the breathing circuits must be drained back into waste bottles, which must be marked with the resident's name, and emptied into the toilet or hopper at the end of every shift. Condensate should be considered infectious. Condensate should never be drained back into the breathing circuit or cascade. 3. Transport respiratory therapy equipment to designated soiled utility area for decontamination. Equipment and Supplies The following equipment and supplies will be necessary when performing tasks related to this procedure: 1. Appropriate equipment/supplies necessary for ordered therapy; 2. Waterless antiseptic handwash (as indicated); and 3. Personal protective equipment (e.g., gowns, gloves, mask, etc., as needed). Steps in the Procedure Infection Control Considerations Related to Oxygen Administration 1. Obtain equipment (i.e., oxygen tubing, reservoir, and distilled water). 2. Use distilled water for humidification per facility protocol. 3. [NAME] bottle with date and initials upon opening and discard after twenty-four (24) hours. 4. Check water levels of refillable humidifier units daily. If the water level falls below the fill line: a. Discard residual solution; b. Pour a small amount of distilled water into the reservoir and swish around to rinse all surfaces; c. Discard water; d. Refill with distilled water to fill line; and e. Change the reservoir every forty-eight (48) hours and disinfect with 2% alkaline glutaraldehyde or sterilize. 5. Check water level of any pre-filled reservoir every forty-eight (48) hours. 6. Change pre-filled humidifier when the water level becomes low. 7. Change the oxygen cannula and tubing every seven (7) days, or as needed. 8. Keep the oxygen cannula and tubing used PRN in a plastic bag when not in use. 9. Wash filters from oxygen concentrators every seven days with soap and water. Rinse and squeeze dry. 10. Wash hands after manipulation. Infection Control Considerations Related to Medication Nebulizers/Continuous Aerosol: 1. Obtain equipment (i.e., administration set-up, plastic bag, gauze sponges). 2. Wash hands. 3. After completion of therapy: a. remove the nebulizer container; b. rinse the container with fresh tap water; and c. dry on a clean paper towel or gauze sponge. 4. Reconnect to the administration set-up when air dried. 5. Take care not to contaminate internal nebulizer tubes. 6. Wipe the mouthpiece with damp paper towel or gauze sponge. 7. Store the circuit in plastic bag, marked with date and resident's name, between uses. 8. Wash hands. 9. Discard the administration set-up every seven (7) days. Infection Control Considerations Related to Mechanical Ventilators: 1. Obtain appropriate equipment (i.e., breathing circuits (as indicated), sterile water, and waste water bottle). 2. Change the ventilator circuits and cascades every forty-eight (48) hours. 3. Do not disconnect the cascades from the heat supply, even when not in use. 4. Change the cascade reservoir and disinfect using 2% alkaline glutaraldehyde or sterilize it. 5. Fill the cascade with sterile distilled water. 6. When cascades need refilling, discard residual fluid. Pour a small amount of sterile distilled water into the cascade. Swish around to rinse all surfaces. Discard the water and refill with sterile distilled water. 7. Drain condensate from corrugated tubing into waste bottles marked with the resident's name. Empty bottles into toilet or hopper at the end of the shift, and as necessary. (Note: Never allow condensate to drain back toward resident or into cascade.) 8. When disconnecting tracheostomies from the breathing circuit, direct the mist away from the resident and your face. 9. Check filters once weekly while they are in continuous use. Discard filters or sterilize them between uses for different residents. 10. Clean and disinfect the surface of the ventilator as necessary and between uses for different residents. Documentation The following information should be recorded in the resident's medical record: 1. The date and time the respiratory therapy was performed. 2. The type of respiratory therapy performed. 3. The name and title of the individual(s) who performed the respiratory therapy. 4. All assessment data obtained during the treatment. 5. If the resident refused the therapy, the reason(s) why and what was done as a result. 6. The signature and title of the person recording the information.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored and secured in accord...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored and secured in accordance with guidelines related to 1) medications improperly labeled and stored in resident rooms (#316 and #416); 2) medications left out in an unlocked office; 3) glucose test strips undated in a medication cart; 4) personal items stored with medications; and 5) improper disposal of a medication observed during three of four days of survey. Findings included: An audit of the A-wing Mid medication cart was conducted on 8/28/2025 at 11:40 a.m. Narcotics were stored in a separate locked compartment; hearing aids and a hearing aid charger were observed stored in the drawer with the medications. Staff KK, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated those should not be in there. An observation was conducted on 8/25/25 at 11:39 p.m. of a prescription tube of Triamcinolone Cream 0.1 sitting on the bathroom counter of room [ROOM NUMBER]. An observation was conducted on 8/25/25 at 4:39 p.m. of a prescription tube of Ammonium Lactate 2% sitting on a bedside table in room [ROOM NUMBER]. There were also two medicine cups, each containing a white cream substance. One was labeled leg and the other labeled calf. An observation was conducted on 8/26/25 at 10:16 a.m. of an office on the C wing with the sign “Nurse Supervisor” on the door. The door was open to a resident hall with no staff present. Inside the office there was an unlocked treatment cart containing prescription medications as well as iodoform packing and wound cleanser sitting out. The same office was again observed to have the door open with no staff present on 8/27/25 at 3:26 p.m. The iodoform packing and wound cleanser remained sitting unlocked in the office. An observation was conducted on 8/26/25 at 4:55 p.m. of Staff R, LPN. Staff R was observed administering medication to a resident. The resident refused one of the pills. Staff R was observed removing the pill from the medication cup and throwing it in the trash can on the side of the medication cart. An audit was conducted of a D wing medication cart on 8/26/25 at 5:26 p.m. with Staff R, LPN. There was one loose medication capsule in the drawer and two bottles of glucose test strips that had been opened and not dated. The narcotic drawer contained a folded piece of paper with money inside being stored in the compartment with medication. Staff R said loose pills should be put in drug buster to dispose of them. Staff R confirmed she had thrown a medication in the trash can and stated it should not have been put there. Staff R also stated glucose tests strips should always be dated with the date they are opened, and he/she didn’t know why two bottles were open. Staff R said the test strips are only good for 6 months after being opened. Staff R said the folded paper with money belonged to a resident and was stored there to keep it safe. An audit was conducted of a C wing medication cart on 8/28/25 at 10:23 a.m. with Staff S, RN. The cart contained a container of glucose test strips that had been opened but not dated. Staff S said the container should have the date the test strips were open written on it because they are only good for “like 90 days”. Staff S then proceeded to write 8/28/25 on the test strip container and admitted to not knowing when they were opened. An audit was conducted of a second D wing medication cart on 8/28/25 at 10:36 a.m. with Staff T, LPN. The top drawer of the cart contained a medication cup with three pills in it. The cup only had a resident name on it. Staff T said he/she had no idea what the medication was or when it was supposed to be given. Staff T said he/she had just received keys to the medication cart and the cup with pills was already in the top drawer. Staff T confirmed pills should not be left in the cart in a medication cup. The narcotic drawer contained a plastic bag with a cell phone and other personal items being stored in the same compartment as medication. Staff T said the bag had resident’s items and she didn’t know it couldn’t be in with the medications. An interview was conducted on 8/28/25 at 2:11 p.m. with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON said prescription creams such as Ammonium Lactate should not be left out in a resident room. She reviewed pictures of the medication cups with cream in them and said she didn’t know what the cream was, and it should not be left in the resident room. The DON also confirmed breathing treatment medication should not be left at a resident’s bedside unless they have a self-administration order and then it should be locked in a drawer. The DON said glucose test strips should always be dated with the opening date and medication should be disposed of in “drug buster” not the trash can. The DON reviewed the pictures of the medication cup with pills that had been left in the medication cart. She said she did not know what the pills were and said they should never have been left like that. The DON agreed the resident might have missed their medication. The DON said often residents hearing aids or money are locked in the medication carts overnight or until a family picks the items up. She said for over 30 years she has been doing this job items were locked in the narcotic box with medications. The DON said she did not know who used the “Nursing Supervisor” office on the C wing, but it should be locked if there is medication in there. Review of a facility policy titled “Medication Labeling and Storage,” revised February 2023, showed: Policy Statement: The facility stores all medications and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature, humidity and light controls. Only authorized personnel have access to keys. Policy Interpretation and Implementation Medication Storage 1. Medications and biologicals are stored in the packaging comma containers or other dispensing systems in which they are received. Only the issuing pharmacy is authorized to transfer medications between containers. 2. The nursing staff is responsible for maintaining medication storage and preparation areas in a clean, safe, and sanitary manner… 4. Compartments (including, but not limited to, drawers, cabinets, rooms, refrigerators, carts, and boxes) containing medications and biologicals are locked when not in use, and trays or carts used to transport such items are not left unattended if open or otherwise potentially available to others…
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0809 (Tag F0809)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to offer a nourishing evening snack for seven residents (Resident #3, #131, #33, #181, #108, #60, and #10) out of seven residents sampled for...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to offer a nourishing evening snack for seven residents (Resident #3, #131, #33, #181, #108, #60, and #10) out of seven residents sampled for dining.Findings included: During a Resident Council meeting on 08/27/2025 at 11:15 a.m., Resident #131 stated residents were not offered evening snacks. She stated she was aware snacks were available on the floors, just not being offered by the staff. Also, stated she'd asked for an evening snack from staff more than once and was told they were out of snacks or didn't have any left. During Resident Council meeting on 08/27/2025 at 11:15 a.m., Resident's #33, #3, #181, and #108 voiced concerns regarding the snacks. Resident #33 stated she had been told more than once snacks were not available at night. Resident #3 stated only one CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) regularly offered snacks, usually offered cookies, on nights he worked. Residents #33, #3, #108, and #181 all agreed stating they would enjoy an evening snack as there is a large time gap between dinner and breakfast. During an interview on 08/27/2025 at 4:00p.m., Resident #10 stated not being offered an evening snack and would love if the facility would offer a snack in the evening as she didn't enjoy the food for the main meals and often ordered out. During an interview on 08/27/2025 at 4:23p.m., Resident #60 stated not being offered an evening snack and needed to have one as being a diabetic. She stated there is one CNA who would offer residents cookies or crackers when he worked nights, but he was the only one who walked around offering snacks. During an interview on 8/27/25 at 3:44 p.m. with Staff II, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), stated snacks are available on the unit. The LPN stated if a resident is diabetic or has an order for a snack, a snack is supposed to be taken to the resident. Staff II stated residents would need to ask the staff if they wanted a snack, the staff do not offer an evening snack to all residents.During an interview with resident #131 on 08/28/2025 at11:30a.m., the resident voiced she was not offered evening snacks regularly. Resident stated depending on who her CNA was for the evening shift she would sometimes be brought a snack if she'd asked for one, however it was never just offered to all residents. Stated she had been told more than once by the staff no snacks were available when she'd asked.During an interview on 08/28/2025 at 3:27 p.m., the Dietary Manager (DM) verified there was a 15-hour gap between dinner and breakfast. The DM stated snacks such as crackers, cookies, and sandwiches are delivered to the units before lunch in case residents want something in between meals. The DM did not know whether the staff were offering them to the residents, but residents should receive a snack if they ask for one. Review of the facility's Meal Delivery Schedule, dated 10/28/2024, revealed: - Dinner: C Wing: 4:00-4:30 p.m., A wing: 4:30-5:00 p.m., Main Dining Room: 5:0-5:15p.m., B wing: 5:15-5:30p.m., D wing: 5:30-5:45p.m.- Breakfast: C wing: 7:00-7:30a.m., A Wing: 7:30-8:00a.m., Main Dining Room: 8:00-8:15a.m., B Wing: 8:15-8:30a.m., D Wing: 8:30-8:45a.m.- Meal Delivery Schedule revealed 15 hours between dinner and breakfast for all wings as well as the Main Dining area.Review of the facility Policy titled Resident Dining Services revealed the following: Purpose:The facility will follow these guidelines to ensure meals are served in a pleasant atmosphere, diets are being served as ordered by the physician, foods are at appropriate temperatures and meet the individual residents' needs.Steps:1. Dining location will be determined based on resident preference and needs. The interdisciplinary team will assist with decisions if needed.2. The Director of Food and Nutrition Services develops a process that indicates the order in which residents are to be served in dining rooms and room trays. This process is updated as needed.3. Nursing staff will assist residents to appropriate dining locations in a timelymanner.4. Mealtimes will be posted in a central location and will be comparable to normal times in the community.5. Residents seated together will receive meals at the same time (served by table) so that they may dine together.6. Staff members assigned to passing meal trays will practice proper hand hygiene techniques (handwashing or use of hand sanitizer) between each table served in the dining room, or each resident served on the hall.7. Food transported through hallways will be completely covered.8. Only Licensed Nurses, Certified Nursing Assistants, Therapists, or trained and certified staff may feed residents per state regulations.9. The time between the evening meal and breakfast will not exceed 14 hours unless a substantial snack is served at HS. When a substantial HS snack is served, up to 16 hours may elapse between an evening meal and breakfast the following day if a resident group agrees to this meal span.10. Residents who wish to eat outside of the scheduled meal times will have access to an always available menu that provides the equivalent nutritional content to meet the recommended dietary guidelines.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0919 (Tag F0919)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure a functioning call light system for four resi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure a functioning call light system for four residents (#169, #125, #147, and #84) out of four residents sampled for call lights. Findings included: An interview was conducted on 8/25/25 at 11:03 a.m. with Resident #169. He/she said after admission it was discovered the call light didn’t work and it was reported. Residen#169 said it took until the next day until the call light was fixed, and he/she was not provided a hand bell or anything to get staff’s attention. Review of admission Records showed Resident #169 was admitted on [DATE]. Review of Resident #169 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], Section C, Cognitive Patterns, showed a brief Interview for mental (BIMS) score of 15, indicating she was cognitively intact. An interview was conducted on 8/25/25 at 5:00 p.m. with Resident #125. Resident #125 stated the call light was not working. He/she was unsure of when it worked last but notified staff early that morning and was told it was reported to maintenance. The resident was observed pushing the call light button and the light in the room did not light up and the lights/sound outside the room did not trigger. Review of admission Records showed Resident #125 was admitted on [DATE]. Review of Resident #125 BIMS, dated 7/29/25, showed a score of 13 indicating he/she is cognitively intact. An observation and interview was conducted on 8/25/25 at 5:41 p.m. with Staff Y, Unit Manager (UM). Staff Y was observed entering Resident #125’s room and testing the call light. Staff Y confirmed the call light did not function inside or outside the room. Staff Y said this was the first they had heard of the light in the resident’s room not working. Staff Y said if staff were notified it should have been reported and fixed immediately. An interview was conducted on 8/25/25 at 5:54 p.m. with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA). The NHA was unaware of call light issues and stated she would do a full house audit. She said her expectation would be for all call lights to be functioning. Review of the audit provided by the NHA showed the first full house audit was completed on 8/25/25 from 6-6:45 p.m. During that audit it was discovered the call light was not working in 128A and 315A. It was also discovered the call light did not work for the resident in 406A. A second full house call light audit was conducted on 8/25/25 during the 11 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. shift on 8/26/25. There were no additional call light concerns noted. A third full house call light audit was conducted on 8/26/25 from 6:30-7:30 a.m. room [ROOM NUMBER] A was discovered to not have a call light in place. room [ROOM NUMBER] was found to have a non-working call light. room [ROOM NUMBER] B was found to not have a functioning call light. The NHA said all of the problems were corrected. An interview was conducted on 8/28/25 at 6:15 p.m. with the Maintenance Director. He said maintenance tests call lights in eight random rooms each month to ensure they are functioning. He said staff should put a request in the maintenance system when they find a call light issue. The Maintenance Director said no request was made and no one notified him on 8/25/25 of the call light not working for Resident #125. He said when a new admission came in the maintenance team did pre-admission check lists to ensure a room is ready and part of that is checking the call light for functionality. The Maintenance Director assisted with the full house call light audits on 8/25-8/26/25. He said every room was checked including empty rooms. He said 99% of the time the issue was the call light cord/button, not the main system. On 8/28/25 at 6:38 p.m. the Director of Nursing said there is no policy on call light functioning. 2. On 08/25/2025 at 10:23 A.M., an observation was made of Resident #147’s call light in a dresser drawer, which was closed and out of reach of the resident. Photographic evidence was obtained. On 08/27/2025 at 12:30 P.M., an observation was made of Resident #147’s call light hanging towards the floor from inside the dresser drawer. The Maintenance Director (DOM) walked into the resident’s room and the resident motioned for the call light with an outstretched arm in the direction of the call light. The resident was unable to speak English. The DOM walked over and passed the call light to the resident. Photographic evidence was obtained. On 08/26/2025 at 10:15 A.M., the call light for Resident #84 was observed to not be working. When pressed, the light in the hall did not trigger and staff did not respond after a second pressing of the call light. Staff S, RN UM was notified of the call light for Resident #84, not working and checked and confirmed the call light was not working. Staff S, RN Um stated maintenance would be notified to fix the call light. On 08/28/2025 at 09:39 A.M., an interview was conducted with Staff I, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). During the interview, Staff I, CNA stated call lights are placed on resident beds and within reach of residents. If a call light is identified to not be working, the staff notifies maintenance. On 08/28/2025 at 09:59 A.M., an interview was conducted with Staff J, CNA. Staff J, stated call lights should be placed on a resident’s bed if the resident is not in bed and in the resident’s chest area if the resident is in bed. Staff J, CNA stated rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] had non-functioning call lights. Staff J, CNA stated if a call light is not working, maintenance should be notified through a paper form at the nurse station. Staff J, CNA stated there is no reason a call light should be in a drawer. On 08/28/2025 at 10:25 A.M., an interview was conducted with Staff Q, CNA. Staff Q, CNA stated call lights should be in reach of residents. Staff Q, CNA stated if a resident is in bed, the call light would be placed in the resident’s hand or clipped to the bed. Staff Q, CNA stated residents in B wing typically do not use call lights and the residents throw them down. Staff Q, CNA stated there is no reason a call light should be tucked in a drawer. On 08/28/2025 at 11:15 A.M., an interview was conducted with Staff R, Registered Nurse (RN). Staff R, RN stated if a call light is not working, a ticket would be opened in the facility’s maintenance work order system, and it would be assigned critical for maintenance to look at. On 08/28/2025 at 12:21 P.M., an interview was conducted with Staff S, Registered Nurse Unit Manager (RN UM). Staff S, RN UM stated call lights should be placed within reach of the residents, so the residents could use the call lights. Staff S, RN Um stated the call light should not be tucked in a bed, wrapped around rails, and not put away. Staff S RN UM explained being aware of call lights not working. Staff S, RN UM stated the system for call lights was not down, only a few call lights were not working. Staff S, RN UM stated residents don’t really use call lights, only a few residents use them.
CONCERN (F) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1) A clean and sanitary kitchen where food i...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1) A clean and sanitary kitchen where food is prepared and served; and 2) an operating dish washing machine on a consistent manner observed during the four days of survey in the facility kitchen. Findings included: -On 8/25/2025 at 9:20 a.m. the kitchen was entered and toured with the Kitchen Manager. Upon entering the space, there was a clean handwashing sink with a soap dispenser and a paper towel holder. No trash can to dispose of the used paper towels was observed. There was no trash can anywhere within a twenty-five to thirty foot span to dispose of used paper towels. The Kitchen Manager revealed he did not know where the trash can went and left the space to find another one. He returned with a large tan trash can with a lid that was able to be opened with a foot pedal device. The trash can was visibly used and half full with refuse. The top of the trash can lid was observed with red and brown sticky substances, as well as along the left side of it. Photographic evidence was taken. The immediate area of the clean hand washing sink to include the walls on the right and left side, the floor tiles just below, were observed with new and old food debris, as well as compressed piles of dust and debris. The immediate space of the hand washing sink was observed soiled. Photographic evidence was taken. -The food service/food preparation area to include the steam table and cooking area, was observed with a long line of dust and debris hanging from the ceiling and light fixture. It was observed the dust and debris build up was directly over food preparation areas, food holding areas, as well as food serving areas. Photographic evidence was taken. -The ceilings and walls near the three compartment sink area, as well as above a two compartment sink near the dish washing machine area revealed brown sticky spotting that appeared to be food debris, or liquids. The spots were observed again during tours on 8/26/2025 at 8:30 a.m. and again on 8/27/2025 at 11:00 a.m. On 8/27/2025 at 1:50 p.m. an interview with the Kitchen Manager revealed the kitchen supports a daily cleaning schedule and stated daily cleaning assignments include the cleaning of walls, floors, cooking and food preparation equipment, as well as food service equipment. He revealed generally the entire kitchen space is cleaned between all meal services. The Kitchen Manager confirmed the observed areas of concern to include liquid and food debris spotting on the walls and ceiling, heavy dust and debris on the ceilings and ceiling vents above food cooking and food preparation stations, and various other soiled areas. The Kitchen Manager revealed the ceiling cleaning maintenance is the responsibility of the Maintenance department and he believed Maintenance will clean the ceilings and vents once monthly. During a telephone interview on 8/26/2025 with a family member related to Resident #8, as well as a documented complaint dated 7/9/2025, it was revealed the family had concerns with the facility's dish washing machine and residents were being provided with Styrofoam containers, and paper and plastic eating utensils for all three meals, every day, since 7/9/2025. She stated she had been told the kitchen had lost a staff member and the machine had broken down. She was not given timeframes of when the machine would be operating again. Resident #8's family member was concerned the residents in the building were not being provided with regular eating ware to provide a good homelike and dignified eating experience and this had been going on for well over one month. On 8/25/2025 at 9:20 a.m. a tour was conducted with the Kitchen Manager. He revealed they have a High Temperature dish washing machine but it was currently not operating and had not been working for some time. The Kitchen Manager revealed they are utilizing the three compartment sink to wash pots and pans and adaptive eating equipment, but are giving residents paper and plastic eating utensils and Styrofoam containers to eat with during all three meal services. The Kitchen Manager revealed the dish washing machine had not been working for over a month and a half, but did not know the exact date when it first broke down. He stated they have worked with the Maintenance department and the Maintenance Director has communicated with the outside sourced dish machine repair company and he believes they are still awaiting parts. The Kitchen Manager stated it has been a long time where residents were using paper, plastic and Styrofoam for all their meals and he understands some have been complaining of the continued use. The Kitchen Manager did not know if the Nursing Home Administrator and Activities staff have notified the residents of the broken down machine, nor did he know if the residents were provided with continual status on when the machine would be fixed and whey they would be able to use regular eating ware. On 8/25/2025 at 11:25 a.m. an interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and Maintenance Director both confirmed the kitchen has been having some ongoing problems with the dish washing machine, which has made it inoperable. The Maintenance Director revealed the Dish Machine has had problems starting over a month ago, but not sure exactly when the problem started. He revealed there were issues with getting parts that needed replacing, as well as proper heated water getting to the heater booster, which is not getting heated enough to support the High Temperature Wash and Rinse cycle. He revealed they had increased the booster temps, etc., but that has not worked. He, along with the NHA, both confirmed they have been using paper and plastic since the first time the machine broke down, which has been over a month. On 8/27/2025 the Nursing Home Administrator provided a documented timeline to show when the dish washing machine broke down and what measures were taken and it showed the following: -On 7/10/2025 the dish washing machine was reported not working by a kitchen staff member. The Maintenance Director called the machine's service repair company. -On 7/11/2025 the machine's service repair company assessed the machine and could not get it to work. It was documented the service repair person left without repairing. -On 7/14/2025 the service repair company was called again to get status on when the machine would be fixed. -On 7/15/2025 the machine's service repair company called the facility and revealed they would not come out to do further work as the facility had outstanding invoices that had not been paid to them. -On 7/25/2025 when the machine's service repair company returned and re assessed the dish washing machine and provided an estimate of $2,641.53 to fully fix the machine. -On 7/28/2025 the facility approved the estimate and had the machine's service repair company order parts. -It was documented from 7/28/2025 through to 8/14/2025, the facility was still awaiting for the machine's service repair company to get parts and return to the facility. -On 8/15/2025 the machine's service repair company came out with parts and tried to fix the machine with no success. -On 8/25/2025 when the machine's service repair company returned to again try and fix the machine. The service was unsuccessful. The machine's service repair company came back again on 8/27/2025 and tried to fix the machine, which was unsuccessful. An interview was conducted with the Kitchen Manager on 8/26/2025 who stated the machine could have been operated and switched from a High Temperature Wash and Rinse cycle option, to a Low Temperature Wash and Rinse with a Sanitizer agent option, but he only knew about this for a couple of weeks. He felt he would have rather of waited for the parts to continue the machine operating at High Temperature requirements. He stated when the dish machine broke on 7/10/2025, the facility could have switched from High Temperature option to Low Temperature with Chemical Sanitizer option, but did not. A review of the Resident Council meeting minutes for months 2/2025, 3/2025, 4/2025, 5/2025, 6/2025, 7/2025, 8/2025 all did not have any documentation to support residents were notified of the dish washing machine being broken and when it would be fixed. The minutes did not identify the facility would be utilizing paper, plastic utensils and eating ware and Styrofoam containers long term. A review of the Food Committee minutes for months 6/2025, 7/2025, and 8/2025 did not support any documentation indicating the dish washing machine was broken and residents would be using paper, plastic eating ware, and Styrofoam containers for long term use. On 8/27/2025 at 11:00 a.m. a resident group meeting to include Residents #3, #131, #92, #99, #136, #108, #141, #33, and #181 all revealed the facility has been having issues with the dish washing machine for more than a couple of months. They revealed there had been problems in 3/2025 and intermittent problems from 4/2025 through to 7/2025. The revealed the machine broke the last time around the first week of 7/2025 and had been broken ever since. They revealed the facility has been providing all residents with paper, plastic eating utensils, and Styrofoam containers for all their meals and nobody has communicated with them with a status of the machine and when it will be fixed. All the residents at this group meeting confirmed they do not like eating from paper and plastic on a routine bases and would like regular eating ware to use. All the above listed residents revealed they have not been communicated with either by way verbally or through documentation indicating when the dish washing machine would be fixed again, nor were they indicated on the status of it. A review of the past six months of resident council meeting minutes to include months (3/2025 - 8/2025) did not indicate any documentation to support residents were notified of the dish washing machine breaking and that they would have to use paper and plastic eating utensils and Styrofoam containers. On 8/28/2025 the Nursing Home Administrator and Kitchen Manager provided the facility's Cleaning Schedules Policy Interpretation and Implementation procedure with a date of 06/2025 for review. The policy stated:Cleaning schedules are posted in the kitchen area in the Master Cleaning Manual which follows a daily, weekly, monthly routine. 1. The Food Service Director is responsible for development and revision of cleaning schedules. 2. Cleaning schedules are posted in the kitchen area in the manual, it is the responsibility of the employee to initial/sign appropriate for when task is complete.3. Cleaning duties are assigned based on employee's job duties.4. The [NAME] Service Director spot checks to ensure that proper procedures are followed. The Nursing Home Administrator and Kitchen Manager did not have or provide a Dish Washing Machine operations policy and procedure for review.
CONCERN (F)

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

Garbage Disposal (Tag F0814)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure the large outside trash compactor area was free from refuse and trash debris during one of one days observed (8/25/20...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure the large outside trash compactor area was free from refuse and trash debris during one of one days observed (8/25/2025). Findings included: On 8/25/2025 at 9:35 a.m. the Kitchen Manager provided an outside tour of the facility in the back alley way. During the observation, there was a very large tan colored trash compactor/dumpster positioned in the alley on a non porous surface. The trash compactor door was observed closed. However, further observations revealed many pieces of trash/refuse on the ground on either side, and the back behind and front of the compactor. The refuse/debris included used/soiled clear plastic gloves, clear full bags of opened trash/refuse, used/soiled plastic Styrofoam containers, many used plastic straws, and loose used crumpled napkins and paper. Photographic evidence was taken. On 8/28/2025 at 1:00 p.m. an interview with the Maintenance Director revealed they have been having issues with trash debris surrounding the trash dumpster/compactor. He revealed the trash/refuse comes from all departments and the department staff are continually educated on how to properly dispose of the trash/refuse. The Maintenance Director also confirmed they do have many ducks in the area and they do get to the trash dumpster/compactor and the staff try to do their best to keep them away. The Maintenance Director did not have any documentation to support continued monitoring of the dumpster/compactor area. On 8/28/2025 the Kitchen Manager and Maintenance Director provided the facility's Procedure Trash Compactor policy with no revision date for review. The policy stated; 1. Collect trash in garbage liners in cans, 2. Roll out to compactor, 3. Place in compactor close door, 4. Push the compactor button to compact garage.The policy did not specify the routine cleaning maintenance of the trash compactor or it's surrounding area.
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0847 (Tag F0847)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure the residents or their representatives acknowledged understa...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure the residents or their representatives acknowledged understanding of the binding arbitration agreement and the agreement is not required as a condition of admission or as a requirement to continue to, receive care for three residents (#19, #117 and #215) of three residents sampled. Findings included: 1. On 8/27/25 at 10:04 a.m., an interview was conducted with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA). She presented a list of residents who have recently signed arbitration agreements. Review of the admission Record for Resident #19 revealed an admission date of 7/24/25 with diagnoses to include Type 2 diabetes, peripheral vascular disease; acquired absence of right leg above knee and other co-morbidies. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], showed Resident #19 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Review of the admission Agreement attachment titled, Agreement to Resolved Disputes by Binding Arbitration was signed by Resident #19 and the facility admission Director on 7/27/25. On 8/28/25 at 6:41 p.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #19. The resident recalled signing a bunch of papers on admission, and a lady going through all the papers. 2. Review of the admission Record for Resident #117 revealed an admission date of 7/23/25 and re-admission of 8/5/25 with diagnoses of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease with (acute) lower respiratory infection (COPD), Atrial Fibrillation (A-Fib), endocarditis, and other co-morbidities. Review of the MDS, dated [DATE], showed Resident #117 had a BIMS score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition.Review of the admission Agreement attachment titled, Agreement to Resolved Disputes by Binding Arbitration was signed by Resident #117 and the facility admission Director on 8/6/25. On 8/28/28 at 6:35 pm., an interview was conducted with Resident #117. Resident #117 stated not being sure of signing paperwork upon admission as being ill at admission and not being in the right frame of mind. 3. Review of the admission Record for Resident #215 revealed an admission date of 8/20/25 with diagnoses of neoplasm (cancer) related pain and other co-morbidities. Review of the MDS, dated [DATE], showed Resident #215 had a BIMS score of 14 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Review of the admission Agreement attachment titled, Agreement to Resolved Disputes by Binding Arbitration was signed by Resident #215 and the facility admission Coordinator on 8/25/25. On 8/28/28 at 6:33 pm, an interview was conducted with Resident #215. Resident #215 stated recalling signing the admission paperwork and was not sure if the documents were optional. During an interview on 08/28/2025 at 5:42 p.m. the admission Coordinator (AC), stated being responsible along with the admission Director (AD) for ensuring residents admitted to the facility have signed the appropriate admission documents, including the Arbitration Agreement which is part of the admission paperwork. The AC explained the arbitration agreement is discussed with all residents admitted . The arbitration agreement is between the facility and the resident. If the resident signs the arbitration agreement, the resident is agreeing to not seek legal action against the facility but go to arbitration with the facility and themselves. We explain to them how to make a request, and the agreement is a legal document. We tell the residents they do not have to sign the agreement, although I do not see in the agreement where it states it is optional. The AC continued to state not being able to find in the agreement the residents can still contact state personnel if they would like to. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 6:30 p.m. the NHA stated being new to the facility and has not had a chance to read the agreement. A policy and procedure for the signing of the arbitration agreement was requested and the NHA stated on 8/28/25 at 6:35 p.m. that they are looking for the policy but don't think we have one.
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0848 (Tag F0848)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the arbitration agreement provided for the selection of a neutral arbitrator agreed upon by both parties for three (#19, #117 and #...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the arbitration agreement provided for the selection of a neutral arbitrator agreed upon by both parties for three (#19, #117 and #215) of three residents sampled. Findings included: Review of the Agreement to Resolve Disputes by Binding Arbitration revealed under section C. Who Will Conduct Arbitration. The Arbitration shall be conducted by the American Health Lawyers Association ( AHLA) through its Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) service. If the AHLA process is no longer in existence at the time of the dispute, or AHLA is unwilling or unable to conduct the arbitration, then facility shall choose another independent entity that is regularly engaged in providing ADR services to conduct the mediation or arbitration.The form was signed by Resident #19 on 7/27/25.The form was signed by Resident #117 on 8/6/25.The form was signed by Resident #215 on 8/25/25.During an interview on 08/28/2025 at 5:42 p.m. with the admission Coordinator (AC), stated the agreement does not appear to give the resident a choice for arbitration. During an interview on 8/28/25 at 6:30 p.m. the NHA stated being new to the facility and has not had a chance to read the agreement. A policy and procedure for the signing of the arbitration agreement was requested and the NHA stated on 8/28/25 at 6:35 p.m. that they are looking for the policy but don't think we have one.
CONCERN (F)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an effective infection control program was i...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an effective infection control program was implemented related to: a) improper use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE); b) contact/isolation signs not posted and precautions not followed by staff; and c) hand hygiene practices were not conducted properly in four of four wings observed.Findings included: 1) On 08/25/2025 Observed room [ROOM NUMBER] to have Special Contact/Droplet isolation sign posted at the door. PPE caddy was present at the door Resident from room observed wheeling herself through the hallways and interacting with staff, resident was not wearing any mask. Interviewed Staff AA, unit clerk on 08/25/2025 at 10:25AM. She stated the resident was on Special Contact/Droplet precautions for the wound on her foot. Voiced resident had a wound vac requiring the isolation precaution. Interview with Staff Y, RN manager on 08/26/2025 about resident's precaution and she stated the resident was exposed to covid because her roommate was positive for COVID, however the resident never exhibited any symptoms, so she was free to go around the facility. Stated the resident also left the facility a few days per week to attend mental health classes. Interview 08/27/2025 at 12:16PM with Staff BB, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). CNA stated she didn't have room [ROOM NUMBER] on that day, however, she previously had her many times, and stated her Special Contact/Droplet precautions were for the wound on her foot. Staff BB voiced the only time they were required to wear the PPE was when they were doing direct patient care. Two observations were made, one on 08/25/2025 at 10:20AM and another on 08/27/2025 at 12:15PM, of staff entering room [ROOM NUMBER] without proper PPE for special contact/droplet precautions. 2. An observation was conducted on 8/25/2025 at 10:06 a.m. room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER] had a personal protective equipment (PPE) caddy hanging from the door. No isolation sign was present. An interview was conducted on 8/25/2025 at 10:21 AM outside room [ROOM NUMBER]. Staff A, Unit Manager (UM) stated she/he was not sure of the isolation precautions but would find out. An interview was conducted on 8/25/2025 at 10:30 AM with Staff JJ, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). The staff member stated if there is no sign it probably means they don’t have anything so there is no need to put any PPE on. An observation and interview was conducted on 8/25/2025 at 10:36 a.m. with Staff A, UM. Staff A was observed placing a special contact droplet isolation sign on the door. Staff A stated the residents in room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER] were positive for COVID-19 and the signs should have been on the door. Staff A stated PPE would be required to enter the room. An interview was conducted on 8/28/2025 at 5:26 p.m. with the Infection Preventionist (IP). The IP agreed with the following; the proper isolation signage should be posted outside the door to the room, the staff members should be following the correct PPE requirements, foley catheter should not be hanging from a trash can, and staff should understand what the isolation precautions are for. 3. An observation was conducted on 8/26/25 at 4:55 p.m. of Staff R, LPN. Staff R was observed administering an injection to a resident in the hallway next to the medication cart. After Staff R completed the injection, he/she poured a cup of water, handled items inside the mediation cart and administered pills to the resident. Then proceeded to another resident room. No hand hygiene was completed throughout the process. An observation and interview was conducted on 8/2/25 at 5:08 p.m. with Staff R. Staff R was observed entering a resident room to check a resident’s blood glucose level. Staff R carried the bottle containing glucose monitoring strips into the resident room and set it on the resident’s bedside table with no barrier. Upon completion of the blood glucose check, Staff R returned the bottle containing blood glucose monitoring strips to the medication cart without cleaning the bottle. Staff R confirmed the bottle was placed in the cart without being cleaned. He/she also confirmed the bottle of strips was not for that individual resident but for all residents that needed their blood glucose checked. Staff R said hand hygiene should have been completed after the resident’s injection and prior to gathering medications and again prior to entering another resident room. An observation was conducted on 8/28/25 at 12:51 p.m. of Staff EE, RN. Staff EE was observed entering a resident room to take their blood pressure. He/she placed the blood pressure cuff on the resident’s bed with no barrier, then moved the blood pressure cuff to the resident’s bedside table. After completing the tasks in the resident’s room, Staff EE exited the room and placed the blood pressure cuff on top of the medication cart with no barrier and without cleaning it. An observation was conducted on 8/25/25 at 10:46 a.m. of a respiratory mask sitting on a table uncovered in room [ROOM NUMBER]. The resident said the mask was always left standing up on the machine and he/she had never seen it in a bag. The mask remained sitting out uncovered on 8/27/25 at 2:22 p.m. An interview was conducted on 8/28/25 at 2:17 p.m. with the DON. The DON said hand hygiene should always be completed after an injection and between each resident room. She also stated the blood pressure cuff should not have been taken from a resident room and placed on the medication cart without being cleaned first. The DON also confirmed respiratory masks should be placed in bags in resident rooms, not be left sitting out on the table uncovered. 4. On 8/25/25 at 10:01 a.m., an observation of room [ROOM NUMBER] revealed there were two precaution signs on the door. Further observations of the signs revealed one was for enhanced barrier precaution (EBP) and the other was for contact precautions. An observation of the inside of room [ROOM NUMBER] revealed Staff C, Housekeeping Aide had a mask and gloves on, but no gown. On 8/25/25 at 10:20 a.m., an observation of Resident #172 was conducted. He was laying down in bed and the foley catheter was observed clipped to the garbage can, with garbage inside, and the bag was touching the floor. He said it is there because that was the lowest position. Resident #172 said sometimes he or staff puts the catheter bag on the garbage. On 8/25/25 at 12:07 p.m., an observation of Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)/Unit Manager (UM) was observed with longer than ¼ inch, artificial nails with multiple gems on them. On 8/25/25 at 4:39 p.m., an observation of dinner tray passing revealed Staff K, CNA went into room [ROOM NUMBER] without any personal protective equipment (PPE) on. An observation of the wall next to the door of room [ROOM NUMBER] revealed the EBP and contact precaution signs were still there. On 8/26/25 at 10:30 a.m., an attempt was made to interview Staff C, Housekeeping Aide, however, she said she did not speak English. On 8/26/25 at 10:35 a.m., Staff C, Housekeeping Aide was interviewed with the assistance of Staff D, Floor Technician. Staff C, Housekeeping Aide said for rooms with an EBP sign, she puts on gloves and a gown. She said for residents with COVID-19, she puts on a mask. Staff C, Housekeeping Aide said she knows a resident had COVID-19 because she hears them coughing. She said before entering a room with contact precautions, she first uses hand sanitizer, then puts on gloves and a gown. She said her supervisor educated her on what the different precaution signs mean and the appropriate PPE to put on. A review of Resident #172’s admission record revealed an original admission date of 6/7/24 and re-admission date of 5/23/25. Further review of the admission record revealed diagnoses to include malignant neoplasm of bladder, unspecified, urinary tract infection, site not specified, extended spectrum beta lactamase (ESBL) resistance, need for assistance with personal care, and unsteadiness on feet. A review of Resident #172’s comprehensive MDS, dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS score of 15, cognitively intact. A review of Resident #172’s physician orders revealed the following to include: - “Indwelling Urinary Catheter care every shift with soap and water. every shift for Catheter,” with a start date of 5/23/25. - “Indwelling urinary catheter 20 FR [French] 30 cc [cubic centimeters] to straight drainage for diagnosis of malignant neoplasm of bladder,” with a start date of 5/27/25. A review of Resident #172’s progress notes from 8/20/25 to 8/27/25 revealed no documentation related to the resident’s preference of putting the catheter bag on the garbage can. A review of Resident #172’s care plan revealed the following to include: - “The staff have identified that I am at risk for falls r/t [related to] emphysema, COPD [chronic obstructive pulmonary disease], morbid obesity, psychotropic drug use, incontinences, possible s/e [side effects] of medications. Date Initiated: 06/10/2024 …” - “At times I can refuse to have my Foley catheter check for placement Date Initiated: 03/06/2025 .” - “[Resident name] can be noncompliant with medication as ordered. He is not always easily redirected r/t [related to]. Patient education and 1:1 [one to one] in regard to prescribed medication, use, health condition and risks of noncompliance. Staff will continue to encourage compliance, redirect as able. Physician aware. Date Initiated: 05/24/2025 …” - “[Resident name] resistive to care,medications, treatments, ADl's [Activities of Daily Living] At times I will refuse medications, treatments, ADL,showers. labs/care, showers, and lab diagnostics. Date Initiated: 11/21/2024 …” - “I utilize an indwelling catheter due to obstructive and reflux uropathy, bladder cancer Date Initiated: 06/10/2024. …” with interventions to include the following, “Check position of leg strap/anchor for placement as per orders Date Initiated: 02/27/2025 … Keep catheter bag below the level of the bladder. Date Initiated: 12/12/2024. …” On 8/27/25 at 12:11 p.m., an observation of Resident #172 revealed the same concerns observed on 8/25/25 related to the catheter bag. The resident gave permission to take photographic evidence. On 8/27/25 at 12:26 p.m., an interview was conducted with Staff B, LPN who confirmed Resident #172 is in her assignment today. She said she follows orders for catheter care and bag placement. Staff B, LPN said she last saw Resident #172’s catheter bag clipped to the side of the bed. She said she’s had this resident a few times and has never seen the catheter bag anywhere else besides the side of the bed. Staff B, LPN said it would not be okay for it to be clipped on to the garbage can. On 8/27/25 at 12:31 p.m., an interview was conducted with Staff A, LPN/UM. An observation of her nails revealed the same concerns observed on 8/25/25. She confirmed Resident #172 moves the catheter bag to the garbage. Staff A, LPN/UM said he walks and has the ability to move it to the garbage. She said it is not okay to have the catheter bag clipped to the garbage. Regarding EBP signs, Staff A, LPN/UM said if staff are having contact or providing care to the resident they need to wear a gown and gloves. She said if it’s delivery of a meal tray or providing medicine to a resident the staff do not need to wear PPE. She said for contact precautions, if care is being provided then a gown, gloves, and mask need to be worn. Staff A, LPN/UM said if there’s no contact with a resident, and they are on contact precautions, then PPE does not need to be worn. She said if it was a housekeeping staff member going into a room with contact precautions, she would advise them to put on a gown. She stated, “If it’s just to mop and clean,” then the housekeeping staff would not need to wear PPE. On 8/28/25 at 10:38 a.m., an interview was conducted with the Risk Manager (RM)/Infection Preventionist (IP). She said a resident is care planned depending on the behavior, what they are refusing, and if it is an acute or on-going behavior. She said a catheter bag should not be clipped to the garbage can or touching the floor because it is an issue of risk of pathogens. The RM/IP said if Resident #172 puts the catheter bag on the trash can, there should be a care plan for resident preference. She confirmed Resident #172’s care plan was updated today for putting the foley bag on the trash can. A review of the facility’s policy titled, “Handwashing/Hand Hygiene,” with a revision date of October 2023, revealed the following, “ … Indications for Hand Hygiene 1. Hand hygiene is indicated: a. immediately before touching a resident; b. before performing an aseptic task (for example, placing an indwelling device or handling an invasive medical device); c. after contact with blood, body fluids, or contaminated surfaces; d. after touching a resident; e. After touching the resident’s environment; f. Before moving from work on a soiled body site to a clean body site on the same resident; and g. immediately after glove removal.” Further review of the policy revealed the following, “Promoting Healthy Hand Skin and Fingernails a. Personnel with direct-care resident responsibilities should maintain short, natural fingernails. a. Fingernails should not extend past to fingertips. b. Wearing artificial fingernails is strongly discouraged among staff members with direct resident-care responsibilities and is prohibited among those caring for severely ill or immunocompromised residents. …” A review of the facility's policy titled, Catheter Care, Urinary, revised August 2022, revealed the following, . Infection Control . 2. Be sure the catheter tubing and drainage bag are kept off the floor.
Feb 2025 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility did not ensure preferences were honored and dignity maintained for one resid...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility did not ensure preferences were honored and dignity maintained for one resident (#8) out of eight sampled residents. Findings included: An interview was conducted on 2/17/25 at 12:03 p.m. with Resident #8. The resident stated on several occasions she requested to only have female care givers for incontinence care. She said there were some male caregivers she did not want to care for her, and they were often assigned to her. Review of the admission Record showed Resident #8 was admitted [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including fracture of left lower leg, major depressive disorder, and morbid obesity. Review of Resident #8's care plan showed a Focus area: I need assistance with activities of daily living related to atrial fibrillation, fibromyalgia, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, diabetes mellitus type 2, and left lower leg fracture, initiated 6/6/24. Interventions included resident prefers female care givers, updated on 9/3/24. Review of Resident #8's Minimum Data Set (MDS), Section C - Cognitive Patterns, showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating she was mentally intact. Review of facility assignment sheets showed the resident was on the assignment of male caregivers on 1/8/25, 1/18/25, 2/14/25, and 2/15/25. An interview was conducted on 2/17/25 at 12:53 p.m. with Staff D, Registered Nurse (RN) and Unit Manager (UM). She said there are a few residents on the unit, including Resident #8, that have a preference for female caregivers. She said Resident #8 is ok with a couple of the male care givers but does not want certain male CNAs. She confirmed Resident #8's care plan said preference for female caregivers. The UM reviewed the facility assignment sheets and confirmed the male staff members assigned to Resident #8 included some of the male providers the resident requested to not have care for her. She stated doing the unit assignments and ensuring the residents who prefer female do not get male providers is a team effort. She said some certified nursing assistance (CNA's) have their normal assignments and she will fill in the open spots with agency nurses or additional staff. She said the nurses sometimes do the CNA's assignments, especially on the night shift. An interview was conducted on 2/17/25 at 1:15 p.m. with the Director of Nursing (DON). She confirmed Resident #8 is care planned for female caregivers. The DON reviewed the facility assignment sheets for 1/8/25, 1/18/25, 2/14/25, and 2/15/25 and confirmed the resident was assigned to male caregivers. She also confirmed there were female caregivers available those days. She stated she was not sure what system was in place to ensure the residents preferences were honored related to caregivers. She also said she provided a list to the units of the residents who requested no male caregivers but does not know specifically who verifies it is honored. The DON confirmed it is a problem Resident #8 was assigned male caregivers. An interview was conducted on 2/17/25 at 1:58 p.m. with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA). She said her expectation would be that a resident's [NAME] and care plan showed if a resident had a preference for female caregivers and that preference would be honored. The NHA said the unit manager and clinical leadership team should be ensuring the preference is honored. Review of a facility policy titled Resident Rights, revised 1/2024 showed: Policy Statement Employees shall treat all residents with kindness, respect, and dignity. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. Federal and state laws guarantee certain basic rights to all residents of this facility. These rights include the resident's right to: a. a dignified existence; b. be treated with respect, kindness, and dignity; e. self-determination i. exercise his or her rights without interference, coercion, discrimination or reprisal from the facility; p. be informed of, and participate in, his or her care planning and treatment
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to act upon resident's concerns and grievances for two residents (#3 ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to act upon resident's concerns and grievances for two residents (#3 and #8) of seven residents reviewed for grievances. Findings included: 1. During an observation and interview conducted on 2/16/25 at 12:05 p.m., Resident #3 stated she had concerns and filed several grievances related to call lights not being answered timely and her meal tray not always being set up in a way where she could reach it. She reported her concerns to the SSD (Social Services Director). The resident stated the SSD did not come to her with any feedback. She also stated there was a problem with medications, she does not receive her medications in a timely manner, and sometimes they are not available. She stated most recently last week, she did not receive her sleeping pill and it was not re-ordered. The ARNP (Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioner) ordered it the next day. The resident stated she filed a grievance about this. She stated there was a problem with staffing. Either they don't have enough staff or they don't care. Review of the admission Record for Resident #3 showed an admission date of 6/11/24. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] showed Resident #3 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15/15, indicating intact cognition. Review of the facility's grievance log dates 12/2/24 to 2/12/25 showed Resident #3 filed three grievances. Review of these grievances showed: - On 12/2/24: Resident stated it took too long to answer the call light. Resident indicated it took 45 minutes for the call light to be answered. Summary of findings: Call lights audits initiated routinely and education provided on the spot if necessary. Summary of action: Call lights audits initiated routinely and education provided on the spot if necessary. - On 2/12/25, Resident #3 filed two grievances: Grievance #1. Resident states during meals, the CNA's (Certified Nursing Assistants) will often put the tray on her bedside table and leave. Many times, she is unable to reach the table or it will get stuck as she can't get the wheels over her catheter tube, or if she is on her side she can't get onto her back in order to sit up and set up her food. Review of this grievance/concern form showed the facility investigation was blank, investigation conclusion was blank, actions completed to resolve the grievance was left blank. - Grievance #2. Resident states the nurses are not applying ointment to her knees TID (three times daily) and did not receive her sleeping pill last night. The resident states that she was told she was out of pills. Also states some nurses yell into her room from the hall rather than walking in and speaking with her and she does not like it. Review of this grievance/concern form showed the facility investigation was blank, investigation conclusion was blank, actions completed to resolve the grievance was left blank. On 2/16/25 at 2:31 p.m., an interview was conducted with the SSD. She stated department heads were doing call light audits to see how long it took for staff to answer. She stated, We had noticed it had been a slight delay, five to ten minutes, while the CNAs are in the rooms taking care of other residents. She stated the audit was going on prior to this resident submitting the grievance back in December 2024. The SSD stated the resolution was reported to the resident on 12/2/24, but she could not confirm if her issue was resolved. She stated she did not have any documentation for the call light audits or any education provided to staff. On 2/16/25 at 3:16 p.m. an interview was conducted with Staff D, Registered Nurse (RN) Unit Manager (UM). Staff D, RN UM stated they educated the CNAs about call lights and, It was not specific to that grievance. She stated they did not take any action related to these grievances and she was not aware of the grievances for the resident. An interview was conducted on 2/16/25 at 4:35 p.m. with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA), the Director of Nursing (DON), and the SSD. The SSD stated the grievances come to her by paper and she transfers the grievance form to an electronic report. This report did not have details, such as who received the grievance, who was notified or who investigated the issue. The review of the grievance on 2/12/25 showed the resident stated some nurses yell at her from the hallway. The review showed this grievance was marked compete, but the issue was not addressed. The SSD stated she thought the appropriate department would have addressed the issue and she marked complete, but did not verify. She also stated she did not speak to the resident. The NHA stated that grievance would have been something they needed to address right away and, Staff should not be yelling out to the resident from the hallway. She confirmed this part of the grievance was not addressed. On 2/16/25 at 3:11 p.m., Staff E, Regional Nurse Consultant (RNC) reviewed the grievances and said, I can see the investigation is missing. There is work that needs to be done there. Review of a facility policy titled Resident Rights, dated 1/2024 showed in the Policy Statement, employees shall treat all residents with kindness, respect, and dignity. The Policy Interpretation and Implementation showed federal and state laws guarantee certain basic rights to all residents of this facility. The rights include the resident's right to: u. voice grievances to the facility or other agency that hears grievances without discrimination and without fear of discrimination or reprisal. 2. During an interview on 2/17/25 at 11:55 a.m., the Resident Representative (RR) of Resident #8 stated they spoke to many of the staff, including the NHA, of concerns related to assisting Resident #8 in a timely manner and they haven't fixed anything. During an observation and interview conducted on 2/17/25 at 12:03 p.m., Resident #8 stated having concerns and they filed grievances regarding call lights being answered timely when needing assistance. The resident also stated no follow up has occurred. Review of the admission Record for Resident #8 showed an admission date of 6/6/24. Review of a quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed Resident #8 had a BIMS score of 14/15, indicating intact cognition. Review of the facility's grievance log dates 12/2/24 to 2/12/25 showed an absence of grievance(s) for Resident #8. During an interview on 2/17/25 at 2:00 p.m., the NHA stated speaking with the RR of Resident #8, although does not remember specifics. The NHA believes a grievance was completed although they did not see the grievance listed on the log. The expectation would be that all grievances are logged and follow up occurs. Review of a facility policy titled Resident and Family Concerns and Grievances Policy and Procedure, not dated, revealed: PURPOSE: To provide for the prompt resolution of medical and non-medical grievances while maintaining confidentiality, in accordance with applicable federal and state statutes and regulations. POLICY: [Facility Name] (the Facility) is committed to providing its residents with exceptional care and services. To ensure the continued provision of such exceptional care and services, the Facility and any and all owners, directors, officers, clinical staff, employees, independent contractors, consultants, and others working for the Facility (Associates), have an established grievance process to address resident and family member concerns or dissatisfaction about the Facility's provision of care and services. PROCEDURE: I. Filing of Grievances. A. Residents or their family members, guardian, or representative may voice a grievance to the Facility staff in person, by telephone, or via written communication. B. Should a resident require assistance in voicing a grievance, the Facility Associates shall provide any needed assistance to the resident. C. The Facility shall provide the attached Grievance Report Form to facilitate the voicing of a grievance if requested by a resident or family member. II. Documentation of Grievances A. The Facility's Compliance and Ethics Officer or a designated Associate will document and keep a log of all grievances expressed either orally and/or in writing on the day that it is received or as soon as possible after the event or events that precipitated the grievance. III. Investigation of Grievances A. The Facility's Compliance and Ethics Officer shall notify the management or supervisory staff responsible for the services or operations which are the subject of the grievance. The management or supervisory staff will commence a formal investigation of the grievance as soon as is practicable. IV. Responses to and Resolution of Grievances A. The Facility will follow up with resident or their family members, guardian, or representative within 72 hours of the filing of the grievance. B. The Facility will make reasonable efforts to ensure that all grievances are adequately resolved within thirty (30) calendar days from the day the grievance is received. C. The Facility will advise the resident of the outcome of the grievance investigation and shall make reasonable efforts to contact the resident's family members to advise them of the outcome of the grievance investigation. D. The Facility will provide the resident with a written Grievance Decision, which shall include: a. the date the grievance was received; b. a summary statement of the resident's grievance; c. the steps taken to investigate the grievance; d. a summary of the pertinent findings or conclusions regarding the resident's concern(s); e. a statement as to whether the grievance was confirmed or not confirmed; f. any corrective action taken or to be taken by the Facility as a result of the grievance; and g. the date the written decision was issued. E. In the event that the Facility cannot resolve the grievance within thirty (30) calendar days, the Facility will notify the resident, their family members, guardian, or representative of the status and estimated completion date of the grievance resolution. F. The Facility will document all steps of the grievance resolution in the Facility's records, including whether or not the resident/family was satisfied with the resolution. The documentation will be kept for a minimum of 3 years. V. Notification of Grievance Policy A. The Facility will notify residents, individually or through postings in prominent locations throughout the Facility, of the right to file a grievance. The notification must include the following information: a. Grievances may be filed orally or in writing, and may be anonymous; b. Contact information of the grievance official; c. A reasonable expected time frame for completing the review of the grievance; d. Filers have the right to obtain a written decision regarding a grievance; e. Contact information or the relevant state agency or Ombudsman program for filing a complaint.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure care and treatment was provided in accordanc...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure care and treatment was provided in accordance with professional standard of practice related to 1. Failure to ensure repositioning, skin integrity checks, and incontinence care was provided timely for one resident (#3) of three residents sampled, 2. Failure to ensure a lift transfer was conducted per facility protocol for one resident (#3) of three residents sampled, 3. Failure to ensure a call light was within reach for one resident (#7) of seven residents sampled, and 4. Failure to ensure medications were administered per physician orders for one resident (#3) of three residents sampled. Findings included: 1. During an observation and interview conducted on 2/16/25 at 12:05 p.m., Resident#3 stated she was not repositioned timely and she was afraid her wound on her bottom was going to reopen due to lack of repositioning. The resident stated today the CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) was here last about 10 a.m. Resident #3 stated when she pushed the call light button five minutes earlier and requested to be changed, the aide said no because it was lunch time. The resident stated they do not reposition or toilet during meals and added they should do it before they serve trays. The resident said, When I ask them, they have an attitude. Some of them just yell from the hallway. They won't even come in to see what I need. The resident stated her fear was the wounds would reopen and delay her plan to discharge home. Review of the admission Record for Resident #3 showed an admission date of 6/11/24 with diagnoses to include urinary tract infection, pressure ulcer of right buttock, stage 3, pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 4, neurogenic bowel disorder, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder and paraplegia, incomplete. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] showed under Section C - Cognitive Patterns, Resident #3 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15/15, indicating intact cognition. Section GG - Functional Abilities showed the resident had lower extremity impairment on both sides. Under toileting hygiene, the assessment showed the resident was dependent, meaning a helper does all the effort. Section GG also showed the resident was dependent, meaning a helper does all of the effort for sit to lying, lying to sitting on side of the bed, sit to stand, chair to bed transfer, and toilet transfers. The assessment showed to roll left and right, the ability to roll from lying on back to left side, and return to lying on back, the resident required moderate assistance, meaning helper does less than half of the effort. Review of wound care notes dated 1/20/25, 1/27/25, and 2/3/25 showed Resident #3 is being closely monitored for wound care on a regular basis. The notes showed, The area needs continued aggressive offloading. This complex patient does have multiple comorbidities which can affect wound healing . Review of Weekly Skin Observation notes for Resident #3 dated 1/16/25 showed the resident did not have skin integrity issues, with a summary note, treatment in progress for existing wounds. Review of Weekly Skin Observation notes dated 1/23/25, 1/24/25, and 1/29/25 showed the resident had skin integrity concerns related to a coccyx pressure wound. Review of Weekly Skin Observation notes dated 2/16/25 showed the resident had skin integrity concerns of right buttock excoriation. Review of Wound Observation Evaluations dated 1/27/25, 2/3/25 and 2/10/25 showed the resident was on a turning and repositioning routine due to right buttock wound. Section E - Comment showed offload area. Review of a care plan for Resident #3 initiated upon admission on [DATE] showed a Focus: The resident has bowel incontinence related to IBS (irritable bowel syndrome) with interventions to observe pattern of incontinence and initiate toileting schedule if indicate. A follow up interview was conducted with Resident #3 on 2/16/25 at 2:14 p.m. She stated the CNA did not come to change her or turn her and she may have had a bowel movement. She stated when the lunch tray was picked up, the aide stated she would come back and, She never came back. The resident stated there was also an issue with wound care and they sometimes don't do it. The dressing is supposed to be changed daily. She stated she filed grievances regarding the issue. On 2/16/25 at 2:44 p.m., Resident #3 stated she still had not been repositioned or changed. She stated when she put the call light on a third time, someone came and said the aide was out on break. The resident confirmed her aide had not come in yet and she waited to be changed and repositioned since approximately 10 a.m. On 2/16/25 at 3:18 p.m., the resident was observed in her room and an interview was conducted. She stated the CNA just cleaned her and the nurse changed her dressing. Resident #3 was observed crying and emotional. She stated she asked the nurse to take a photo of her wound and it showed new redness and new skin irritation. The resident stated it was because she does not get changed or repositioned in a timely manner. She stated she could help in repositioning but need help to roll. Review of the February 2025 CNA task log for Resident #3 showed on 2/16/25 and 02/17/25, the resident received ADL (activities of daily living) care one time to include personal hygiene, toileting and repositioning - roll left and right. There was no documentation of other times when care was offered or provided. Review of a CNA [name of an informational filing software displaying key patient information] showed under Safety, encourage resident to turn and reposition every two hours. During an interview on 2/16/25 at 3:50 p.m., Resident #3 was observed sitting in her wheelchair. She stated the aide cleaned her up by herself. She told her the skin was dry, and her bottom had dried up bowel movement (BM). The resident stated it was from lying on the poop too long. The resident also stated she does not always have feeling on her lower body and does not always know she had a bowel movement. She stated she depended on staff to check and change her. An interview was conducted on 2/16/25 at 4:15 p.m. with Staff B, CNA, who was assigned to Resident #3. She stated she was scheduled to work 7 a.m. to 7p.m. The staff member checked the resident this morning, sometime between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m., and at the time the resident did not have a BM. She also stated she repositioned the resident at that time. Staff B, CNA confirmed she did not change or reposition the resident again throughout the day and said, I was told she would let me know if she needed care. The staff member said when she went to change the resident, she had a BM, it was thick and stuck on her bottom. I used the spray and a lot of wipes. Her bottom was kind of raw. The CNA stated she was trained to check and change the resident but not at is facility. She stated she should have asked the resident if she needed to be changed. An interview was conducted on 2/16/25 at 4:35 p.m. with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated the resident should be repositioned and turned periodically, at a minimum of every two hours. She stated if the aide needed help, she should get the nurse if a CNA was not available. The NHA said, The resident should not have waited that long. The DON stated she spoke with Staff B, CNA, who confirmed it was approximately 5 hours, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. and stated, It is a long wait, not acceptable to us. An interview was conducted on 2/17/25 at 11:30 a.m. with the wound care certified Physician Assistant (PA-C). The PA-C stated the Resident #3 was compliant with care the resident complained about care this past weekend. He said, She showed me a picture of the wound, it was red and inflamed yesterday, not today. She shared some concerns related to repositioning, and expressed fears related to skin breakdown. The PA-C stated the wound was looking good and continues to heal, but he could understand the resident's fear. 2. During an interview on 2/16/25 at 3:50 p.m., Resident #3 stated Staff B, CNA transferred her from the bed to the wheelchair by herself. The resident said, She did not get help. It is nerve-racking, I am not necessarily a small person. I do not want to fall and get hurt. An interview was conducted with Staff B, CNA on 2/16/25 at 4:15 p.m. The CNA stated she did not review Resident #3's plan of care and did not know about the facility's [name of an informational filing software displaying key patient information]. She stated she used a full body sling lift to transfer the resident by herself. The staff member said, she wanted to get out of bed. This place was a mad house. I could not find anyone to help me. I looked out in the hallways. I decided to transfer her by myself. I know I should not have. The CNA stated she was trained to always use two people for full body sling lift transfers. She stated she did not receive education at this facility related to the use of the lift. Review of a CNA [name of an informational filing software displaying key patient information] showed under ADL (activities of daily living), Transfers - mechanical lift with assistance of 2. Review of a care plan for Resident #3 initiated upon admission on [DATE] showed a Focus - I need assistance with activities of daily living because of paraplegia, DM2 (diabetes mellitus) HTN (hypertension), gout, chronic a fib (atrial fibrillation), severe morbid obesity, and multi(ple) wounds. Interventions included to anticipate resident's needs, assist me promptly, assist with daily ADL care to ensure needs are met, and transfers - mechanical lift with assistance of 2. Review of a Physical Therapy (PT) Progress Report, dates of service 1/28/25 - 2/10/25, showed under Patient and Caregiver Training: Instructed patient and primary caregivers in safe [brand name of full body sling lift] transfer techniques in order to with 100% carryover demonstrated by primary caregivers. An interview was conducted on 2/16/25 at 4:29 p.m. with the NHA and the DON. The DON stated she heard Staff B, CNA transferred Resident #3 without help and she used a [brand name of full body sling lift] by herself. The DON said, The resident is a two - person transfer. The CNA should have gotten help. The NHA said the CNA should not have done the transfer alone. She said, absolutely not, that was not safe. The DON stated the CNAs should check the [name of an informational filing software displaying key patient information] to know the transfer status, or they could always ask the nurse. On 02/17/25 at 2:37 p.m. the DON stated the facility did not have a policy for ADLs or written expectations for transfers and bowel and bladder care. 3. During a facility tour on 2/16/25 at 8:47 a.m., Resident #7 was observed in her room eating her breakfast, her plate noted almost empty. The resident stated she did not receive any coffee or anything to drink with her breakfast tray. Her cup was observed empty. The resident stated she was trying to reach her CNA but could not because her call light was on the floor, and no one came around. On 2/16/25 at 8:54 a.m. an interview was conducted with Staff F, CNA. He revealed he was unaware the resident's call light was on the floor. He walked around the resident's bed, picked up the call light, and clipped it to her blanket. He stated he passed the trays at approximately 7:15 a.m. and he did not know the resident did not receive coffee. He checked the cup and said, my bad, I'll get her some. The CNA confirmed he did not do rounds or check on the residents who were eating breakfast in their rooms. Review of the admission Record for Resident #7 showed an admission date of 7/27/22 with diagnoses of dementia, paraplegia, and adult failure to thrive. An interview was conducted on 2/17/25 at 2:15 p.m. with the NHA and the DON. The NHA stated staff should have made sure the resident had a beverage to start with and the CNAs should have been rounding. She stated the call light should have been within reach.4. Review of Resident #3's February 2025 Order Summary Report showed an order for Zolpidem 10 milligrams (mg), 1 tablet given every night at bedtime. Review of Resident #3's Medication Administration Record (MAR) from 12/15/24 through 2/15/25 showed Zolpidem was signed off as administered every day, with the exception of 2/11/25. On 2/11/25, the medication was documented as see nurse note. Review Resident #3's Controlled Substance Record for Zolpidem from 12/15/24 through 2/15/25 showed the medication was not signed out on 12/19/24 and 1/14/25. Although they were signed off on the MAR, no Zolpidem was dispensed. On 2/10/25, the resident was administered the last Zolpidem tablet out of the bubble pack. On 2/11/25 the resident did not receive the ordered Zolpidem. The nurse progress note dated 2/11/25 at 11:08 p.m. showed, awaiting pharmacy update. An interview was conducted on 2/17/25 at 10:30 a.m. with Staff C, Licensed Practical Nurse and Unit Manager (LPN UM). He said if a resident runs out of medication the facility has an electronic medication dispensing machine. Staff C, LPN UM said if the medication is a controlled substance, they would have called the pharmacy to get a code to dispense the medication. An interview was conducted on 2/17/25 at 10:38 a.m. with a representative from the facility's delivering pharmacy. The representative reviewed Resident 3's medication record and said no one from the facility pulled Zolpidem out of the electronic dispensing machine at the facility from 12/15/24 through 2/15/25 for the resident. The pharmacy said the re-order of Resident #3's Zolpidem was not put in until the evening of 2/10/25, which was when the last tablet was used. An interview was conducted on 2/17/25 at 1:58 p.m. with the DON. She reviewed Resident #3's MAR and Controlled Substance Record. The DON confirmed the MAR showed Zolpidem was signed off as administered on 12/19/24 and 1/14/25 and the Controlled Substance Record did not show the medication was dispensed. Upon review, she also stated Zolpidem should have been reordered when Resident #3 had four or five days' worth remaining, not when she ran out. The DON confirmed documentation showed the resident did not receive her Zolpidem on 2/11/25 as ordered. Review of a facility policy titled Medication Administration and General Guidelines, dated 2024, showed: Policy Medications are administered as prescribed, in accordance with state regulations using good nursing principles and practices and only by persons legally authorized to do so. Personnel authorized to administer medications do so only after they have familiarized themselves with the medication, monograph of all medications is available in the [brand name of medication dispensing unit] otherwise authorized personnel should refer to drug reference material provided by the facility. Procedure 2. Medications are administered in accordance with written orders of the attending physician. If a dose seems excessive considering the resident's age and condition, or a medication seems to be unrelated to the resident's current diagnosis or condition, the physician is contacted for clarification prior to the administration of the medication. The interaction with the physician is documented in the nursing notes and elsewhere in the medical record as appropriate period 12. If a dose of regularly scheduled medication is withheld, refused, or given at other than the scheduled time (e.g. Resident not in facility at scheduled dose time, initial dose of antibiotic), the space provided on the front of the MAR for the dosage administration is initialed and circled. An explanatory note is entered on the reverse side of the record provided for [as needed] documentation. The physician must be notified when a dose of medication has not been given. If an electronic medical record is being utilized then the caregiver administering the medication will enter the correct documentation that will then be electronically date/time stamped with their initials.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Abuse Prevention Policies (Tag F0607)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property for six employees (Staff C, Licensed Practical Nurse and Unit Manager, Staff G, Registered Nurse, Staff H, Certified Nursing Assistant, Staff I, Certified Nursing Assistance, Staff J, Licensed Practical Nurse, and Staff K, Certified Nursing Assistant) of six employee files reviewed. Findings included: Record review of the facility's undated policy titled, Resident Rights to Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, showed the facility had no procedure for screening of employees or verifying prior employment. During an interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) on 2/17/25 at 2:00 p.m., the NHA stated the only policy and procedure they have is the one titled, Resident Rights to Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation. Review of Staff C, Licensed Practical Nurse's (LPN's) employee file revealed: Date of Hire (DOH) 12/3/24, with a Level 2 background screening completed prior to employment, but was not added to the Background Clearinghouse until 1/14/25, which would notify the facility if the employee was charged with a disqualifying offense. No reference checks were completed of prior employment history. Review of Staff G, Registered Nurse's (RN's) employee file revealed: DOH 12/10/24, with a Level 2 background screening completed prior to employment, but was not added to the Background Clearinghouse, which would notify the facility if the employee was charged with a disqualifying offense. No reference checks were completed of prior employment history. Review of Staff H, Certified Nursing Assistant's (CNA's) employee file revealed: DOH 2/4/25, with a Level 2 background screening completed prior to employment, but was not added to the Background Clearinghouse, which would notify the facility if the employee was charged with a disqualifying offense. No reference checks were completed of prior employment history. Review of Staff I, CNA's employee file revealed: DOH 2/4/25, with a Level 2 background screening completed prior to employment, but was not added to the Background Clearinghouse, which would notify the facility if the employee was charged with a disqualifying offense. No reference checks were completed of prior employment history. Review of Staff J, LPN's employee file revealed: DOH 9/17/24. No reference checks were completed of prior employment history. Review of Staff K, CNA's employee file revealed: DOH 1/14/25, with a Level 2 background screening completed prior to employment, but was not added to the Background Clearinghouse, which would notify the facility if the employee was charged with a disqualifying offense. No reference checks were completed of prior employment history. During an interview with the NHA on 2/17/25 at 11:05 a.m., the NHA stated the expectation is to have the employee's Level 2 background check completed prior to employment, the employee added to the Clearinghouse data base within five days of hire, and reference checks to be completed prior to employment.
Nov 2024 14 deficiencies 5 IJ (3 facility-wide)
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 observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to protect the resident(s') right to be free from negl...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to protect the resident(s') right to be free from neglect when it failed: 1) to provide a hazard free environment and supervision for three residents (#3, #8, and #12) of three reviewed for falls with injuries; 2) to provide follow-up notification for critical radiology results for one resident (#9) of one reviewed for imaging; 3) to provide proper wound care to prevent the development of complications for four residents (#19, #21, #22, and #20) of four reviewed for wound care; 4) to provide medication administration per physician orders for three residents (#1, #13, #15) of three reviewed for medications; 5) to provide assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL's) related to showers, incontinence care, and assistance with meals for six resident (#16, #18, #7, #17, #24, and #25) out of six reviewed for Activities of Daily Living; 6) to provide laboratory services as ordered for three residents (#14, #13, and #10) out of three reviewed for laboratory orders. This failure created a situation that resulted in a worsened condition and the likelihood for serious injury and or death to Resident #3, #8, #12, #9, #19, #21, #22, #20, #1, #13, #15, #16, #18, #7, #17, #24, #25 #14, and #10 and resulted in the determination of Immediate Jeopardy on 6/22/24. The findings of Immediate Jeopardy were determined to be removed on 10/28/2024 and the severity and scope was reduced to an E. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated 6/22/24 at 9:48 a.m., authored by Staff M, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) showed the following: Upon arriving on the unit and doing rounds the resident was observed sitting in wheelchair by resident's room door chanting but not outside of her normal behavior. Another nurse came and informed the nurse that the resident posture was not looking normal and if I would assess her. Upon walking up to the resident, the posture was abnormal, and her leg was twisted. When approaching the resident to touch her she begin screaming. Wheelchair was in locked position. The resident admitted to pain and responded to yes or no type questions. The nurse asked if she was in pain she stated 'yes'. The nurse asked was her leg bothering her and she stated 'yes'. The nurse asked did she fall, and she stated, 'yes'. When asked can the nurse look at her leg she stated, 'no don't'. PRN [as needed] offered to resident for pain but resident was not eating or drinking breakfast tray in front of her. EMS [Emergency Management Services] arrived and took resident to [Hospital Name]. Supervisor notified [family member] of resident's transfer. [Physician] office notified. Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated 6/22/24 at 2:45 p.m., authored by Staff M, LPN showed the following: The nurse spoke with ER [Emergency Room] at [Hospital Name] and was notified that the resident was admitted for UTI [Urinary Tract Infection] and hip fracture. Review of admission Records showed Resident #3 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including pacemaker placement, weakness, low back pain, Alzheimer's disease, and other co-morbidities. Review of Resident #3's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], showed the resident required maximum assistance with all Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care, the resident did not have a condition or chronic disease that may result in a life expectancy of less than 6 months, and the resident had not had any falls since admission/entry or reentry prior to the assessment. Review of Resident #3's Comprehensive Care Plan, 7/31/23, showed the following: Focus: Resident needed assistance with activities of daily living because of a diagnosis of dementia with memory impairment, pain, and weakness. Goals included: -Caregivers will be able to perform a safe transfer using proper body mechanics with 100% carryover by the next review date. -Resident will perform self-feeding tasks with supervision or touching assistance by next review date. -Staff will help me with all my ADL needs so that I appear neat and tidy with absence of foul body odor through next review. Interventions included: -Anticipate resident's needs. -Assist me with hygiene, bathing, dressing, toileting and transfers. -Assist me with toileting promptly when requested. -Assist with all ADL care to ensure daily needs are met. Check nails, trim and clean on bath day and as necessary. -Encourage/allow me to do as much for self as possible with feeding self, provide assistance with ADLs that I am unable to do for myself as indicated. -Keep call bell within reach and remind/encourage me to use it to call for assistance. -Skin inspections twice a week on shower days and with ADL care: Observe for redness, open areas, scratches, cuts, bruises and report changes to the Nurse. Review of the facility's Incident Log, from April 2024 to October 2024, did not reveal any incidents related to Resident #3 suffering an injury of unknown origin. Review of the facility's Abuse and Neglect Log, from April 2024 to October 2024, did not reveal any allegations/incidents of abuse or neglect for Resident #3 had occurred or been reported. Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated 6/22/24 at 3:20 p.m., authored by the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) showed: Writer spoke to [family member] who stated that she was with [Resident #3] at the hospital and [Resident #3] was admitted with a hip fracture and UTI. I notified [family member] that we were working on the root cause investigation, and she was satisfied and understood. Review of Emergency Department (ED) records for Resident #3, dated 6/22/24, showed per EMS she had a possible trip and fall it was unwitnessed, but she does slip out of her wheelchair multiple times per the facility has a history of hip fracture falls . It showed prior to arrival in the ED the resident had 70 mcg (micrograms) of Fentanyl for pain, and she endorsed pain when pressing on her right hip. The extremities physical assessment showed, no deformity, moderate trauma. Difficult to examine the patient's right leg patient is curled up in bed she usually is in a wheelchair moderately confused and not following direction with palpitation of the patient's right thigh/right hip she does scream in excruciating pain . Review of the hospital History and Physical for Resident #3, dated 6/22/24, showed the resident was brought to the emergency department after she was found on the floor .patient found to have right periprosthetic proximal fracture with significant angulation . Review of the hospital Operative Reports for Resident #3, dated 6/24/24, showed the resident underwent an open reduction and internal fixation of right periprosthetic proximal femur fracture. The surgeon noted, The rationale for surgery would be for palliative measures. I do not anticipate this fracture will heal to the point where she will be more functional than she was before the injury, which was bedbound, wheelchair dependent, non-weight bearing. My hope is that the incision heals, and she does not develop any perioperative complications arising, such as blood clots, infections, wound healing problems, fractures, dislocations, or risks of the medications and anesthesia. Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated 6/24/24 at 3:36 p.m., authored by the Director of Nursing (DON) showed: Investigation and statements stated that fx [fracture] happened during transfer of resident from bed to chair. Resident at no time had a fall. Daughter made aware of findings of investigation. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 4:43 p.m. with the DON and Risk Manager (RM). The DON stated during an investigation it was determined Resident #3's fracture occurred during a transfer. The DON said she had been notified the resident was transferred out with a potential fracture on 6/22/24. She stated an investigation was started to see how the possible fracture happened. She said a report was not filed for abuse or neglect as the fracture occurred during transfer. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 5:08 p.m. with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the Administrator in Training (AIT). The NHA said he became aware of Resident #3's fracture during a morning meeting on 6/22/24 when a nurse's note was read that stated Resident #3 had a fall. He said the management team reviewed the statements from the staff who worked, and everyone stated there was no fall. He said the management team did not complete interviews, they just read the written statements received. The NHA explained the Department of Children and Families (DCF) came in later that same morning (6/22/24) as the hospital had contacted them regarding the fracture. The NHA said the management team investigated and determined Resident #3 did not have a fall, therefore they did not file a reportable event. The NHA said the investigation they did, did not indicate how the resident was transferred to the wheelchair. During a follow-up interview on 10/23/24 at 9:38 a.m. with the NHA. The NHA stated he did not know how the fracture occurred, he stated, I went off the DCF investigation. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 5:35 p.m. with Staff M, LPN. Staff M stated being familiar with Resident #3 and recalled the event on 6/22/24. She said upon arrival to the unit on 6/22/24, Resident #3 was up in the wheelchair. Staff M said Resident #3 was usually self-propelling around the unit and talked nonsensically. She said on the morning on 6/22/24 Resident #3 was not self-propelling nor speaking as usual. Staff M said she did not think much of it, she thought maybe Resident #3 was just tired from the night before. She said another nurse came to her and asked if she thought Resident #3 looked funny. She stated, I then noted the angle of Resident #3's leg was not right. Staff M said she went to assess the resident's leg and as soon as she reached for her leg, Resident #3 started screaming. Staff M said the resident answered yes to being in pain when asked. She said Resident #3 was not able to be touched therefore they contacted 911. Staff M said when she was on the phone with 911, the DON told her to cancel the call, because the x-rays could be conducted in the facility. Staff M said she did not cancel the call and when 911 arrived, they had to sedate Resident #3 so she could be moved from the wheelchair to stretcher. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 12:00 p.m. with Staff O, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). Staff O said she recalled Resident #3 and the shift when the fracture occurred. She said she worked 6/21/24 for the 3 p.m. to 11 p.m. shift and the 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. shift ending 6/22/24. Staff O said she was not assigned to Resident #3. She said Staff P, CNA asked her to help transfer Resident #3. Staff O explained she overheard Resident #3 scream multiple times during the night, which is normal for her, so she did not think much about it. Staff O said when she entered the room to assist Staff P, Resident #3 screams were different, painful almost. She said she helped Staff P place Resident #3 in the wheelchair. Staff O explained for the transfer of Resident #3, she placed her arm under the resident's, to assist with standing. She said the two CNAs had the resident pivot and they assisted the resident to sit in the wheelchair. Staff O said she does not recall if the resident scream out or just took a deep breath during the transfer, but it was very quick. Staff O said Staff P was rushing and wanted to get off shift. Staff O said typically when Resident #3 was in the wheelchair, she self-propelled throughout the unit but she did not go anywhere. She said she thought Resident #3 was just tired from being up most of the night. Staff O said later that same morning she observed blood on the arm of Resident #3 and informed the nurse. Staff O stated no skin tears occurred during the transfer. Staff O stated no one ever spoke with her regarding the fracture until the next day when the supervisor asked her to write a statement as Resident #3 had a fracture. She stated she did not hear anything else regarding the subject. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 11:38 a.m. with Staff Q, CNA. Staff Q recalled working 6/21/24 on the 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. shift into 6/22/24 and stated Resident #3 was on the morning list to get up early. She said Staff P, CNA was assigned to Resident #3 and would have been the one to transfer the resident. She said she did not recall anyone mentioning anything throughout the shift, it was a normal night until she noticed Resident #3 had blood on her hand and was gripping her hip. Staff Q said she brought this to the attention of Staff M, LPN and Staff G, LPN. She said the nurses commented about the resident's leg looking odd. She said she didn't notice the resident's leg at the time as she was looking at the blood on her hand. She said Staff M, LPN called 911 and while Staff M was on the phone, the DON told her to hang up because we could take care of the resident here. She said the nurse didn't hang up the phone. Staff Q said she was surprised that no one asked her about the incident. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 11:18 a.m. with Staff G, LPN. Staff G confirmed he worked the evening of 6/21/24 into the morning of 6/22/24 and said he was the one that saw Resident #3 sitting in her wheelchair and her leg bent awkwardly. Staff G said he informed Staff M, LPN and told her to look at Resident #3 and Staff M immediately said, Oh her leg is broken. Staff G said they were not able to touch the leg because the resident would scream. Staff G said no one looked into how the fracture occurred. Staff G said they didn't know if Resident #3 fell and just got put back in the wheelchair. He said Resident #3 didn't ever try to walk or get out of bed and to his knowledge had never fallen before. Staff G said management did not know what happened, they got statements from a couple of CNAs then moved Staff P, CNA, who was assigned Resident #3, to a different floor. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 2:35 p.m. with Staff P, CNA. Staff P stated she recalled Resident #3 and worked with on the 11p (6/21/24) to 7a (6/22/24) shift. Staff P said, I don't know anything about a fracture. Staff P said she arrived at the unit and Resident #3 was in the bed sleeping. Staff P said around 2:00 a.m. she completed incontinence care for Resident #3 while the resident slept. Staff P added Resident #3 was a squealing person, Resident #3 squeals all the time. She said Resident #3 was on the get up list so she got Resident #3 dressed and requested assistance from another CNA with the transfer to the wheelchair. Staff P could not recall how the transfer of Resident #3 occurred and denied any knowledge of a fracture or skin tear. Staff P said, If something happened maybe on her [Staff O, CNA]. Staff P, CNA stated, I didn't do anything wrong, DCF and the NHA said so. Staff P then disconnected the phone call. Review of Resident #3's primary care provider (PCP) note, dated 7/1/24, showed Patient was readmitted to [facility] on 06/25/24. Patient was sent to ER for right hip pain that she sustain during a fall per hospital records. Review of Resident #3's Social Service note, dated 7/10/24 showed Resident will be hospice resident as of tomorrow, 7/11/24 . A progress note, dated 7/13/24, showed Resident without vital signs. Family made aware. Hospice was also notified. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 4:37 p.m. with Staff N, (CNA). Staff N said she had taken care of Resident #3 several times and did hear about the fracture. She said she was not working at the time of the incident but heard the CNA tried to transfer Resident #3 and dropped her. Staff N said, Sad, resident was perfectly fine before the fall, when she came back, she just went downhill medically, never the same. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 2:37 p.m. with Resident #3's primary care provider (PCP). He said he remembered the incident with Resident #3 and recalled that Staff H, Nurse Practitioner (NP) was upset neither of them were notified. The PCP reviewed Resident #3's medical records. He said the hospital records showed the resident had a fall and another note said there were no falls. He said, I would assume the facility has protocols in place if a resident had a fracture and they don't know where it came from. He said there should be a protocol and procedure for falls/injuries. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 2:47 p.m. with Staff H, Nurse Practitioner (NP). She said she was a provider for Resident #3. She said she had not been notified when Resident #3 had a fall. She said facility staff should have called when something happened to a resident. She said she did not know until the resident returned from the hospital and she saw the fall in the hospital record. Staff H said the resident was having pain but was stable after she returned. She said, For sure, they should look into that if it is not known where the fracture came. Staff H said the resident's fracture was fixed for comfort, not really to be able to walk on it. 2. Review of the facility's Admission/Discharge To/From Report, dated 7/1/24 to 10/21/24, revealed Resident #8 was discharged to an acute care hospital on 9/23/24. Review of the facility's Incident Log, dated 4/24 to 11/24, revealed Resident #8 had a fall on 9/23/24. Review of a progress note for Resident #8, dated 09/23/24 at 11:35 p.m., by Staff S, LPN showed, This writer noticed other nurses and cna's running down the hall, I went to see what was going on and witnessed other nurses assisting the resident and speaking to keep to keep [sic] him awake. A focus assessment was performed on the resident. Resident Vital signs, kept residents on his Rt [right] side to prevent aspiration, held gauze and applied pressure to eyebrow area. 911 was called and stayed with the patient until EMS [Emergency Management Service] arrived. A message was left with the PCP [Primary Care Provider] answering service. Family was called and voicemail was left, shift supervisor was notified. Review of admission Records showed Resident #8 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Cerebrovascular Accident (stroke) with right hemiparesis, sepsis, dysphagia, wounds, and other co-morbidities. Review of Resident #8's admission MDS, dated [DATE], showed the resident was dependent with all activities of daily living care (ADL), had impairments in both upper and lower extremities preventing movement, and the resident had not had any falls since admission/entry or reentry prior to assessment. An interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 3:31 p.m. with Staff S, LPN. Staff S, LPN confirmed working with Resident #8 on 9/23/24 and recalled the incident. Staff S recalled coming out of another resident's room seeing all these employees going to Resident #8's room. Staff S said she immediately followed, as she was the assigned nurse. She said upon arrival, she noted Resident #8 on the floor with blood on his head. Staff S said the CNA responsible for the resident (Staff T, CNA) stated she turned the resident, and he rolled out of the bed. She stated Resident #8 had an air mattress with collapsable sides. Staff S stated she was not sure how this happened as Resident #8 was tall, thin, and did not move. An interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 5:13 p.m. with Staff T, CNA. Staff T confirmed she cared for Resident #8 on the night of 9/23/24. She said he often had behaviors and yelled. She said she went in and talked to him, and he was calm. She said since the resident was calm, she thought she could clean him up on her own. She said she cleaned up his front and rolled him away from her to clean up his back side. She said the resident was on an air mattress and they are slippery. She said he was not really on a sheet. She said when she rolled him away from her, he slipped off the other side. She said she tried to catch him by his shirt, but he fell off and hit the floor. She said as that happened, she had to let go of his shirt and go search for someone to help. She said she went outside and got the nurse assigned to him. She said she didn't really know his injuries, but he was bleeding, and the nurse started working on him. The CNA said she had previously assisted with Resident #8 being cleaned and changed because he was sometimes combative. She said she was only worried about his behavior and thought since he was calm, she could change him herself. She said the CNAs do not know if a resident is a one-person or a two-person assist because it is not in the computer or on their Kardex. She said they have to go off of personal judgement and it is sometimes passed down from the previous shift's CNA. Staff T explained if shift to shift report was not completed, then you just go off your experience. She said the facility had not done any training on turning/positioning residents before or after the incident with Resident #8. Review of Resident #8's Comprehensive Care Plan, 8/2/24, showed the following: -Focus: Resident needed assistance with activities of daily living because of weakness. The goal showed: I will improve my ability to transfer, dress, toilet, ambulate by next review. The interventions included: Anticipate resident's needs; Assist me with all oral intake of food and fluids; Assist me with hygiene, bathing, dressing, toileting and transfers; Assist me with toileting promptly when requested; Assist with all ADL care to ensure daily needs are met. -Focus: The staff have identified that I am at risk for falls because of these risk factors: Unaware of safety needs. The goal showed: I will have minimized injury due to a fall through next review. The interventions included: Anticipate resident's needs; I should have sneakers, shoes, slippers with rubber soles or non-slip socks when I am out of bed; Keep frequently used items within reach: TV remote, tissues, water glass over bed stand and my water glass (unless I need thickened liquids or can't have anything by mouth); Keep my call light within reach so I can call for assistance; Maintain bed in lowest locked position. -Focus: At times I can agitated, combative, continuous outburst. The goal showed: I will show a decrease in my episodes of being resistant thru next review. The interventions included: Allow choices when able to give resident feeling of control; Converse with during care about topic of interest to redirect; Monitor for effectiveness of medication prescribed to limit behavior; Report to Dr if not effective or behavior continues to decline; Psych eval and follow up per order. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 1:10 p.m. with Staff Z, LPN UM (Unit Manager). Staff Z said residents were evaluated by therapy and those results were sent to the MDS team. She said MDS then enters the information about the functional level of the resident and that populates to the Kardex. She said it usually says dependent or max assist, something like that. She said dependent means two-person assist and maximum assist means 1-2. When asked how the CNAs would know which to use since they cannot assess residents she said, That is all I know about the process. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 12:48 p.m. with Staff Y, CNA. She said the facility had not done any training on turning, positioning, or transferring residents. She said the CNAs do not know if a resident is a one or two-person assist or if they need a lift. She said the CNAs have To figure it out. Interviews were conducted from 10/22/24 to 10/28/24 at various times with the following staff: Staff U, D, W, X, V, N, O, Q, CNA's. During these interviews staff stated the computer system does not indicate specific directions for what level of care (i.e Assist of one, mechanical lift) is needed for residents' ADL needs. The staff stated usually they just know how to care for residents based on our experience. The CNAs said they try to complete shift to shift report to inform other CNAs of care needs, but it does not always happen with staffing patterns and time constraints. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 2:23 p.m. with the MDS Coordinator. She said approximately a year ago, when the Minimum Data Set (MDS) changed from section G to section GG, it quit having an assist of 1 or two option. She stated related to the care plan not indicating a level of assistance needed, That is not a directive I have been given here. She said the CNAs would just know the level of care from passing it down in report. She doesn't know how else they would know. The MDS Coordinator confirmed CNAs cannot assess residents. Review of hospital records for Resident #8, dated 9/24/24, showed the resident presented to the emergency department and underwent a head and maxillofacial CT (computed tomography) scan which revealed an 8 millimeter (mm) subdural hemorrhage layering along the right frontotemporal convexity, with no significant midline shift, interval development of large right frontotemporal infarct is noted compared to February 2022, and possible acute/subacute. The resident was noted to have a right front scalp hematoma which was a laceration, and sutures were applied. Upon arrival the resident was noted to have a forehead laceration with a dressing in place that was blood soaked. The resident was unable to answer questions correctly although he was attempting to. The CT scan results, dated 9/23/24, showed the following: Calvarium/Scalp: large right frontal scalp hematoma calvaria fracture evaluation limited by motion artifact. CT Maxillofacial: comminuted right greater than left nasal bone fractures moderate overlying soft tissue swelling. Review Resident #8's ER record showed the resident received 12 sutures to right eyebrow laceration. Resident #8 was admitted to the ICU (intensive care unit). No other documentation is available at this time. An interview was conducted on 10/23/2024 at 4:10 p.m. with the NHA and DON. The NHA stated the facility was following Resident #8's plan of care with one-person assist. The NHA confirmed the care plan did not have assist requirements as an intervention. The NHA stated, I thought it was there. The NHA stated no investigation was needed. The NHA stated after comparing statements from staff he decided to eventually find the CNA neglected to utilize proper positioning techniques and the facility had no control over this. The NHA stated this was based on the DCF investigation. After the NHA spoke with the investigator, the NHA decided to start a neglect report. The NHA stated the report was filed and the nursing assistant was reported to the board. The NHA and DON stated no other actions needed to be taken. They stated they did not do any in-services, review their policies, or interview other residents. They stated no education was provided to staff post-incident. An interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 4:38 p.m. with the Director of Rehabilitation (DOR). He said Resident #8 had severe safety awareness concerns and had decreased coordination. He said Resident #8 was totally dependent and in therapy that means they would use two people to assist. He said nursing decides if two people should be used for transfers and care on the unit. He said the Resident #8 had rigid tone so Everything is total dependent, and he needs a lot of help. He said the resident having rigid tone means staff would have to hold him because he cannot hold himself while turning. He said if the resident was being turned, he would need a person on each side of him. The DOR stated, To roll him he still needs a lot of help. He said if the resident didn't have control, it is dangerous for a CNA to roll the resident away from them because they can roll off the bed if no one is on the other side. The DOR said for therapy, Total dependent means max assist; two people and lifts. Review of the facility's Abuse and Neglect Log, dated 4/24 to 10/24, did not reveal any reports after 8/28/24 of any incidents of abuse or neglect. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 10:33 a.m. with the DON. The DON stated she had validated with the NHA, no other reports or allegations of abuse or neglect had been made since 8/28/24. 3. Review of the facility's Admission/Discharge To/From Report, for dates 7/1/2024 to 10/21/24, revealed Resident #12 was discharged to an acute care hospital on 9/26/24. Review of Resident #12's progress notes, dated 9/26/2024 at 3:31 p.m., authored by the DON showed: Resident had a fall blood pressure is 159/86 pulses 85. We're sending her to the hospital. Review of Resident #12's progress notes, dated 9/26/2024 at 3:44 p.m., authored by Staff AA, Registered Nurse (RN) showed: Pt [patient] found on the floor at evacuation site. VSS [Vital Signs Stable]. EMS [Emergency Medical Services] on site. Pt sent to hospital. Family called. Message left. Review of admission Records showed Resident #12 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including hypertension, weakness, dementia, Huntington's disease, and other co-morbidities. Review of Resident #12's admission MDS, dated [DATE], Section C, Cognitive Patterns, revealed a BIMS score of 8, indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment, Section J, Health Conditions showed no pain and no falls. Review of Resident #12's Physical Therapy Discharge summary, dated [DATE], showed: Resident #12 was able to perform sitting to standing with the use of an assistive device; was able to transfer with supervision only, and was able to walk 150 feet with a front wheeled walker with contact guard assistance. Review of Resident #12 Comprehensive Care Plan, 7/19/24, shows: -Focus: The staff have identified that I am at risk for falls because of these risk factors: Dementia, use of anti-psychotic medication, use of antidepressant medication. The care plan interventions showed: Anticipate resident's needs; I should have sneakers, shoes, slippers with rubber soles or non-slip socks when I am out of bed; Keep frequently used items within reach: TV remote, tissues, water glass over bed stand and my water glass (unless I need thickened liquids or can't have anything by mouth); Keep my call light within reach so I can call for assistance; Maintain bed in lowest locked position. -Focus: I need assistance with activities of daily living because of weakness. The care plan intervention showed: Anticipate resident's needs; Assist me with all oral intake of food and fluids; Assist me with hygiene, bathing, dressing, toileting and transfers; Assist me with toileting promptly when requested; Assist with all ADL care to ensure daily needs are met. -Focus: The resident has an ADL Self Care Performance Deficit r/t Activity Intolerance, r/t cognitive deficits. The interventions showed: Encourage the resident to participate to the fullest extent possible with each interaction; Encourage the resident to use bell to call for assistance; Anticipate needs not verbalized as resident does not always clearly make needs Nursing known. Keep call bell within reach, encourage use, answer promptly. An interview was conducted on 10/21/2024 at 3:15 p.m. with the NHA and AIT. They stated the facility needed to prepare for evacuation to a church on 9/24/24. The NHA said at the church the County Emergency Management showed up and stated the facility should move their residents to a county shelter. The NHA and AIT stated no one was seriously injured, no one died, and no one eloped. They said there may have been a skin tear. The NHA stated, We did the best we could. The NHA confirmed they did not comple a post-storm assessment, as they did not have time; they needed to get ready for the next storm. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 11:50 a.m. with Staff V, CNA. Staff V sta[TRUNCATED]
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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide a hazard free environment and adequate supervision for thr...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide a hazard free environment and adequate supervision for three residents (#3, #8, and #12) of three reviewed for falls with injuries, resulting in the need for transfer to a higher level of care for evaluation and treatment. This failure created a situation that resulted in a worsened condition and the likelihood for serious injury and or death to Residents #3, #8, and #12 and resulted in the determination of Immediate Jeopardy on 6/22/24. The findings of Immediate Jeopardy were determined to be removed on 10/28/04 and the severity and scope was reduced to a E. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated 6/22/24 at 9:48 a.m., authored by Staff M, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) showed the following: Upon arriving on the unit and doing rounds the resident was observed sitting in wheelchair by resident's room door chanting but not outside of her normal behavior. Another nurse came and informed the nurse that the resident posture was not looking normal and if I would assess her. Upon walking up to the resident, the posture was abnormal, and her leg was twisted. When approaching the resident to touch her she begin screaming. Wheelchair was in locked position. The resident admitted to pain and responded to yes or no type questions. The nurse asked if she was in pain she stated 'yes'. The nurse asked was her leg bothering her and she stated 'yes'. The nurse asked did she fall, and she stated, 'yes'. When asked can the nurse look at her leg she stated, 'no don't'. PRN [as needed] offered to resident for pain but resident was not eating or drinking breakfast tray in front of her. EMS [Emergency Management Services] arrived and took resident to [Hospital Name]. Supervisor notified [family member] of resident's transfer. [Physician] office notified. Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated 6/22/24 at 2:45 p.m., authored by Staff M, LPN showed the following: The nurse spoke with ER [Emergency Room] at [Hospital Name] and was notified that the resident was admitted for UTI [Urinary Tract Infection] and hip fracture. Review of admission Records showed Resident #3 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including pacemaker placement, weakness, low back pain, Alzheimer's disease, and other co-morbidities. Review of Resident #3's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], showed the resident required maximum assistance with all ADL care, the resident did not have a condition or chronic disease that may result in a life expectancy of less than 6 months, and the resident had not had any falls since admission/entry or reentry prior to the assessment. Review of Resident #3's Comprehensive Care Plan, 7/31/23, showed the following: Focus: Resident needed assistance with activities of daily living because of a diagnosis of dementia with memory impairment, pain, and weakness. Goals included: -Caregivers will be able to perform a safe transfer using proper body mechanics with 100% carryover by the next review date. -Resident will perform self-feeding tasks with supervision or touching assistance by next review date. -Staff will help me with all my ADL needs so that I appear neat and tidy with absence of foul body odor through next review. Interventions included: -Anticipate resident's needs. -Assist me with hygiene, bathing, dressing, toileting and transfers. -Assist me with toileting promptly when requested. -Assist with all ADL care to ensure daily needs are met. Check nails, trim and clean on bath day and as necessary. -Encourage/allow me to do as much for self as possible with feeding self, provide assistance with ADLs that I am unable to do for myself as indicated. -Keep call bell within reach and remind/encourage me to use it to call for assistance. -Skin inspections twice a week on shower days and with ADL care: Observe for redness, open areas, scratches, cuts, bruises and report changes to the Nurse. Review of the facility's Incident Log, from April 2024 to October 2024, did not reveal any incidents related to Resident #3 suffering an injury of unknown origin. Review of the facility's Abuse and Neglect Log, from April 2024 to October 2024, did not reveal any allegations/incidents of abuse or neglect for Resident #3 had occurred or been reported. Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated 6/22/24 at 3:20 p.m., authored by the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) showed: Writer spoke to [family member] who stated that she was with [Resident #3] at the hospital and [Resident #3] was admitted with a hip fracture and UTI. I notified [family member] that we were working on the root cause investigation, and she was satisfied and understood. Review of Emergency Department (ED) records for Resident #3, dated 6/22/24, showed per EMS she had a possible trip and fall it was unwitnessed, but she does slip out of her wheelchair multiple times per the facility has a history of hip fracture falls . It showed prior to arrival in the ED the resident had 70 mcg (micrograms) of Fentanyl for pain, and she endorsed pain when pressing on her right hip. The extremities physical assessment showed, no deformity, moderate trauma. Difficult to examine the patient's right leg patient is curled up in bed she usually is in a wheelchair moderately confused and not following direction with palpitation of the patient's right thigh/right hip she does scream in excruciating pain . Review of the hospital History and Physical for Resident #3, dated 6/22/24, showed the resident was brought to the emergency department after she was found on the floor .patient found to have right periprosthetic proximal fracture with significant angulation . Review of the hospital Operative Reports for Resident #3, dated 6/24/24, showed the resident underwent an open reduction and internal fixation of right periprosthetic proximal femur fracture. The surgeon noted, The rationale for surgery would be for palliative measures. I do not anticipate this fracture will heal to the point where she will be more functional than she was before the injury, which was bedbound, wheelchair dependent, non-weight bearing. My hope is that the incision heals, and she does not develop any perioperative complications arising, such as blood clots, infections, wound healing problems, fractures, dislocations, or risks of the medications and anesthesia. Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated 6/24/24 at 3:36 p.m., authored by the Director of Nursing (DON) showed: Investigation and statements stated that fx [fracture] happened during transfer of resident from bed to chair. Resident at no time had a fall. Daughter made aware of findings of investigation. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 4:43 p.m. with the DON and Risk Manager (RM). The DON stated during an investigation it was determined Resident #3's fracture occurred during a transfer. The DON said she had been notified the resident was transferred out with a potential fracture on 6/22/24. She stated an investigation was started to see how the possible fracture happened. She said a report was not filed for abuse or neglect as the fracture occurred during transfer. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 5:08 p.m. with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the Administrator in Training (AIT). The NHA said he became aware of Resident #3's fracture during a morning meeting on 6/22/24 when a nurse's note was read that stated Resident #3 had a fall. He said the management team reviewed the statements from the staff who worked, and everyone stated there was no fall. He said the management team did not complete interviews, they just read the written statements received. The NHA explained the Department of Children and Families (DCF) came in later that same morning (6/22/24) as the hospital had contacted them regarding the fracture. The NHA said the management team investigated and determined Resident #3 did not have a fall, therefore they did not file a reportable event. The NHA said the investigation they did, did not indicate how the resident was transferred to the wheelchair. During a follow-up interview on 10/23/24 at 9:38 a.m. with the NHA. The NHA stated he did not know how the fracture occurred, he stated, I went off the DCF investigation. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 5:35 p.m. with Staff M, LPN. Staff M stated being familiar with Resident #3 and recalled the event on 6/22/24. She said upon arrival to the unit on 6/22/24, Resident #3 was up in the wheelchair. Staff M said Resident #3 was usually self-propelling around the unit and talked nonsensically. She said on the morning on 6/22/24 Resident #3 was not self-propelling nor speaking as usual. Staff M said she did not think much of it, she thought maybe Resident #3 was just tired from the night before. She said another nurse came to her and asked if she thought Resident #3 looked funny. She stated, I then noted the angle of Resident #3's leg was not right. Staff M said she went to assess the resident's leg and as soon as she reached for her leg, Resident #3 started screaming. Staff M said the resident answered yes to being in pain when asked. She said Resident #3 was not able to be touched therefore they contacted 911. Staff M said when she was on the phone with 911, the DON told her to cancel the call, because the x-rays could be conducted in the facility. Staff M said she did not cancel the call and when 911 arrived, they had to sedate Resident #3 so she could be moved from the wheelchair to stretcher. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 12:00 p.m. with Staff O, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). Staff O said she recalled Resident #3 and the shift when the fracture occurred. She said she worked 6/21/24 for the 3 p.m. to 11 p.m. shift and the 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. shift ending 6/22/24. Staff O said she was not assigned to Resident #3. She said Staff P, CNA asked her to help transfer Resident #3. Staff O explained she overheard Resident #3 scream multiple times during the night, which is normal for her, so she did not think much about it. Staff O said when she entered the room to assist Staff P, Resident #3 screams were different, painful almost. She said she helped Staff P place Resident #3 in the wheelchair. Staff O explained for the transfer of Resident #3, she placed her arm under the resident's, to assist with standing. She said the two CNAs had the resident pivot and they assisted the resident to sit in the wheelchair. Staff O said she does not recall if the resident scream out or just took a deep breath during the transfer, but it was very quick. Staff O said Staff P was rushing and wanted to get off shift. Staff O said typically when Resident #3 was in the wheelchair, she self-propelled throughout the unit but she did not go anywhere. She said she thought Resident #3 was just tired from being up most of the night. Staff O said later that same morning she observed blood on the arm of Resident #3 and informed the nurse. Staff O stated no skin tears occurred during the transfer. Staff O stated no one ever spoke with her regarding the fracture until the next day when the supervisor asked her to write a statement as Resident #3 had a fracture. She stated she did not hear anything else regarding the subject. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 11:38 a.m. with Staff Q, CNA. Staff Q recalled working 6/21/24 on the 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. shift into 6/22/24 and stated Resident #3 was on the morning list to get up early. She said Staff P, CNA was assigned to Resident #3 and would have been the one to transfer the resident. She said she did not recall anyone mentioning anything throughout the shift, it was a normal night until she noticed Resident #3 had blood on her hand and was gripping her hip. Staff Q said she brought this to the attention of Staff M, LPN and Staff G, LPN. She said the nurses commented about the resident's leg looking odd. She said she didn't notice the resident's leg at the time as she was looking at the blood on her hand. She said Staff M, LPN called 911 and while Staff M was on the phone, the DON told her to hang up because we could take care of the resident here. She said the nurse didn't hang up the phone. Staff Q said she was surprised that no one asked her about the incident. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 11:18 a.m. with Staff G, LPN. Staff G confirmed he worked the evening of 6/21/24 into the morning of 6/22/24 and said he was the one that saw Resident #3 sitting in her wheelchair and her leg bent awkwardly. Staff G said he informed Staff M, LPN and told her to look at Resident #3 and Staff M immediately said, Oh her leg is broken. Staff G said they were not able to touch the leg because the resident would scream. Staff G said no one looked into how the fracture occurred. Staff G said they didn't know if Resident #3 fell and just got put back in the wheelchair. He said Resident #3 didn't ever try to walk or get out of bed and to his knowledge had never fallen before. Staff G said management did not know what happened, they got statements from a couple of CNAs then moved Staff P, CNA, who was assigned Resident #3, to a different floor. Staff G said, there were Many incidences of neglect that could have been prevented. He said, It is my belief she died from it, speaking of Resident #3's hip fracture. Review of the facility's staff roster did not list Staff R, LPN. The AIT stated Staff R, LPN is no longer employed at the facility but gave the last known phone number. On 10/24/24 at 4:00 p.m. the number was called, and a message was heard stating the number had been disconnected. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 2:35 p.m. with Staff P, CNA. Staff P stated she recalled Resident #3 and worked with on the 11p (6/21/24) to 7a (6/22/24) shift. Staff P said, I don't know anything about a fracture. Staff P said she arrived at the unit and Resident #3 was in the bed sleeping. Staff P said around 2:00 a.m. she completed incontinence care for Resident #3 while the resident slept. Staff P added Resident #3 was a squealing person, Resident #3 squeals all the time. She said Resident #3 was on the get up list so she got Resident #3 dressed and requested assistance from another CNA with the transfer to the wheelchair. Staff P could not recall how the transfer of Resident #3 occurred and denied any knowledge of a fracture or skin tear. Staff P said, If something happened maybe on her [Staff O, CNA]. Staff P, CNA stated, I didn't do anything wrong, DCF and the NHA said so. Staff P then disconnected the phone call. Review of Resident #3's primary care provider (PCP) note, dated 7/1/24, showed Patient was readmitted to [facility] on 06/25/24. Patient was sent to ER for right hip pain that she sustain during a fall per hospital records. Review of Resident #3's Social Service note, dated 7/10/24 showed Resident will be hospice resident as of tomorrow, 7/11/24 . A progress note, dated 7/13/24, showed Resident without vital signs. Family made aware. Hospice was also notified. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 4:37 p.m. with Staff N, (CNA). Staff N said she had taken care of Resident #3 several times and did hear about the fracture. She said she was not working at the time of the incident but heard the CNA tried to transfer Resident #3 and dropped her. Staff N said, Sad, resident was perfectly fine before the fall, when she came back, she just went downhill medically, never the same. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 2:37 p.m. with Resident #3's primary care provider (PCP). He said he remembered the incident with Resident #3 and recalled that Staff H, Nurse Practitioner (NP) was upset neither of them were notified. The PCP reviewed Resident #3's medical records. He said the hospital records showed the resident had a fall and another note said there were no falls. He said, I would assume the facility has protocols in place if a resident had a fracture and they don't know where it came from. He said there should be a protocol and procedure for falls/injuries. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 2:47 p.m. with Staff H, Nurse Practitioner (NP). She said she was a provider for Resident #3. She said she had not been notified when Resident #3 had a fall. She said facility staff should have called when something happened to a resident. She said she did not know until the resident returned from the hospital and she saw the fall in the hospital record. Staff H said the resident was having pain but was stable after she returned. She said, For sure, they should look into that if it is not known where the fracture came. Staff H said the resident's fracture was fixed for comfort, not really to be able to walk on it. 2. Review of the facility's Admission/Discharge To/From Report, dated 7/1/24 to 10/21/24, revealed Resident #8 was discharged to an acute care hospital on 9/23/24. Review of the facility's Incident Log, dated 4/24 to 11/24, revealed Resident #8 had a fall on 9/23/24. Review of a progress note for Resident #8, dated 09/23/24 at 11:35 p.m., by Staff S, LPN showed, This writer noticed other nurses and cna's running down the hall, I went to see what was going on and witnessed other nurses assisting the resident and speaking to keep to keep [sic] him awake. A focus assessment was performed on the resident. Resident Vital signs, kept residents on his Rt [right] side to prevent aspiration, held gauze and applied pressure to eyebrow area. 911 was called and stayed with the patient until EMS [Emergency Management Service] arrived. A message was left with the PCP [Primary Care Provider] answering service. Family was called and voicemail was left, shift supervisor was notified. Review of admission Records showed Resident #8 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Cerebrovascular Accident (stroke) with right hemiparesis, sepsis, dysphagia, wounds, and other co-morbidities. Review of Resident #8's admission MDS, dated [DATE], showed the resident was dependent with all activities of daily living care (ADL), had impairments in both upper and lower extremities preventing movement, and the resident had not had any falls since admission/entry or reentry prior to assessment. An interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 3:31 p.m. with Staff S, LPN. Staff S, LPN confirmed working with Resident #8 on 9/23/24 and recalled the incident. Staff S recalled coming out of another resident's room seeing all these employees going to Resident #8's room. Staff S said she immediately followed, as she was the assigned nurse. She said upon arrival, she noted Resident #8 on the floor with blood on his head. Staff S said the CNA responsible for the resident (Staff T, CNA) stated she turned the resident, and he rolled out of the bed. She stated Resident #8 had an air mattress with collapsable sides. Staff S stated she was not sure how this happened as Resident #8 was tall, thin, and did not move. An interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 5:13 p.m. with Staff T, CNA. Staff T confirmed she cared for Resident #8 on the night of 9/23/24. She said he often had behaviors and yelled. She said she went in and talked to him, and he was calm. She said since the resident was calm, she thought she could clean him up on her own. She said she cleaned up his front and rolled him away from her to clean up his back side. She said the resident was on an air mattress and they are slippery. She said he was not really on a sheet. She said when she rolled him away from her, he slipped off the other side. She said she tried to catch him by his shirt, but he fell off and hit the floor. She said as that happened, she had to let go of his shirt and go search for someone to help. She said she went outside and got the nurse assigned to him. She said she didn't really know his injuries, but he was bleeding, and the nurse started working on him. The CNA said she had previously assisted with Resident #8 being cleaned and changed because he was sometimes combative. She said she was only worried about his behavior and thought since he was calm, she could change him herself. She said the CNAs do not know if a resident is a one-person or a two-person assist because it is not in the computer or on their Kardex. She said they have to go off of personal judgement and it is sometimes passed down from the previous shift's CNA. Staff T explained if shift to shift report was not completed, then you just go off your experience. She said the facility had not done any training on turning/positioning residents before or after the incident with Resident #8. Review of Resident #8's Comprehensive Care Plan, 8/2/24, showed the following: -Focus: Resident needed assistance with activities of daily living because of weakness. The goal showed: I will improve my ability to transfer, dress, toilet, ambulate by next review. The interventions included: Anticipate resident's needs; Assist me with all oral intake of food and fluids; Assist me with hygiene, bathing, dressing, toileting and transfers; Assist me with toileting promptly when requested; Assist with all ADL care to ensure daily needs are met. -Focus: The staff have identified that I am at risk for falls because of these risk factors: Unaware of safety needs. The goal showed: I will have minimized injury due to a fall through next review. The interventions included: Anticipate resident's needs; I should have sneakers, shoes, slippers with rubber soles or non-slip socks when I am out of bed; Keep frequently used items within reach: TV remote, tissues, water glass over bed stand and my water glass (unless I need thickened liquids or can't have anything by mouth); Keep my call light within reach so I can call for assistance; Maintain bed in lowest locked position. -Focus: At times I can agitated, combative, continuous outburst. The goal showed: I will show a decrease in my episodes of being resistant thru next review. The interventions included: Allow choices when able to give resident feeling of control; Converse with during care about topic of interest to redirect; Monitor for effectiveness of medication prescribed to limit behavior; Report to Dr if not effective or behavior continues to decline; Psych eval and follow up per order. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 1:10 p.m. with Staff Z, LPN UM (Unit Manager). Staff Z said residents were evaluated by therapy and those results were sent to the MDS team. She said MDS then enters the information about the functional level of the resident and that populates to the Kardex. She said it usually says dependent or max assist, something like that. She said dependent means two-person assist and maximum assist means 1-2. When asked how the CNAs would know which to use since they cannot assess residents she said, That is all I know about the process. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 12:48 p.m. with Staff Y, CNA. She said the facility had not done any training on turning, positioning, or transferring residents. She said the CNAs do not know if a resident is a one or two-person assist or if they need a lift. She said the CNAs have To figure it out. Interviews were conducted from 10/22/24 to 10/28/24 at various times with the following staff: Staff U, D, W, X, V, N, O, Q, CNA's. During these interviews staff stated the computer system does not indicate specific directions for what level of care (i.e Assist of one, mechanical lift) is needed for residents' ADL needs. The staff stated usually they just know how to care for residents based on our experience. The CNAs said they try to complete shift to shift report to inform other CNAs of care needs, but it does not always happen with staffing patterns and time constraints. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 2:23 p.m. with the MDS Coordinator. She said approximately a year ago, when the MDS changed from section G to section GG, it quit having an assist of 1 or two option. She stated related to the care plan not indicating a level of assistance needed, That is not a directive I have been given here. She said the CNAs would just know the level of care from passing it down in report. She doesn't know how else they would know. The MDS Coordinator confirmed CNAs cannot assess residents. Review of hospital records for Resident #8, dated 9/24/24, showed the resident presented to the emergency department and underwent a head and maxillofacial CT (computed tomography) scan which revealed an 8 millimeter (mm) subdural hemorrhage layering along the right frontotemporal convexity, with no significant midline shift, interval development of large right frontotemporal infarct is noted compared to February 2022, and possible acute/subacute. The resident was also noted to have a right front scalp hematoma which was a laceration, and sutures were applied. Upon arrival the resident was noted to have a forehead laceration with a dressing in place that was blood soaked. The resident was unable to answer questions correctly although he was attempting to. The CT scan results, dated 9/23/24, showed the following: Calvarium/Scalp: large right frontal scalp hematoma calvaria fracture evaluation limited by motion artifact. CT Maxillofacial: comminuted right greater than left nasal bone fractures moderate overlying soft tissue swelling. Review Resident #8's ER record showed the resident received 12 sutures to right eyebrow laceration. Resident #8 was admitted to the ICU (intensive care unit). No other documentation is available at this time. An interview was conducted on 10/23/2024 at 4:10 p.m. with the NHA and DON. The NHA stated the facility was following Resident #8's plan of care with one-person assist. The NHA confirmed the care plan did not have assist requirements as an intervention. The NHA stated, I thought it was there. The NHA stated no investigation was needed. The NHA stated after comparing statements from staff he decided to eventually find the CNA neglected to utilize proper positioning techniques and the facility had no control over this. The NHA stated this was based on the DCF investigation. After the NHA spoke with the investigator, the NHA decided to start a neglect report. The NHA stated the report was filed and the nursing assistant was reported to the board. The NHA and DON stated no other actions needed to be taken. They stated they did not do any in-services, review their policies, or interview other residents. They stated no education was provided to staff post-incident. An interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 4:38 p.m. with the Director of Rehabilitation (DOR). He said Resident #8 had severe safety awareness concerns and had decreased coordination. He said Resident #8 was totally dependent and in therapy that means they would use two people to assist. He said nursing decides if two people should be used for transfers and care on the unit. He said the Resident #8 had rigid tone so Everything is total dependent, and he needs a lot of help. He said the resident having rigid tone means staff would have to hold him because he cannot hold himself while turning. He said if the resident was being turned, he would need a person on each side of him. The DOR stated, To roll him he still needs a lot of help. He said if the resident didn't have control, it is dangerous for a CNA to roll the resident away from them because they can roll off the bed if no one is on the other side. The DOR said for therapy, Total dependent means max assist; two people and lifts. Review of the facility's Abuse and Neglect Log, dated 4/24 to 10/24, did not reveal any reports after 8/28/24 of any incidents of abuse or neglect. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 10:33 a.m. with the DON. The DON stated she had validated with the NHA, no other reports or allegations of abuse or neglect had been made since 8/28/24. 3. Review of the facility's Admission/Discharge To/From Report, for dates 7/1/2024 to 10/21/24, revealed Resident #12 was discharged to an acute care hospital on 9/26/24. Review of Resident #12's progress notes, dated 9/26/2024 at 3:31 p.m., authored by the DON showed: Resident had a fall blood pressure is 159/86 pulses 85. We're sending her to the hospital. Review of Resident #12's progress notes, dated 9/26/2024 at 3:44 p.m., authored by Staff AA, Registered Nurse (RN) showed: Pt [patient] found on the floor at evacuation site. VSS [Vital Signs Stable]. EMS [Emergency Medical Services] on site. Pt sent to hospital. Family called. Message left. Review of admission Records showed Resident #12 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including hypertension, weakness, dementia, Huntington's disease, and other co-morbidities. Review of Resident #12's admission MDS, dated [DATE], Section C, Cognitive Patterns, revealed a BIMS score of 8, indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment, Section J, Health Conditions showed no pain and no falls. Review of Resident #12's Physical Therapy Discharge summary, dated [DATE], showed: Resident #12 was able to perform sitting to standing with the use of an assistive device; was able to transfer with supervision only, and was able to walk 150 feet with a front wheeled walker with contact guard assistance. Review of Resident #12 Comprehensive Care Plan, 7/19/24, shows: -Focus: The staff have identified that I am at risk for falls because of these risk factors: Dementia, use of anti-psychotic medication, use of antidepressant medication. The care plan interventions showed: Anticipate resident's needs; I should have sneakers, shoes, slippers with rubber soles or non-slip socks when I am out of bed; Keep frequently used items within reach: TV remote, tissues, water glass over bed stand and my water glass (unless I need thickened liquids or can't have anything by mouth); Keep my call light within reach so I can call for assistance; Maintain bed in lowest locked position. -Focus: I need assistance with activities of daily living because of weakness. The care plan intervention showed: Anticipate resident's needs; Assist me with all oral intake of food and fluids; Assist me with hygiene, bathing, dressing, toileting and transfers; Assist me with toileting promptly when requested; Assist with all ADL care to ensure daily needs are met. -Focus: The resident has an ADL Self Care Performance Deficit r/t Activity Intolerance, r/t cognitive deficits. The interventions showed: Encourage the resident to participate to the fullest extent possible with each interaction; Encourage the resident to use bell to call for assistance; Anticipate needs not verbalized as resident does not always clearly make needs Nursing known. Keep call bell within reach, encourage use, answer promptly. An interview was conducted on 10/21/2024 at 3:15 p.m. with the NHA and AIT. They stated the facility needed to prepare for evacuation to a church on 9/24/24. The NHA said at the church the County Emergency Management showed up and stated the facility should move their residents to a county shelter. The NHA and AIT stated no one was seriously injured, no one died, and no one eloped. They said there may have been a skin tear. The NHA stated, We did the best we could. The NHA confirmed they did not compile a post-storm assessment, as they did not have time; they needed to get ready for the next storm. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 11:50 a.m. with Staff V, CNA. Staff V stated, During the evacuation things happened. Staff V stated, Yes there was a fall. I was in the gym where [Resident #12] was assigned. The management did not leave out assignments for CNAs, so I am not sure who was responsible for [Resident #12]. Staff V said, I was in a doorway and heard a loud thud. I turned and noted [Resident #12[ on the floor, it looked bad, no one was near. [TRUNCATED]
CRITICAL (L) 📢 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 F0725 (Tag F0725)

Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents

⚠️ Facility-wide issue

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure sufficient nursing staff, with the appropria...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure sufficient nursing staff, with the appropriate competencies and skill sets, provided nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident on four out of four resident units in the facility. This failure resulted in a fracture of unknown origin, falls with major injury, lack of wound care according to physician orders, lack of medication administration according to physician orders, missed laboratory orders, lack of follow-up for critical diagnostic results, and Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care not being provided to residents per care plans. This failure created a situation that resulted in a worsened condition and the likelihood for serious injury and or death to Residents #3, #8, #12, #9, #19, #21, #22, #20, #1, #13, #15, #16, #18, #7, #17, #24, #25 #14, and #10 and resulted in the determination of Immediate Jeopardy on 6/22/24. The findings of Immediate Jeopardy were determined to be removed on 10/28/04 and the severity and scope was reduced to a F. Findings included: Cross reference F600 An observation was conducted on 10/21/24 at 10:11 a.m. of Resident #19 in bed with the head of the bed elevated. He had a bandage on his right anterior forearm. The bandage was approximately 6 by 4 and clearly visible. The bandage had a faded date of 10/8/24 written on it. The same bandage remained in place on 10/22/24 and 10/23/24. An observation and interview was conducted on 10/21/24 at 10:47 a.m. with Resident #21. The resident was observed to have two bandages on his left leg, one on his knee and one on his foot. The bandage on the left knee had slid down his leg leaving the open wound exposed. The resident was also observed to have a bandage on his right knee and no bandage on his right foot. The bandage on the right knee was observed to have blood soaked through the underside. The right foot had an open wound on his 2nd toe and on his heel. None of the bandages in place had a date notated. Resident #21 said, I'm very upset. This is why I have come here. He said he was really worried because he didn't want any further infections. He said he had not had a dressing change for the 10 days he had been at the facility. He said he kept asking the nurses about changing the bandages with no follow-up on their part. He said no one responded to his call bell for two days and he felt very isolated. A follow-up observation and interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 1:50 p.m. with Resident #21. The resident's bandages remained in the same condition as they were the previous day. The resident confirmed the bandages had not been changed. He said he was not sure why he was there and if the facility did not do something soon, he would leave against medical advice (AMA). On 10/23/24 9:30 a.m. Resident #21 was observed rolling through the front corridor with the same loose, undated dressing in place. An observation and interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 12:38 p.m. with Resident #20. The resident was lying in bed uncovered. A large bandage was observed on her anterior lower right leg. The bandage was not dated. The resident said she had fallen and hit her leg about a month ago and the dressing had not been changed since she was admitted to the facility. The resident said she had a skin tear on her left leg, but it was almost healed. Resident #20 said the wound on her right leg is not being taking care of to my liking. On 10/21/2024 at 10:15 a.m. during an observation and interview, Resident #16 was observed in bed, dressed in a facility gown watching television. Resident #16 was observed partially covered by a bed sheet and his face had food from breakfast on it. Resident #16 said the care in facility was not great. He said he had not had a shower or a bed bath in a long time. He stated it had been about two weeks. Resident #16 said he had asked several times for a shower or bed bath, but was told by staff they were too busy, and he would have to wait. He said he does not like to feel dirty. On 10/21/2024 at 11:03 a.m. during an observation and interview, Resident #18 was observed in bed watching television. The resident stated he had not had any daily care for the day. Resident #18 said it sometimes takes staff hours to answer call lights, and he does not get showers or bed baths on the days he is supposed to. On 10/21/2024 at 12:50 p.m. during an observation and interview, Resident #7 was observed dressed and seated in his wheelchair eating lunch. His family member (FM) was in a chair at the resident's side assisting him with lunch. Resident #7's FM stated the facility is always short staffed with nurses and CNAs. She said Resident #7 does not always get showers on his shower days and will not get one until she speaks with the staff. On 10/21/2024 at 10:15 a.m. during an observation and interview, Resident #17 was observed dressed and sitting in his wheelchair watching a movie on his personal electronic device. Resident #17 said staffing in the facility is really bad and he doesn't always get a shower on his scheduled day because of short staffing. Resident #17 said he has even asked for a shower appointment on days when he does not get a shower on his scheduled day. He said he would at least like to have a shower on the two shower days he is scheduled for. An observation was conducted on 10/21/24 at 11:15 a.m. of Resident #24 lying in bed asleep. Her breakfast tray was sitting on her bedside table pushed approximately five feet aware from her bed, out of her reach. The call bell was also observed to be hanging on the wall out of reach for the resident. On 10/22/24 during the lunch meal the following was observed: - 12:03 p.m. the lunch meal carts arrived to A wing, four residents were observed in their wheelchairs, sitting around the table in the common area/dining room. No staff were seen in the area. - 12:13 p.m. a staff member served the four residents their lunch meal, set the meal up and walked away. - 12:19 p.m. no staff member in the dining room, one resident (Resident #25) calling for assistance and appeared to be having a difficult time eating, another resident was observed just looking at the tray. - 12:20 p.m. notified the A wing Unit Manager (UM) of Resident #25 needing assistance. The UM approached and spoke with resident, then proceeded back to the nurses' station. - 12:25 p.m. Resident #25 still requesting assistance. - 12:35 p.m. notified a passing CNA of Resident #25 request, CNA said OK and kept walking. - 12:54 p.m. All four residents still at dining table, two (one being Resident #25) residents had not touched their meals and one resident is calling out loudly. Two CNAs were at the far corner of the dining room talking. Three staff members (unit clerk, UM, and nurse) were observed at the nurse's station. No staff member attempted to assist the residents. - 12:55 p.m. Surveyors requested staff assist residents in the dining room. An interview was conducted on 10/21/24 at 11:30 a.m. with family members of a resident. The family said staff did not assist the residents with eating. They observed the staff offering one bite of food and if the resident did not take it immediately, the staff member took the tray away and no one attempted again to get the resident to eat. The family said staff asked them about feeding the resident themselves, but they do not feel comfortable doing that because they do not want the resident to choke. An observation and interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 9:41 a.m. of a call light on in room [ROOM NUMBER]A and 109B. The call light system at the nurses' station showed the lights had been on for 26 minutes and 35 minutes respectively. Staff E, LPN, was observed standing a couple of rooms down in the hall but was not responding to the call lights. Upon entering room [ROOM NUMBER]A, the resident said her call light had been on for a long time. The resident was observed to have on a gown that was wet on the front. The resident said she spilled her drink from breakfast on her gown. She said a staff member came in and said they would get someone, but no one had come. The resident said it is normal to wait an hour and a half for your call light to be answered. She said You could be dying in here and no one would come. They never have enough staff. Upon entering room [ROOM NUMBER]B the resident was observed sitting in her wheelchair crying. She said she really needed to go to the bathroom and her light had been on for 30 mins. She said a CNA came in and told her she would be back after she had finished feeding other residents, but she had not returned. At 9:45 a.m. Staff E, LPN was observed going into room [ROOM NUMBER]B. The resident was overheard telling the nurse she had to go to the bathroom really bad. The nurse told her she would go find her CNA, then she exited the room. At 9:49 a.m. Staff FF, CNA was observed entering the room to assist the resident. The nurse then checked on the resident in 109A and assisted with getting a new gown. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 9:56 a.m. with Staff FF, CNA. She said staffing was not good, especially on weekends. She confirmed the resident in 109B had her call light on for a while and she told her she would come back. She said the problem is that some residents get their breakfast early, including room [ROOM NUMBER]B. She said those residents then need to go to the bathroom and she is still feeding other residents. Staff FF said just on her assignment she had six residents to assist with breakfast. She said there is no additional help to feed residents or answer call bells during mealtimes. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 3:23 p.m. with the ADON. She said residents were scheduled for two showers a week and additional if requested. She said if a resident missed a shower staff should document. She confirmed CNAs document showers in the Task section of the medical record. The ADON said if a resident asked for a shower they should have gotten one. Regarding call lights, she said they should have been responded to as soon as staff can. She said everyone should answer a call light, not just CNAs. The ADON said call light response times had been an issue and she had heard about it. The ADON agreed residents not getting assisted with eating is not acceptable. The ADON said she felt like a lot of things weren't getting done because agency just don't care. An interview was conducted on 10/21/24 at 10:22 a.m. with Resident #13. Resident #13 stated, They [the facility] are understaffed, as they have a significant amount of residents to care for. They don't have time to care for me a lot of the times, I have to sit in my soiled brief. I feel demoralized when this happens. I have expressed my concerns to the NHA, he useless and never gets back to me and makes comments like, we are doing the best we can. You can leave in you don't like it. So, I just deal with it. Resident #13 continued to state not receiving medications in a timely manner either. An observation and interview was conducted on 10/21/24 at 10:47 a.m. with Resident #21. He said, No one responded to me [my call bell] for two days, I felt very isolated. Resident #21 stated being thirsty and the facility only passes water one time per day, I have gotten smart and now ask for two cups. I don't think they [facility] have time for me. An interview was conducted on 10/21/24 at 10:57 a.m. with a family member while visiting. The family member stated I ensure myself or another family member is here to care for [resident] as the facility does not have enough staff. The CNAs are very compassionate and try their best but just not enough of them. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 1:00 p.m. with Staff U, CNA. Staff U stated, Staffing is terrible, I can't get my job done. For example, today I was told at 9:30 a.m. that someone [another CNA] did not show up, so our assignments changed. Which means, no one was assigned to those residents from 7:00 to 9:30 a.m. they [the residents] had not been touched. It's too much, one and a half hours to figure out someone did not show up and rearrange assignment. Breakfast was done, hopefully those residents did not need assistance. There are a lot of heavy care residents (meaning total care) that need assistance with everything. We just don't have time to do everything. There is not enough staff. Agency won't come here for one reason or another. It's even worse on the weekends. On a couple of weekends there isn't even staff in the main dining room. Family members are passing trays to residents as no one [staff] shows up in the dining room. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 1:10 p.m. with Staff CC, CNA. Staff CC stated, Hard working here, staffing is crazy, we are always short. You just have to work around, harder get up total care [residents] they have to stay in bed. We have difficulty assisting in dining, especially if the resident takes longer [to eat] and then food [gets] cold. Really hard to accomplish our job. Sometimes we are not even told if someone did not show up [for their shift] then that assignment doesn't even have anyone over [the residents] until it's noticed. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 1:15 p.m. with Staff DD, CNA. Staff DD stated, Staffing is not good, call offs, workload is crazy. I can't get them [residents] 100%. I can do basics only, no showers, hardly any assistance with meals especially if they need a lot of encouragement. Just not enough to assist with everyone who needs. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 2:09 p.m. with Staff W, CNA. Staff W stated, Work a lot, doubles, multiple days in a row. I don't have time for any extras with the residents, no time for breaks. Staff W continued to state it's easier to leave the residents in their beds due to time restraints. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 2:18 p.m. with Staff X, CNA. Staff X stated, having to work a lot due to not enough staff, call offs, works many doubles and multiple days in a row. We want to do what we can for the residents, as the care is too much for the number we have. We don't have time for things like showers, or just getting them out of bed. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 4:13 p.m. with Staff EE, LPN. Staff E stated the evening shift [3:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m.) is especially challenging on staff. Many times, the staff scheduled don't show up and are not replaced, we don't start with the number needed, many reasons not enough. The facility receives a number of new admissions on the evening shift, not sure how those residents feel. Very sad, we do what we can. During an interview on 10/24/24 at 11:50 a.m. with Staff V, CNA. Staff V stated, Staffing is awful. It's crazy, no one knows what is up, people [staff] come and go as they please. No one pays attention to what anyone does. Staff V stated not having time to get resident up out of bed regularly, shower. Only, the basics. During an interview on 10/25/24 at 12:00 p.m. with Staff O, CNA stated, staffing was difficult, as have over 20 residents a piece to care for. Staff O said accomplishing anything outside of basic care is hard. Staff O stated, Showers don't happen, and you hope you have all good eaters as not much time to assist. During an interview on 10/28/24 at 11:38 a.m. with Staff Q, CNA stated working for the facility for many years and the past few months have just been terrible. She stated, Staffing and patient care is a big mess. The facility has no idea if staff are here or not. Nursing doesn't pay attention to residents, unless their families are here. Administration has no idea what they are doing. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 12:17 p.m. with a family member. The family member stated having to come to ensure family member receives care. Someone from the family is here most of the time, especially for meals as the staff don't have time to assist. The family member stated, In fact, we have had to pass trays in the dining room to residents on weekends as no staff members show up. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 9:45 a.m. with room [ROOM NUMBER]. Resident in room [ROOM NUMBER] stated, There is no staff on weekends. I have to help my roommate sometimes, he is a veteran so I don't mind, but they should be helping him. I will put the call light on for him, because he needs to be changed. The staff will comes in and turn the light off and says they will be back. It will be an hour and a half to two hours before they come back to change him. Numerous staff don't show up when they are supposed to, weekends are especially short. It is impossible to get any help around here. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 11:58 a.m. with Resident #15. Resident #15 stated last Friday she Did not get shower and could not get help. This happens from time to time because they don't have enough staff. Resident #15 stated speaking with the administration many times and filed grievances but nothing happens. On 10/28/24 at 9:39 a.m. and 11:15 a.m. a strong smell of urine occurred on the 300 unit near the right side of the nurse's station. On 10/21/24 at 10:24 a.m. an observation on the A-wing revealed 6 call lights going off, two LPN's present in hallway took several minutes and surveyor walking by staff to enter one of the rooms with the light on. During an interview and observation on 10/21/24 at 12:50 p.m. the family member of Resident #7 was in the resident's room at the bedside assisting the with lunch meal. Resident #7 family member stated, The facility never knows what their staffing should be and is always short staffed from the nurses to the CNAs. She said the staffing numbers are never posted on the weekends even after she has told the facility they need to be posted. Resident #7 family member stated Resident #7 doesn't always get showers and they will skip the shower until I say something to the staff. Not sure why I need to keep asking for something they should be providing. During an interview on 10/21/24 at 10:07 a.m. Resident #16 stated the care here is not great, it takes a long time for his call light to be answered, if at all. Resident #16 states having to ask to have his sheets changed. Resident #16 said not having had a shower or bed bath for over two weeks, if requests the staff say they are busy and has to wait, which means I don't get one. During an interview on 10/21/24 at 11:03 a.m. Resident #18 stated, There is definitely a staff shortage here. It takes a long time for call lights to be answered, don't get showers or baths when supposed to. Resident #18 stated, I feel like management doesn't care. An interview was conducted on 10/23/2024 at 3:20 p.m. with Staff GG, CNA. Staff GG stated usually working the 3pm-11pm shift. Staff GG said there is supposed to be 7 CNAs, but sometimes there are only 5 working. Staff GG said it is very busy when this happens. Staff GG stated she does not get overwhelmed as she has been a CNA for many years and has a lot of experience. Staff GG stated, the CNAs with less experience have a harder time keeping up when there is not enough staffing, and they struggle. She stated, sometimes upon arrival to the shift residents have not had all of their needs met from the day shift and sometimes they have to change residents and do complete care that should have been done on the previous shift. An observation was conducted on 10/23/24 at 11:05 a.m. of Resident #17, who is cognitively intact, approaching Staff C, RN at the A Unit nurses' station. The resident expressed concerns related to staffing the previous shift. He stated there was only one nurse on the A Unit for part of the 10/22/24 11:00 p.m. to 10/23/24 7:00 a.m. shift. An interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 1:03 p.m. with Staff C, RN. She confirmed she was scheduled to work on the A Unit until 11:00 p.m. on 10/22/24. She said she stayed over because a nurse did not come to relieve her. She said she left the facility before another nurse arrived, thus leaving Staff G, LPN as the only nurse for 64 residents. She said she left because the other nurse Was almost here. Staff C said she did not do a narcotic count or give report to Staff G, LPN. Staff C said she did not remember what time she left the facility. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 11:18 a.m. with Staff G, LPN. Staff G confirmed he worked on 10/22/24 11:00 p.m. to 10/23/24 7:00 a.m. shift on the A Unit. Staff G said he does not know what time Staff C, LPN left. He confirmed he was the only nurse for 64 residents but does not remember how long it was between Staff C leaving and the Unit Manager arriving. Staff G remembered getting a new admission resident while being the only nurse on the unit. He said as transport was leaving the facility the Unit Manager arrived. Staff G said there were staffing issues in the facility. He said over the weekend the police were called by an agency nurse because she did not want to leave her assignment or it would be abandonment, but there was no staff in the facility. He said staff had called the staffing phone and no one answered and the ADON said she would not come in. He said he called the NHA and the NHA made some calls getting the D Wing Unit Manager to come in. Staff G said he counted narcotics with the agency nurse so she could leave, and he waited until the Unit Manager arrived. Staff G said, Staffing [explicative]. He said there were a lot of disgruntled employees, and they never had the staff they needed. Staff G said it was like that often and There is rarely a time we have adequate staff, so we have time to give the patients the adequate care they deserve. He said they do not know where people are working, and people had to switch units mid shift. Staff G said a week or so ago some of the resident's family members stepped in and helped in the dining room. He said the family were passing residents their meal trays and pouring juice and coffee for residents. He said staffing had been like that for a while and staff Feel like pawns in this big game. He said he often gets complaints from residents and family members about not getting showers and ADL care. He said, We don't have the capacity because of the workload. He said, If we don't have the eyes on the floor to see a resident on the edge of the bed because CNAs are in other rooms . A lot of the stuff can be prevented but we can't catch it in time. Staff G said they had a lot of residents that tried to stand up and needed to be watched because they tried to get up by themselves. He said if you have 4 CNAs taking care of 60 + patients, someone is going to get neglected. Staff G said there have been Many incidences of neglect that could have been prevented. An interview was conducted on 10/29/24 at 11:07 a.m. with the DON regarding staffing concerns. She agreed during mealtimes there are not enough hands on deck. She said the management team (i.e. DON, ADON, etc.) do not go to the units to help with meals. The DON said the facility had a lot of call outs and use agency staff. She said if all else fails they offered bonuses to their staff to come in. As for the night shift going from 10/22/24 into the morning or 10/23/24, she said she was told a nurse stayed over until the unit manager arrived and got report. She said she was not aware there was a period of time with only one nurse for 64 residents. She said having one nurse is not acceptable, unless there are under 40 residents. She said the nurse should have stayed on the unit until a relieving nurse arrived, report was given, and a narcotic count was completed. She said she heard the facility was short on CNAs over the weekend, but was told the NHA came in to work because he is a CNA. The DON said staff had been good about picking up shifts, but they are angry with management about several issues. She said they are down to very few agencies they work with. The DON said there is a problem with call outs, no shows, or some staff quitting. She agreed staffing concerns and shortages lead to a domino effect with care not being provided. The DON agreed that all the concerns combined including staffing, wound care, ADL care, labs, and medications all together can lead to neglect of the residents. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 2:35 PM with the Staffing Coordinator (SC). The SC stated overseeing the staffing for the building. The SC explained when a call off is received, we try to fill the position immediately. The SC stated staff know they have to report off a minimum of 2 hours prior to start of shift, if less than 2 hours it is considered a no call no show. The SC stated having had 4 call offs for 10/24/24 and was able to fill through calling staff and using agency staff which would be the process. The SC stated being instructed by the NHA and DON to staff the building based on census and state calculations of a minimum of 2.0 for CNA and 1.0 for Nursing. The SC stated the biggest obstacle for staffing is finding good staff. The SC stated they can only utilize one agency as the facility has not paid two other agencies monies owed. During an interview on 10/25/24 at 3:23 p.m. the ADON stated, I think there is enough staff here. We try to staff so nurses have no more than 40 residents and CNAs 20. We base the staffing on census. The ADON stated a nurse should not leave the facility until the next nurse arrives to take over the cart. The ADON stated being vaguely aware, that two nurses had to stay over as another nurse did not show up the other night, but I thought a nurse came in to relieve one. The ADON stated not being aware that the nurse did not stay until the other nurse arrived which left, one nurse to care for 64 residents. The ADON stated being unaware the police department was contacted regarding not having enough staff in the facility. During an interview on 10/25/2024 at 4:24 p.m. with the NHA staffing was discussed. The NHA stated staffing the facility is based on the census for day. The NHA stated the Staffing Coordinator (SC) is responsible for totaling the number of hours staff worked the day before. The NHA stated they did increase the number of staff on the rehab unit based on acuity but really it [staffing] is on census. The NHA stated if there is a call off, the supervisor is responsible for finding a replacement for the position. The supervisor works with the SC to accomplish this. If the position is a nurse, then the agency can be called and if the position remains open then the supervisor/UM will fill this position. The NHA stated the UM hours are in the system as direct care staff. The facility has a staffing phone for the staff to call with any need. The phone is carried by the Nurse Manager on call for the day. The NHA stated being aware of staffing concerns from staff and families. The NHA stated, Yes, I have heard of staffing concerns. I'll come over at 3:30 in the morning, as staff are complaining. I will say to them, why do we need more [staff] if you are not going to do the job, as you are just sitting at the station, talking when I come in. We are doing the best we can, we are focusing on the evening shift [3-11p]. Review of facility's policy and procedure titled Staffing, dated revised 8/2022 showed: Policy Statement: Our facility provides sufficient numbers of staff with the skills and competency necessary to provide care and services for all residents in accordance with resident care plans and the facility assessment. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. Licensed nurses and certified nursing assistants are available 24 hours a day to provide direct resident care services. 2. Staffing numbers and the skill requirements of direct care staff are determined by the needs of the residents based on each resident's plan of care. 3. Other support services (e.g., dietary, activities/recreational, social, therapy, environmental, etc.) are also staffed to ensure that resident needs are met. 4. Direct care staffing information per day (including agency and contract staff) is submitted to the CMS payroll-based journal system on the schedule specified by CMS, but no less than once a quarter. 5. Inquiries or concerns relative to our facility's staffing should be directed to the administrator or his/her designee. Facility immediate actions to remove the Immediate Jeopardy included: 1. Staffing a. Current staffing model reviewed and updated to reflect resident needs and acuity. b. Facility assessment reviewed and updated on 10/25/2024 to reflect current resident population needs. c. Reassessed the acuity level of each unit. Reviewed assistance the level of care needs for ADLs including transfer status, mechanical lift usage, and residents requiring a higher level of care due to comorbidities. Education 1. Education provided to the staffing team to include administration, Director of Nursing, and staffing coordinator by RDO on 10/28/2024 regarding staffing standards and staffing for acuity on each unit to ensure quality resident care. Audit: 1. Initial audit was completed for 30 days to compare the AHCA report to the PPD report and compare with schedules to ensure that PPD was met, and ratios were appropriate for the resident acuity. In the initial audit, the administrator, staffing coordinator and payroll coordinator reviewed staffing from the previous day to ensure that hours and ratios were achieved according to the staffing plan based on acuity. Payroll also ran the PPD report from the payroll software, after editing missed punches, to compare and enter into the AHCA staffing sheets to encompass hours from the previous day. Staffing coordinator reviewed the schedule for the current day and next day to review attendance and staffing needs to ensure that resident needs are met, and staff are within the ratio of the staffing model. It is the administrator's responsibility to ensure that the staffing model is updated, and the facility assessment is completed to reflect resident acuity needs on each unit. Verification of the facility's removal plan was conducted by the survey team on 10/28/2024. A review of facility education was conducted to verify the staff on the staffing team were understand and implement staffing guideline changes. Interviews were conducted with the NHA, the DON, and two Nurse Managers to validate staffing needs education had been given and understanding of staffing guidelines. Based on verification of the facility's Immediate Jeopardy removal plan, the immediate jeopardy was determined to be removed on 10/28/2024 and the non-compliance was reduced to a scope and severity of F.
CRITICAL (L) 📢 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 most or all residents

⚠️ Facility-wide issue

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the administration of the facility failed to update their emergency plan as changes occurre...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the administration of the facility failed to update their emergency plan as changes occurred and failed to plan and carry out a safe evacuation. There was a complete disregard for patient safety and quality of care to be maintained during a natural disaster that required an evacuation. Additionally, after one failed evacuation the facility did not secure a location for a second natural disaster that occurred shortly after the first one. The facility maintained an evacuation agreement with a local church that began in 2018. In February 2024 the church informed the facility that the agreement was to be terminated effective May 31, 2024. No alternative evacuation location was arranged. In September of 2024 when evacuation was ordered for hurricane [NAME] the facility staff moved 226 residents to a local church. Family members of the residents called the police and emergency medical services to report conditions. Local Police, Fire and Emergency officials assessed the location and deemed it unsafe. The residents were on small cots placed right next to each, staff did not have enough room to care for the residents, the resident care was not organized, supplies were not available, there was not enough room for every resident to be indoors, important supplies were housed outside with rain predicted and the residents were not safe in terms of fire exits and supervision. The local authorities moved all the residents to a county shelter the night before hurricane [NAME]. Before hurricane [NAME] the facility Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) began calling Local County Emergency Operation Center (CEOC), and State officials asking for an evacuation location or to be allowed to not evacuate. Again, the facility did not have a plan for the safety and care of its residents. A volunteer at the CEOC working with the Emergency Operations leadership assisted the NHA by determining that the most acutely ill residents could be moved to a local Nursing Home. The NHA moved all the remaining 217 residents to a church in a nearby county. The CEOC acknowledged awareness of his plan and said they were unable to approve evacuation plans at the last minute. Upon review after the storm, the County Emergency Management did not approve of this location due to it being in an evacuation zone and unsuitable if evacuations were ordered for a hurricane. The facility remains without a safe evacuation location. These failures created a situation that resulted in a worsened condition and the likelihood for serious injury and or death to all facility Residents and resulted in the determination of Immediate Jeopardy on 09/24/2024. The findings of Immediate Jeopardy are ongoing and have not been removed, the severity and scope remains an L as there has been no verification of removal of immediacy of harm. Findings included: During an interview on 10/20/24 at 3:15 p.m. with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the Administrator in Training (AIT), the NHA said he knew the agreement with Evacuation Location #1 was terminated sometime in January 2024 when he began as the NHA with the facility. The facility received the termination of contract letter in March 2024. He said he started calling other vendors at this time to find a suitable location and admitted to only looking for options to keep the entire facility in one location (approximately 280 residents). The NHA stated he was unsuccessful and called (local) County Emergency Management (CEM) for assistance, who instructed him they could not assist him. The NHA did not have a location as of September 2024 when a hurricane was projected to impact St. Petersburg. The NHA stated he was not able to find a location and continued to contact CEM for assistance, and said they needed to help us. The NHA stated he was finally able to find a location. The NHA stated that no communication occurred to families during the evacuation for [NAME]. The AIT stated if families had her number they were contacting her, although only if they had her number. The NHA stated he thought this was successful event as no one eloped, died or (had a) major injury. The NHA admitted to not looking for a location for evacuation prior to the imminent need of the next major hurricane, [NAME]. The NHA stated, I kept contacting CEM and they did not help me. Review of the approved facility disaster plan dated February 2024, provided by the local Emergency Management office showed multiple sections such as Facility Basic information, Incident Command Structure. It included Policies and Procedures on a Food Plan, Water Plan, Emergency Power Plan, Medical Supplies, Medical Records, Sewage, Transportation and Rationale for disaster plan. It contained a Hazard Analysis, Elevation certificate, Evacuation Plan and Essential Business Functions, Disaster Chain of Command, a Floor Plan of the facility, Emergency meal plan, menus, a food a water list needed, Evacuation Time Table, Information, Training and Exercises, Emergency Preparedness Communication Plan, management and staff contact numbers. It contained the Sheltering License Agreement with (Evacuation Location #1) and Mutual Aid Agreements with two local nursing homes. It contained agreements with a Food distributor, commercial buses, wheelchair transport, a rental truck company, Review of the approved facility disaster plan dated February 2024, provided by the local Emergency Management office included a Sheltering License Agreement effective June 1, 2018, with the [NAME] of a local church (Evacuation Location #1). The church agreed to make certain areas available to the Nursing Home in the event of a hurricane evacuation order. A Shelter Agreement Clarification page was included that showed the Church (Evacuation Location #1) would be able to accommodate 379 Residents from the facility for the year 2023, signed by the NHA at the time and the [NAME] of the church on 5/3/2023. Mutual Aid Agreements were included with two nearby nursing homes. Both Mutual Aid Agreements specified that the receiving facility could only take 60 residents from an outside source and the number would depend on current in-house census and both facilities understand that a local in-house emergency, and or emergency that affected all facilities in the [NAME] Bay Area, would render a variance in available space. The Mutual Aide Agreements were signed by each facility and the current NHA in February of 2024. Review of a letter dated 2/16/2024, written to the administrator of the facility and signed by the [NAME] of a local church (Evacuation Location #1) showed the church was terminating the agreement to be the evacuation location for the facility effective May 31,2024. The termination was due to the facility not following agreed upon safety and cleanliness procedures during the past evacuations, and other problems described in the letter. An Emergency Management Planning document was provided to the surveyors on 10/24/2024 by the NHA and described by him as the plan followed for hurricane [NAME]. The document showed the facility was licensed to house 274 residents including a secure dementia unit of up to 70 residents. The facility is in hurricane evacuation Zone A (most vulnerable zone and is usually the first to be evacuated), the elevation was 9 feet 4 inches above sea level and will be evacuated to an offsite location as directed by the Local County Emergency Management. Review of the document showed Evacuation Location #1 crossed out and replaced by a different church located in a nearby city (Evacuation Location #2). Evacuation location #2 was dated to be effective 7/1/2024. On multiple pages of the Emergency Management Planning Document Evacuation Location #1 was still listed. No documentation was provided for the approval of Evacuation Location #2 by the local Emergency Management Office. Review of an email communication from the Emergency Management Health Care Plan Compliance Specialist showed the last review and approval of an Emergency Plan for the facility on 10/3/2023. Review of a letter from the local County Emergency Management office, dated 10/3/2023 signed by the Healthcare Plan Compliance Specialist showed, To the current Administrator, We are pleased to inform you that your electronic Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) was reviewed. You will receive the CEMP Approval Certificate upon payment. The facility was instructed to submit their plan for the March 2024 to February 2025 time frame by January 2, 2024. Review of the local County Emergency Operations Center evacuation orders for hurricane [NAME] showed, September 24, 2024, Attn: Facility Administration: An Evacuation order for Residential Health Care Facilities, [local] County has issued an evacuation order for all Level A facilities. The anticipated impacts of the storm include: -Storm Surge of 5 to 8 ft is possible along areas of [local] County; however, this is highly dependent on where the storm makes landfall. -Strong tropical storm force winds are forecast for [local] County starting 10 am on Thursday. -Heavy rainfall of up to 6 inches is forecast for [local] County. -Isolated to scattered tornadoes will be possible, especially in the outer rainbands of the storm. -Hazardous surf and rip currents are expected to continue until the storm passes If you are included in the evacuation level A you should complete your evacuation and be in your safe location by Thursday at 7am. The [local] County Emergency Operations Center (EOC) will be calling to ensure that you are evacuating as planned and as called for in the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) for your facility. If you are not included in the evacuation level, but choose to evacuate anyway, please ensure that you inform the Emergency Operations Center of your plans and sheltering location. We will continue to monitor the system. Please monitor your emails for any further protective measures. The contact information for the [local] County Emergency Operations Center is: The Health and Human Services EOC Desk [PHONE NUMBER] or [PHONE NUMBER] Sincerely, [local]County Emergency Operations Center. The facility evacuated to Evacuation Location #2, a church in a nearby city on 9/25/2024, an unapproved location. Review of a [local] Police Department Incident report dated 9/25/2024 showed they were called at 7:40 pm, and arrived at 7:42 pm at the Evacuation Location #2. This report is to document the conditions at [evacuation location #2], during the preparation for tropical storm [NAME]. On 9/25/2024 two officers did an area check . there were 4 different rooms that people were placed in. Each room was over-packed with cots half the size of a person pushed together leaving no space for a person to move around or get up in most areas. Each room was hotter than outside inside the building, leaving many people uncomfortable. The majority of the people were barely dressed due to the conditions of the room. A lot of people were placed in adult diapers. There was only 1 fan observed running which was a small ceiling fan in the primary chapel. The primary chapel had more than 80 people in it, the memory care had more than 50 people in it, and the two other rooms had more than 30 people in each room. Multiple wheelchairs were left outside with no cover for the storm to come. Multiple medical and survival supplies were also left outside with no cover for the storm to come. While these rooms were already packed full there were more than 20 people outside standing and in wheelchairs waiting to be placed in a room. This information was forwarded up the chain of command. Review of an e-mail communication from the Deputy Director of Safety and Emergency Services for local County Government written on 9/26/2024 at 3:00 am to 5 [local] County staff members regarding the facility's residents at Evacuation Location #2 revealed: Good morning, [facility name], is a skilled nursing facility located in zone A and were required to evacuate 250 residents. They evacuated to [Evacuation Location #2] in [city name]. We were advised that the SNF [skilled nursing facility] had all of the medical support needed for its patients, but the facility lacked a few resources. We received a request to assist them with a generator at the church and a safety concern was raised because the church did not have fire suppression, so [local] FD [fire department] responded and put them on fire watch. More calls came in concerned about the safety of the patients due to a lack of generator for refrigerated medicine, heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) so County Officials, [the local County EMS Medical Director and the EMS and FIRE Administrator for local County] responded to the church. Upon arrival and conversations between [Local city] FD, [local county] PD [police department], [the local County EMS Medical Director] and [the EMS and FIRE Administrator for local County], it was decided that the facility was not safe for the residents. Initially, it was decided that the patients would be moved to an Academy due to the nearby location. After multiple conversations with the school district and due to a lack of a generator at [the academy] was decided that the patients should be moved to [a local middle school] which is further away but is a special needs shelter and has a generator back up for those patients dependent on electricity. [County Busses] helped move the 50 patients that could walk and provided transport for wheelchairs. Multiple trucks with liftgates from [commercial ambulance service] helped transport equipment and the [commercial ambulance service] and the Fire Departments transported the rest of the patients to the shelter. An interview was conducted with the local County EMS Medical Director, 10/31/23024 at 1:30 p.m. He said concerns about the facility (Evacuation Location #2) came about as follows: 1) Concerns were raised to the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) by a Fire Department officer that had run a 911 call to the facility and reported concerns about conditions. 2) A request for assistance was made for power for the refrigerator. [The local County EMS Medical Director], went with a group to evaluate the situation, and he said that on 09/25/2024 ahead of [NAME]: 1)Medications and computers were being stored outside in a courtyard area. 2) Residents were on cots, shoulder to shoulder and head to foot, there was no access to residents, the square footage available was woefully short. 3) Security concerns were identified for the memory care residents in a hall room with little to no safeguards. 4) Means of egress was not clear of all obstructions. 5) They had a handful of portable generators that looked like they were picked up at (a home improvement store) that day. 6) Several residents were on Oxygen concentrators and would have posed a significant problem in the event of power loss. [The local County EMS Medical Director] stated that a consensus meeting was held between himself, [local city] Police, and [local city] Fire and they were all on the same page that the facility was inadequate to care for so many residents. Together the group decided that the most appropriate course of action was to relocate the residents to a more suitable location. An interview was conducted with Staff Member Q, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) on 10/28/2024 at 11:38 a.m. She said she has worked for the facility since 2022. She said the hurricane staffing and patient care were a big mess. The administration has no idea what they are doing. For hurricane [NAME] it was an absolute nightmare, She was scheduled to work 11-7 a.m. and they were told to meet at the church at 11 pm, not even come in early, crazy. She said, The residents were packed into this church with no linen, you could not walk between cots. It was so hot even with the portable units, there was no air flow. We were short staffed, there were no fluid passes, you could not get to the residents, they were covered with towels, there were not enough linens. There were no assignments, everyone was everywhere, except with residents. Residents were not provided supplies; you could not get to the supplies. Then we evacuated to the school, even though we were at the school still there was confusion, no direction given on who to take care of, we were left to guess, which means no one accepts responsibility. I stayed in the cafeteria from 7am to 7 pm. I did hear that someone fell in the gym, but I did not see it. An interview was conducted on 10/21/24 at 3:11 p.m. with Resident #15. She said during the hurricane [NAME] evacuation the residents were taken to a church big enough for 100 people but there were 250 people there. Resident #15 said she didn't do well in tight spaces and was a little claustrophobic. She said, It was so bad. I called my grandson and told him to get me the [explicative] out of here. Resident #15 said she was not happy because she was put on a cot and her wheelchair was taken away. She said she was independent and used the bathroom herself. She said she was left on her cot for hours without being able to get up. Resident #15 said staff told her to just go in her pants and they wound just change me. Resident #15 said the evacuations were horrible. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 2:15 p.m. with the Staff Member II, Occupational Therapist (OT) who stated there were safety concerns. I tried to give my opinion, but no one wanted to hear me. The evacuations were Very disorganized. Therapy knew their responsibility of transferring residents on to the buses and off only. The facility had Charter buses for the evacuations for the first (storm). If residents were able to sit upright in a wheelchair, we were able to sit them in the bus seat. We had to physically lift the residents into the bus. To my knowledge the wheelchairs did not go to the evacuation site unless the resident had to travel in the chair. Those residents were evacuated by wheelchair transporters. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 2:35 p.m. with Staff Member JJ, Physical Therapist (PT) who stated the evacuations were confusing regarding transport. He found out no transport had been set up for return after hurricane [NAME]. The facility was only utilizing the buses they owned for transport, this took forever. Resident #23 received a skin tear during one of the transfers. A nurse came to evaluate the wound right away, but they were not able to find a first aid kit for supplies to cover the skin tear. Thirty minutes went by, and someone finally drove over with supplies, to cover the skin tear. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 2:47 p.m. with Staff Member KK, CNA who stated regarding the evacuations, No one knew what was up with any of the evacuations, chaos. I'm sure that is why I don't remember anything specific except chaos. An interview was conducted on 10/24/2024 at 4:37 p.m. with former Staff Member M, CNA. She said, The evacuation for [NAME] to the church was unorganized, the Therapy department completed the transferring charter. At the church everyone was being put on a cot, no elevated head, just a sheet, maybe a pillow I don't think enough for everyone. There was not enough room for everyone, you could hardly squeeze between cots, residents were outside in the rain as there was no room in the church. Families started to come there complaining, I don't remember who. The bathroom hallway had cots as there was no room. No one was told anything, we did not know who we were to care for, except follow normal schedules, be at work at 7 a.m. at the nursing home, then we went to the church at 3:30 p.m. It started to get dark; it started raining. I'm not sure if everyone got to eat, there was no organization, everyone received the same diet, we were not sure who was who, it was a total mess. We could not pass fluids because we couldn't get to residents, we had to walk sideways between cots. They stuck some residents in a closet, at least they left the doors open for them, but it was hot, even with the spot cooler. There were residents who had been bed bound for years and now they were on these cots with only a sheet. I was instructed to go assist alert residents. All the officials came, and we had to move again, at least that evacuation had organization somewhat. You could tell the officials were frustrated. When we got to the school (Evacuation Location #3) the meals were the same, no one had their diets indicated but it was better than the church as the school was giving out meals. Then they told us not to give the school meals, we were only supposed to use our supply. Well, who knew where that was? The only fluids were given with a meal, if you received meal. I don't think they had a way to know who got what or if everyone got to eat. I didn't see anyone helping anyone eat. I was assigned the alert residents, so they only needed to be served. There were no assignments [NAME] except B wing (the memory care wing) was in gym, but I am not sure who was in the gym with them. I saw a Resident outside on the sidewalk exiting to the street. I brought her back in, I am not sure who it was, but she got out. Review of EOC evacuation orders for hurricane [NAME] showed, October 6, 2024, Attn: Facility Administration: Level A-C Evacuation order for Residential Health Care Facilities, (local) County has issued an evacuation order for all Level A, B and C facilities. The anticipated impacts of the storm include: Storm Surge over 10 ft. is possible along areas of (local) County, however this is highly dependent on where the storm makes landfall. Life-threatening storm surge flooding will be possible across coastal areas of (local) County on Wednesday (10/09).Heavy rain of 5 to 8 inches, with isolated higher amounts of up to 12 inches is forecast through Thursday (10/10).Tropical storm force winds are forecast to start in the early morning hours of Wednesday (10/09)and continue through late Wednesday night (10/09). The wind field is expected to expand. There is the potential for some tornadoes and /or waterspouts on Thursday (10/10). If you are included in the evacuation level A, B or C you should complete your evacuation and be in your safe location by Tuesday 8pm. The (local) County Emergency Operations Center (EOC) will be calling to ensure that you are evacuating as planned and as called for in the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) for your facility. If you are not included in the evacuation level, but choose to evacuate anyway, please ensure that you inform the Emergency Operations Center of your plans and sheltering location. We will continue to monitor the system. Please monitor your emails for any further protective measures. The contact information for the (local) County Emergency Operations Center is: The Health and Human Services EOC Desk [PHONE NUMBER] or [PHONE NUMBER] An interview was conducted by phone with the Director of the Department of Health in (local) County on 10/31/23024 at 4:00 p.m. He stated that requests for assistance in finding a place to evacuate to were being made by the facility as [NAME] was approaching. The facility ultimately evacuated to the church in (local city), Evacuation Location #2. He said the EOC received a Fire Officers concerns about conditions following a 911 call they responded to (at Evacuation Location #2). He said an additional request for assistance with powering refrigeration equipment at the location was received. He said the EOC dispatched the Medical Director for the (local) County EMS, (local) Police, and (local) Fire Departments to assess and evaluate conditions at (Evacuation location #2). He said the EOC received a report that available square footage was inadequate for the number of residents present, creating security concerns for the police, and egress concerns due to crowding for the fire representative. The (local) County allowed them to relocate to a Middle School, (Evacuation Location #3) where they were operating a special needs shelter. The Director of the Department of Health in (local) County noted that while actions were taken because of need, (local) County evacuee numbers were expected to be in the thousands (for Hurricane [NAME]) and their system is not designed to support long term care facility residents. The Director of the Department of Health in (local) County acknowledged that it was a short turnaround between [NAME] and when the evacuation for [NAME] was ordered. The facility did request the use of the special needs shelter again. The (local county) was expecting large numbers of evacuees, has multiple long term care facilities, and planning for evacuations is the responsibility of the facility. The Director of the Department of Health in (local) County said that, while unfortunate, it does not change the responsibility of the facility to develop arrangements with other [facilities] [and] other providers to receive patients in the event of limitations or cessation of operations to maintain the continuity of services to facility patients. Review of an e-mail communication from the County Emergency Operations Center written on 10/06/2024 at 7:54 pm to 5 (local) County staff members regarding the facility revealed: As The Director of [the] Department of Health in (local) County knows, [name] the NHA of this building had a [Emergency Plan] approved with receiving facility that unfortunately failed meaning the receiving facilities backed out thus they did not have placement for this larger facility. The plan in motion is 23 residents with higher acuity to [Local Nursing Home] and the rest to go with the Administrator, Director of Nurses (DON) and staff to (Evacuation Location #4) that is 10 K SQT, high and not in an evac zone, has a kitchen, etc. The facility would bring a generator, 12 portable AC units and 4 wet vacs in case needed in addition to food, fluids, medications, treatments, mattresses, etc. We did have a conversation with [name] the Administrator explaining that the CEOC [(local) County Emergency Operations Center] cannot review or approve a new or temporary plan at this point other than verbally as done. In doing so we explained that it is his decision what is best for the residents and staff of his facility and that the CEOC acknowledges this new plan, but it is not approved. [NHA] did verbalize his understanding. Signed by a volunteer at the (CEOC). An interview was conducted with the Emergency Management Healthcare Plan Compliance Specialist with the (local) County Emergency Management office on 10/31/2024 at 10:30 a.m. She stated that the facility did not submit an alternative location for approval prior to the hurricanes. The facility did not ask for approval for either Evacuation Location #2 or Evacuation Location #4. She reviewed the location information for Evacuation Location #4 and said that it would not be approved as an evacuation site because it is in Flood Zone D. She said only facilities in no flood zone areas can be used as evacuation locations. Review of the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Policy and Procedure, dated 2024 revealed the following: PURPOSE, To ensure that (the Facility) implements a comprehensive QAPI program which addresses all the care and unique services that the facility provides. To ensure continuous evaluation of the Facility's systems with the objectives of: ensuring that care delivery systems function consistently, accurately, and incorporate current and evidence-based practice standards where available; preventing deviation from care processes, to the extent possible; identifying issues and concerns with the Facility's systems, as well as identifying opportunities for improvement; and developing and implementing plans to correct and/or improve identified areas. To ensure that the Facility implements a quality management program which takes a systematic, interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and data-driven approach to maintaining and improving safety and quality. An interdisciplinary approach encompasses all managerial, and clinical, services, which includes care and services provided by outside (contracted or arranged) providers and suppliers. [ .] VII. Governance and Leadership, A. The Facility Administrator is essentially responsible for the internal risk management and QAPI program. B. The governing body and/or executive leadership (or organized group or an individual who assumes full legal authority and responsibility for operation of the Facility), must ensure the QAPI Program: a. Is defined, implemented, and ongoing; b. Addresses identified priorities; c. Is sustained through transitions in leadership and staffing; d. Has adequate resources, including staff time, equipment, and technical training as needed; e. Uses performance indicator data, resident and staff input, and other information to identify and prioritize problems and opportunities; f. Implements corrective actions to address gaps in systems and evaluates actions for effectiveness; and g. Establishes clear expectations around safety, quality, rights, choice, and respect. [ .] IX. Responsibilities of QAA Committee. Functioning under the Facility's governing body, the QAA Committee is responsible for: A. Reporting to the Facility's governing body, or designated person(s) functioning as a governing body regarding its activities, including implementation of the QAPI program; B. Regularly reviewing and analyzing data, including data collected under the QAPI program and data resulting from drug regimen reviews; C. determining what performance data will be monitored and the schedule or frequency for monitoring this data; D. Acting on available data to make improvements; E. Identifying and responding to quality deficiencies throughout the facility; F. Oversight of the QAPI program when fully implemented. G. Developing and implementing corrective action, and monitoring to ensure performance goals or targets are achieved; H. Revising corrective action when necessary. I. Meeting at least quarterly, and as needed to coordinate and evaluate activities under the QAPI program, such as identifying issues with respect to which quality assessment and assurance activities, including performance improvement projects required under the QAPI program, are necessary.
CRITICAL (L) 📢 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 F0837 (Tag F0837)

Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents

⚠️ Facility-wide issue

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to maintain a Governing Body that was aware of the facility emergency p...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to maintain a Governing Body that was aware of the facility emergency plans. The Governing body was not aware the facility did not update their emergency plan as changes occurred. The facility failed to address the needs of their patient population during an emergency and failed to provide for continuity of operations during a natural disaster, a hurricane. The facility maintained an evacuation agreement with a local church that began in 2018. In February 2024 the church informed the facility that the agreement was to be terminated effective May 31, 2024. No alternative evacuation location was arranged. In September of 2024 when evacuation was ordered for hurricane [NAME] the facility staff moved 226 residents to a local church. Family members of the residents called the police and emergency medical services to report conditions. Local Police, Fire and Emergency officials assessed the location and deemed it unsafe. The residents were on small cots placed right next to each, staff did not have enough room to care for the residents, the resident care was not organized, supplies were not available, there was not enough room for every resident to be indoors, important supplies were housed outside with rain predicted and the residents were not safe in terms of fire exits and supervision. The local authorities moved all the residents to a county shelter the night before hurricane [NAME]. The conditions during hurricane [NAME] led to the injury of 2 residents (#12, #22) known to have suffered harm, including a fracture for one resident as a result of lack of supplies and lack of supervision during that evacuation that lasted from 9/25/2024 to 9/28/2024. Before hurricane [NAME] the facility Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) began calling Local County Emergency Operation Center (CEOC), and State officials asking for an evacuation location or to be allowed to not evacuate. Again, the facility did not have a plan for the safety and care of its residents. A volunteer at the CEOC working with the Emergency Operations leadership assisted the NHA by determining that the most acutely ill residents could be moved to a local Nursing Home. The NHA moved all the remaining 217 residents to a church in a nearby county. The CEOC acknowledged awareness of his plan and said they were unable to approve evacuation plans at the last minute. Upon review after the storm, the County Emergency Management did not approve of this location due to it being in an evacuation zone and unsuitable if evacuations were ordered for a hurricane. The facility remains without a safe evacuation location. These failures created a situation that resulted in a worsened condition for two residents (#12, #22) and the likelihood for serious injury and or death to all facility Residents and resulted in the determination of Immediate Jeopardy on 09/24/2024. The findings of Immediate Jeopardy are ongoing and have not been removed, the severity and scope remains an L as there has been no verification of removal of immediacy of harm. Findings included: Review of the Facility assessment dated [DATE] and signed by the NHA, DON, Governing Body Representative, Medical Director and Infection Control Prevention Officer revealed, on page 24, Section IV Facility and Community-Based Risk Assessment, B. Emergency Management, Please note: In lieu of completing this section, your facility can include a copy of its required Emergency Preparedness Plan. 1. See CEMP book for further information. CEMP Binder is located in Administrator's Office. Review of the approved facility disaster plan dated February 2024, provided by the local Emergency Management office showed multiple sections such as Facility Basic information, Incident Command Structure. It included Policies and Procedures on a Food Plan, Water Plan, Emergency Power Plan, Medical Supplies, Medical Records, Sewage, Transportation and Rationale for disaster plan. It contained a Hazard Analysis, Elevation certificate, Evacuation Plan and Essential Business Functions, Disaster Chain of Command, a Floor Plan of the facility, Emergency meal plan, menus, a food a water list needed, Evacuation Time Table, Information, Training and Exercises, Emergency Preparedness Communication Plan, management and staff contact numbers. It contained the Sheltering License Agreement with (Evacuation Location #1) and Mutual Aid Agreements with two local nursing homes. It contained agreements with a Food distributor, commercial buses, wheelchair transport, a rental truck company, Review of the approved facility disaster plan dated February 2024, provided by the local Emergency Management office included a Sheltering License Agreement effective June 1, 2018, with the [NAME] of a local church (Evacuation Location #1). The church agreed to make certain areas available to the Nursing Home in the event of a hurricane evacuation order. A Shelter Agreement Clarification page was included that showed the Church (Evacuation Location #1) would be able to accommodate 379 Residents from the facility for the year 2023, signed by the NHA at the time and the [NAME] of the church on 5/3/2023. Mutual Aid Agreements were included with two nearby nursing homes. Both Mutual Aid Agreements specified that the receiving facility could only take 60 residents from an outside source and the number would depend on current in-house census and both facilities understand that a local in-house emergency, and or emergency that affected all facilities in the [NAME] Bay Area, would render a variance in available space. The Mutual Aide Agreements were signed by each facility and the current NHA in February of 2024. Review of a letter dated 2/16/2024, written to the administrator of the facility and signed by the [NAME] of a local church (Evacuation Location #1) showed the church was terminating the agreement to be the evacuation location for the facility effective May 31,2024. The termination was due to the facility not following agreed upon safety and cleanliness procedures during the past evacuations, and other problems described in the letter. An interview was conducted with a member of the Governing Body on 11/6/2024 at 1:55 p.m. She said she has been working for Aventura for 2 years and on the Governing Body of Aventura for a year and ½. She said that the Administrator reports regularly to the Governing Body through regularly scheduled meetings, emails, and impromptu meetings. She said there is a constant flow of information. She said that problems are communicated with the Governing Body, resource needs, system breakdowns. She said that the Governing Body responds to the Administrator with phone calls, Zoom calls, in person visits and sometimes QAPI programs are started. She said that the Administrator is held accountable by reports that are sent, Risk management meetings weekly, and the Administration is supervised through the Electronic medical record. She said she was not aware until recently that the facility did not have an approved Evacuation Location. An Emergency Management Planning document was provided to the surveyors on 10/24/2024 by the NHA and described by him as the plan followed for hurricane [NAME]. The document showed the facility was licensed to house 274 residents including a secure dementia unit of up to 70 residents. The facility is in hurricane evacuation Zone A (most vulnerable zone and is usually the first to be evacuated), the elevation was 9 feet 4 inches above sea level and will be evacuated to an offsite location as directed by the Local County Emergency Management. Review of the document showed Evacuation Location #1 crossed out and replaced by a different church located in a nearby city (Evacuation Location #2). Evacuation location #2 was dated to be effective 7/1/2024. On multiple pages of the Emergency Management Planning Document Evacuation Location #1 was still listed. No documentation was provided for the approval of Evacuation Location #2 by the local Emergency Management Office. Review of an email communication from the Emergency Management Health Care Plan Compliance Specialist showed the last review and approval of an Emergency Plan for the facility on 10/3/2023. Review of a letter from the local County Emergency Management office dated 10/3/2023 signed by the Healthcare Plan Compliance Specialist showed, To the current Administrator, We are pleased to inform you that your electronic Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) was reviewed. You will receive the CEMP Approval Certificate upon payment. The facility was instructed to submit their plan for the March 2024 to February 2025 time frame by January 2, 2024. Review of the local County Emergency Operations Center evacuation orders for hurricane [NAME] showed, September 24, 2024, Attn: Facility Administration: Level An Evacuation order for Residential Health Care Facilities, [local] County has issued an evacuation order for all Level A facilities. The anticipated impacts of the storm include: -Storm Surge of 5 to 8 ft is possible along areas of [local] County; however, this is highly dependent on where the storm makes landfall. -Strong tropical storm force winds are forecast for [local] County starting 10 am on Thursday. -Heavy rainfall of up to 6 inches is forecast for [local] County. -Isolated to scattered tornadoes will be possible, especially in the outer rainbands of the storm. -Hazardous surf and rip currents are expected to continue until the storm passes If you are included in the evacuation level A you should complete your evacuation and be in your safe location by Thursday at 7am. The [local] County Emergency Operations Center (EOC) will be calling to ensure that you are evacuating as planned and as called for in the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) for your facility. If you are not included in the evacuation level, but choose to evacuate anyway, please ensure that you inform the Emergency Operations Center of your plans and sheltering location. We will continue to monitor the system. Please monitor your emails for any further protective measures. The contact information for the [local] County Emergency Operations Center is: The Health and Human Services EOC Desk [PHONE NUMBER] or [PHONE NUMBER] Sincerely, [local]County Emergency Operations Center. The facility evacuated to Evacuation Location #2, a church in a nearby city on 9/25/2024, an unapproved location. Review of a [local] Police Department Incident report dated 9/25/2024 showed they were called at 7:40 pm, and arrived at 7:42 pm at the Evacuation Location #2. This report is to document the conditions at [evacuation location #2], during the preparation for tropical storm [NAME]. On 9/25/2024 two officers did an area check . there were 4 different rooms that people were placed in. Each room was over-packed with cots half the size of a person pushed together leaving no space for a person to move around or get up in most areas. Each room was hotter than outside inside the building, leaving many people uncomfortable. The majority of the people were barely dressed due to the conditions of the room. A lot of people were placed in adult diapers. There was only 1 fan observed running which was a small ceiling fan in the primary chapel. The primary chapel had more than 80 people in it, the memory care had more than 50 people in it, and the two other rooms had more than 30 people in each room. Multiple wheelchairs were left outside with no cover for the storm to come. Multiple medical and survival supplies were also left outside with no cover for the storm to come. While these rooms were already packed full there were more than 20 people outside standing and in wheelchairs waiting to be placed in a room. This information was forwarded up the chain of command. Review of an e-mail communication from the Deputy Director of Safety and Emergency Services for local County Government written on 9/26/2024 at 3:00 am to 5 [local] County staff members regarding the facility's residents at Evacuation Location #2 revealed: Good morning, [facility name], is a skilled nursing facility located in zone A and were required to evacuate 250 residents. They evacuated to [Evacuation Location #2] in [city name]. We were advised that the SNF [skilled nursing facility] had all of the medical support needed for its patients, but the facility lacked a few resources. We received a request to assist them with a generator at the church and a safety concern was raised because the church did not have fire suppression, so [local] FD [fire department] responded and put them on fire watch. More calls came in concerned about the safety of the patients due to a lack of generator for refrigerated medicine, heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) so County Officials, [the local County EMS Medical Director and the EMS and FIRE Administrator for local County] responded to the church. Upon arrival and conversations between [Local city] FD, [local county] PD [police department], [the local County EMS Medical Director] and [the EMS and FIRE Administrator for local County], it was decided that the facility was not safe for the residents. Initially, it was decided that the patients would be moved to an Academy due to the nearby location. After multiple conversations with the school district and due to a lack of a generator at [the academy] was decided that the patients should be moved to [a local middle school] which is further away but is a special needs shelter and has a generator back up for those patients dependent on electricity. [County Busses] helped move the 50 patients that could walk and provided transport for wheelchairs. Multiple trucks with liftgates from [commercial ambulance service] helped transport equipment and the [commercial ambulance service] and the Fire Departments transported the rest of the patients to the shelter. An interview was conducted with the local County EMS Medical Director, 10/31/23024 at 1:30 p.m. He said concerns about the facility (Evacuation Location #2) came about as follows: 1) Concerns were raised to the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) by a Fire Department officer that had run a 911 call to the facility and reported concerns about conditions. 2) A request for assistance was made for power for the refrigerator. [The local County EMS Medical Director], went with a group to evaluate the situation, and he said that on 09/25/2024 ahead of [NAME]: 1)Medications and computers were being stored outside in a courtyard area. 2) Residents were on cots, shoulder to shoulder and head to foot, there was no access to residents, the square footage available was woefully short. 3) Security concerns were identified for the memory care residents in a hall room with little to no safeguards. 4) Means of egress was not clear of all obstructions. 5) They had a handful of portable generators that looked like they were picked up at (a home improvement store) that day. 6) Several residents were on Oxygen concentrators and would have posed a significant problem in the event of power loss. [The local County EMS Medical Director] stated that a consensus meeting was held between himself, [local city] Police, and [local city] Fire and they were all on the same page that the facility was inadequate to care for so many residents. Together the group decided that the most appropriate course of action was to relocate the residents to a more suitable location. An interview was conducted with Staff Member Q, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) on 10/28/2024 at 11:38 a.m. She said she has worked for the facility since 2022. She said the hurricane staffing and patient care were a big mess. The administration has no idea what they are doing. For hurricane [NAME] it was an absolute nightmare, She was scheduled to work 11-7 a.m. and they were told to meet at the church at 11 pm, not even come in early, crazy. She said, The residents were packed into this church with no linen, you could not walk between cots. It was so hot even with the portable units, there was no air flow. We were short staffed, there were no fluid passes, you could not get to the residents, they were covered with towels, there were not enough linens. There were no assignments, everyone was everywhere, except with residents. Residents were not provided supplies; you could not get to the supplies. Then we evacuated to the school, even though we were at the school still there was confusion, no direction given on who to take care of, we were left to guess, which means no one accepts responsibility. I stayed in the cafeteria from 7am to 7 pm. I did hear that someone fell in the gym, but I did not see it. An interview was conducted on 10/21/24 at 3:11 p.m. with Resident #15. She said during the hurricane [NAME] evacuation the residents were taken to a church big enough for 100 people but there were 250 people there. Resident #15 said she didn't do well in tight spaces and was a little claustrophobic. She said, It was so bad. I called my grandson and told him to get me the [explicative] out of here. Resident #15 said she was not happy because she was put on a cot and her wheelchair was taken away. She said she was independent and used the bathroom herself. She said she was left on her cot for hours without being able to get up. Resident #15 said staff told her to just go in her pants and they wound just change me. Resident #15 said the evacuations were horrible. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 2:15 p.m. with the Staff Member II, Occupational Therapist (OT) who stated there were safety concerns. I tried to give my opinion, but no one wanted to hear me. The evacuations were Very disorganized. Therapy knew their responsibility of transferring residents on to the buses and off only. The facility had Charter buses for the evacuations for the first (storm). If residents were able to sit upright in a wheelchair, we were able to sit them in the bus seat. We had to physically lift the residents into the bus. To my knowledge the wheelchairs did not go to the evacuation site unless the resident had to travel in the chair. Those residents were evacuated by wheelchair transporters. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 2:35 p.m. with Staff Member JJ, Physical Therapist (PT) who stated the evacuations were confusing regarding transport. He found out no transport had been set up for return after hurricane [NAME]. The facility was only utilizing the buses they owned for transport, this took forever. Resident #23 received a skin tear during one of the transfers. A nurse came to evaluate the wound right away, but they were not able to find a first aid kit for supplies to cover the skin tear. Thirty minutes went by, and someone finally drove over with supplies, to cover the skin tear. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 2:47 p.m. with Staff Member KK, CNA who stated regarding the evacuations, No one knew what was up with any of the evacuations, chaos. I'm sure that is why I don't remember anything specific except chaos. An interview was conducted on 10/24/2024 at 4:37 p.m. with former Staff Member M, CNA. She said, The evacuation for [NAME] to the church was unorganized, the Therapy department completed the transferring charter. At the church everyone was being put on a cot, no elevated head, just a sheet, maybe a pillow I don't think enough for everyone. There was not enough room for everyone, you could hardly squeeze between cots, residents were outside in the rain as there was no room in the church. Families started to come there complaining, I don't remember who. The bathroom hallway had cots as there was no room. No one was told anything, we did not know who we were to care for, except follow normal schedules, be at work at 7 a.m. at the nursing home, then we went to the church at 3:30 p.m. It started to get dark; it started raining. I'm not sure if everyone got to eat, there was no organization, everyone received the same diet, we were not sure who was who, it was a total mess. We could not pass fluids because we couldn't get to residents, we had to walk sideways between cots. They stuck some residents in a closet, at least they left the doors open for them, but it was hot, even with the spot cooler. There were residents who had been bed bound for years and now they were on these cots with only a sheet. I was instructed to go assist alert residents. All the officials came, and we had to move again, at least that evacuation had organization somewhat. You could tell the officials were frustrated. When we got to the school (Evacuation Location #3) the meals were the same, no one had their diets indicated but it was better than the church as the school was giving out meals. Then they told us not to give the school meals, we were only supposed to use our supply. Well, who knew where that was? The only fluids were given with a meal, if you received meal. I don't think they had a way to know who got what or if everyone got to eat. I didn't see anyone helping anyone eat. I was assigned the alert residents, so they only needed to be served. There were no assignments [NAME] except B wing (the memory care wing) was in gym, but I am not sure who was in the gym with them. I saw a Resident outside on the sidewalk exiting to the street. I brought her back in, I am not sure who it was, but she got out. Review of CEOC evacuation orders for hurricane [NAME] showed, October 6, 2024, Attn: Facility Administration: Level A-C Evacuation order for Residential Health Care Facilities, (local) County has issued an evacuation order for all Level A, B and C facilities. The anticipated impacts of the storm include: Storm Surge over 10 ft. is possible along areas of (local) County, however this is highly dependent on where the storm makes landfall. Life-threatening storm surge flooding will be possible across coastal areas of (local) County on Wednesday (10/09).Heavy rain of 5 to 8 inches, with isolated higher amounts of up to 12 inches is forecast through Thursday (10/10).Tropical storm force winds are forecast to start in the early morning hours of Wednesday (10/09)and continue through late Wednesday night (10/09). The wind field is expected to expand. There is the potential for some tornadoes and /or waterspouts on Thursday (10/10). If you are included in the evacuation level A, B or C you should complete your evacuation and be in your safe location by Tuesday 8pm. The (local) County Emergency Operations Center (EOC) will be calling to ensure that you are evacuating as planned and as called for in the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) for your facility. If you are not included in the evacuation level, but choose to evacuate anyway, please ensure that you inform the Emergency Operations Center of your plans and sheltering location. We will continue to monitor the system. Please monitor your emails for any further protective measures. The contact information for the (local) County Emergency Operations Center is: The Health and Human Services EOC Desk [PHONE NUMBER] or [PHONE NUMBER] An interview was conducted by phone with the Director of the Department of Health in (local) County on 10/31/23024 at 4:00 p.m. He stated that requests for assistance in finding a place to evacuate to were being made by the facility as [NAME] was approaching. The facility ultimately evacuated to the church in (local city), Evacuation Location #2. He said the EOC received a Fire Officers concerns about conditions following a 911 call they responded to (at Evacuation Location #2). He said an additional request for assistance with powering refrigeration equipment at the location was received. He said the EOC dispatched the Medical Director for the (local) County EMS, (local) Police, and (local) Fire Departments to assess and evaluate conditions at (Evacuation location #2). He said the EOC received a report that available square footage was inadequate for the number of residents present, creating security concerns for the police, and egress concerns due to crowding for the fire representative. The (local) County allowed them to relocate to a Middle School, (Evacuation Location #3) where they were operating a special needs shelter. The Director of the Department of Health in (local) County noted that while actions were taken because of need, (local) County evacuee numbers were expected to be in the thousands (for Hurricane [NAME]) and their system is not designed to support long term care facility residents. The Director of the Department of Health in (local) County acknowledged that it was a short turnaround between [NAME] and when the evacuation for [NAME] was ordered. The facility did request the use of the special needs shelter again. The (local county) was expecting large numbers of evacuees, has multiple long term care facilities, and planning for evacuations is the responsibility of the facility. The Director of the Department of Health in (local) County said that, while unfortunate, it does not change the responsibility of the facility to develop arrangements with other [facilities] [and] other providers to receive patients in the event of limitations or cessation of operations to maintain the continuity of services to facility patients. Review of an e-mail communication from the County Emergency Operations Center written on 10/06/2024 at 7:54 pm to 5 (local) County staff members regarding the facility revealed: As The Director of [the] Department of Health in (local) County knows, [name] the NHA of this building had a [Emergency Plan] approved with receiving facility that unfortunately failed meaning the receiving facilities backed out thus they did not have placement for this larger facility. The plan in motion is 23 residents with higher acuity to [Local Nursing Home] and the rest to go with the Administrator, Director of Nurses (DON) and staff to (Evacuation Location #4) that is 10 K SQT, high and not in an evac zone, has a kitchen, etc. The facility would bring a generator, 12 portable AC units and 4 wet vacs in case needed in addition to food, fluids, medications, treatments, mattresses, etc. We did have a conversation with [name] the Administrator explaining that the CEOC [(local) County Emergency Operations Center] cannot review or approve a new or temporary plan at this point other than verbally as done. In doing so we explained that it is his decision what is best for the residents and staff of his facility and that the CEOC acknowledges this new plan, but it is not approved. [NHA] did verbalize his understanding. Signed by a volunteer at the (CEOC). An interview was conducted with the Emergency Management Healthcare Plan Compliance Specialist with the (local) County Emergency Management office on 10/31/2024 at 10:30 a.m. She stated that the facility did not submit an alternative location for approval prior to the hurricanes. The facility did not ask for approval for either Evacuation Location #2 or Evacuation Location #4. She reviewed the location information for Evacuation Location #4 and said that it would not be approved as an evacuation site because it is in Flood Zone D. She said only facilities in no flood zone areas can be used as evacuation locations. Resident #12 Review of Resident #12's progress notes, dated 9/26/2024 at 3:44 p.m., authored by Staff AA, Registered Nurse (RN) showed: Pt [patient] found on the floor at evacuation site. VSS [Vital Signs Stable]. EMS [Emergency Medical Services] on site. Pt sent to hospital. Family called. Message left. Review of Resident #12's hospital records, dated 9/26/24, showed admission to the Emergency Department [AGE] year-old female presenting with left lateral superior orbital rim fracture (a break in the thick bone on the outer edge of the eye socket, on the left side, and in the upper part) minimally displaced and left humerus (long bone of the arm) fracture with need of surgical intervention status post ground level fall. Review of Resident #12's hospital records, from her admission on [DATE], showed She suffered a fall after her skilled nursing facility was forced to evacuate. The patient reportedly struck her head on the wall and also complained of pain in her arm. The assessment showed the resident had a left humerus fracture with surgical intervention and orbital wall fracture. Review of admission Records showed Resident #12 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including hypertension, weakness, dementia, Huntington's disease, and other co-morbidities. Review of Resident #12's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], Section C, Cognitive Patterns, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8, indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment, Section J, Health Conditions showed no pain and no falls. Review of Resident #12's Physical Therapy Discharge summary, dated [DATE], showed: Resident #12 was able to perform sitting to standing with the use of an assistive device; was able to transfer with supervision only, and was able to walk 150 feet with a front wheeled walker with contact guard assistance. Review of Resident #12 Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 7/19/24, showed: Focus: The staff have identified that I am at risk for falls because of these risk factors: Dementia, use of anti-psychotic medication, use of antidepressant medication. The care plan interventions showed: Anticipate resident's needs; I should have sneakers, shoes, slippers with rubber soles or non-slip socks when I am out of bed; Keep frequently used items within reach: TV remote, tissues, water glass over bed stand and my water glass (unless I need thickened liquids or can't have anything by mouth); Keep my call light within reach so I can call for assistance; Maintain bed in lowest locked position. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 11:50 a.m. with Staff V, CNA. Staff V stated, During the evacuation things happened. Yes, there was a fall. I was in the gym where [Resident #12] was assigned. The management did not leave out assignments for CNAs, so I am not sure who was responsible for [Resident #12]. Staff V said, I was in a doorway and heard a loud thud. I turned and noted [Resident #12] on the floor, it looked bad, no one was near. Staff V stated there was no walker and most of the residents came without their walkers or wheelchairs, etc. She said those items were not brought with them for the evacuation. Staff V, said the DON did finally come over to Resident #12, after another nurse had already been providing care. Staff V stated, The DON was not in the gym when Resident #12 fell. Staff V stated she did not remember who else was in the gym. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 2:08 p.m. with Staff AA, Registered Nurse (RN). Staff AA stated, I did not see [Resident #12] fall, no one did. I heard a noise, and she was on the floor when I looked. I believe [Resident #12] was heading toward a door. A follow-up interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 1:17 p.m. with the DON and AIT. The DON stated, Oh, I forgot to mention that fall earlier. I saw her fall in the gym. I was standing and talking to [Resident #12], who had rubber/foam slip on shoe with holes on the top and [Resident #12] turned around fell and hit the door frame before I could reach my hand out to catch [Resident #12]. The nurse [Staff AA] assisted her. Resident #22 Review of Resident #22's admission Records showed he was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including sepsis, unspecified protein-calorie malnutrition, chronic pain, other specified local infections of the skin and subcutaneous tissue and acquired absence of the right and left leg above the knee. He was re-admitted on [DATE] with the additional diagnoses of osteomyelitis, arthritis due to other bacteria unspecified joint, and unspecified open wound, left hip, subsequent encounter. [TRUNCATED]
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to store medications properly on one out of four units...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to store medications properly on one out of four units and in three out of four medication carts. Findings include: On 10/21/24 at 10:03 a.m. observed a treatment cart sitting in an alcove outside a resident room unlocked. No staff were within sight. The cart remained unlocked at 10:45 a.m. On 10/21/24 at 10:15 a.m. observed a medication cup containing a pill sitting on the bedside table in room [ROOM NUMBER] window bed. On 10/21/2024 at 10:15 a.m. observed a lidocaine pain relief patch on the resident's over bed table in room [ROOM NUMBER] window bed. On 10/21/2024 at 10:26 a.m. observed Fluticasone Propionate Nasal Spray and a container of A&D+E ointment located on the resident's nightstand in room [ROOM NUMBER] door bed. On 10/21/24 at 10:28 a.m. observed a bottle of Nystatin topical power with a prescription label attached on the bedside table in room [ROOM NUMBER] window bed. On 10/21/24 at 4:03 p.m. observed a medication cart on the A-Wing unlocked sitting by the nurses' station. A resident was sitting beside the cart and no nurse was present. On 10/22/24 at 12:24 p.m. observed a medication cart on the A-Wing unlocked. No staff members were in the hall at the time. On 10/22/2024 at 1:42 p.m. observed a bottle of Ibuprofen 200 mg tablets in a bin on the over the bed table in room [ROOM NUMBER] door bed. On 10/23/24 at 9:40 a.m. observed an unidentified medication on the floor in the A-wing hall. An audit and interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 11:10 a.m. of the A-wing high medication cart with Staff C, Registered Nurse (RN). Loose medications were observed in a medication cup in the top drawer. Staff C, RN stated it was for a resident she had not given the medication to yet. In the locked controlled substance drawer, three hearing aid boxes, batteries, glasses, and other personal items were stored with medications. An audit and interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 10:31 a.m. of the D-wing high medication cart with Staff K, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). The locked controlled substance drawer contained hearing aids, batteries and other personal items stored with medications. Staff K, LPN stated they have always put them in there. An audit and interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 10:55 a.m. of the C-wing high medication cart with Staff L, RN. A personal water bottle was stored in a medication drawer with medications. Hearing aid batteries were stored in the locked controlled substance drawer with medications. Staff L, RN admitted the water bottle was hers and she should not have stored it with medications. On 10/24/24 at 10:55 a.m. an interview with Staff L, RN was conducted. Staff L Stated medications should not be at the resident's bedside and she would remove them. Staff L also stated she always watches the residents take their medications. On 10/25/24 at 3:23 p.m. an interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) was conducted. She stated medications should not be at bedside, pills should not be left on the floor, and medication carts should be locked when a nurse is not at the cart. A review of Policy titled Medication Storage in the facility, dated 2024, revealed the following: Policy: Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly following manufacturer's recommendations or those of the supplier. The medication supply is accessible only to license nursing personnel, pharmacy personnel, or staff members lawfully authorized to administer medications. Procedure: 2.Medication rooms, carts, and medication supplies are locked or attended by persons with authorized access. (Photographic evidence obtained).
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving abuse or neglect were repo...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving abuse or neglect were reported immediately, but not later than two hours after the allegation was made, to the administrator of the facility and required state agencies in accordance with state law through established procedures for three residents (#3, #8, and #12) of three sampled residents. Findings Include: Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated 6/22/24 at 9:48 a.m., authored by Staff M, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) showed the following: Upon arriving on the unit and doing rounds the resident was observed sitting in wheelchair by resident's room door chanting but not outside of her normal behavior. Another nurse came and informed the nurse that the resident posture was not looking normal and if I would assess her. Upon walking up to the resident, the posture was abnormal, and her leg was twisted. When approaching the resident to touch her she begin screaming. Wheelchair was in locked position. The resident admitted to pain and responded to yes or no type questions. The nurse asked if she was in pain she stated 'yes'. The nurse asked was her leg bothering her and she stated 'yes'. The nurse asked did she fall, and she stated, 'yes'. When asked can the nurse look at her leg she stated, 'no don't'. PRN [as needed] offered to resident for pain but resident was not eating or drinking breakfast tray in front of her. EMS [Emergency Management Services] arrived and took resident to [Hospital Name]. Supervisor notified [family member] of resident's transfer. [Physician] office notified. Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated 6/22/24 at 2:45 p.m., authored by Staff M, LPN showed the following: The nurse spoke with ER [Emergency Room] at [Hospital Name] and was notified that the resident was admitted for UTI [Urinary Tract Infection] and hip fracture. Review of admission Records showed Resident #3 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including pacemaker placement, weakness, low back pain, Alzheimer's disease, and other co-morbidities. Review of Resident #3's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], showed the resident required maximum assistance with all ADL care, the resident did not have a condition or chronic disease that may result in a life expectancy of less than 6 months, and the resident had not had any falls since admission/entry or reentry prior to the assessment. Review of Resident #3's Comprehensive Care Plan, 7/31/23, showed the following: Focus: Resident needed assistance with activities of daily living because of a diagnosis of dementia with memory impairment, pain, and weakness. Goals included: -Caregivers will be able to perform a safe transfer using proper body mechanics with 100% carryover by the next review date. -Resident will perform self-feeding tasks with supervision or touching assistance by next review date. -Staff will help me with all my ADL needs so that I appear neat and tidy with absence of foul body odor through next review. Interventions included: -Anticipate resident's needs. -Assist me with hygiene, bathing, dressing, toileting and transfers. -Assist me with toileting promptly when requested. -Assist with all ADL care to ensure daily needs are met. Check nails, trim and clean on bath day and as necessary. -Encourage/allow me to do as much for self as possible with feeding self, provide assistance with ADLs that I am unable to do for myself as indicated. -Keep call bell within reach and remind/encourage me to use it to call for assistance. -Skin inspections twice a week on shower days and with ADL care: Observe for redness, open areas, scratches, cuts, bruises and report changes to the Nurse. Review of the facility's Incident Log, from April 2024 to October 2024, did not reveal any incidents related to Resident #3 suffering an injury of unknown origin. Review of the facility's Abuse and Neglect Log, from April 2024 to October 2024, did not reveal any allegations/incidents of abuse or neglect for Resident #3 had occurred or been reported. Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated 6/22/24 at 3:20 p.m., authored by the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) showed: Writer spoke to [family member] who stated that she was with [Resident #3] at the hospital and [Resident #3] was admitted with a hip fracture and UTI. I notified [family member] that we were working on the root cause investigation, and she was satisfied and understood. Review of Emergency Department (ED) records for Resident #3, dated 6/22/24, showed per EMS she had a possible trip and fall it was unwitnessed, but she does slip out of her wheelchair multiple times per the facility has a history of hip fracture falls . It showed prior to arrival in the ED the resident had 70 mcg (micrograms) of Fentanyl for pain, and she endorsed pain when pressing on her right hip. The extremities physical assessment showed, no deformity, moderate trauma. Difficult to examine the patient's right leg patient is curled up in bed she usually is in a wheelchair moderately confused and not following direction with palpitation of the patient's right thigh/right hip she does scream in excruciating pain . Review of the hospital History and Physical for Resident #3, dated 6/22/24, showed the resident was brought to the emergency department after she was found on the floor .patient found to have right periprosthetic proximal fracture with significant angulation . Review of the hospital Operative Reports for Resident #3, dated 6/24/24, showed the resident underwent an open reduction and internal fixation of right periprosthetic proximal femur fracture. The surgeon noted, The rationale for surgery would be for palliative measures. I do not anticipate this fracture will heal to the point where she will be more functional than she was before the injury, which was bedbound, wheelchair dependent, non-weight bearing. My hope is that the incision heals, and she does not develop any perioperative complications arising, such as blood clots, infections, wound healing problems, fractures, dislocations, or risks of the medications and anesthesia. Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated 6/24/24 at 3:36 p.m., authored by the Director of Nursing (DON) showed: Investigation and statements stated that fx [fracture] happened during transfer of resident from bed to chair. Resident at no time had a fall. Daughter made aware of findings of investigation. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 4:43 p.m. with the DON and Risk Manager (RM). The DON stated during an investigation it was determined Resident #3's fracture occurred during a transfer. The DON said she had been notified the resident was transferred out with a potential fracture on 6/22/24. She stated an investigation was started to see how the possible fracture happened. She said a report was not filed for abuse or neglect as the fracture occurred during transfer. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 5:08 p.m. with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the Administrator in Training (AIT). The NHA said he became aware of Resident #3's fracture during a morning meeting on 6/22/24 when a nurse's note was read that stated Resident #3 had a fall. He said the management team reviewed the statements from the staff who worked, and everyone stated there was no fall. He said the management team did not complete interviews, they just read the written statements received. The NHA explained the Department of Children and Families (DCF) came in later that same morning (6/22/24) as the hospital had contacted them regarding the fracture. The NHA said the management team investigated and determined Resident #3 did not have a fall, therefore they did not file a reportable event. The NHA said the investigation they did, did not indicate how the resident was transferred to the wheelchair. During a follow-up interview on 10/23/24 at 9:38 a.m. with the NHA. The NHA stated he did not know how the fracture occurred, he stated, I went off the DCF investigation. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 5:35 p.m. with Staff M, LPN. Staff M stated being familiar with Resident #3 and recalled the event on 6/22/24. She said upon arrival to the unit on 6/22/24, Resident #3 was up in the wheelchair. Staff M said Resident #3 was usually self-propelling around the unit and talked nonsensically. She said on the morning on 6/22/24 Resident #3 was not self-propelling nor speaking as usual. Staff M said she did not think much of it, she thought maybe Resident #3 was just tired from the night before. She said another nurse came to her and asked if she thought Resident #3 looked funny. She stated, I then noted the angle of Resident #3's leg was not right. Staff M said she went to assess the resident's leg and as soon as she reached for her leg, Resident #3 started screaming. Staff M said the resident answered yes to being in pain when asked. She said Resident #3 was not able to be touched therefore they contacted 911. Staff M said when she was on the phone with 911, the DON told her to cancel the call, because the x-rays could be conducted in the facility. Staff M said she did not cancel the call and when 911 arrived, they had to sedate Resident #3 so she could be moved from the wheelchair to stretcher. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 12:00 p.m. with Staff O, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). Staff O said she recalled Resident #3 and the shift when the fracture occurred. She said she worked 6/21/24 for the 3 p.m. to 11 p.m. shift and the 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. shift ending 6/22/24. Staff O said she was not assigned to Resident #3. She said Staff P, CNA asked her to help transfer Resident #3. Staff O explained she overheard Resident #3 scream multiple times during the night, which is normal for her, so she did not think much about it. Staff O said when she entered the room to assist Staff P, Resident #3 screams were different, painful almost. She said she helped Staff P place Resident #3 in the wheelchair. Staff O explained for the transfer of Resident #3, she placed her arm under the resident's, to assist with standing. She said the two CNAs had the resident pivot and they assisted the resident to sit in the wheelchair. Staff O said she does not recall if the resident scream out or just took a deep breath during the transfer, but it was very quick. Staff O said Staff P was rushing and wanted to get off shift. Staff O said typically when Resident #3 was in the wheelchair, she self-propelled throughout the unit but she did not go anywhere. She said she thought Resident #3 was just tired from being up most of the night. Staff O said later that same morning she observed blood on the arm of Resident #3 and informed the nurse. Staff O stated no skin tears occurred during the transfer. Staff O stated no one ever spoke with her regarding the fracture until the next day when the supervisor asked her to write a statement as Resident #3 had a fracture. She stated she did not hear anything else regarding the subject. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 11:38 a.m. with Staff Q, CNA. Staff Q recalled working 6/21/24 on the 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. shift into 6/22/24 and stated Resident #3 was on the morning list to get up early. She said Staff P, CNA was assigned to Resident #3 and would have been the one to transfer the resident. She said she did not recall anyone mentioning anything throughout the shift, it was a normal night until she noticed Resident #3 had blood on her hand and was gripping her hip. Staff Q said she brought this to the attention of Staff M, LPN and Staff G, LPN. She said the nurses commented about the resident's leg looking odd. She said she didn't notice the resident's leg at the time as she was looking at the blood on her hand. She said Staff M, LPN called 911 and while Staff M was on the phone, the DON told her to hang up because we could take care of the resident here. She said the nurse didn't hang up the phone. Staff Q said she was surprised that no one asked her about the incident. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 11:18 a.m. with Staff G, LPN. Staff G confirmed he worked the evening of 6/21/24 into the morning of 6/22/24 and said he was the one that saw Resident #3 sitting in her wheelchair and her leg bent awkwardly. Staff G said he informed Staff M, LPN and told her to look at Resident #3 and Staff M immediately said, Oh her leg is broken. Staff G said they were not able to touch the leg because the resident would scream. Staff G said no one looked into how the fracture occurred. Staff G said they didn't know if Resident #3 fell and just got put back in the wheelchair. He said Resident #3 didn't ever try to walk or get out of bed and to his knowledge had never fallen before. Staff G said management did not know what happened, they got statements from a couple of CNAs then moved Staff P, CNA, who was assigned Resident #3, to a different floor. Staff G said, there were Many incidences of neglect that could have been prevented. He said, It is my belief she died from it, speaking of Resident #3's hip fracture. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 2:35 p.m. with Staff P, CNA. Staff P stated she recalled Resident #3 and worked with on the 11p (6/21/24) to 7a (6/22/24) shift. Staff P said, I don't know anything about a fracture. Staff P said she arrived at the unit and Resident #3 was in the bed sleeping. Staff P said around 2:00 a.m. she completed incontinence care for Resident #3 while the resident slept. Staff P added Resident #3 was a squealing person, Resident #3 squeals all the time. She said Resident #3 was on the get up list so she got Resident #3 dressed and requested assistance from another CNA with the transfer to the wheelchair. Staff P could not recall how the transfer of Resident #3 occurred and denied any knowledge of a fracture or skin tear. Staff P said, If something happened maybe on her [Staff O, CNA]. Staff P, CNA stated, I didn't do anything wrong, DCF and the NHA said so. Staff P then disconnected the phone call. Review of Resident #3's primary care provider (PCP) note, dated 7/1/24, showed Patient was readmitted to [facility] on 06/25/24. Patient was sent to ER for right hip pain that she sustain during a fall per hospital records. Review of Resident #3's Social Service note, dated 7/10/24 showed Resident will be hospice resident as of tomorrow, 7/11/24 . A progress note, dated 7/13/24, showed Resident without vital signs. Family made aware. Hospice was also notified. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 4:37 p.m. with Staff N, (CNA). Staff N said she had taken care of Resident #3 several times and did hear about the fracture. She said she was not working at the time of the incident but heard the CNA tried to transfer Resident #3 and dropped her. Staff N said, Sad, resident was perfectly fine before the fall, when she came back, she just went downhill medically, never the same. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 2:37 p.m. with Resident #3's primary care provider (PCP). He said he remembered the incident with Resident #3 and recalled that Staff H, Nurse Practitioner (NP) was upset neither of them were notified. The PCP reviewed Resident #3's medical records. He said the hospital records showed the resident had a fall and another note said there were no falls. He said, I would assume the facility has protocols in place if a resident had a fracture and they don't know where it came from. He said there should be a protocol and procedure for falls/injuries. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 2:47 p.m. with Staff H, Nurse Practitioner (NP). She said she was a provider for Resident #3. She said she had not been notified when Resident #3 had a fall. She said facility staff should have called when something happened to a resident. She said she did not know until the resident returned from the hospital and she saw the fall in the hospital record. Staff H said the resident was having pain but was stable after she returned. She said, For sure, they should look into that if it is not known where the fracture came. Staff H said the resident's fracture was fixed for comfort, not really to be able to walk on it. 2. Review of the facility's Admission/Discharge To/From Report, dated 7/1/24 to 10/21/24, revealed Resident #8 was discharged to an acute care hospital on 9/23/24. Review of the facility's Incident Log, dated 4/24 to 11/24, revealed Resident #8 had a fall on 9/23/24. Review of a progress note for Resident #8, dated 09/23/24 at 11:35 p.m., by Staff S, LPN showed, This writer noticed other nurses and cna's running down the hall, I went to see what was going on and witnessed other nurses assisting the resident and speaking to keep to keep [sic] him awake. A focus assessment was performed on the resident. Resident Vital signs, kept residents on his Rt [right] side to prevent aspiration, held gauze and applied pressure to eyebrow area. 911 was called and stayed with the patient until EMS [Emergency Management Service] arrived. A message was left with the PCP [Primary Care Provider] answering service. Family was called and voicemail was left, shift supervisor was notified. Review of admission Records showed Resident #8 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Cerebrovascular Accident (stroke) with right hemiparesis, sepsis, dysphagia, wounds, and other co-morbidities. Review of Resident #8's admission MDS, dated [DATE], showed the resident was dependent with all activities of daily living care (ADL), had impairments in both upper and lower extremities preventing movement, and the resident had not had any falls since admission/entry or reentry prior to assessment. An interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 3:31 p.m. with Staff S, LPN. Staff S, LPN confirmed working with Resident #8 on 9/23/24 and recalled the incident. Staff S recalled coming out of another resident's room seeing all these employees going to Resident #8's room. Staff S said she immediately followed, as she was the assigned nurse. She said upon arrival, she noted Resident #8 on the floor with blood on his head. Staff S said the CNA responsible for the resident (Staff T, CNA) stated she turned the resident, and he rolled out of the bed. She stated Resident #8 had an air mattress with collapsable sides. Staff S stated she was not sure how this happened as Resident #8 was tall, thin, and did not move. An interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 5:13 p.m. with Staff T, CNA. Staff T confirmed she cared for Resident #8 on the night of 9/23/24. She said he often had behaviors and yelled. She said she went in and talked to him, and he was calm. She said since the resident was calm, she thought she could clean him up on her own. She said she cleaned up his front and rolled him away from her to clean up his back side. She said the resident was on an air mattress and they are slippery. She said he was not really on a sheet. She said when she rolled him away from her, he slipped off the other side. She said she tried to catch him by his shirt, but he fell off and hit the floor. She said as that happened, she had to let go of his shirt and go search for someone to help. She said she went outside and got the nurse assigned to him. She said she didn't really know his injuries, but he was bleeding, and the nurse started working on him. The CNA said she had previously assisted with Resident #8 being cleaned and changed because he was sometimes combative. She said she was only worried about his behavior and thought since he was calm, she could change him herself. She said the CNAs do not know if a resident is a one-person or a two-person assist because it is not in the computer or on their Kardex. She said they have to go off of personal judgement and it is sometimes passed down from the previous shift's CNA. Staff T explained if shift to shift report was not completed, then you just go off your experience. She said the facility had not done any training on turning/positioning residents before or after the incident with Resident #8. Review of Resident #8's Comprehensive Care Plan, 8/2/24, showed the following: -Focus: Resident needed assistance with activities of daily living because of weakness. The goal showed: I will improve my ability to transfer, dress, toilet, ambulate by next review. The interventions included: Anticipate resident's needs; Assist me with all oral intake of food and fluids; Assist me with hygiene, bathing, dressing, toileting and transfers; Assist me with toileting promptly when requested; Assist with all ADL care to ensure daily needs are met. -Focus: The staff have identified that I am at risk for falls because of these risk factors: Unaware of safety needs. The goal showed: I will have minimized injury due to a fall through next review. The interventions included: Anticipate resident's needs; I should have sneakers, shoes, slippers with rubber soles or non-slip socks when I am out of bed; Keep frequently used items within reach: TV remote, tissues, water glass over bed stand and my water glass (unless I need thickened liquids or can't have anything by mouth); Keep my call light within reach so I can call for assistance; Maintain bed in lowest locked position. -Focus: At times I can agitated, combative, continuous outburst. The goal showed: I will show a decrease in my episodes of being resistant thru next review. The interventions included: Allow choices when able to give resident feeling of control; Converse with during care about topic of interest to redirect; Monitor for effectiveness of medication prescribed to limit behavior; Report to Dr if not effective or behavior continues to decline; Psych eval and follow up per order. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 1:10 p.m. with Staff Z, LPN UM (Unit Manager). Staff Z said residents were evaluated by therapy and those results were sent to the MDS team. She said MDS then enters the information about the functional level of the resident and that populates to the Kardex. She said it usually says dependent or max assist, something like that. She said dependent means two-person assist and maximum assist means 1-2. When asked how the CNAs would know which to use since they cannot assess residents she said, That is all I know about the process. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 12:48 p.m. with Staff Y, CNA. She said the facility had not done any training on turning, positioning, or transferring residents. She said the CNAs do not know if a resident is a one or two-person assist or if they need a lift. She said the CNAs have To figure it out. Interviews were conducted from 10/22/24 to 10/28/24 at various times with the following staff: Staff U, D, W, X, V, N, O, Q, CNA's. During these interviews staff stated the computer system does not indicate specific directions for what level of care (i.e Assist of one, mechanical lift) is needed for residents' ADL needs. The staff stated usually they just know how to care for residents based on our experience. The CNAs said they try to complete shift to shift report to inform other CNAs of care needs, but it does not always happen with staffing patterns and time constraints. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 2:23 p.m. with the MDS Coordinator. She said approximately a year ago, when the MDS changed from section G to section GG, it quit having an assist of 1 or two option. She stated related to the care plan not indicating a level of assistance needed, That is not a directive I have been given here. She said the CNAs would just know the level of care from passing it down in report. She doesn't know how else they would know. The MDS Coordinator confirmed CNAs cannot assess residents. Review of hospital records for Resident #8, dated 9/24/24, showed the resident presented to the emergency department and underwent a head and maxillofacial CT (computed tomography) scan which revealed an 8 millimeter (mm) subdural hemorrhage layering along the right frontotemporal convexity, with no significant midline shift, interval development of large right frontotemporal infarct is noted compared to February 2022, and possible acute/subacute. The resident was also noted to have a right front scalp hematoma which was a laceration, and sutures were applied. Upon arrival the resident was noted to have a forehead laceration with a dressing in place that was blood soaked. The resident was unable to answer questions correctly although he was attempting to. The CT scan results, dated 9/23/24, showed the following: Calvarium/Scalp: large right frontal scalp hematoma calvaria fracture evaluation limited by motion artifact. CT Maxillofacial: comminuted right greater than left nasal bone fractures moderate overlying soft tissue swelling. Review Resident #8's ER record showed the resident received 12 sutures to right eyebrow laceration. Resident #8 was admitted to the ICU (intensive care unit). No other documentation is available at this time. An interview was conducted on 10/23/2024 at 4:10 p.m. with the NHA and DON. The NHA stated the facility was following Resident #8's plan of care with one-person assist. The NHA confirmed the care plan did not have assist requirements as an intervention. The NHA stated, I thought it was there. The NHA stated no investigation was needed. The NHA stated after comparing statements from staff he decided to eventually find the CNA neglected to utilize proper positioning techniques and the facility had no control over this. The NHA stated this was based on the DCF investigation. After the NHA spoke with the investigator, the NHA decided to start a neglect report. The NHA stated the report was filed and the nursing assistant was reported to the board. The NHA and DON stated no other actions needed to be taken. They stated they did not do any in-services, review their policies, or interview other residents. They stated no education was provided to staff post-incident. An interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 4:38 p.m. with the Director of Rehabilitation (DOR). He said Resident #8 had severe safety awareness concerns and had decreased coordination. He said Resident #8 was totally dependent and in therapy that means they would use two people to assist. He said nursing decides if two people should be used for transfers and care on the unit. He said the Resident #8 had rigid tone so Everything is total dependent, and he needs a lot of help. He said the resident having rigid tone means staff would have to hold him because he cannot hold himself while turning. He said if the resident was being turned, he would need a person on each side of him. The DOR stated, To roll him he still needs a lot of help. He said if the resident didn't have control, it is dangerous for a CNA to roll the resident away from them because they can roll off the bed if no one is on the other side. The DOR said for therapy, Total dependent means max assist; two people and lifts. Review of the facility's Abuse and Neglect Log, dated 4/24 to 10/24, did not reveal any reports after 8/28/24 of any incidents of abuse or neglect. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 10:33 a.m. with the DON. The DON stated she had validated with the NHA, no other reports or allegations of abuse or neglect had been made since 8/28/24. 3. Review of the facility's Admission/Discharge To/From Report, for dates 7/1/2024 to 10/21/24, revealed Resident #12 was discharged to an acute care hospital on 9/26/24. Review of Resident #12's progress notes, dated 9/26/2024 at 3:31 p.m., authored by the DON showed: Resident had a fall blood pressure is 159/86 pulses 85. We're sending her to the hospital. Review of Resident #12's progress notes, dated 9/26/2024 at 3:44 p.m., authored by Staff AA, Registered Nurse (RN) showed: Pt [patient] found on the floor at evacuation site. VSS [Vital Signs Stable]. EMS [Emergency Medical Services] on site. Pt sent to hospital. Family called. Message left. Review of admission Records showed Resident #12 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including hypertension, weakness, dementia, Huntington's disease, and other co-morbidities. Review of Resident #8's admission MDS, dated [DATE], Section C, Cognitive Patterns, revealed a BIMS score of 8, indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment, Section J, Health Conditions showed no pain and no falls. Review of Resident #12's Physical Therapy Discharge summary, dated [DATE], showed: Resident #12 was able to perform sitting to standing with the use of an assistive device; was able to transfer with supervision only, and was able to walk 150 feet with a front wheeled walker with contact guard assistance. Review of Resident #12 Comprehensive Care Plan, 7/19/24, shows: -Focus: The staff have identified that I am at risk for falls because of these risk factors: Dementia, use of anti-psychotic medication, use of antidepressant medication. The care plan interventions showed: Anticipate resident's needs; I should have sneakers, shoes, slippers with rubber soles or non-slip socks when I am out of bed; Keep frequently used items within reach: TV remote, tissues, water glass over bed stand and my water glass (unless I need thickened liquids or can't have anything by mouth); Keep my call light within reach so I can call for assistance; Maintain bed in lowest locked position. -Focus: I need assistance with activities of daily living because of weakness. The care plan intervention showed: Anticipate resident's needs; Assist me with all oral intake of food and fluids; Assist me with hygiene, bathing, dressing, toileting and transfers; Assist me with toileting promptly when requested; Assist with all ADL care to ensure daily needs are met. -Focus: The resident has an ADL Self Care Performance Deficit r/t Activity Intolerance, r/t cognitive deficits. The interventions showed: Encourage the resident to participate to the fullest extent possible with each interaction; Encourage the resident to use bell to call for assistance; Anticipate needs not verbalized as resident does not always clearly make needs Nursing known. Keep call bell within reach, encourage use, answer promptly. An interview was conducted on 10/21/2024 at 3:15 p.m. with the NHA and AIT. They stated the facility needed to prepare for evacuation to a church on 9/24/24. The NHA said at the church the County Emergency Management showed up and stated the facility should move their residents to a county shelter. The NHA and AIT confirmed no one was seriously injured, no one died, and no one eloped. They said there may have been a skin tear. The NHA stated, We did the best we could. The NHA confirmed they did not compile a post-storm assessment, as they did not have time; they needed to get ready for the next storm. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 11:50 a.m. with Staff V, CNA. Staff V stated, During the evaluation things happened. Staff V stated, Yes there was a fall. I was in the gym where [Resident #12] was assigned. The management did not leave out assignments for CNAs, so I am not sure who was responsible for [Resident #12]. Staff V said, I was in a doorway and heard a loud thud. I turned and noted [Resident #12[ on the floor, it looked bad, no one was near. Staff V stated there was no walker and most of the residents came without their walkers/wheelchairs, etc. She said those items were not brought with them for the evacuation. Staff V, said the DON did finally come over to Resident #12, after another nurse had already been providing care. Staff V stated, The DON was not in the gym when Resident #12 fell. Staff V stated she did not remember who else was in the gym. An interview was conducted on 10/24/24 at 2:08 p.m. with Staff AA, Registered Nurse (RN). Staff AA stat[TRUNCATED]
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide assistance with Activities of Daily Living ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL's) related to showers, incontinence care, and assistance with meals for six residents (#16, #18, #7, #17, #24, and #25) out of six reviewed for Activities of Daily Living. Findings included: 1. On 10/21/2024 at 10:15 a.m. during an observation and interview, Resident #16 was observed in bed, dressed in a facility gown watching television. Resident #16 was observed partially covered by a bed sheet and his face had food from breakfast on it. Resident #16 said the care in facility was not great. He said he had not had a shower or a bed bath in a long time. He stated it had been about two weeks. Resident #16 said he had asked several times for a shower or bed bath, but was told by staff they were too busy, and he would have to wait. He said he does not like to feel dirty. Review of Resident #16's admission Record showed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with medical diagnoses including generalized muscle weakness, severe morbid obesity, emphysema and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Review of Resident #16's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], Section C-Cognitive Patterns revealed a BIMS score of 15 out of 15 indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #16's Care Plan, dated 06/08/2024, showed the resident needed assistance with ADLs. The Care Plan Goal regarding ADLs showed staff will help the resident with all ADL needs so Resident #16 appears neat, tidy and with the absence of foul body odor. The Care Plan Interventions included assistance with all ADL care to ensure all daily needs are met. Honor shower preferences. Review of Resident #16's shower schedule showed the resident's shower days were Tuesday on the evening shift and Friday on the day shift. Review of Resident #16's electronic medical records (EMR) Task Menu showed between 09/30/2024 and 10/21/2024 the resident did not have a shower or a bed bath. 2. On 10/21/2024 at 11:03 a.m. during an observation and interview, Resident #18 was observed in bed watching television. The resident stated he had not had any daily care for the day. Resident #18 said it sometimes takes staff hours to answer call lights, and he does not get showers or bed baths on the days he is supposed to. Review of Resident #18's admission Record showed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with medical diagnoses including generalized muscle weakness, unsteadiness on feet, need for assistance for personal care, severe morbid obesity, chronic pain syndrome, and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with diabetic neuropathy. Review of Resident #18's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], Section C-Cognitive Patterns revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #18's Care Plan, dated 07/18/2024, showed the resident needed assistance with ADLs. The Care Plan Goal regarding ADLs showed staff will help the resident with all ADL needs so Resident #18 appears neat, tidy and with the absence of foul body odor. The Care Plan Interventions included assistance with all ADL care to ensure all daily needs are met. Honor shower preferences. Review of Resident #18's EMR Task Menu showed in the last 30-day period, the resident had one shower on 10/28/2024. 3. On 10/21/2024 at 12:50 p.m. during an observation and interview, Resident #7 was observed dressed and seated in his wheelchair eating lunch. His family member (FM) was in a chair at the resident's side assisting him with lunch. Resident #7's FM stated the facility is always short staffed with nurses and CNAs. She said Resident #7 does not always get showers on his shower days and will not get one until she speaks with the staff. Review of Resident #7's admission Record showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with medical diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, need for assistance with personal care and history of falling. Review of Resident #7's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], Section C-Cognitive Patterns revealed a BIMS score of 11 out of 15 indicating the resident was moderately impaired cognition. Review of Resident #7's Care Plan, dated 11/06/2023, showed the resident needed assistance with ADLs. The Care Plan Goal regarding ADLs showed staff will help the resident with all ADL needs so Resident #7 appears neat, tidy and with the absence of foul body odor. The Care Plan Interventions included assistance with all ADL care to ensure all daily needs are met. Honor shower preferences. Review of Resident #7's EMR Task Menu showed in the last 30-day period, the resident had one shower on 10/17/2024. 4. On 10/21/2024 at 10:15 a.m. during an observation and interview, Resident #17 was observed dressed and sitting in his wheelchair watching a movie on his personal electronic device. Resident #17 said staffing in the facility is really bad and he doesn't always get a shower on his scheduled day because of short staffing. Resident #17 said he has even asked for a shower appointment on days when he does not get a shower on his scheduled day. He said he would at least like to have a shower on the two shower days he is scheduled for. Review of Resident #17's admission Record showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with admitting diagnoses including central cord syndrome, lack of coordination, contractures of left and right knee, dizziness and giddiness, paralytic syndrome, need for assistance with personal care. Review of Resident #17's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], Section C-Cognitive Patterns revealed a BIMS score of 14 out of 15 indicating he was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #17's Care Plan, dated 09/09/2022, showed the resident needed assistance with ADLs. The Care Plan Goal regarding ADLs showed staff will help the resident with all ADL needs so Resident #17 appears neat, tidy appearance. The Care Plan Interventions included assistance with all ADL care to ensure all daily needs are met. Honor shower preferences. Review of Resident #17's EMR Task Menu showed in the last 30-day period, the resident had showers on 10/03/2024, 10/17/2024, 10/21/2024 and 10/28/2024. 5. An observation was conducted on 10/21/24 at 11:15 a.m. of Resident #24 lying in bed asleep. Her breakfast tray was sitting on her bedside table pushed approximately five feet aware from her bed, out of her reach. The call bell was also observed to be hanging on the wall out of reach for the resident. Review of admission Records showed Resident #24 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including adult failure to thrive, dysphagia, dehydration, dementia, and moderate protein-calorie malnutrition. Review of Resident #24's care plan, dated 7/22/24, showed a focus for impaired nutritional status. Interventions included: monitor/document/report to speech therapy as needed for signs and symptoms of dysphagia and provide assistance with all meals as needed. 6. On 10/22/24 during the lunch meal the following was observed: - 12:03 p.m. the lunch meal carts arrived to A wing, four residents were observed in their wheelchairs, sitting around the table in the common area/dining room. No staff were seen in the area. - 12:13 p.m. a staff member served the four residents their lunch meal, set the meal up and walked away. - 12:19 p.m. no staff member in the dining room, one resident (Resident #25) calling for assistance and appeared to be having a difficult time eating, another resident was observed just looking at the tray. - 12:20 p.m. notified the A wing Unit Manager (UM) of Resident #25 needing assistance. The UM approached and spoke with resident, then proceeded back to the nurses' station. - 12:25 p.m. Resident #25 still requesting assistance. - 12:35 p.m. notified a passing CNA of Resident #25 request, CNA said OK and kept walking. - 12:54 p.m. All four residents still at dining table, two (one being Resident #25) residents had not touched their meals and one resident is calling out loudly. Two CNAs were at the far corner of the dining room talking. Three staff members (unit clerk, UM, and nurse) were observed at the nurse's station. No staff member attempted to assist the residents. - 12:55 p.m. Surveyors requested staff assist residents in the dining room. Review of admission Records for Resident #25 showed she was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including anemia, unspecified lack of coordination, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, dementia and moderate protein-calorie malnutrition. Review of Resident #25's care plan, 12/7/23, showed a focus for impaired nutritional status or am at risk for alteration in my nutritional status . Interventions included: monitor/document/report to speech therapy as needed for signs and symptoms of dysphagia and provide assistance with all meals as needed. Review of a facility policy titled Activities of Daily Living, reviewed 10/25/24, showed the following: Policy Statement Residents will be provided with care, treatment and services as appropriate to maintain or improve their ability to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs). Residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living independently will receive the services necessary to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene. Policy interpretation and implementation: 1. Residents will be provided with care, treatment and services to ensure that their activities of daily living (ADLs) do not diminish unless the circumstances of their condition(s) demonstrate that diminishing ADLs are unavoidable. (a.) The existence of a clinical diagnosis or condition does not alone justify a decline in a resident's ability to perform ADLs. (b.) Unavoidable decline may occur if he or she: (1.) Has a debilitating disease with known functional decline. (2.) Has suffered the onset of an acute episode that caused physical or mental disability and is receiving care to restore or maintain functional abilities; and /or (3.) Refuses care and treatment to restore or maintain functional abilities and: (a). the resident and or representative has been informed of the risk and benefits of the proposed care or treatment; and (b). He or she has been offered alternative interventions to minimize further decline; and; (c.) the refusal and information are documented in the resident's clinical record. 2. Appropriate care and services will be provided for residents who are unable to carry out ADLs independently, with the consent of the resident and in accordance with the plan of care, including appropriate support and assistance with: (a.) Hygiene (bathing, dressing, grooming and oral care); (b.) Mobility (transfer and ambulation, including walking); (c.) Elimination (d.) Dining (meals and snacks) (e.) Communication (speech, language, and any functional communication systems). 3. Care and services to prevent and/or minimize functional decline will include appropriate pain management, as well as treatment for depression and symptoms of depression. 4. If residents with cognitive impairment or dementia resist care, staff will attempt to identify the underlying cause of the problem and not just assume the resident is refusing or declining care. Approaching the resident in a different way or at a different time or having another staff member speak with the resident may be appropriate. 5. A resident's ability to perform Als will be measured using clinical tools, including the MDS. Functional decline or improvement will be evaluated in reference to the Assessment Reference Date (ARD) and the following MDS definitions. (a.) Independent - Resident completed activity with no help or staff oversight at any time during the last 7 days. (b.) Supervision: Oversight, encouragement or cueing provided 3 or more timed during the last 7 days. (c.) Limited Assistance - Resident highly involved in activity and received physical help in guided maneuvering of limb(s) or other non-weight bearing assistance 3 or more times during the last 7 days. (d.) Extensive assistance - while resident performed part of activity over the last 7 days, staff provided weight bearing support. (e.) Total Dependence - Full staff performance of an activity with no participation by resident for any aspect of the ADL activity. Resident was unwilling or unable to perform any part of the activity over entire 7-day look back period. 6. Interventions to improve or minimize a resident's functional abilities will be in accordance with the resident's assessed needs, preferences, stated goals and recognized standards of practice. 7. The resident's response to interventions will be monitored, evaluated and revised as appropriate.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide proper wound care to prevent the developmen...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide proper wound care to prevent the development of complications for four residents (#19, #21, #22, and #20) of four reviewed for wound care. Finding included: 1. An observation was conducted on 10/21/24 at 10:11 a.m. of Resident #19 in bed with the head of the bed elevated. He had a bandage on his right anterior forearm. The bandage was approximately 6 by 4 and clearly visible. The bandage had a faded date of 10/8/24 written on it. The same bandage remained in place on 10/22/24 and 10/23/24. Review of admission Records showed Resident #19 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including severe protein-calorie malnutrition and hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side. Review of Resident #19's orders showed an order for Skin Check: Complete weekly body assessment every evening shift every Monday for skin integrity, dated 9/25/24. There were no additional orders related to wound care. Review of Resident #19's Comprehensive Care Plan, 6/25/24, showed a focus area of alteration in skin integrity and at risk for impaired skin integrity related to reduced mobility, generalized weakness, malnutrition, and incontinence. Interventions included: administer treatments as ordered and monitor for effectiveness, frequent repositioning, and inform resident/family/doctor of any new areas of skin breakdown. Review of Resident #19's progress notes did not reveal any documentation on 10/8/24 related to a wound or bandage. Review of Weekly Skin Observations, dated 10/14/24 and 10/21/24, written by Staff C, Registered Nurse (RN) showed Resident #19 had no skin integrity concerns. An observation and interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 10:08 a.m. with Staff D, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). Staff D was observed looking at Resident #19's right arm bandage. She confirmed it was dated 10/8/24. She said she believed the resident received a skin tear during the hurricane evacuation. An interview and observation was conducted on 10/23/24 at 10:10 a.m. with Staff C, RN. Staff D, CNA was present during the observation. She said she did not know what happened. Staff C said she had not put any bandages on the resident, so she hadn't seen it yet. Staff C confirmed she routinely cared for Resident #19. Staff C was observed entering the room of Resident #19 and assessing his right arm. She confirmed the bandage was dated 10/8/24 and said the resident should have been seen by wound care. Staff C said she had not noticed the bandage before. Staff C gathered supplies and re-entered the room and began removing the bandage. The bandage was not easily removed, the non-adherent portion of the bandage was stuck to the skin. Once removed, an open area approximately 1 inch long by ½ inch wide with sanguineous drainage was observed. The surrounding skin looked to be dark red and blue-tinged bruising extending approximately 1-1.5 inches on all sides forming a circular shape. The RN used gauze and saline to clean the wound, applied triple antibiotic ointment, and covered with a new foam bandage. The RN did not date or initial the bandage. A follow-up interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 1:00 p.m. with Staff C, RN. She said, For the weekly skin check I don't know what the protocol is but what I do is tell the CNA when they shower the resident to let me know so I can do an assessment and then I chart it. 2. An observation and interview was conducted on 10/21/24 at 10:47 a.m. with Resident #21. The resident was observed to have two bandages on his left leg, one on his knee and one on his foot. The bandage on the left knee had slid down his leg leaving the open wound exposed. The resident was also observed to have a bandage on his right knee and no bandage on his right foot. The bandage on the right knee was observed to have blood soaked through the underside. The right foot had an open wound on his 2nd toe and on his heel. None of the bandages in place had a date notated. Resident #21 said, I'm very upset. This is why I have come here. He said he was really worried because he didn't want any further infections. He said he had not had a dressing change for the 10 days he had been at the facility. He said he kept asking the nurses about changing the bandages with no follow-up on their part. He said no one responded to his call bell for two days and he felt very isolated. Review of the admission Records showed Resident #21 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including gangrene, peripheral vascular disease, Type 2 Diabetes, and unspecified open wound, unspecified knee. Review of Resident #21's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), dated 10/23/24, showed a score of 12, indicating he was cognitively intact. Review of the physician orders for Resident #21 revealed: -On 10/20/2024 wound consult on bilateral knees and left foot. -On 10/20/2024 cleanse left foot surgery with normal saline and apply abd [abdominal] pad and wrap with kerlix daily and prn [as needed], in the evening. -On 10/20/2024 cleanse knees with normal saline and apply xeroform and wrap with kerlix daily and prn [as needed], in the evening. -On 10/15/2024 Weekly skin check, Friday, every evening shift every Friday. Review of the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for Resident #21 revealed: -Cleanse knees with normal saline and apply xeroform and wrap with kerlix daily and prn. in the evening -Start Date10/21/2024 1500, marked completed on 10/21/24 and 10/22/24. -Cleanse left foot surgery with normal saline and apply abd pad and wrap with kerlix daily and prn in the evening -Start Date10/21/2024 1500, marked completed on 10/21/24 and 10/22/24. -Weekly skin check, Friday every evening shift every Fri -Start Date10/18/2024 1500, marked completed on 10/18/24. Review of Residet #21's Medical Certification for Medicaid Long-Term Care Services and Patient Transfer Form (AHCA form 3008), dated 10/15/24 revealed Section T: Skin Care showed bilateral knee eschar wounds. Section E: Medical Condition surgical procedure performed showed bilateral knee debridement, and Primary diagnosis of sepsis eschar. Review of Resident #21's Skilled Daily Nursing Note, dated 10/21/24 was not completed in the Skin and Services and Interventions sections. Review of Resident #21's care plan showed a focus of skin impairment and at risk for future impaired skin integrity related to impaired mobility, bilateral knees, left foot surgery. Date Initiated: 10/16/2024. Interventions included Administer treatments as ordered and monitor for effectiveness. Date Initiated: 10/16/2024. A follow-up observation and interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 1:50 p.m. with Resident #21. The resident's bandages remained in the same condition as they were the previous day. The resident confirmed the bandages had not been changed. He said he was not sure why he was there and if the facility did not do something soon, he would leave against medical advice (AMA). On 10/23/24 9:30 a.m. Resident #21 was observed rolling through the front corridor with the same loose, undated dressing in place. An interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 2:48 p.m. with Staff E, LPN. She said on admission the process is to do a full skin check and if there are issues with wounds, or they did not come in with orders the doctor should be called and a wound consult put in the computer. She confirmed Resident #21 did not have wound orders from 10/15/24 when he was admitted until 10/20/24. She said she would not expect a resident to be admitted with a wound and not have orders for five days. Review of Resident #21's progress note, dated 10/23/24, showed the resident left the facility AMA. 3. Review of Resident #22 admission Records showed he was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including sepsis, unspecified protein-calorie malnutrition, chronic pain, other specified local infections of the skin and subcutaneous tissue and acquired absence of the right and left leg above the knee. He was re-admitted on [DATE] with the additional diagnoses of osteomyelitis, arthritis due to other bacteria unspecified joint, and unspecified open wound, left hip, subsequent encounter. Review of Resident #22's physician orders showed: --Wound vac order initiate NPWT (negative pressure wound therapy) treatment with facility device. Apply wound VAC (vacuum assisted closer device) foam and seal. Connect to wound VAC machine at 120mmHg continuous suction. Wound VAC dressing change Monday, Wednesday, Friday. Patient requires prompt management of stool and urine to avoid soiling of wound. The wound care team can make appropriate changes to this order if necessary, as long as changes are communicated to the primary medical team. Dated 10/4/2024. --Wound VAC: setting 120. Every shift for wound care. Dated 10/4/2024. --Cleanse left buttock with Dakin's solution, pat dry, apply wound VAC Monday, Wednesday, Friday and PRN. Every day shift every Mon, Wed, Fri for wound care and as needed if soiled/saturated. Dated 10/4/2024. Review of Resident #22's Care Plan showed a focus area of skin integrity impairment and is at risk for future skin impairment, left buttock, dated 2/9/24. Interventions included wound VAC NPWT treatment as per orders, dated 6/5/24. Review of Resident #22's Treatment Administration Record (TAR), from 9/1/24 to 9/20/24, revealed the resident did not receive his wound care treatment on 9/27/24, while at the hurricane evacuation site. Wound care was also missed on 9/4/24 and 9/11/24 with no documentation as to why. Review of Resident #22's progress note, dated 9/27/24, documenting the order to cleanse left buttock with Dakin's solution, pat dry, apply wound VAC Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and as needed as offsite UTA [unable to assess]. A progress note, dated 9/29/24, revealed 911 was called and the resident was sent to the emergency room for evaluation and treatment related to abnormal vital signs. His oxygen saturation was 85%, heart rate 102, blood pressure 100/63. Review of Resident #22's hospital History and Physical (H&P) from 9/29/24 showed the following: He was then evacuated to another facility during the recent hurricane, and he was there for 3 days where the wound VAC was not changed. When he went back to his regular rehab he started to feel ill, and he was sent here for evaluation . The H&P diagnoses list nonhealing left hip surgical wound now with osteomyelitis and septic arthritis of left hip and severe sepsis secondary to osteomyelitis and septic arthritis. An Operative Report, dated 10/1/24, showed Resident #22 had Excisional debridement left hip with placement of negative pressure wound dressing. Review of Resident #22's AHCA Form 3008, dated 10/3/24, showed he was discharged from the hospital and returned to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was discharged on antibiotics and a wound VAC. There were instructions to follow-up at the wound care clinic in 1 week and the surgeon in 2 weeks. Review of Resident #22's TAR from 10/1/24 to 10/29/24 showed he did not receive his ordered wound care on 10/14/24 and 10/28/24. 4. An observation and interview was conducted on 10/23/24 at 12:38 p.m. with Resident #20. The resident was lying in bed uncovered. A large bandage was observed on her anterior lower right leg. The bandage was not dated. The resident said she had fallen and hit her leg about a month ago and the dressing had not been changed since she was admitted to the facility. The resident said she had a skin tear on her left leg, but it was almost healed. Resident #20 said the wound on her right leg is not being taking care of to my liking. Review of admission Records showed Resident #20 was re-admitted after a hospital stay on 10/14/24 with diagnoses including unspecified physeal fracture of lower end of left fibula, subsequent encounter for fracture with routine healing, muscle weakness (generalized), difficulty in walking, not elsewhere classified, unsteadiness on feet, and unspecified lack of coordination. Review of Resident #20's physician orders did not reveal any orders for wound care. There was an order for weekly skin checks every Wednesday, dated 7/24/24. Review of Resident #20's BIMS, dated 10/22/24, revealed a score of 13, indicating she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #20's Care Plan showed a focus of risk for impaired skin integrity related to impaired mobility and pain. Date Initiated: 06/25/2024. Interventions included skin checks on resident's shower days. Report any abnormalities to nurse. Review of Resident #20's admission Nursing Evaluation, dated 10/115/24, showed the resident's skin condition as skin clear and ashen. There was no documentation on a wound on the resident's right lower leg. Review of Resident #20's AHCA Form 3008, undated, showed she had a skin tear to her right foot and right shin. Review of Resident #20's Progress notes did not reveal any notes related to a wound on her right lower leg. An interview and observation was conducted on 10/23/24 at 2:23 p.m. with Staff J, LPN. He confirmed he knew Resident #20 and was assigned to care for her. He said the resident had very thin skin and wore a boot on her left leg due to a previous fracture. When asked about the wound on her right leg he said he did not think she had one. Staff J was observed entering Resident #20's room and assessing her right leg. He then said he did recall seeing the bandage she had on when she was admitted . Staff J reviewed the resident's orders and confirmed she did not have any wound care orders and did not know what type of wound she had under the bandage. He said she should have had wound care orders when she arrived. He was again observed entering Resident #20's wound with wound care supplies. He had a difficult time removing the bandage due to the non-adherent part of the bandage being stuck to the wound scab. The bandage had dry drainage on the center. When it was removed the scab was pulled off the skin tear on the resident's leg. Staff J was observed cleaning the skin tear with saline, putting triple antibiotic ointment in place and applying a new bandage. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 3:23 p.m. with the Assisted Director of Nursing (ADON). She stated skin checks occurred weekly for each resident. She said when a resident is admitted with a bandage, the nurse should get orders from the provider, and it should be documented on the skin assessment. The ADON said skin tears should be included on the skin assessments for residents. She said all bandages should be changed per doctor orders. She said a bandage dated 10/8/24 should not have remained on the resident on until 10/23/24. She stated, This would be an infection risk. She said she would have expected Resident #19's wound to have been on his 2 skin checks that had been completed. The ADON said for Resident #20 she would have expected the nurse to have called the doctor to have gotten wound care orders and for the bandage to have been changed. An interview was conducted on 10/29/24 at 11:07 a.m. with the DON. She said if a resident had a bandage on admission the nurse should remove the bandage and see What is under there and get orders, unless it is a surgical site. The DON said that is Nursing 101. She said she would have expected Resident #21 to have had orders upon admission, not five days later. Review of a facility policy titled Wound care policy, reviewed 10/25/24, showed the following: Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidelines for the care of wounds to promote healing. Preparation 1. Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure. 2. Review the resident's care plan to assess for any special needs of the resident. (a.) For example, the resident may have PRN orders for pain medication to be administered prior to wound care. 3. Assemble the equipment and supplies as needed. Date and initial all bottles and jars upon opening. Wipe nozzles, foil packets, bottle tops, etc. with alcohol pledget before opening as necessary. (Note: This may be performed at the treatment cart) Equipment and Supplies The following equipment and supplies will be necessary when performing this procedure. 1. Dressing material, as indicated (i.e. gauze tape, scissors, etc.) 2. Disposable cloths as indicated. 3. Antiseptic (as ordered ) and 4. Personal protective equipment (e.g. gowns, gloves, mask, etc., as needed. Documentation: The following information should be recorded in the resident's record: 1. The type of wound care given. 2. The date and time the wound care was given 3. The position in which the resident was placed. 4. The name and title of the individual performing the wound care. 5. Any change in resident's condition. 6. All assessment data (i.e. wound bed color, size , drainage, etc.) obtained when inspecting the wound. 7. How the resident tolerated the procedure. 8. Any problems or complaints made by the resident related to the procedure. 9. If the resident refused the treatment and the reason why. 10. The signature of the person recording the data. Reporting: 1. Notify the supervisor if the resident refuses the wound care. 2. Report other information in accordance with facility policy and professional standards of practice.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide medication administration per physician orders for three r...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide medication administration per physician orders for three residents (#1, #13, #15) of three reviewed for medication administration. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #1's admission Record showed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms, chronic pain syndrome, and polyneuropathy. Review of Resident #1's active physician orders revealed the following orders: -Flomax Capsule 0.4 mg. [milligram] Give 1 capsule by mouth at bedtime. Dated 9/25/24. -Lyrica Oral Capsule 25 mg. (Pregabalin). Give 1 capsule by mouth two times. Dated 9/25/24. Review of Resident #1's October Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed Flomax was not administered on 10/05/24, 10/07/24, 10/08/24, 10/09/24, 10/11/24, and 10/12/24, and Lyrica was not given on 10/11/24. A review of Resident #1's complete medical record revealed no documentation for the reason as to why the medications were not administered. 2. Review of Resident #13's admission Record showed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Type II Diabetes, atrial fibrillation, post-traumatic stress disorder, Bipolar Disorder, paranoid schizophrenia, presence of urogenital implants, calculus of kidney, and hydronephrosis with renal and ureteral calculous obstruction. Review of Resident #13's active physician orders revealed the following orders: - Allopurinol Oral Tablet 100 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth in the morning for lower uric acid levels. Dated 8/23/24. - Amiodarone HCl Oral Tablet 200 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime for irregular heart rhythm. Dated 8/22/24. - Metformin HCl Oral Tablet 1000 mg Give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime for type II diabetes. Dated 8/22/24. - Allopurinol Oral Tablet 100 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth in the morning for lower uric acid levels. Dated 8/23/24. - Famotidine Oral Tablet 20 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth in the morning for Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Dated. 8/23/24. -Oxycodone HCl Oral Tablet 10 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth every 6 hours for pain. Dated 8/22/24 -Lyrica Oral Capsule 100 mg (Pregabalin). Give 1 capsule by mouth at bedtime for pain. Dated 8/22/24 -Lyrica Oral Capsule 50 mg (Pregabalin). Give 1 capsule by mouth two times a day for neuropathy. Dated 8/23/24 -Xanax Oral Tablet 0.25 mg (Alprazolam). Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for generalized anxiety disorder. Dated 8/22/24 -Ilotycin Ointment 5 mg/gm (Erythromycin). Instill 5 mg in both eyes three times a day for infection until 9/6/24. Dated 9/4/24. -Tolterodine Tartrate Oral Tablet 2 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for treat overactive bladder. Dated 8/22/24. Review of Resident #13's October MAR showed Metformin and Amiodarone were not administered on 10/14/24 due to being on order from the pharmacy. Review of Resident #13's September MAR showed the resident missed the following medications: -Allopurinol Oral Tablet 100 mg on 9/8, 9/11, 9/12, 9/13, 9/16, 9/18, 9/21, 9/25 and 9/26/24. Progress notes dated 9/9, 9/11, 9/12, 9/13, 9/18/24 showed the medication was on order. - Amiodarone HCl Oral Tablet 200 mg on 9/8, 9/12, 9/13, 9/16, 9/18, 9/21, 9/25, and 9/26/24. Progress notes dated 9/13, 9/25/24 showed the medication was on order. -Famotidine Oral tablet 20 mg on 9/8 and 9/26/24. No reason documented. -Metformin HCL Oral Tablet 1000 mg on 9/26/24. No reason documented. -Tolterodine Tartrate Oral Tablet 2 mg on 9/26 and 9/27/24. No reason documented. -Xanax Oral Tablet 0.25 mg on 9/5 and 9/28/24. A progress note dated 9/5/24 at 12:40 p.m. showed medication is not available. No reason documented for the 9/28/24 evening dose. -Oxycodone HCl Oral Tablet 10 mg on 9/8 (2 doses) and 9/26/24 (2 doses). No reason documented. -Ilotycin Ointment 5 mg/gm (Erythromycin). Medication was not administered 3 times on 9/4 and 2 times on 9/5/24. The medication was only administered 1 out of 6 doses scheduled. No reason documented. No documentation physician was notified. 3. Review of Resident #15's admission Record showed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including epilepsy, fibromyalgia, chronic pan, and opioid dependence. Review of Resident #15's active physician orders revealed the following orders: -Keppra Tablet 1000 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day. Dated 9/25/24. -Lyrica Capsule 25 mg. Give 1 capsule by mouth in the evening. Dated 9/25/24. -Percocet Oral Tablet 7.5-325 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth every 6 hours for chronic pain Review of Resident # 15's October MAR revealed the bedtime dose of Keppra was not administered on 10/11/24 and 10/14/24, Lyrica was not administered on 10/13/24, 10/14/24, 10/15/24, 10/18/24, and 10/19/24, Percocet was not administered on 10/16/24. All medications not administered had an administration note of on order from the pharmacy. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 10:42 AM with Staff F, LPN. She stated, If we have a missing medication, we put an order in the computer for it. Sometimes we have to call the pharmacy if they haven't sent it. Sometimes the pharmacy will have to order the medication before they send it. I would put a note in saying per pharmacy, they are ordering the medication. If someone is out to the hospital for more than 24 hours, we have to put all the orders in and verify with the doctor. It usually only takes a couple minutes to get it verified. If a medication is held because we don't have it, I notify the doctor and document that in a progress note. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 10:55 a.m. with Staff J, LPN. He stated they order medications that are low on the computer. Staff J said if he noticed the medication was on order, he would send the pharmacy a fax and the medication would typically arrive right away. Staff J also stated if a medication was held, he would have notified the doctor or nurse practitioner and put a progress note in the electronic medical record. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 2:20 p.m. with the pharmacy for the facility. Regarding Resident #15 the pharmacy stated Resident #15 needed new prescriptions for her medications due to the facility changing pain management providers. The pharmacy said they received the prescription request for Resident #15's Lyrica on 10/21/24, and for Percocet on 10/16/24. The pharmacy said they make multiple deliveries to the facility each day. They said staff requested medications electronically, by fax or over the phone. The pharmacy said there was no reason residents did not have medication available if it was ordered. An interview was conducted on 10/29/24 at 11:07 a.m. with the DON. She reviewed the medical records of Resident's #1, #13, and #15. She said she did not know why Resident #1 did not get the Lyrica and confirmed there was no documentation why it was not administered. She said Resident #15 shouldn't have missed some of the medications she did due to them being in the facility's electronic dispensing machine. The DON said there are a lot of agency nurses in the facility, and they didn't let her know. She said at one point there was an issue with the facility's system integrating with the pharmacy, but even if that was the case, there is no reason any resident should go days without their medication. Regarding Resident #13 the DON said the resident admitted on [DATE] and there was no reason the Amiodarone was not in the facility. She said that could have also been pulled from the electronic medication dispensing machine. The DON said she believed all of the missing and on order medication is mostly due to agency nurses. Review of a facility policy titled Policy: Administering Medication, revised 8/2022, showed the following: Policy Statement Medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. Only persons licensed or permitted by this state to prepare, administer and document the administration of medications may do so. 2. The director of nursing services supervises and directs all personnel who administer medications and/or have related functions. 3. Staffing schedules are arranged to ensure that medications are administered without unnecessary interruptions. 4. Medications are administered in accordance with prescriber orders, including any required time frame. [ .] 21. If a drug is withheld, refused, or given at a time other than the scheduled time, the individual administering the medication shall document in the MAR. 22. The individual administering the medication initials the resident's MAR on the appropriate line after giving each medication and before administering the next ones. 23. As required or indicated for a medication, the individual administering the medication records in the resident's medical record.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0773 (Tag F0773)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and policy review the facility failed to provide laboratory services as ordered for three res...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and policy review the facility failed to provide laboratory services as ordered for three residents (#14, #13, and #10) out of three reviewed for laboratory orders. Findings included: 1. Review of admission Record showed Resident #14 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and Type II Diabetes mellitus. Review of Resident #14's physician orders showed: - Please check Vitamin D level, BMP, iron level, B12 level, CBC, A1C, Lipids. One time only for 1 Day. Ordered 8/26/2024. - Please check Vitamin D level, iron level, B12 level, BMP, CBC, A1C, Lipids. Every night shift for LABS for 1 Day. Ordered 9/4/2024. Discontinued 9/5/24. - Please check Vitamin D level, iron level, B12 level, BMP, CBC, A1C, Lipids. Every night shift for LABS for 1 Day. Ordered 9/5/2024. Review of Resident #14's August 2024 MAR showed the lab test was signed off as completed on 8/26/24. Review of Resident #14's Lab Reports did not reveal any results from labs signed off as drawn on 8/26/24. Review of Resident #14's September 2024 MAR showed the lab was not signed off as completed on 9/4/24. A new order was entered for 9/5/24 and that was signed off as completed. Review of Resident #14's Lab Results Report, dated 9/6/24, showed it was flagged for several abnormal values. 2. Review of admission Records showed Resident #13 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including urinary tract infection, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, acute kidney failure, and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease with exacerbation. Review of Resident #13's provider progress note, dated 9/5/24, showed the following: . [Resident] endorses increase feelings of urgency and frequency. [Resident] states that she feels as if she has a yeast infection and may be getting a UTI. Ordered UA [urinalysis] w/ C&S [with culture and sensitivity] . Diagnoses: N39.0 - Urinary tract infection, site not specified. Review of Resident #13's physician orders revealed: - UA w/ C&S. Ordered 9/6/24 -UA w/ C&S. Ordered 9/7/24 -UA w/ C&S. Ordered 9/9/24. -UA w/ C&S. Ordered 9/10/24. -UA w/ C&S via straight cath [catheter]. Ordered 9/11/24. -UA w/ C&S via straight cath for 3 days. Ordered 9/16/24. -UA w/ C&S. Ordered 10/22/24. Review of Resident #13's progress notes revealed: Resident refusal for 9/6/24, 9/10/24, and 9/11/24. No other documentation was found related to the 9/7, 9/8, 9/9. On 9/18/24 it was revealed the order for UA C&S was marked as completed, however no results were found for that date. On 10/22/24 the UA w/ C&S revealed lab results showing bacteria in the urine. 3. Review of admission Record showed Resident #10 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including rhabdomyolysis, acquired absence of other specified parts of the digestive tract, urinary tract infection, dementia, and acute kidney failure. Review of Resident #10's physician orders showed: -Obtain UA C&S to r/o UTI possibly related to confusion. Every shift for UA C&S Clean Catch Urine. May use Straight Cath to obtain sample if unable to obtain Clean Catch. COMPLETE REQUISITION ON AMA WEBSITE, PRINT REQ AND UNIT REPORT LOG AND FLAG IN PHLEBOTOMY BINDER PRIOR TO 0300. D/C order upon collection. Ordered 9/15/2024 - UA C&S IS IN THE FRIDGE, PLEASE DO THE REQ FORM. One time only for 1 Day. Ordered 9/16/2024. - UA / CS for s/s of UTI (confusion) every shift for UA C&S Clean Catch Urine. May use Straight Cath to obtain sample if unable to obtain Clean Catch. COMPLETE REQUISITION ON AMA WEBSITE, PRINT REQ AND UNIT REPORT LOG AND FLAG IN PHLEBOTOMY BINDER PRIOR TO 0300. D/C order upon collection. Ordered 9/16/2024. Discontinued on 9/16/24. - Re-collect urine for u/a c&s per daughter request. May straight cath. Every shift for burning. Ordered 9/19/2024. Discontinued 10/2/2024 Review of Resident #10's September and October 2024 MAR showed the UA order on 9/15/24 was signed off as completed. The order showing UA C&S IS IN THE FRIDGE, PLEASE DO THE REQ FORM, was not signed off on 9/16, but was signed off on 9/17/24. The order for UA on 9/16/24 was not signed off as completed but was discontinued. The order to re-collect urine for U/A C&S was signed off as completed once on 9/19, 3 times on 9/20, 3 times on 9/21, 2 times on 9/22, 3 times on 9/23, one time on 9/24, one time on 9/25, w times on 9/26, 3 times on 9/27, 3 times on 9/28, 3 times on 9/29, 3 times on 9/30, and two times on 10/1/24. Review of Resident #10's progress notes revealed a note dated 9/19/24 saying attempted to collect urine sample via straight cath, swelling and redness noted to vaginal area. Resident c/o pain due to swelling, refused straight cath stating 'I can't do this anymore'. Education provided to resident; she continues to refuse. A provider note, dated 9/23/24, showing history of present illness: .Facility staff states they are unable to collect a urine specimen over the weekend. Facility staff state the patient is no longer complaining of symptoms. Hospice nurse states that they spoke with daughter, and she stated that she does not want a urinalysis performed at this time . Review of Resident #10's Lab Results Report showed a UA C&S received on 10/1/24 flagged as abnormal and showed many bacteria present (Klebsiella pneumoniae). An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 4:01 p.m. with Staff G, LPN. He said the process for labs was the orders were put into the electronic medical record, then night shift took orders and put them into the laboratory's website, printed out a requisition form and placed it in the lab book. He said the lab came around 4:00 a.m. to draw labs that had been ordered for that day. He said for urine samples, it is collected on night shift if possible then put in the fridge in the soiled utility room. He said the lab tech got the requisition forms from the lab book, drew labs, and collected samples from the fridge. Staff G said all lab results go directly into the electronic medical record when they are completed. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 2:25 p.m. with Staff B, LPN/UM. She said all lab and imaging results are digital and could be in each resident's medical record. An interview was conducted on 10/22/24 at 3:53 p.m. with the laboratory that services the facility. They reviewed all orders received by the lab and results for Resident #14 and said they showed no orders were placed in August 2024; they only showed an order placed on 9/6/24. They reviewed all orders received by the lab and results for Resident #13. They said they showed no lab received in September 2024. The lab reviewed all orders received by the lab and results for Resident #10 and said they had no orders in September 2024; they only showed a urine culture on 10/1/14 that was abnormal. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 3:23 p.m. with the ADON. She said she had not been aware of any issues with labs in the facility. She described the process saying orders were put in the computer, night shift completed the requisition forms and put them in the lab book, then lab came to draw and collect labs. The ADON said if labs are ordered one day they should be done by the next day and if they are not completed a reason should be documented in the chart and a doctor notified. The ADON reviewed the medical record for Resident #14 and confirmed he had no lab results for the labs ordered on 8/26/24 and it was signed off as completed. She said she didn't know why it was signed off and not done. The ADON reviewed Resident #13's record and said there were some refusals documented, but she didn't know why a urine sample didn't get to the lab in September when it was ordered. Review of a facility policy titled Lab and Diagnostic Test Results - Clinical Protocol, reviewed 10/25/24, showed the following: Assessment and Recognition 1. The physician will identify, and order diagnostic and lab testing based on the resident's diagnostic and monitoring needs. 2. The staff will process test requisitions and arrange for tests. 3. The laboratory, diagnostic radiology provider, or other testing source will report test results to the facility. Review by Nursing Staff 1. When test results are reported to the facility, a nurse will first review the results. (a.) If staff who first receive or review lab and diagnostic test results cannot follow the remainder of this procedure for reporting and documenting the results and their implications, another nurse in the facility (supervisor, charge nurse, etc.) should follow or coordinate procedure. 2. Before contacting the physician, the person who is to communicate results to a physician will gather, review and organize the information and be prepared to discuss the following (to the extent that such information is available). (a.) The individual's current condition and details of any recent changes in status, including vital signs and mental status. (b.) Major diagnoses, allergies, current medications , any recent pertinent lab work, actions already taken to address results and treat the resident/patient, and pertinent aspects of advance directives (example limitations on testing and treatment). (c.) Why the las and diagnostic tests were obtained (for example as a routine screen or follow -up; to assess a condition change or recent onset of signs and symptoms, or to monitor a serum medication level. (d.) How test results may relate to the individual's current condition and treatment (e.) Any concerns and questions the physician will be expected to address regarding the resident. 3. A nurse will identify the urgency of communicating with the attending physician based on physician request, the seriousness of any abnormality and the individual's current condition. 4. A nurse will try to determine whether the test was done: (a.) As routine screen or follow -up. (b.) To assess a condition change or recent onset of signs and symptoms or (c.) To monitor a drug level. (1.) The reason for getting a test often affects the urgency of acting upon the result. (2.) If the reason for performing the test cannot be identified, the nurse should proceed as though the test were ordered to assess a condition change or recent onset of signs and symptoms.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0777 (Tag F0777)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide follow-up notification for critical radiology results for ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide follow-up notification for critical radiology results for one resident (#9) of one reviewed for imaging. Findings included: Review of admission Records showed Resident #9 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including anemia, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, dementia, and acquired absence of left great toe. Review of Resident #9's wound care provider notes dated 8/19/24 showed the following: The patient is an [AGE] year-old female who I have been asked to see regarding an ulcer on her left foot .The area needs continued aggressive offloading. Measurements of the left foot ulcer are 2.6 cm long, 2.7 cm wide, and 0.5 cm deep with moderate serosanguineous drainage. Notes showed a wound culture and arterial and venous doppler ultrasound were ordered. Review of Resident #9's physician orders revealed an order dated 8/19/24 for Complete ultrasound to left foot due to open wound. The computer showed it was ordered by Staff A, [NAME] Clerk. Review of Resident #9's ultrasound results, dated 8/20/24, showed the following: Impressions: No evidence of hemodynamically significant stenosis. Occlusion of the left proximal to mid superficial femoral, posterior tibial and peroneal arteries. Critical Findings: Y Review of Resident #9's medical record showed a progress note, dated 8/20/24, written by Staff F, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). The note showed MD ordered arterial ultra sound [sic] to resident left foot due to current open wound located on the left side of her foot. Ultrasound completed and results sent to MD. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 1:41 a.m. with Staff F, LPN. She did remember Resident #9 but does not recall if she spoke with anyone about the ultrasound results. Review of Resident #9's medical record did not reveal any evidence of follow-up related to the critical ultrasound findings. There were no consults, additional tests, no mention of the results in provider notes, and the resident was not sent to a higher level of care for evaluation. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 3:30 p.m. with Resident #9's PCP. He said he remembered the resident well. He reviewed his notes and said on 8/20/24 at 9:30 p.m. he was notified of Resident #9's ultrasound results, and the nurse informed him Resident #9 had an appointment to see a vascular specialist on 8/23/24. An interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 1:33 p.m. with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). The ADON said there had been a glitch in the computer and it was putting a staff member in the ordered by space in the orders so she would have to figure out who ordered the ultrasound. A follow-up interview was conducted on 10/28/24 at 3:23 p.m. with the ADON. She said she found in the wound care provider notes that he was the one that ordered the ultrasound for Resident #9. She said he should have been notified of the critical results. She said she spoke to him, and he had been unaware of the critical findings on the ultrasound. The ADON said there should have been follow-up with critical results to ensure the provider was notified so the problem could have been addressed. An interview was conducted on 10/29/24 at 12:02 p.m. with Resident #9's wound care provider. He said he ordered the ultrasound for Resident #9 on 8/19/24. He reviewed his notes and said he had no notes related to ultrasound results. He said if he had received the results, he would have charted the information. He said with the resident having occluded blood vessels he would have sent her straight to vascular. He said he was not notified of the results, or he would have followed up. An interview was conducted on 10/29/24 at 11:07 a.m. with the DON. She said she was only able to find the ultrasound for Resident #9 was ordered by the wound care provider. The DON said she does not see where any follow-up was completed with vascular for Resident #9. She said she spoke with the wound care provider, and he was not happy he was not notified of the results. The DON said on the facility's end, the result did not flag as having critical findings. She said she did not know until she pulled up the results to review them. She said the system should alert the staff to critical values. The DON said when a nurse gets critical results called to them, they should notify the provider. She said nurses are expected to follow-up on their resident's labs and imaging. She said, In our head it was done. The doctor got notified. She said the management team did not see the result to make sure there was more follow-up. Review of Resident #9's progress note, dated 9/20/24, showed the resident's left foot is cold and blotchy with no pulse. The resident stated there was a little pain when the nurse touched her feet. The doctor was notified and ordered the resident to be sent to the hospital to have her left foot assessed. Review of a facility policy titled Lab and Diagnostic Test Results - Clinical Protocol, reviewed 10/25/24, showed the following: Assessment and Recognition 1. The physician will identify, and order diagnostic and lab testing based on the resident's diagnostic and monitoring needs. 2. The staff will process test requisitions and arrange for tests. 3. The laboratory, diagnostic radiology provider, or other testing source will report test results to the facility. Review by Nursing Staff 1. When test results are reported to the facility, a nurse will first review the results. (a.) If staff who first receive or review lab and diagnostic test results cannot follow the remainder of this procedure for reporting and documenting the results and their implications, another nurse in the facility (supervisor, charge nurse, etc.) should follow or coordinate procedure. 2. Before contacting the physician, the person who is to communicate results to a physician will gather, review and organize the information and be prepared to discuss the following (to the extent that such information is available). (a.) The individual's current condition and details of any recent changes in status, including vital signs and mental status. (b.) Major diagnoses, allergies, current medications , any recent pertinent lab work, actions already taken to address results and treat the resident/patient, and pertinent aspects of advance directives (example limitations on testing and treatment). (c.) Why the las and diagnostic tests were obtained (for example as a routine screen or follow -up; to assess a condition change or recent onset of signs and symptoms, or to monitor a serum medication level. (d.) How test results may relate to the individual's current condition and treatment (e.) Any concerns and questions the physician will be expected to address regarding the resident. 3. A nurse will identify the urgency of communicating with the attending physician based on physician request, the seriousness of any abnormality and the individual's current condition. 4. A nurse will try to determine whether the test was done: (a.) As routine screen or follow -up. (b.) To assess a condition change or recent onset of signs and symptoms or (c.) To monitor a drug level. (1.) The reason for getting a test often affects the urgency of acting upon the result. (2.) If the reason for performing the test cannot be identified, the nurse should proceed as though the test were ordered to assess a condition change or recent onset of signs and symptoms.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were implemented ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were implemented to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents on three out of four units in the facility related to hand hygiene, soiled linens, housekeeping carts during mealtime, personal protective equipment (PPE) carts, and isolation precautions. Findings included: On 10/21/24 at 10:00 a.m. an observation was made of a staff member entering room [ROOM NUMBER], removing tape from a call light button, turning the light off, and exiting the room with no hand hygiene performed. On 10/21/24 at 10:05 a.m. an observation was made of a used exam glove on the floor inside the entrance to room [ROOM NUMBER], a room on enhanced barrier precautions. On 10/21/24 at 10:25 a.m. an observation was made in the A Unit shower room of multiple soiled towels and bath clothes in the shower and on the floor of the shower room. Bags of soiled linen were observed in the shower room. On 10/21/24 at 10:30 a.m. an observation was made of multiple staff members entering and exiting resident rooms answering call lights without performing any hand hygiene. On 10/21/24, 10/23/24, and 10/25/24 a housekeeping cart was observed sitting in the dining area on the A unit while residents were eating their meals. On 10/23/24 at 9:53 a.m.an observation was made of soiled linen and a urinal on the floor in room [ROOM NUMBER]. On 10/23/24 at 10:07 a.m. Staff C, Registered Nurse (RN) was observed retrieving a treatment cart, gathering wound care supplies, and entering room [ROOM NUMBER] without performing hand hygiene. On 10/23/24 at 10:20 a.m. an observation was made of a PPE cart sitting outside of an isolation room with coffee creamer and sweetener sitting on top in the hall on the C Unit. On 10/24/24 at 2:30 p.m. a soiled towel and a liquid substance was observed on the floor in the elevator. On 10/21/24 at 10:45 a.m. and 10/23/24 at 2:00 p.m. an observation occurred of an isolation cart outside room [ROOM NUMBER] with an 8 ½ x 11 yellow paper, laminated with the words Isolation Cart typed on the paper. A quarter sized brown substance was noted on top of the paper. On 10/22/24 at 1:24 p.m. and 10/24/24 at 10:43 a.m. a blanket was observed on floor to catch liquid running down the wall from the ceiling. On 10/22/24 at 1:52 p.m. an observation of Staff II, Housekeeping Aide (HA) wearing blue gloves exiting room [ROOM NUMBER], entering room [ROOM NUMBER], and performed job duties in room [ROOM NUMBER], exited room [ROOM NUMBER], entered room [ROOM NUMBER]. Staff II went to each resident individual trash cans, brought the cans closer to the entry of the room. Staff II then removed the trash from each resident trash can at the entrance to the room, placed the individual trash bags into a larger trash bag and left the large trash bag at the entrance to the room. Staff II then stacked the three resident trash cans at the entry of the room. Staff II exited the room, touched the mop handle and other parts of the housekeeping cart. No removal of gloves, no PPE being donned/doffed and no hand hygiene (HH) were observed. room [ROOM NUMBER] had a STOP Contact Precautions sign on the outside of the room, with an isolation cart next to the door containing PPE. The Contact Precaution sign showed: Everyone Must: clean their hands, including before entering and when leaving the room. Providers and staff must also: put on gloves before room entry. Discard gloves before the room exit. Put on gown before room entry. Discard gown before room exit. Do not wear the same gown and gloves for the care of more than one person. Use dedicated or disposable equipment. Clean and disinfect reusable equipment before use on another person. On 10/22/24 at 1:55 p.m. an observation and interview was conducted with Staff L, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). Staff L was observed entering room [ROOM NUMBER], and walked directly to the resident in bed A. Staff L touched the resident's sheets and the resident, assisted the resident in repositioning. Staff L exited the room and walked directly to the nurse medication cart. No PPE was donned/doffed. An interview with Staff L occurred upon the exit of room [ROOM NUMBER]. Staff L stated the resident in 323 A is on contact precautions due to an organism in the wound, and the physician ordered contact isolation. Staff L stated she did not wear PPE to assist the resident in 323 A and did not complete HH. Staff L stated contact precautions means to wear PPE when providing care to the location of the organism and I did not have contact with where the organism is located. The organism is in the wound on his bottom. She stated PPE would only need to be used during wound care. Staff L was not able to verbalize the difference between contact precautions and enhanced barrier precautions. An interview was conducted with Staff II, HA on 10/22/24 at 2:00 p.m. Staff II confirmed not changing gloves and completing HH in between resident rooms and not donning PPE. Staff II stated not having to wear PPE when cleaning or emptying trash cans. Staff II stated she did see the contact precaution sign and isolation cart on the outside of the room. During multiple interviews on 1/22/24 between 2:00 p.m. and 4:45 p.m. 3 of 3 CNAs, 3 of 4 nurses and 2 of 2 therapists were not able to explain what contact precautions were and the difference between enhanced barrier precautions. An interview was conducted on 10/25/24 at 3:23 p.m. with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON)/Infection Preventionist (IP). She stated dirty linens should not be left on the floor or in resident rooms, they should be taken to the soiled utility. She said if a resident leaves dirty linens on the floor, staff should pick it up. The ADON/IP reviewed photos of the shower room on Unit A with soiled towels and bath clothes lying around and said, No that should not be like that. She confirmed used gloves should never be left on the floor and PPE carts should not have anything set on top. She said if a resident puts something on the cart, it should be discarded. She said for a resident on contact precautions anyone that entered a room should have put a gown and gloves on and removed them before exiting the room. She said for an enhanced barrier precaution room anyone doing contact care with the resident should have put on a gown and gloves. She stated that gloves should not be worn in the hallway, gloves should be removed and HH performed upon exiting a resident room. Review of the facility's policy and procedure titled POLICY: Infection Prevention and Control Program dated 7/24 reveals: Policy: It is a policy of this facility to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines 1. The designated Infection Preventionist serves as a consultant to our staff on infectious diseases, resident room placement, implementing of isolation precautions, staff and resident exposures, and epidemiological investigations of exposures of infectious diseases. 2. The RNs and LPNs supervise direct care staff in daily activities to assure appropriate precautions and techniques are observed, assess the resident's isolation needs, initiate appropriate precautions in accordance with our established policies and current CDC Infection Control Isolation Guidelines, consult with the Medical Director (and/or the resident's attending physician) as soon as possible to obtain written order for same; and consult the Infection Preventionist for questions regarding isolation, infection control issues, and questions relative to communicable diseases and infections. 3. Surveillance: a. A system of surveillance is utilized for prevention, identifying, reporting, investigating, and controlling infections and communicable disease for all residents, staff, volunteers, visitors, and other individuals providing services under a contractual arrangement based upon a facility assessment and accepted national standards. b. The Infection Preventionist serves as the leader in surveillance activities, maintains documentation of incidents, findings, and any corrective actions made by the facility and reports surveillance findings to the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance Committee. c. The RNs and LPNs participate in surveillance through assessment of residents and reporting changes in condition to the residents' physicians and management staff, per protocol for notification of changes and in-house reporting of communicable diseases and infections. 4. Hand Hygiene Protocol: a. All staff shall wash their hands when coming on duty, between resident contacts, after handling contaminated objects, after PPE removal, before/after eating, before/after toileting, and before going off duty. b. Staff shall wash their hands before and after performing resident care procedures. c. Hands shall be washed in accordance with our facility's established hand washing procedure. 5. Isolation Protocol: a. Standard precautions shall be observed for all residents. b. A resident with an infection or communicable disease shall be placed on isolation precautions as recommended by current CDC Guidelines for Isolation Precaution. A copy of these guidelines are[sic] available at each nurses' station. c. Residents will be placed on the least restrictive isolation precaution for the shortest duration possible under the circumstances. d. When a resident on isolation precautions must leave the resident care unit/area, the charge nurse on that unit/area shall communicate to all involved departments the nature of the isolation and shall prepare the resident for transport in accordance with current isolation precaution guidelines. e. Residents with Tuberculosis are placed on Airborne Precautions and placed in a special room that is equipped with special air handling and ventilation capacity. If no such room is available, the resident(s) will be discharged to a facility with such capabilities. f. Immunocompromised and myelosuppressed residents shall be placed in a private room if possible and shall not be placed with any resident having an infection or communicable disease. [ .] 10. Linens a. Laundry and direct care staff shall handle, store, process, and transport linens so as to prevent spread of infection. b. Clean linen shall be delivered to resident care units on covered linen cards with covers down. c. Linen shall be stored on all resident care units on covered cards, shelves, in bins, drawers, or linen closets. d. Soiled linen shall be collected at the bedside and placed in a linen bag. When the task is complete, the bag shall be closed securely and placed in the soiled utility room. Soiled linen shall not be kept in the resident's room or bathroom. e. Environmental services staff shall not handle soiled linen unless it is properly bagged. Review of the facility's policy and procedure titled Policy: Enhanced Barrier Precautions, undated, reveals: Implementation of EBP: EBPs are used in conjunction with standard precautions and expand the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) during high-contact resident care activities both inside and outside the residents' room, which can result in transferring MDROs to staff hands and clothing. EBPs should be followed when performing transfers or assisting during bathing in a shared/common shower room and when working with residents in the therapy gym, specifically when anticipating close physical contact while assisting with transfers and mobility. PPE to include Gloves & Gown. Eye & Face protection may be indicated if a splash risk exists. PPE and ABHR should be stored near residents' room and be accessible to staff. Near the exit or outside the room is acceptable. For residents for whom EBP are indicated, EBP is employed when performing the following high-contact resident care activities: -Dressing -Bathing/showering -Transferring -Providing hygiene -Changing linens -Changing briefs or assisting with toileting -Device care or use: central line, urinary catheter, feeding tube, tracheostomy/ventilator -Wound care: any skin opening requiring a dressing Note: EBP should be followed when performing transfers or assisting during bathing in a shared/common shower room and when working with residents in the therapy gym, specifically when anticipating close physical contact while assisting with transfers and mobility. When to Use EBP: EBPs are indicated for residents with any of the following, regardless of where they reside in the facility: -Infection or colonization with a CDC-targeted MDRO when contact precautions do not otherwise apply. -Wounds and/or indwelling medical devices even if the resident is not known to be infected or colonized with a MDRO. -Wounds include chronic wounds, such as pressure ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers, unhealed surgical wounds, and venous stasis ulcers. Shorter-lasting wounds, such as skin breaks or skin tears covered with an adhesive bandage or similar dressing, do not require EBP. Indwelling medical device examples include central lines, urinary catheters, feeding tubes, and tracheostomies. A peripheral intravenous line (not a peripherally inserted central catheter) is not considered an indwelling medical device for EBP. Facilities are not required to use EBP for residents who do not have a chronic wound or indwelling medical device and are infected or colonized with an MDRO that is not currently targeted by the CDC. Review of the facility's policy and procedure titled Handwashing/Hand Hygiene, Revised 9/2024, revealed: Policy Statement This facility considers hand hygiene the primary means to prevent the spread of infections. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1.All personnel shall be trained and regularly in-serviced on the importance of hand hygiene in preventing the transmission of healthcare-associated infections. 2. All personnel shall follow the handwashing/hand hygiene procedures to help prevent the spread of infections to other personnel, residents, and visitors. 3. Hand hygiene products and supplies (sinks, soap, towels, alcohol-based hand rub, etc.) shall be readily available and convenient for staff use to encourage compliance with hand hygiene policies. 5.[sic] Residents, family members and/or visitors will be encouraged to practice hand hygiene through the use of fact sheets, pamphlets and/or other written materials provided at the time of admission and/or posted throughout the facility. 6. Wash hands with soap (antimicrobial or non-antimicrobial) and water for the following situations: a. When hands are visibly soiled; and b. After contact with a resident with infectious diarrhea including, but not limited to infections caused by norovirus, salmonella, shigella and C. difficile. 7. Use an alcohol-based hand rub containing at least 62% alcohol; or, alternatively, soap (antimicrobial or non-antimicrobial) and water for the following situations: a. Before and after coming on duty; b. Before and after direct contact with residents; c. Before preparing or handling medications; d. Before performing any non-surgical invasive procedures; e. Before and after handling an invasive device (e.g., urinary catheters, IV access sites); f. Before donning sterile gloves g. Before handling clean or soiled dressings, gauze pads, etc.; h. Before moving from a contaminated body site to a clean body site during resident care; i. After contact with a resident's intact skin; j. After contact with blood or bodily fluids; k. After handling used dressings, contaminated equipment, etc.; l. After contact with objects (e.g., medical equipment) in the immediate vicinity of the resident; m. After removing gloves; n. Before and after entering isolation precaution settings; o. Before and after eating or handling food; p. Before and after assisting a resident with meals; and q. After personal use of the toilet or conducting your personal hygiene. 8. Hand hygiene is the final step after moving and disposing of personal protective equipment. 9. The use of gloves does not replace hand washing/hand hygiene. Integration of glove use along with routine hand hygiene is recognized as the best practice for preventing healthcare-associated infections.
CONCERN (F) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, and homelike environment was ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, and homelike environment was maintained, to include resident rooms, resident bathrooms, and doors, on four of four resident units, during five of five days observed during survey. Findings included: The following observations were made between 10/21/24 and 10/25/24 during survey activities: - Resident rooms 216 & 217 did not have access to a sink and the bathroom door was locked with a padlock from both sides. - Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] - at the entrance way to the corridor a ceiling tile was missing, and a large hole was in the ceiling above the bathroom door, - Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] - the ceiling above the bathroom door, near the air conditioner intake vent, the paint appeared to be bubbling away from the ceiling, and black/brownish color is in a circular pattern near the area. - Resident common area, Sunroom on the D unit had an orange colored, cloth sofa which emanated an offensive urine spell immediately noticeable upon entrance to the room. - Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] and 126-the electrical box was pulling away from the wall behind the resident bed. - Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] had what appeared to be brown/black bio-growth on the ceiling in multiple locations of the ceiling and the entry way to the room. The paint was bubbling and pulling away from the surface near the air conditioning intake vent, which had brown oxidization throughout. The resident of the room stated the bio-growth had been there a couple of months; the facility just keeps painting over it. - Resident Rooms - nightstand drawers would not close, the finish was pulling away from the side exposing the particle board preventing the surface from being cleaned. - Resident rooms - dresser legs were exposed particle board preventing the surface from being cleaned. - Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] - had a fluorescent bulb sitting on the counter - Resident room [ROOM NUMBER]-bathroom faucet was not attached to the basin. - Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] - a blanket was on the floor at the entrance across from the bathroom, absorbing water coming down from the ceiling. - In the corridor outside room [ROOM NUMBER] was an electrical box with the door open and unlocked. - In the corridor outside room [ROOM NUMBER] was an electrical box with the door open and unlocked (a padlock was hanging on the latch. - room [ROOM NUMBER] was unable to access the bathroom due to facility storage of various carts, shower chairs, etc. - 2nd floor maintenance door did not close properly - Janitor closet outside 319 did not close properly - Hallway ceiling tiles outside room [ROOM NUMBER] had dark black fuzzy bio-growth on the edges of 3 ceiling tiles - Resident stated the ceiling has been like this for months. - Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] - dirty air conditioning vent During an interview and observation on 10/23/2024 at 2:17 p.m. rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] had locks on the bathroom doors preventing entrance to anyone without the key. Staff HH, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) said the restrooms have not been working for two months, maintenance knows, and they even tried to unclog the restroom in room [ROOM NUMBER] and the snake tool they were using broke off in the toilet. Staff HH, CNA said they [the staff] has to take a bucket and fill it with water to clean and bathe the residents in those rooms. An interview was conducted with the Director of Maintenance (DOM) on 10/25/2024 at 4:30 pm. The DOM said the facility has an electronic work order system. The facility staff have access to the work order system and are able to enter maintenance issues for the maintenance staff to investigate. The DOM said the work orders are given a priority level by the staff member who enters the work order into the system. The priority levels available are low, medium, high and critical. He said an example of a critical work order would be a sink leaking with flooding. Work orders are assigned to the appropriate member of the maintenance team. He said there is a maintenance team member on call after hours and on weekends. A critical work order would require the on call person to go to the facility to assess the issue and begin work to fix it. The DOM said the facility is in the process of having eight (8) areas on the roof patched. He said these areas had been leaking and need to be fixed. He said the facility needs a new roof, but only patching the current problem spots was in the facility budget at the time. A tour was conducted with the DOM at the time of the interview. Rooms and areas toured include the above items. The DOM said the vents and fire extinguishers are checked monthly. He agreed the air vents and filter in the residents' room were dirty, and it has been longer than a month since they have been cleaned. room [ROOM NUMBER]: An observation was made, with the DOM, of the ceiling in the entryway of the resident's room was bubbled and discolored around the air conditioning vent. He said there may have been some water leakage. He agreed the area should be fixed. room [ROOM NUMBER]: An observation was made, with the DOM, of the ceiling outside of the rooms. There was a piece of plywood covering the hole in the ceiling that was observed earlier in the week. An observation was made of black bio growth on the side of the newly installed piece of plywood. The plywood did not cover the entire hole in the ceiling. The DOM said a maintenance team member was in the process of fixing the hole. He said the hole in the ceiling was from a water leak from the supply line that has been fixed. room [ROOM NUMBER]B and 126: An observation was made of a wall outlet that was hanging out of the wall at the end of the resident's bed. The DOM said the outlet should be securely in the wall and agreed it was a hazard. Review of the facility's policy and procedure titled, Creating a Home-Like Environment, dated 05/21/2024, showed the following: Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to ensure that residents reside in a home-like environment and atmosphere. This includes creating an environment that allows residents to create their own living conditions and environment. Residents are free to hang up photos and pictures and bring their own furniture. From a facility-perspective, it is the facility's responsibility to create a clean atmosphere that is properly maintained to ensure that residents are comfortable in their environment. Staff Responsibilities Ensuring that residents living conditions are healthy. Discuss residents' concerns regarding their environment and report their concerns via the grievance process. Ensure that residents reside in a clean environment. If a resident or family member has a concern regarding their environment, staff is responsible to report it to the appropriate department or via the maintenance online software portal. Review of the facility's policy and procedure titled: Maintenance Service, dated January 2005, showed the following: Policy: Maintenance service shall be provided to all areas of the building, grounds and equipment. Procedure: 1. The maintenance department is responsible for maintaining the buildings, grounds and equipment in a safe and operable manner at all times. 2. The following functions are performed by maintenance but are not limited to: a. Maintaining the building and compliance with current federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and guidelines. b. Maintaining the building and good repair and free from hazards. . f. Establishing priorities and providing repair services. . i. Providing routinely scheduled maintenance service to all areas. (Photographic Evidence Obtained).
May 2024 8 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to review and revise a care plan to reflect the nonuse of a secure door safety banner stop sign for one resident (# 54) out of ten residents sampled. Findings included: During an observations made on 05/07/24 at 9:47 a.m. and 1: 30 p.m., and on 5/8/2024 at 9: 00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Resident # 54 was observed sitting on the side of her bed with her call light within reach. Observation showed no stop sign across Resident # 54's room door. Review of the admission Record Resident # 54 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include Chronic Kidney Disease, Stage 3 unspecified, need for assistance with personal care, unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, with psychotic disturbance, and unspecified mood affective disorder. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 03 indicating Resident # 54 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of Resident # 54's care plan, dated 3/27/2024, showed a care plan focus area as: Resident 54 is at risk for abuse and neglect due to dementia, adapting to a new environment. Interventions included a stop sign across Resident # 54's door. An interview was conducted on 05/08/2024 at 3:00 p.m., with Staff L, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). Staff M stated he has worked at the facility for 8 years on the secured unit. He stated he was usually assigned to Resident #54 as her nursing assistant, and she has never had a stop sign across her door. During an interview on 05/09/2024 at 8:41 a.m., with Staff M, Registered Nurse (RN/ Director of MDS), she stated she did not know why Resident # 54 has a care plan focus that shows she is at risk for abuse and neglect. She further stated she did not know why the resident had an intervention showing that she needed to have a stop sign across her door. When she reviewed the resident chart, she did not see any assessments done to show why she would need to have a care plan put in place for a stop sign. She said if Resident # 54 is care planned to have a stop sign across her door, then she should have one. Review of the facility policy titled, Aventura Protocol for Care Plans, Comprehensive Person- Centered, revised March 2022, showed the following: Policy statement, A comprehensive, person - centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: Assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the residents and the residents' conditions change.
CONCERN (D)

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. On 5/6/24 at 11:28 a.m. Resident #9 was observed in her room sitting upright in bed and looking out the window to her right. ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. On 5/6/24 at 11:28 a.m. Resident #9 was observed in her room sitting upright in bed and looking out the window to her right. An interview was attempted; however, she did not answer directed questions. Observation of her left hand, as she pointed to the window, revealed two fingers with a dark brown material underneath her nails. On 5/7/24 at 9:00 a.m. Resident #9 was observed in her room sitting up right in bed and facing forward looking at the door. Observation of her left hand, seen over the blanket covering her, revealed the same two fingers observed on 5/6/24 with a dark brown material underneath her nails. Review of Resident #9's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage with loss of consciousness status unknown, subsequent encounter encephalopathy, unspecified cerebral ischemia, personal history of transient ischemic attack and cerebral infarction without residual deficits, unspecified cognitive communication deficit, unspecified dementia, unspecified severity with mood disturbance, other recurrent depressive disorder, and parkinsonism unspecified. Review of Resident #9's care plan, dated 8/4/23, revealed a focus area of needing assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) because of a diagnoses of dementia with memory impairment, cerebrovascular accident (CVA), impaired balance and weakness. Interventions for the ADL focus revealed, SKIN INSPECTION twice a week on shower days and with ADL care . Resident #9's current plan did not reveal a focus or intervention specific to nail care. Review of Resident #9's Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2, severe cognitive impairment. Section GG - Functional Abilities and Goals which included an assessment for shower and bathing revealed a score of dependent, and an assessment for personal hygiene revealed a score of substantial/maximal assistance. Review of documentation of staff tasks for personal hygiene for Resident #9, dated 5/6/24 to 5/8/24, revealed the following: - 5/6/24: At 6:51 a.m. Resident #9 required extensive assistance. At 14:47 p.m. (2:47 p.m.) Resident #9 required limited assistance. - 5/7/24: At 6:51 a.m. Resident #9 required extensive assistance. At 13:00 p.m. (1:00 p.m.) Resident #9 required total dependence on staff. At 21:35 p.m. (9:35 p.m.) Resident #9 required total dependence on staff. - 5/8/24: At 6:45 a.m. Resident #9 required extensive assistance. Review of Resident #9's progress notes, date range of 4/8/24 to 5/9/24, revealed no documentation of activities related to nail care. On 5/08/24 at 9:25 a.m. an interview with Staff J, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) revealed she does assist with showers for Resident #9. Staff J stated the showers for B beds are done during the 3 p.m. to 11 p.m. shift. Staff J stated she assists Resident #9 with grooming and other activities such as brushing her hair and teeth. She said it is her responsibility to assist with the residents' personal hygiene every day. She said she will give the resident a shower, if needed, if there is something out of the ordinary. Staff J stated she hasn't seen anything out of the ordinary with this resident. On 5/08/24 at 9:31 a.m. an interview was conducted with Staff K, Registered Nurse/Unit Manager (RN/UM). She stated residents are provided with showers twice a week. Staff K stated during showers the residents' hair is brushed, and nails are trimmed and/or cut. She said sometimes the resident refuses. Staff K stated the expectation is the CNA should report the refusal to the nurse. She said the staff will then notify the family. She revealed the family will attempt to do the grooming. Staff K revealed documentation regarding showers is completed on the unit shower sheet, which is kept in the unit manager's office. She stated resident refusals should be documented on the shower sheet. An observation and interview on 5/8/24 at 9:33 a.m., in the presence of Staff K, RN/UM, revealed a dark brown material underneath the same two nails of Resident #9 observed on 5/6/24 and 5/7/24. Staff K confirmed Resident #9's nails should not be like that. An interview on 5/9/24 at 11:46 a.m. with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed nail care should be done on shower day. The DON stated if the resident refused this would be documented by staff on the shower sheet or the progress note in the electronic medical record. She stated the expectation for staff is that grooming should be done every day, however, nail care would fall on shower day. She confirmed a resident should not have dark brown colored material or soiled nails for multiple days. A review of the facility's policy titled, Nail Grooming, review date of 7/24/18, included in the purpose statement, Regular fingernail care will promote cleanliness and prevent infection. The nursing staff will provide observation and care of nails for all residents daily and as necessary. The policy revealed responsible roles were, Certified Nursing Assistant, Licensed Nurse. Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide two residents (#3 and #9), who were dependent for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), personal grooming related to shaving and nail care. Findings included: 1. On 05/06/24 at 11:05 a.m., Resident #3 was observed in bed in her room. Facial hair was observed above the resident's lip. On 05/08/24 at 12:32 p.m., Resident #3 was observed in bed in her room. Facial hair was observed above the resident's lip. The admission Record showed Resident #3 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis to include unspecified intracranial injury with loss of consciousness of unspecified duration. A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], showed in Section C- Cognitive Patterns Resident #3 was rarely/never understood. In Section GG- Functional Abilities and Goals Resident #3 was totally dependent for personal hygiene (shaving). The care plan related to ADLS, initiated on 05/30/19, showed a focus area that revealed Resident #3 needed total assistance with ADLs because of functional quadriplegia, spastic Hemiplegia affecting her right dominant hand, traumatic brain injury, decreased range of motion on upper and lower extremities, incontinent of bowel and bladder, and unable to speak. The interventions included, assist with all ADL care to ensure daily needs are met. There was no documentation in the resident's record that indicated shaving was offered or refused. The policy provided by the facility Removal of Facial Hair, revised 09/2022, revealed the following: Residents have the right to choose their style, including facial hair. Residents have the right to refuse or comply with facial hair removal. 1. Assess the resident to ensure that there is ability to safely remove facial hair. 4. CNA [certified nursing assistant] should evaluate resident for safe facial hair removal. On 05/09/24 at 9:47 a.m., Staff O, Registered Nurse (RN)/Unit Manager (UM), stated Resident #3 was compliant with care. She confirmed Resident #3 had facial hair above her lip and staff should be attempting to shave her. On 05/09/24 at 11:46 a.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) stated shaving should be done on shower day.
CONCERN (D)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice related to unlabeled dre...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice related to unlabeled dressings for one resident (#294) out of two residents sampled for skin conditions. Findings included: An observation of Resident #294 on 05/06/24 at 03:19 PM revealed the resident was lying on his bed with his legs uncovered. The resident had a large white dressing covering his left calf below the knee and above the ankle. The dressing revealed no staff initial or a date listed on the dressing. An observations of the Resident #294 on 05/07/24 at 09:02 AM revealed the resident was lying on his bed with his legs uncovered. Resident #294 had a large white dressing covering his left calf. The dressing had no staff initial or a date listed on the dressing. Review of the residents orders revealed the following: -Cleanse L [left] medial calf with NS [normal saline], pat dry, apply oil emulsion and cover with foam dressing daily/prn [as needed], every day shift for wound care AND as needed if soiled/dislodged 5/7/24. -Cleanse L calf with n/s, apply wet to dry dressing and kerlix, as needed for Impaired Skin Integrity. complete daily and as needed until resolved, AND in the afternoon for wound care complete daily until resolved. 4/25/24. During an interview on 05/08/24 at 09:28 AM with Staff Q, CNA she reported wound care is completed by nurses or a wound care nurse. During an interview on 05/08/24 at 10:48 AM with the Director of Nursing (DON) she stated dressings should be dated and initialed following the physician orders. She reported the wound care nurse does wound rounds on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays and does dressing changes. She reported floor nurses should do skin wounds. A request was made for a policy related to the standards of practice for labeling wounds, but not provide by the facility.
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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility 1) failed to ensure a resident who cares for his laryngectomy ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility 1) failed to ensure a resident who cares for his laryngectomy tube was assessed and deemed competent, 2) failed to ensure necessary supplies were available, and 3) failed to ensure follow-up with a specialty physician related to his laryngectomy tube was coordinated for one resident (#154) out of one resident sampled with a laryngectomy tube. Findings included: Review of Resident #154's admission Record revealed he was admitted to the facility from an acute care hospital on 6/21/23 with diagnoses of respiratory failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), tracheostomy status, malignant neoplasm of the mouth, malignant neoplasm of the larynx, and shortness of breath. An interview and observation were conducted on 05/06/24 at 09:59 AM with Resident #154. Resident #154 was observed to have a laryngectomy tube in place, with clean trach ties. He communicated well by whispering and writing his requests on paper. He said he needs an ear nose and throat (ENT) appointment because his laryngectomy tube is not long enough, and it makes it harder to breathe. He said he had an appointment but the first time there was a transportation issue and the second time there was an insurance issue. He said there is still not an appointment made. He brought the surveyor to his room, and he said he cleans his own trach six times a day because it gets clogged up with mucus. He opened his side drawer and said he uses normal saline in a bottle and rolls up paper towels located in his beside drawer and uses the normal saline and the rolled-up paper towel to clean his laryngectomy tube. He said he changes his own trach ties. He said he had asked the staff to give him extra laryngectomy tubes but they have not given him any and there was no extra laryngectomy tubes observed in his room. He pulled out his laryngectomy tube to show the side of his laryngectomy tube, where the trach ties loop into the laryngectomy tube, the hole was observed to be torn. He said he needs a new laryngectomy tube but Staff E, A-Wing Unit Manager said she can't order more until he sees the ENT doctor. The resident reinserted his laryngectomy tube and secured his own trach ties. He was not in respiratory distress when he took out his laryngectomy tube. Review of Resident #154's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], Section C, Cognitive Patterns, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #154's physician orders revealed the following orders: -A start date of 5/2/24 with no end date Patient needs appointment with ENT . -A start date of 4/18/24 with no end date Send to ER for trach evaluation. -A start date of 10/30/23 with no end date Remove [NAME] [laryngectomy] tube from stoma completely and clean while awake very [sic] shift for Tracheostomy care Resident dose [sic] himself. -A start date of 6/22/23 with no end date Replace HME on tube daily or if it becomes saturated with secretions, resident changes himself every day shift for Tracheostomy Care resident dose [sic] it himself. -A start date of 6/22/23 with no end date Stoma Care every day shift for Maintenance Resident dose [sic] himself AND as needed for Maintenance. -A start date of 6/21/23 with no end date Soak laryngectomy tube with normal saline, clean with tube brush and pat dry. Every shift for Tracheostomy care Review of the Resident #154's physician note, dated 3/29/24, revealed Has appt with ENT for trach widening on 4/8/24. Review of Resident #154's progress note, dated 4/9/24 at 3:00 p.m., revealed Residents appointment with ENT was rescheduled he will be going via facility transport . Review of Resident #154's progress note, dated 4/16/24 at 1:02p.m., revealed [Company] respiratory notified in regards to coming out to eval, treat as well deliver trach cannula's .No expressions or signs of distress. O2 sats 94% on room air. He will be monitored. Review of Resident #154's progress note, dated 4/18/24 at 2:43 p.m., revealed Call placed to [Physician] in regards to Larynx tube out of place D/T [due to] clamp broken to strap it in place. Patient trach site is open and free from cannulas at this time. He has no signs of distress. he [sic] continue to ambulate around, joke and laugh with the staff. [Physician] states if he's not showing any emergent signs of respiratory distress following necessary procedures to get supply's needed. U.M. [unit manager] aware. [Company Name] respiratory notified and recommendations pending. O2 [oxygen] sats 94% roomair [sic]. He will be monitored. Review of Resident #154's progress note, dated 4/18/24 at 3:42 p.m., revealed Resident sent to ER [emergency room] for evaluation of trach, Resident shows no S/S [signs and symptoms] of distress he is in agreement with going to the ER for an evaluation. Resident is able to make needs known. An interview was conducted on 05/08/24 at 10:53 AM with Staff E, A-Wing Unit Manager (UM). She said, the reason Resident #154 needs to see an ENT physician is because he does not have extra laryngectomy tubes and we want the ENT to let us know if he needs a different size tube or if they want to remove it. Staff E, A-wing UM said Resident #154 cleans his own laryngectomy tube and he should be cleaning it with warm soapy water then letting it dry or he can clean it with normal saline and let it dry. She also said he will change his own trach ties. She said the staff will assist him sometimes with cleaning and changing the trach ties. She said Resident #154 does not have an extra laryngectomy tubes so when he cleans the tube he does not have another one to replace it with But he does well with it out he actually told me he can breathe better than he ever could before with it out. Review of Resident #154's Respiratory Assessment and Recommendation form, dated 1/31/24, revealed .Diagnosis: Resp. [respiratory] failure, COPD, Laryngectomy Tube. .Notes: :laryngectomy pt [patient] does self care. Pt c/o [complained of] increased SOB [shortness of breath] and dry cough since yesterday. Expiratory wheezes noted. Pt agrees breathing treatments will help him feel better . Review of Resident #154's medical record did not reveal documentation Resident #154 was assessed to care for his own laryngectomy competently. An interview was conducted on 05/08/24 at 04:33 PM with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA). He said usually facilities don't accept residents with a laryngectomy because those tubes are $1600 each. He said the resident does all his own care related to his laryngectomy and he would have to review the record to see if the resident had competencies to ensure he knows how to properly clean and maintain his laryngectomy tube. An interview was conducted on 05/09/24 at 08:31 AM with the Director of Nursing (DON). She said Resident #154 had a laryngectomy tube and he provides his own care. She said at his bedside there should be an ambu bag, trach ties, suction kit, trach care kit with a wire brush, gauze, and he is supposed to use normal saline to clean it. He does the cleaning himself and he changes the trach ties himself, he should have an extra laryngectomy tube at the bedside, and she confirmed he does not. She said they have ordered one, but it has not come in yet. The order sheet was requested to be provided. She said her expectation is the resident uses the wire brush in the trach care kit not paper towels to clean his laryngectomy tube. She said it was her understanding he rolls up the paper towels and uses them in his nose. She said the Respiratory Therapist came in and did an assessment on Resident #154 to ensure he can competently care for his laryngectomy tube and she said it was documented on the Respiratory Assessment and Recommendation form, dated 1/31/24. She reviewed the document and said the document says Laryngectomy pt, does self care. but she will look to see if there is another assessment performed. She said she was not sure what happened with Resident #154's ENT appointment. She said the facility tries to use the resident's insurance for transportation but if the facility needs to transport a resident to an appointment, then the Maintence department is the one who does the driving. An interview was conducted on 5/9/24 at 9:23 a.m. with Staff E, A-Wing UM. She said they ordered a new laryngectomy tube for him on 4/18/24. She said The resident was sent out on 4/18/24 to the hospital because his laryngectomy tube broke where the straps attach and every time, he coughed the tube would come out because the ties couldn't attach to it. I was under the impression the hospital fixed it and that is when we contacted [Respiratory Therapy Company] to get another tube and they said it would take three to five weeks to get it. She said the laryngectomy tube has been paid for and she would provide an invoice. An interview was conducted on 05/09/24 at 09:29 AM with Staff E, A-Wing UM. She said We don't have the invoice related to Resident #154's laryngectomy tube because all orders get sent up to our corporate company and they pay them. She provided hospital documentation dated 4/18/24 and said, All the documentation says is to follow up with his primary care physician and to return to the hospital only if needed. She confirmed there is no documentation related to what the hospital did for the resident. She also said Resident #154 had two ENT appointments the first time the office canceled his appointment because Resident #154's primary physician did not approve the insurance authorization for him to go. She said they called the doctor and let him know to authorize the appointment and we made Resident #154 another appointment. She said that appointment got canceled too because the insurance authorization was never completed again. A phone interview was conducted on 05/09/24 at 12:57 PM with Staff F, Respiratory Vendor Manager. He said he was familiar with Resident #154 and said he had a laryngectomy tube. He said an order was placed for an entire laryngectomy kit, which includes a new tube, was placed today (5/9/24) and there is a three-to-five-week delivery time. He said this is a specialty item they do not keep on the shelf so they had to special order it through a supply company and the Laryngectomy kit will be delivered to the facility as soon as it comes in. He said The facility has not paid for the laryngectomy tube yet because since the order was placed today (5/9/24) they will not be billed for it until the end of the month, and they have 60 days to pay the invoice. An interview was conducted with Staff H, Maintence Supervisor on 05/09/24 at 10:44 AM he said A-Wing told him Resident #154 made an ENT appointment and he took him but the appointment was not approved so the resident rescheduled the appointment and I brought him back. He said he has not heard or taken him to any other ENT appointment. Review of Resident #154's care plan with a creation date of 6/22/24 revealed I have impaired respiratory status or risk for related to: COPD with risk for recurrent respiratory infections. The goals included I have impaired respiratory status or risk for related to: COPD with risk for recurrent respiratory infections. The interventions included: -Administer medications as ordered by physician. Monitor/document side effects and effectiveness. -Monitor for s/sx of respiratory distress and report to MD PRN: Respirations, Pulse oximetry, Increased heart rate (Tachycardia), Restlessness, Diaphoresis, Headaches, Lethargy, Confusion, Atelectasis, Hemoptysis, Cough, Pleuritic pain, Accessory muscle usage, Skin color. -Promote lung expansion and improve air exchange by positioning with proper body alignment when in chair and keeping head of bed elevated to resident's comfort level. -Provide rest periods during ADL's and periods of activity to prevent episodes of SOB. Review of Resident #154's care plan with a revision date of 3/1/24 revealed Resident has the potential for respiratory complications due to tracheostomy tube the goal revealed Airway will remain patent and complications will not develop secondary to having a laryngectomy site thru next review. The interventions revealed: -Monitor skin integrity under and around laryngectomy tube. Notify MD of any changes -Provide adequate hydration and nutrition -Resident provides self care to stoma/tube site -Resident teaching as needed -Trach care Q [every] shift and prn [as needed] Review of the facility's Laryngectomy Care and Suctioning Policy, undated, revealed the following: Policy: It is the policy of this facility to ensure that a resident with a laryngectomy stoma receives care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents goals and preferences. Definition: A laryngectomy is a surgical procedure to remove all or part of the larynx, or voice box. It may be indicated in persons with laryngeal cancer, laryngeal fracture, or damage to the larynx due to trauma or injury. A stoma is created, attached to the trachea, in which the person will now breathe through. .Laryngectomy Tube Care 1. Gather supplies (may be premade tracheostomy/laryngectomy care kit, or a nylon tracheostomy brush, cotton neck tape or other tube securement device, scissors, normal saline, cotton-tipped applicators, lubricating jelly, dry gauze pads). 2. perform hand hygiene and don gloves. 3. Fill one kit basin compartment or small basin with sterile water or normal saline. If needed for a harder to clean tube, another compartment may be filled with hydrogen peroxide. 4. Remove neck ties or tube securement device. 5. Remove the tube from the stoma. 6. Place the laryngectomy tube in the water or saline and use the nylon brush to gently clean the inside of the tube. The tube may be to be briefly soaked in the hydrogen peroxide if harder to clean, to loosen material in the tube (then rinse in the water or saline). 7. dry the tube with clean gauze. 8. Put clean neck tape or tube securement device into the slots on the side of the tube. 9. gently clean the skin around the stoma site with normal saline and cotton tipped applicators. 10. Lubricate the outside of the tube with lubricating jelly. 11. Have the person tilt their chin slightly toward their chest and have them hold their breath while placing the tube into the stoma. 12. Tie or secure the tape or securement device, leaving 1 finger space between the tape and the neck. 13. Discard supplies into he appropriate receptacle, remove gloves and perform hand hygiene.
CONCERN (D)

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

Drug Regimen Review (Tag F0756)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the drug regimen review was completed monthly, the pharmacist's report was documented in the medical record, and the pharmacist's r...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the drug regimen review was completed monthly, the pharmacist's report was documented in the medical record, and the pharmacist's recommendations were acted upon for one resident (#135) of nine residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings included: A review of the medical record for Resident #135 revealed diagnoses to include: unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, with other behavioral disturbance, psychotic disorder with hallucinations due to known physiological condition, age-related cognitive decline, mood disorder due to known physiological condition specified, anxiety disorder, unspecified. A review of the Physician Orders, dated May 2024, revealed the following: -Dulaglutide Subcutaneous Solution Pen-injector 0.75 MG (milligrams)/0.5 ML (milliliters) Inject 0.5 ml subcutaneously every evening shift every Sunday for glucose control. Start date 8/27/23. -Glucagon Emergency Kit 1 MG. Inject 1 mg intramuscularly as needed for Hypoglycemia of less than or equal to 70 mg/dl (deciliter) who are unresponsive or cannot swallow. Start date 8/25/23. -HYDROcodone-Acetaminophen Oral Tablet 5-325 MG. Give 1 tablet by mouth every 4 hours as needed for pain. Start date 11/3/23. busPIRone HCl Oral Tablet 10 MG. Give 1 tablet by mouth three times a day for anxiety. Start date 3/26/24. -QUEtiapine Fumarate Oral Tablet 25 MG. Give 1.5 tablet by mouth in the evening for psychosis. Start date 4/11/24. -LORazepam Oral Concentrate 2 MG/ML. Give 0.25 ml by mouth every 6 hours as needed for Anxiety for 30 Days. Start date 5/6/24. -TraMADol HCl Tablet 50 MG. Give 1 tablet by mouth three times a day for moderate to severe pain. Start date 8/25/23. -QUEtiapine Fumarate Oral Tablet 150 MG. Give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime for mood disorder. Start date 8/25/23. -QUEtiapine Fumarate Oral Tablet 100 MG. Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for mood disorder. Start date 8/25/23. -QUEtiapine Fumarate Oral Tablet 25 MG. Give 1.5 tablet by mouth in the evening for psychosis. Start date 4/11/24. On 5/8/24 the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) provided the Drug Regimen Review reports for February 2024, March 2024, and April 2024. The February 2024 report revealed the following, Below are the residents that were reviewed this period that, assuming the record was complete, accurate, and without error, were reviewed and no new comments were made. Upon review of the report, Resident #135 was not listed as a resident reviewed. The Drug Regimen Review report for February 2024 revealed no recommendations for Resident #135 by the Pharmacy Consultant. Documentation of the pharmacy recommendations from the Pharmacy Consultant were requested from the Director of Nursing (DON). A review of Resident #135's progress notes, dated 2/7/24 to 3/8/24, revealed no documentation regarding pharmacy consultant recommendations. A review of miscellaneous documents in the medical record revealed documentation from the pharmacy with dates of 7/16/21, 8/26/21, 1/31/22, and 1/27/22. An interview on 5/09/24 at 9:38 a.m. with the NHA revealed Resident #135 was not reviewed by the Pharmacy Consultant in February 2024. The NHA confirmed there is no documentation available that Resident #135 was reviewed by the Pharmacy Consultant in February 2024. The NHA provided a second copy of the Drug Regimen Review report dated February 2024 that revealed in writing [Resident #135] - not reviewed in 2024. The NHA revealed the Pharmacy Consultant comes once or twice a month for reconciliation. He stated the expectation of the pharmacy reviews is they should be completed quarterly. An interview around 10:00 a.m. with the NHA revealed that he spoke with the Pharmacy Consultant who stated there was a glitch in their [Vendor's] system in February 2024. An interview on 5/09/24 at 11:11 a.m. with the Pharmacy Consultant revealed he started with the facility in December 2023. He stated he goes to the facility once or twice a week. He stated the regulation requires that he reviews the residents one time a month or every 30 days. He stated he attends the weekly Gradual Dose Reduction (GDR) meetings. He stated he reviews one building a week and does a, Clean up at the end of the month. The Pharmacy Consultant stated he has a spreadsheet he works from. He stated he compares the [Vendor name] software the facility uses to their [Vendor name] software. He stated at the end of the month he reviews all residents and, Dives in deeper for certain residents depending on the situation. The Pharmacy Consultant stated at the end of the month he participates in an exit meeting which consists of the Pharmacy Consultant, DON or the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). He stated there was a glitch in the system in February 2024. He stated the system the Pharmacy Consultant uses, [Vendor name], is the company's own system. The Pharmacy Consultant stated the company was doing beta testing, which caused the glitch, and the issue has been fixed. He stated he did review Resident #135 and has documentation of his recommendations from February 2024. The Pharmacy Consultant stated he sent the DON a screenshot of his recommendations. On 5/9/24, the NHA provided a third copy of the Drug Regimen Report, dated February 2024, that revealed Resident #135 on the report. Along with the third report, the NHA provided a copy of an email sent on 5/9/24 at 1:06 p.m. from the Pharmacy Consultant. The NHA stated the report in the email is the Pharmacy Consultant's recommendations from February 2024 for Resident #135. The notes from the Pharmacy Consultant were the following, .Discuss and research multiple Quetiapine orders affecting overall numbers and ratings 02/2024. Review of Resident #135's medical record to include progress notes, care plan, miscellaneous documents, and Clinical Physician Orders, revealed no evidence of the attending physician or the DON reviewing the Pharmacy Consultant's recommendations. Review of the [Vendor name] Pharmacy Services Agreement with the facility revealed the following: Responsibilities of [Vendor name]: e. Maintain drug profiles on each resident in the Facility in compliance with applicable requirements of local, state and federal laws, rules, and regulations; f. Provide drug information and consultation to the Facility's licensed professional staff regarding Pharmacy Products ordered; .
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0925 (Tag F0925)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** During an observations made on 05/06/204, 05/7/2024 and 05/08/2024 at 12:30 p.m., and 3:00 p.m., revealed a roach on the bathroo...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** During an observations made on 05/06/204, 05/7/2024 and 05/08/2024 at 12:30 p.m., and 3:00 p.m., revealed a roach on the bathroom floor for three days. During an interview on 05/ 09/2024 at 12:57 p.m., with the Maintenance Director. He reviewed the photographic evidence and stated he was not made aware of the pest on the locked unit. (Photographic evidence obtained). Review of the facility's Pest Control Policy and Procedure undated revealed the following: Policy: It is the policy of this facility to maintain pest control program at all times. An agreement with a licensed pest control company must be maintained. The goal of this program is to prevent any pests from entering the facility and to report any problems that are observed. Program: Staff are to report any pest control issues that they might have observed and report it to Maintence immediately. Pest sightings are to be reported to Maintence by using the [Work Order] work order system. On the [Work Order System] work order system there is a category for reporting pest control issues. When the work order is filled out maintenance will put the work order in the pest control sighting log book. This book is kept in the maintenance office and is monitored by the maintenance Director. When the pest control company comes in they will get the book and address any work orders for pest control. The service report from the pest control company should have the work order number that addressed the issue on it. Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain an effect pest control program for two units out of four units in the facility. Findings included: 1. An observation was conducted on 05/06/24 at 10:39 AM. The shower in room [ROOM NUMBER] was had a spider web with a live spider in it. An observation was conducted on 05/06/24 at 10:47 AM of room [ROOM NUMBER] and 110's shared shower. Five small live roaches were crawling on the shower floor. An interview was conducted on 05/06/24 at 11:49 AM with Staff D, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). She said out of the four residents who share the shower, one of them uses the shower. The other three residents use the shower room down the hall. She went into the shower room and confirmed there were five roaches in the shower and she said, There is a guy who comes and sprays for pests and housekeeping also sprays for the bugs but it seems the more they spray the more roaches come out. Sometimes there will be flying roaches. An observation was conducted on 5/8/24 at 10:33 AM of the shared shower in room [ROOM NUMBER] and 110. There were 5 live, small roaches crawling on the floor and the wall of the shower. An interview was conducted on 5/8/24 at 10:43 a.m. with Staff I, Housekeeping. She was observed cleaning the sink in room [ROOM NUMBER]-B and she said there is a big roach problem at the facility. She pointed to two cylinder shaped black droppings on the counter next to the sink. She said, You see these droppings these are here every morning. She also pointed to the corner of the wall under the sink, there was a pile of dirt and debris coming from the crack in the baseboards. She said she cleans this corner every morning and finds large and small roaches in the room and bathroom. She said, I think the roaches come from the wall and the dirt must come out of the wall when they come out of the wall because it is here every morning and along with the droppings on the sink. She said she has told Maintence about the roaches and she does see a pest control guy who comes and sprays, but he just sprays in the hallway. I have not seen them spray in the rooms. She confirmed there were five small roaches crawling on the floor and the wall of the shower in room [ROOM NUMBER]. She said she cleans the shower twice a week because none of the residents use it. An interview was conducted on 05/09/24 at 10:03 AM with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) he said the pest control company is here almost weekly especially recently. An interview was conducted with the Maintence Director on 05/09/24 at 10:14 AM. He said they could not find the contract for the pest control company, but they come monthly and as needed. He said the facility does not have an infestation problem just the general complaints that the staff report. Review of the pest control work orders for March, April, and May revealed 13 out of 19 total pest work orders revealed roach sightings. 1 out of 19 work orders was a spider sighting. An interview was conducted with the Maintence Director 05/09/24 at 12:55 PM. He reviewed the photographic evidence of the shared shower in room [ROOM NUMBER] and 109, and the shower in room [ROOM NUMBER]. He said he was not aware of the environmental conditions. (Photographic evidence obtained).
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. During an observation made on 05/07/2024 at 12:00 p.m., paint was missing off the walls in rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]. In room [ROO...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. During an observation made on 05/07/2024 at 12:00 p.m., paint was missing off the walls in rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]. In room [ROOM NUMBER], one closet door was observed off the door track. room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed showing one missing call light, rusted light fixtures over the residents' beds, and cracks in the walls. During an interview conducted on 05/09/2024 at 12:57 p.m., with the Maintenance Director. He reviewed photographic evidence and stated he did not have a process in place to identify environmental issues. 3. An observation was conducted on 05/06/24 at 10:39 AM. The shower in room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed to have a rust-colored substance along the crack of the bathroom wall and the shower tile. The corner of the shower was not intact with a black substance noted. (Photographic evidence obtained) An observation was conducted on 05/06/24 at 10:47 AM of room [ROOM NUMBER] and 110's shared shower. There were several rust-colored areas around the drain and the shower floor. There was bubbled, peeling, paint from the floor and up the wall with areas of a black substance and chipped tile. room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bathroom was observed to have missing tile behind the toilet. room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bathroom was observed to have peeling paint on the wall. (Photographic evidence obtained). An observation was conducted on 5/8/24 at 10:33 a.m. of the shared shower in room [ROOM NUMBER] and 110. There were several rust-colored areas around the drain and the shower floor. There was bubbled, peeling, paint from the floor and up the wall with areas of a black substance and chipped tile. room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bathroom was observed to have missing tile behind the toilet. room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bathroom was observed to have peeling paint on the wall. An interview was conducted with the Maintence Director on 05/09/24 at 12:55 PM. He reviewed the photographic evidence of the shared shower in room [ROOM NUMBER] and 109, room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bathroom, room [ROOM NUMBER] bathroom, and the bathroom in 118. He said he was not aware of the environmental conditions. Review of the facility's Physical Environment policy, effective January 1, 2020, revealed the following: Policy: A safe, clean, comfortable, and home-life environment is provided for each resident/patient . Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the environment was maintained in a clean and comfortable manner in two hallways (100 hall and 200 hall) out of four hallways in the facility serving as resident living areas. Findings included: 1. Observations during the initial tour of the 200 hall, a secured unit, on 05/06/24 from 10:26 AM to 11:47 AM revealed the following: -room [ROOM NUMBER], A privacy curtain and a toilet bowel noted to be soiled with a brown substance. The bedroom floor was noted to be dirty and the bathroom had missing tile. (Photographic evidence obtained) -room [ROOM NUMBER], The bathroom ceiling was noted to be peeling. (Photographic evidence obtained) -room [ROOM NUMBER], The bathroom ceiling was noted with peeling paint with area noted with black/brown bio-growth. (Photographic evidence obtained) -room [ROOM NUMBER], Directly outside the door was noted to have peeling paint, and two nails were noted to be protruding out of the door frame on the left and right side of the door. The wall by the window was noted to be peeling with black/brown bio-growth in the seams. The ceiling directly above the wall vent was noted with a black substance. (Photographic evidence obtained) -room [ROOM NUMBER], Broken tile was noted in the bathroom, and the toilet was noted to be soiled with a brown substance. (Photographic evidence obtained) -200 hall lounge area, Tile was missing in two areas of the lower room. (Photographic evidence obtained) During an interview on 05/09/24 at 01:00 PM with the Maintenance Director, he reported he was not aware of the environmental concerns and there is no policy in place to address the environment.
CONCERN (F) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0725 (Tag F0725)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. An interview was conducted on 05/06/24 at 11:49 AM with Staff D, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) and Staff C CNA. They both...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. An interview was conducted on 05/06/24 at 11:49 AM with Staff D, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) and Staff C CNA. They both said they had 14 residents today and normally they have around 12-14 residents. They said it is hard to get all the work done that needs to get done. Staff C, CNA said, I couldn't get it all done without Staff D, CNA we are a good team. Staff D, CNA said It is hard to get everything completed with 14 residents you have to do one thing with one resident then go straight the next resident and do what you need to and then go to the next and the next. I have one resident who has shakes today and she normally doesn't need assistance, but her shakes are so bad that she needs assistance. I told her not to do anything by herself. The nurse knows about the shakes and the doctor came and saw her today already but she needs close monitoring. She also said she had another resident who had Parkinson's and he is very unsteady as well and needs to keep a close on eye on and It can be hard. An interview was conducted with Staff B, CNA on 5/6/24 at 3:30 pm. She said she just worked the 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. shift. She was observed charting and the resident care areas on the screen were red. She said it was red because she didn't have time to chart today. She said she still had one more person to change their brief before she leaves for the day. She said she had 15 residents today and the shift before hers didn't have time to get residents up out of bed so that set her behind on her work and then she had two residents who were not having a good day so she had to spend extra time with them. An interview was conducted on 05/07/24 at 12:31 PM with Staff, CNA. She said today she has 10 residents but normally she has 14 or 15 residents, and it is really hard to manage the care they need with that many residents. We just have to go from one resident to the next. There is no time to ask your coworkers if they need help because we are so busy trying to get everything done. There will be lights going off and if we take too long to answer the lights then that's another issue. There are times when I stay late to catch up on my charting because I did not have any time during my shift to chart because there is so much to get done. Then I will go come and think about how nails didn't get trimmed, people didn't get shaved, and others didn't get their routine they normally like. My heart is in this job that is why I stay late and work really hard. We all do the best we can and every day we prepare ourselves to only have four or five CNA's for 67 or 68 residents. Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff to provide nursing and related services in a timely manner in relation to call lights for three residents (#173, #57, and #117) out of 53 sampled residents with the potential to affect all residents in the faciltiy. Findings included: 1. A grievance was filed on 01/17/24 related to call lights not being answered in a timely manner. The resolution showed staff were educated on answering call lights promptly. The In-Service Sign in Sheet, dated 01/19/24, for the 11-7 shift showed a topic of answering call lights in a timely fashion. A grievance was filed on 03/18/24 related to call lights not being answered. The resolution showed the resident was offered a facility change, but the family declined. A call light audit was completed through maintenance. A work history report showed a test was conducted on the nurse call system once a month from 05/31/23 to 04/30/24 and was completed by maintenance. A grievance was filed on 04/04/24 by the Resident Council related to call lights not being answered. Staff answer the call light, say they will be back, and don't come back for a while. The resolution showed staff were educated regarding call lights in a CNA (certified nursing assistant) meeting on 04/03/24 and call light audits were completed. The Call Light Response Time Audit was completed in six different rooms on 2 out of the 4 wings on 04/05/24 and 04/08/24. On 05/08/24 at 3:47 p.m., the Social Services Director (SSD) stated when conducting audits related to call lights, she would go in a room, turn on the call light, wait in the room without staff seeing her, document the time she initiated the call light button, and document the time the call light was answered. She reported she was still getting complaints about call lights not being answered timely. Resident Council Minutes, dated 12/07/23 to 05/02/24, showed no concerns related to call lights. On 05/09/24 at 9:33 a.m., Resident #173, Resident Council President, stated the residents were still complaining that it takes 30-45 minutes to answer the call lights during the Resident Council Meetings and there had been no improvement. A review of the admission Record for Resident #173 showed she was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a primary diagnosis of urinary tract infection. Section C- Cognitive Patterns of the Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], showed Resident #173 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 out of 15 indicating cognitively intact. On 05/06/24 at 12:42 p.m., Resident #57 reported she had to wait a long time to get her call light answered. She had to wait at least 40 minutes when she had to go to the restroom. She stated part of her colon was cut so she had to go the restroom often after meals. Resident #57 stated staff repeatedly tells her they have other residents when they are taking a while to answer the call light. She had to use a lift to stand to go to the restroom and she thinks that's where the problem comes in. A review of the admission Record for Resident #57 showed she was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a primary diagnosis of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Section C- Cognitive Patterns of the MDS, dated [DATE], showed Resident #57 had a BIMS score of 15 out of 15 indicating cognitively intact. On 05/06/24 at 10:48 a.m., Resident #117 reported she had not received her morning medications and they were late. She stated she pressed the call light to get pain medication because she was in constant pain on her backside, and it always takes staff a while to answer. It takes them at least 30 minutes. A review of the admission Record for Resident #117 showed she was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a primary diagnosis of pressure ulcer to the sacral region, stage 4. Section C- Cognitive Patterns of the MDS dated [DATE] showed Resident #117 had a BIMS score of 15 out of 15 indicating cognitively intact. On 05/07/24 at 3:18 p.m., three call lights were observed going off simultaneously in rooms [ROOM NUMBER]. The resident in room [ROOM NUMBER] stated her call light had been on for 1/2 an hour. At 3:27 p.m., two staff members walked by the call lights and went to the closet at the end of the hallway. They grabbed something from the closet and walked past the rooms a second time without answering the call lights. The resident in room [ROOM NUMBER] could be heard repeatedly saying, Can you get me some water please in 408A. The Unit Secretary/Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) entered room [ROOM NUMBER] at 3:29 p.m. She then went to room [ROOM NUMBER]. At 3:32 p.m., the Unit Secretary/CNA then went to room [ROOM NUMBER]. The resident in room [ROOM NUMBER] reported her bottom hurts and she needed to be changed. On 05/07/24 at 3:45 p.m., Staff N, CNA, stated sometimes it's hard to answer the call lights timely. She had 14 residents that needed total assistance. You must check on the residents every two hours and she can't do that. Staff N, CNA, stated she can't get to all her residents that needed showers, but she tries to. Trying to do showers with 14 dependent residents and 3 to 4 call lights going off was a lot because there was no teamwork. If you go on break, and a call light goes off on your set, the call light will be on until you come back from break. She complains to Administration but nothing changes. On 05/07/24 at 3:50 p.m., Staff P, CNA, stated they are short-staffed sometimes. He was scheduled to work 2:00 p.m.-11:00 p.m., but usually must stay until 12:00 p.m. because his work was not done. He's had at least 18 residents assigned at one time or another on one shift. On 05/09/24 at 11:18 a.m., the Staffing Coordinator reported staffing was a back-and-forth thing. When they have call offs, she would pull the unit secretary to the floor to make sure they make their hours, or she would ask someone to stay over or come in earlier. The Unit Secretaries/CNA would stay over during the 3-11 shift but not overnight. They use agency, but not as much. Staffing had been better lately. Staff always complain that they are short-staffed and will ask for another aide. She picks up on the floor as well. The Staffing Coordinator confirmed she had seen call lights going off and because the assigned aide was on break, staff would say they were not their residents, and the lights would go off until the assigned aide was back from break. This had been brought up in town hall. On 05/09/24 at 12:42 p.m., the Administrator reported call lights should be answered in a timely manner and anyone can answer the call light. This had been talked about in the townhall meetings. The policy provided by the facility Nursing Services- Staffing Policy with an effective date of 09/28/21 revealed the following: Purpose Statement It is the organization's intent to ensure nursing staff support the well-being of all residents. Policy Statement The facility will have sufficient nursing staff with appropriate competencies and skill sets to provide nursing and related services and to maintain the highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being of each resident as required by federal and state law. Procedure: Staffing will be allocated and adjusted to deliver quality care considering the number, characteristics, and acuity of the facility's
Sept 2023 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to submit a timely report to the required state agencies ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to submit a timely report to the required state agencies for 1 resident (#6) out of 3 residents reviewed. The facility failed to submit a timely report to the required state agencies for misappropriation of Resident #6's missing narcotic medication. Findings included: Review of admission records revealed Resident #6 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include dementia, sacral fracture, and osteoarthritis of the hand. Review of a physician order dated 05/15/23 revealed Morphine Sulfate 100mg/5ml give 0.25 ml by mouth every 4 hours as needed for pain/dyspnea. Review of Resident #6's Medication Administration Record (MAR) and the Controlled Substance Use log for Morphine Sulfate100 mg/5ml for August 2023 and September 2023 revealed the following two entries were medications signed out as given to the resident but not recorded on the log: 1. 09/03/23 at 6:20 p.m. Morphine Sulfate 0.25 milliliters for pain level 3 of 10 was administered and was effective. 2. 08/13/23 at 09:16 a.m. resident received Morphine Sulfate 0.25 milliliters for pain level 3. Review of resident #6 Controlled Substance Use log for Morphine Sulfate100 mg/5ml revealed entries showing doses of liquid Morphine missing with no corresponding documentation of the resident receiving the medication: 9/02/23 at 0900 revealed 14 ml available, 0.25 ml removed and 13.75 ml remaining. 09/02/23 at 1300 13.75ml available, 0.25 ml removed and 13.5 ml remaining. 09/02/23 at 1700 13.25ml available, is written, 0.25 ml removed. Review of the facility's Abuse log did not reveal an immediate report for missing Morphine Sulfate solution was filed. During an interview with the Nursing Home Administrator on 09/26/2023 at 1:52 p.m., she said education regarding controlled medications started on 09/15/23. Resident #6's Controlled Drug Use Record for Morphine Solution was reviewed, she said the DON notified her on 09/25/23 of controlled substance documentation issues and she was not aware of Resident #6's, 3.25 ml Morphine Solution discrepancy. The NHA said the discrepancy should have been reported, we should have known. If I were the assigned nurse, I would not have taken the key, it is the supervisor's responsibility to notify administration. I will notify the State Agency for Adult Protective Services, the police, and our pharmacy consultants about the discrepancy. The DON should have let me know. Review of the facility's Elder Justice Act and Reporting Suspected Crimes Against Residents Policy and Procedure Revised on 8/2022 revealed Purpose To facilitate efforts to prevent, detect, treat, intervene in, and prosecute elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation and to protect elders with diminished capacity while maximizing their autonomy and their right to be free of abuse, neglect, and exploitation. Policy It is Aventura policy to empower and enable any and all owners, directors, officers, clinical staff, employees, independent contractors, consultants, and others (Associates) working for the Facility to make reports to the relevant authorities pursuant to the provision of the Elder Justice Act (EJA) and CMS regulations. The Facility will not retaliate against any Associate in response to lawful acts done by the Associate pursuant to the EJA. Procedure I. Duty to Report A. All Associates have duty to report any reasonable suspicion of a crime (as defined by the law of applicable political subdivision) against any individual who is a resident of, or is receiving care from, the Facility pursuant to Section 1150B of the Social Security Act. (The Elder Justice Act). B. the (sic) Facility has a duty to report all alleged violations of abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, as well as the results of all investigations of alleged violations pursuant to 42 CFR 483.12(c). .III. What must be reported? Crimes must be reported. Crimes include, but are not limited to, .C. Neglect a. Neglect is the failure of the facility, its employees, or service providers to provide goods and services to a resident that are necessary to maintain the health or safety of a resident and to avoid physical harm, pain, mental anguish, or emotional distress; . .F Misappropriation of Resident Property a. Misappropriation of resident property means the deliberate misplacement, exploitation, or wrongful, temporary, or permanent use of a resident's belongings or money without the resident's consent. A. Reasonable Suspicion of a Crime a. Pursuant to the EJA, Associates must report reasonable suspicions of a crime to the State Survey Agency and at least one local law enforcement entity. B. Alleged Violations of abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, as well as the results of all investigations of alleged violations- a. Pursuant to 42 CFR 483.12(c), Associated must report to the Administrator or other designated Facility representatives (the Facility) and the Facility must report to alleged violations to (1) The state Survey Agency (2) The adult protective services if applicable state law provides for jurisdiction in long-term care facilities, and (3) at least one local law enforcement entity . .V. When to Report? A. Reasonable Suspicion under the EJA a. If there are events that cause suspicion that the resident may suffer, or has suffered from, a serious bodily injury, then the Associate (sic) must report the suspicion immediately, but not later than 2 hours after forming the suspicion. b. If the events that cause the suspicion do not result in serious bodily injury, the Associate must report the suspicion no later than 24 hours after forming the suspicion. B. Alleged Violations under 42 CFR 483.12 (c) a. Immediately (for alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property) but not later than i. 2 hours-if the alleged violation involves abuse or results in serious bodily injury ii. 24 hours-if the alleged violation does not involve abuse and does not result in serious bodily injury .
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and review of facility and resident's record, the facility did not ensure supervision was provided to preven...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and review of facility and resident's record, the facility did not ensure supervision was provided to prevent a fall for 1 of 3 residents reviewed, Resident #3 and the facility did not ensure documentation and follow up were completed after the fall. Findings included: Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include other intervertebral disc degeneration Lumbar, Unspecified dementia, history of falling, primary insomnia, major depressive disorder, and mood disorder. Review of an annual MDS (Minimum Data Set) for Resident #3 dated 08/05/23 showed Resident #3 had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 3, indicating severe impairment. Section G showed Resident #3 required extensive assistance with two plus person's physical assistance for transfers. The resident required extensive assistance with one-person physical assistance for locomotion on and off unit. A care plan for Resident #3 initiated on 04/13/23 showed, the staff have identified that I am at risk for falls because of these risk factors, dementia, gait/balance problems, incontinence, unaware of safety needs, use of anti-psychotic medication, use of pain medication and history of falls. Interventions included, during hurricane/disaster evacuation [Resident #3] will have special transportation versus regular bus with lifts. I should have sneakers, shoes, slippers with rubber soles or non-slip socks when I'm out of bed. Review of a document titled, [name of facility] incident list dated June 1, 2023, to September 25, 2023, showed Resident #3 had a fall while off property on 08/28/23. Review of Resident #3's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) showed there were no progress notes, assessments or evaluations documented related to a fall on 8/28/23. The record did not show that Resident #3's physician and family were notified of the fall. On 09/26/23 at 12:57 p.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #3. The resident was observed in her room, lying in bed. She could not remember any details related to the fall. The resident's side of the bed was noted with fall mats. The resident said, these are to keep me safe in case I fall. On 09/26/23 at 1:18 p.m. an interview was conducted with Staff J, Registered Nurse (RN). She stated she worked with the resident the day she fell. She said, I was at the evacuation site when Staff S, LPN/ Unit Manager brought her inside the building. He said she slid between two seats in the bus and was wedged in between and that he had to pull her out. She stated Resident #3 was injured. She stated the Resident suffered bruising on the right side of her forehead and a skin tear on her right temporal area and skin tears to both arms. Staff J stated the resident's left arm was wrapped with a small dressing. She stated she applied steri strips, but no other treatment was given. Staff J said, I saw the resident during the 3 days. I gave her medications. It was my fault I did not document. My Unit Manager (Staff S) had stated he would submit a post fall assessment. I did not do any documentation. It was my fault I should have submitted a post fall assessment. I did not do any skin checks and I did not notify the physician. I thought my Unit Manager (Staff S) would have done it. Staff J stated Resident #3 was confused and unable to verbalize the events of her fall on the bus. On 09/26/23 at 11:53 a.m., an interview was conducted with Staff E, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). She stated she was at the church (evacuation site) helping to check people in as they got off the bus. She stated she observed Staff S, Unit Manager pushing Resident #3 in her wheelchair. She stated Staff S said, the resident had an accident on the bus. She stated she noticed the resident had blood on her left temple. Staff E stated if a resident had a fall with an injury to the head, they notify the doctor, they do neuro (neurological) checks, and if the resident complained of head pain, they would send them out. Staff E, LPN confirmed she saw the resident's arms and it looked like she had a skin tear. She stated she was not assigned to the resident but if she was, she would have notified the family and physician, follow fall process, assess for pain, follow treatment orders and document. On 09/26/23 at 1:10 p.m. an interview was conducted with Staff I, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). She stated she was working the day the resident fell. She said the resident fell while on the bus. She stated the resident slid between two seats and she could not get up. The resident had some injury to her face and bruises on her hand. She said, She was complaining of pain when you moved her. She had a sore bump on the right side of her head. The nurse (Staff J) put something on her head. On 09/26/23 at 2:27 pm. an interview was conducted with Staff F, CNA. She said, I was at the church, and we were unloading the bus when an agency CNA who was riding in the bus came to me and said the resident was pinned in the seat. I was outside of the bus. I got on the bus and saw [Resident #3] between the seats, her face was down, and her knees were touching the floor. She was squeezed into the seats. I was unable to move her. I ran to get Staff S, Unit Manager. Staff S was able to pull the resident out after several attempts. Staff F stated at the time she did not notice any bruising. Staff F stated the incident was chaotic. She stated she noticed Resident #3's bruising when they returned to the facility three days later. On 09/26/23 at 12 p.m. an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Staff E, LPN Weekend Supervisor. Staff E stated after they returned to the facility, they received notification that there was a note regarding some type of injury that occurred on the bus. She said, We talked about it on 09/12/23 at the morning meeting. The administration reviewed the incident. At this point, nothing was documented. I went back and saw the resident; she had a yellow bruise and scab on the left side of her face. The DON said, I notified the doctor that during the transfer, there had been some type of incident and the resident had suffered bruising to her temple area. I did not document but, I started the incident report. The doctor had no new orders because it had been two weeks so there was not much we could do. The DON stated the issue was there was no documentation at the time, and they could not say exactly what happened. The DON stated the expectation would be to notify the supervisor of any injuries that occur to a resident. On 09/26/23 at 9:45 a.m. an interview was conducted with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA). She confirmed Resident #3 suffered a fall with injuries on the bus and there was no documentation. She stated she became aware the resident had fallen while getting off the bus or while on the bus during the evacuation transport. She stated The Unit Manager (Staff S) was with the resident. The NHA said, I would have expected him to document what happened per facility protocol. The resident suffered some scabbing and bruising. The nurse should have assessed, notified the physician and family. Review of an undated facility document titled, Fall Event Protocol, showed an expectation to notify supervisor of all falls immediately. Notify DON/administrator of all falls with injury immediately. Complete (SNF) skilled nursing facility metrics enter as much detail as possible. In point click care, complete change in condition form, fall risk assessment, pain assessment, skin assessment and the progress note showing what happened and what the immediate intervention was.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure Narcotic Cards/ Bottles Reconciliation logs ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure Narcotic Cards/ Bottles Reconciliation logs were completed on 4 out 4 resident wings (A, B, C, D) and failed to document controlled narcotics in sufficient detail to enable an accurate reconciliation for 3 residents (Resident #5, Resident #6, and Resident# 11) of 3 residents reviewed on Wing B, for 2 of 2 medication carts located on Wing B. Findings included: 1. Review of the facility's Wing D Narcotic Cards\ Bottles Reconciliation log revealed between 09/07/23 and 09/25/23, there were eight shifts missing oncoming and off going nurse signatures. Review the facility's Wing B Narcotic Cards\ Bottles Reconciliation log revealed between 09/02/23 and 09/25/23, there were 29 shifts missing oncoming and off going nurse signatures. Review the facility's Wing C Narcotic Cards\ Bottles Reconciliation log revealed between 09/01/23 and 09/25/23, there were 21 shifts missing oncoming and off going nurse signatures. Review the facility's Wing A Narcotic Cards\ Bottles Reconciliation log revealed between 09/05/23 and 09/25/23, 41 shifts were missing oncoming and off going nurse signatures. On 09/25/23 at 3:22 p.m., the DON said she was not aware of any missing controlled medications and the facility has planned to start Narcotic Controls education with the nursing staff. The DON said the expectation was for staff to sign the Narcotic Cards/ Bottles Reconciliation log immediately after narcotics are counted at the beginning and end of shift. The Narcotic Cards/ bottles Reconciliation log columns should not be blank. The DON said the Control Drug Use Record should be signed at the time the medication is removed. Review of a document provided by the facility titled Narcotic Controls, undated, revealed the following directions: At the change of shift, the off-going and on-coming nurse must count all narcotics and sheets and record both on the controlled medication shift change log. Any time a new nurse takes the keys to a medication cart, the off-going and on-coming nurses must count all narcotics and sheets. The controlled medication shift change log should be completed in its entirety to include the data and time of the narcotic count. Review of the facility policy titled Medication, Administration of Medication, effective date, 04/01/22 revealed, Medications shall be administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. The scope applies to all staff authorized to administer medications to residents instructs staff to administer medications in accordance with orders, including any required time frame. Review of the facility's Drug Diversion: Prevention, Identification, Reporting and Response policy, revised 09/2022 revealed: Purpose: the drug diversion prevention, detection and response program provides A systematic coordinated and continuous approach to the prevention, recognition, and reporting of drug diversion to ensure safe medication practices, safe employee behavior and to prevent patient harm Definitions: drug diversion-intentionally and without proper authorization, using or taking possession of a prescription medication or inhalation anesthetic agent from [insert health facility name] through the through use of prescription, ordering or dispensing system examples of drug diversion include but not limited to medication theft, using, or taking possession of a medication without valid order. Policy statement: 4) suspicion of drug diversion may arise from a variety of circumstances including but not limited to the following . discrepancies with controlled substance count . Procedures: 1) suspicion of diversion warrants an immediate thorough investigation an audit that reveals A statistical outlier in a dispensing or wasting of controlled substances require further investigation immediately to determine the error by the staff persons associated with the medication delivery system. 2) Narcotic and controlled drug security, accurate inventory counts, and the timely and accurate completion of narcotic registers shall be maintained at all time period any unresolved inventory or record variances will be reported to the supervisor/Don or designated leader immediately, who will undertake the appropriate reporting and investigations in a timely manner. A) if account discrepancy occurs in the change of shift verification and investigation is made: 1. Immediately notified the supervisor /DON/designee to assist in count reconciliation. 2. If the count cannot be reconciled anyone associated with the administration or assistance of medication may not leave the facility. Only the administrator or the administrator designee in charge may dismiss the staff persons involved in the control medication count if a discrepancy occurs. An interview with Staff B, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) and review of the current Controlled Substance Record was conducted on 09/25/23 at 09:45 a.m. The Controlled Substance Record is used to document controlled substances available on the wing for residents. Staff B LPN said narcotic counts are completed and documented at the beginning and end of each shift and the supervisor notified of narcotic count discrepancies. Staff B LPN reviewed the current Narcotic Cards/ Bottles Reconciliation log and verified several dates without the oncoming and off going nurses' signatures. An interview and review of the current Controlled Substance Record was conducted on 09/25/23 at 10:00 a.m. with Staff A LPN, Unit Manager (UM) who said at end of each shift the oncoming and off going nurses count the number of narcotics in the medication carts and are expected to sign the Narcotic Cards/ Bottles Reconciliation log immediately. Staff A, LPN UM, said unit managers audit the Narcotic Cards/ Bottles Reconciliation logs to ensure compliance with the policy. She said no education regarding Controlled Substance Record is provided during orientation, nurses know what to do. Staff A, LPN UM validated missing signatures on the oncoming and off going Narcotic Cards/ Bottles Reconciliation log. An interview and review of the current Controlled Substance Record was conducted on 09/25/23 at 10:30 a.m. with Staff D, LPN; she said narcotic counts are completed at the end of each shift, and count discrepancies are reported to the supervisor immediately. When narcotic medications are wasted (removed and not administered) two nurses witness, indicate the reason, and document on the Controlled Substance Record. Staff D, LPN said no education about narcotic counts has been provided. Staff D, LPN confirmed missing nurse signatures on the Narcotic Cards/ Bottles Reconciliation log. An interview and review of the current Controlled Substance Record was conducted on 09/25/23 at 11:00 a.m. with Staff C, LPN. During a review of the Controlled Substance Record, Staff C, LPN confirmed her initials beside a medication indicated as wasted. She was unsure why the medication was wasted. During an observation of number of pills on hand for one medication, Staff C LPN verified the number of narcotic pills on the Controlled Substance Record and the number of actual pills remaining did not match. Staff C, LPN said she removed, administered, and plans to document the removal on Controlled Substance Record later. Staff C LPN confirmed there were missing nurse signatures on the Narcotic Cards/ Bottles Reconciliation log. 2. Review of Resident #5 records revealed, the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include metabolic encephalopathy, dementia, mood disorder, and anxiety disorder. Review of Resident #5's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], Section C-Cognitive Patterns revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three out of 15, severe cognitive impairment. Section C- Signs and Symptoms of Delirium documented behavior present and fluctuates. Review of Resident #5's physician orders revealed an order for Lorazepam 0.5 mg tablet every 8 hours for anxiety. Review of Resident #5's Controlled Drug Use Record for Lorazepam 0.5mg revealed on 08/26/23 at 10:00a.m., 72 pills available, 1 pill removed, 71 remaining with the word waste handwritten in the right margin. Staff initials and the reason for the waste was not documented. Review of the admission record for Resident #11 revealed an admission date of 12/09/22, with diagnoses to include Dementia and Anxiety disorder. Review of Resident #11's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of two out of 15, indicating severe impairment and signs and symptoms of delirium documented the behavior was present and fluctuated. Review of Resident #11's physician orders dated 02/08/23 showed Xanax tablet 0.25 mg, give 1 tablet by mouth three times a day for anxiety, hold for sedation. Review of Resident #11's MAR for 09/01/23 to 09/25/23 showed the resident received Xanax 0.25mg tablet at 9:00 a.m., 2:00 p.m., and 9:00 p.m. daily. Review or Resident #11's MAR on 09/21/23 showed Xanax 0.25mg was signed out on the MAR at 2:00 p.m., the Controlled Substance Record did not document this removal. Resident #11's MAR dated 09/22/23 showed Xanax 0.25mg was signed out at 9:00 p.m., the Controlled Substance Record did not document this removal. An observation was conducted on 09/26/23 at 1:23 p.m. of Resident #11's Control Substance Record and the number of Xanax 0.25 mg tablets on hand, found the count on the Control Substance Record and the number of pills available matched. Review of admission records revealed Resident #6 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include dementia, sacral fracture, and osteoarthritis of the hand. Review of a physician order dated 05/15/23 revealed Morphine Sulfate 100mg/5ml give 0.25 ml by mouth every 4 hours as needed for pain/dyspnea. Review of Resident #6's Medication Administration Record (MAR) and the Controlled Substance Use log for Morphine Sulfate100 mg/5ml for August 2023 and September 2023 revealed the following two entries were medications signed out as given to the resident but not recorded on the log: 1. 09/03/23 at 6:20 p.m. Morphine Sulfate 0.25 milliliters for pain level 3 of 10 was administered and was effective. 2. 08/13/23 at 09:16 a.m. resident received Morphine Sulfate 0.25 milliliters for pain level 3. Review of resident #6 Controlled Substance Use log for Morphine Sulfate100 mg/5ml revealed entries showing doses of liquid Morphine missing with no corresponding documentation of the resident receiving the medication: 9/02/23 at 0900 revealed 14 ml available, 0.25 ml removed and 13.75 ml remaining. 09/02/23 at 1300 13.75ml available, 0.25 ml removed and 13.5 ml remaining. 09/02/23 at 1700 13.25ml available, is written, 0.25 ml removed. 09/02/23, an untimed entry, revealed Count is off liquid line is at 10 mL, 10 ml amount remaining. Observation of the Morphine Sulfate bottle for Resident #6 revealed the volume of a pink colored solution was at the 10 mL line. (Photographic evidence obtained) Review of the facility's Abuse log did not reveal an immediate report for missing Morphine Sulfate solution was filed. On 09/25/23 at 4:00 p.m. a tour was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON), to observe discontinued controlled substance storage. An unlocked two drawer file cabinet was observed in the DON's office that was completely full, both drawers, with medication cards, medication bottles and medication patches. A number of the medications were reviewed and were narcotics dated between January and September 2023 that needed to return to the pharmacy. The DON confirmed maintenance and housekeeping staff have access to the office. She said a count of the discontinued medications is unavailable, she said the previous DON stored the medications and she plans to contact the pharmacy liaison to initiate disposal of the medications and confirmed they should not have these medications stored in this location. During an interview with the Nursing Home Administrator on 09/26/2023 at 1:52 p.m., she said education regarding controlled medications started on 09/15/23. Resident #6's Controlled Drug Use Record for Morphine Solution was reviewed, she said the DON notified her on 09/25/23 of controlled substance documentation issues and she was not aware of Resident #6's, 3.25 ml Morphine Solution discrepancy. The NHA said the discrepancy should have been reported, we should have known. If I were the assigned nurse, I would not have taken the key, it is the supervisor's responsibility to notify administration. I will notify the State Agency for Adult Protective Services, the police, and our pharmacy consultants about the discrepancy. The DON should have let me know. Review of an undated document provided by the facility titled Narcotic Controls directed two nurses, including the responsible nurse were to waste controlled substances. The responsible nurse and a witness must visualize the medication to be wasted. Both nurses are required to document on the Controlled Drug Use Record, the medication name, dose, date/time, and reason for the waste. Review of Inservice sign in sheet provided by the facility dated 7/31/23, revealed topics covered Narcs: Following MD orders, wasting Narcs lists nine nursing staff signatures.
Mar 2023 4 deficiencies 2 IJ (2 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL (K) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, facility policies, interviews with facility staff, the resident's physician, Medical Direc...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, facility policies, interviews with facility staff, the resident's physician, Medical Director and family members, the facility failed to provide supervision, education and corrective action in response to incidents in order to prevent falls with injury for 1 resident (#3 ) out of 12 residents sampled for falls. Resident #3 was a long-term nursing care resident who was at risk for falls admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 2/14/23 to an acute care hospital for a fall with injury. On 2/14/23 at 1:45 pm a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) did not follow facility policy and independently used the sit to stand lift for Resident #3. The CNA did not use the appropriate size waist belt during the transfer even after Resident #3, who was assessed to have no cognitive deficits, told the CNA she was using the incorrect sling [waist belt] and that the blue sling was the right one for her not the red one. The CNA continued to use the wrong supportive waist belt and continued to use the sit to stand lift independently which resulted in Resident #3 sustaining a fracture of both bones of the lower leg which required surgical repairment. Resident #3 suffered multiple complications after the surgery, required intensive care and remained hospitalized on [DATE]. The facility was unable to provide documentation of the CNA's training on the lift during orientation. The facility's response to the incident did not address communicating individual resident sling size with staff. Additionally, based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide supervision to prevent multiple falls in the facility's secured unit. A review of the facility's incident list revealed on 2/25/23, 2/26/23 and 2/27/23, 16 falls occurred in the facility. Ten of the 16 falls were unwitnessed and occurred on the secured unit to Residents #8, #9, #19, #11, #12, #13, #14, #15, #16 and #17. The residents who resided on the secured unit due to severe cognitive impairment, were observed unattended in the common area or with limited supervision on 4 of 4 days of the survey, (2/27/23, 2/28/23, 3/01/23 and 3/02/23). This placed them at risk for falls, accidents, and potentially injurious interactions between residents. The actual serious physical harm to Resident #3, likelihood of death to Resident #3, likelihood of serious harm to residents who require mechanical lifts, and very likely risk of serious harm, injury or death from a fall to the facility's residents who are at risk for falls resulted in the finding of on-going immediate jeopardy starting on 2/14/23. Findings included: An interview was conducted on 2/27/23 at 5:31 p.m. with Staff Q, Registered Nurse (RN) who said . [Resident #3] room was in a quad room [four person room, with 2 residents on the left side of an entrance hallway and 2 residents on the right side of an entrance hallway], and I was in one of the rooms taking care of another resident when I heard the resident yelling my leg! my leg! my leg! The CNA [Staff P, CNA] was also screaming [Staff Q, RN]! [Staff Q, RN]! Come help! The resident was in the hallway of the quad, I think [Staff P, CNA] was trying to transfer her to the bathroom, the bathroom is also in the hallway of the quad, I heard her screaming and I came out saw the resident and yelled for help because she was about to hit the floor, she was suspended on the lift. Her left leg was out past the foot plate towards the shift bar of the mechanical lift. The resident was in the strap that goes on like a belt around her waist and the straps were still hooked onto the sit to stand machine. Her two arms were still holding on to the handles of the machine. Both sides of the belt straps were still attached to the sit to stand. Her right leg was on the foot plate. She was slipping off of the belt I don't know if it was tight enough or what but she never touched the ground at this point. I think when [Staff P, CNA] noticed [Resident #3] was going to hit the ground that's when she started to call out. The hallway door was closed, I opened it and called out for help. The CNA was not touching the resident, the CNA was holding onto the remote of the machine with one hand and reaching for the wheelchair with the other and telling me to get the wheelchair to put the resident back into the wheelchair but I told her the resident was too low to put her back into her chair we need to lower her to the ground so I got behind the resident and supported her head and guided her to the floor and the CNA pressed the remote to lower the sit to stand which lowers the resident. We lowered the resident completely to the ground, the CNA removed the lift from the area and that's when I noticed her leg is facing an asymmetrical position and now, she was yelling, and the pain is too much and at that point 911 was called. Because of the pain, we couldn't touch her, and other people came to help, and we put pillows under her head and stayed with her until the paramedics came. I did not see the sit to stand on the resident. I don't think it fell on her, It is a very heavy machine and I don't think if it fell on the resident the CNA would not have been able to pick it up and get the resident back into the position I found her in. It's just my opinion but what I think might have happened was her leg got caught under the foot plate and when she was lifted up it could have broke but like I said that is just my opinion because her break was just above her ankle. But that is why we are supposed to have 2 people when they use the mechanical lifts, one to operate it and one to guide the resident. The CNA did not do that, that day. I don't know why she didn't use two people. She floats around all the units but she has worked with this resident before so she cannot say she doesn't know how she was supposed to be transferred. The CNA told me she was taking the resident to the bathroom. The resident did have a brief on, but she told me she was taking her to the toilet. And usually that's what they do when they take someone to the toilet they transfer them from the wheelchair onto the sit to stand with two people, wheel them into the bathroom, one person pulls down their clothes and the other lowers them onto the toilet while the other person guides them onto the toilet, the resident uses the bathroom, the staff member cleans them up, puts their clothes back up and then they wheel the resident back to the wheelchair and lowers them back onto the wheelchair. The resident never comes off of the lift they are strapped to it the entire time. The resident did not have a strap around her legs to stabilize her legs against the padded cushion of the sit to stand, no A phone interview was conducted on 2/28/23 at 2:11 p.m. with Staff P, CNA, who operated the mechanical lift at the time of Resident #3's fall. She stated I know when I wrote my initial letter about [Resident #3] I was emotional and all over the place. But, when I put her in the machine and we went up she kind of slipped, she did not hit the floor and once the nurse came, she told me to put her on the floor. My first instinct was to not let her touch the floor. I just didn't want her to touch the floor at all. I was holding the resident on her side she was still attached to the machine and then [Staff Q, RN] said let's put her on the floor [Staff Q, RN] said we aren't getting her back onto the wheelchair so I took the controller and lowered her down with the machine as low as it possibly could, unhooked her and we lowered her to the floor. The belt was Velcro'd on pretty decently .I was never told there was different sizes or different colored slings and belts .That day I was just getting off my 30-minute break and [Staff Q, RN] was saying my lights were on and people were waiting for me to take them to the restroom . so I was trying to prioritize who I saw first. I had one person in bed with a call light on, I had one person who was continent and then [Resident #3]. I went and saw the resident who was in their bed, they told me that they had already been helped so I turned off their light and then I heard the two women arguing about who has been waiting longer to go to the bathroom. [Resident #3] had her wipes and her brief in her lap and the other resident had her towels and I knew she was continent and she said she had been holding it for 30 minutes, so I put her on the sit-to-stand lift and took her to the bathroom, I came back out and put her back in her chair. Then I was going to take [Resident #3] to the bathroom and she had already soiled herself and as I was strapping her waist belt on and hooking her onto the machine, just as I did earlier that morning when I got her out of bed, I was talking to her apologizing to her for her wait and telling her I understand her frustration I didn't mean to frustrate her because when I was taking the other lady to the bathroom I could hear her arguing, well not arguing she was just expressing how she felt. But I don't want to use me talking to her as an excuse that I was distracted. As I was strapping the belt on her she was trying to strap it on herself, and she was trying to tell me how other people do it and I told her that I'm not the other CNA's I feel more comfortable doing it my way and then I told her I am going to lift you up and as I was lifting her up I was explaining to her you're wet let me take you to your room to change you and she said she said no I want to get changed right here and then everything happened so fast the resident was slipping, I grabbed her because I didn't want her to hit the floor, I called out for [Staff Q, RN] and [Staff Q, RN] came and that's when we lowered her to the floor. When I got back from break there was no one on the floor, everyone was doing their own thing except [Staff Q, RN] because she was the one who told me about my lights. I did not have another staff member right there with me because everyone was doing their own thing and when I got off break there was no one in the hallways and I just felt this sense of urgency because people needed to use the toilet and people are yelling at each other and I just wanted to help the residents. I did not have two people with me either time I used the sit to stand for both of them. So, the way the room worked is there is a door off the hallway and then there is a bathroom in the corridor of the hallway and 4 rooms that branch off that corridor; I was in the corridor with [Resident #3] and the other lady that is in one of the other rooms in [Resident #3's] hallway. [Staff Q, RN] was in one of the other residents' rooms in that hallway, but she was not right next to me when I used the lift. I had worked there for about 2 months before this happened . Review of Resident #3's admission record revealed she was an [AGE] year-old female resident admitted to the facility on [DATE] from an acute care hospital and discharged on 2/14/23 back to an acute care hospital. Resident #3 had diagnoses that included congestive heart failure, muscle weakness, dysphagia, type 2 diabetes with chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes with diabetic peripheral angiopathy without gangrene, diabetic neuropathy, dementia, pulmonary hypertension, anemia, hyperlipidemia, atherosclerosis, bipolar disorder current episode hypomanic, disorder of bone density and structure of right lower leg, primary osteoarthritis left hip and right knee, sciatica left side, localized edema, chronic kidney disease stage 3A, age related osteoporosis without current pathological fracture, generalized anxiety disorder, nonrheumatic mitral valve insufficiency, atrial fibrillation, other specified disorders of bone density and structure of the left forearm, pharyngoesophageal phase and vitreous degeneration, bilaterally. Review of Resident #3's progress note dated 2/14/23 at 13:45 p.m. revealed Resident had a fall incident. 2/14/23 1:45 PM resident is alert and oriented. Resident was Transferring at time of incident. Pain is noted. Resident sent to emergency room for evaluation. Neuro Checks immediate after. Physician notified Responsible party notified. Guardian Notified. Supervisor notified. Review of Resident #3's quarterly minimal data set (MDS) dated [DATE] section C, cognitive patterns, revealed she had a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 indicating no cognitive deficits. Section G, functional status, revealed Resident #3 had impairment on both sides of her lower extremities. For transfers Resident #3 required extensive assistance with two plus person's physical assist. Toilet use revealed Resident #3 required extensive assistance with two plus person's physical assist. Section H, bowel and bladder, revealed Resident #3 was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of Resident #3's Task List Report revealed a task with an initiated date of 4/21/2022 and a resolved/cancelled date of 2/14/2023. The position(s) indicated the task was for Certified Nursing Aide. to Transfers: Sit to stand lift, Assist x2 [times 2] Everyday. Qshift [every shift]: Day (7-3), Night (11-7), Evening (3-11). Everyday, Qshift Night (7-7). Further review of February's task documentation revealed Staff P, CNA signed off Transfers: Sit to Stand lift, assist X2 on 2/14/23 at 8:59 a.m. Review of Resident #3's care plan initiated on 2/14/2019 revealed a focus of The staff have identified that I am at risk for falls because of these risk factors: weakness, impaired mobility, dementia, History of falls, Incontinence, use of opioid medication, dizziness, DM [diabetes mellitus] with neuropathy; Dx [diagnosis] of Osteoporosis with increased risk for pathological fractures. The goal revealed I will be free of major injury due to a fall through next review. Interventions included but are not limited to, .I will notify staff my need for assistance when I have a bowel or bladder accident. Toilet me upon rising before and after meals at hs [hours of sleep] and when needed . Assist of 2 staff with transfers using sit-to-stand lift. Further care plan review revealed a care plan with an initiated date of 2/14/2019 revealed a focus of I need assistance with activities of daily living because of muscle weakness, pain, dizziness, impaired mobility. The goal revealed I like to maintain a neat and tidy appearance. Staff will assist as needed to help maintain that goal through next review. Interventions included but are not limited to, 2 female staff to be present when caring for resident Assist of 2 staff using sit-to-stand for transfers . Review of Resident #3's Clinical Physician Orders revealed a physician's order with a start date of 2/14/2023 TRANSFER TO ER [EMERGENCY ROOM] HOSPITAL FOE [sic] EVALUATION AND TREATMENT FOR POSSIBLE TIBIA FRACTURE OF THE LEFT LEG. Review of Resident #3's Change in Condition Evaluation with an effective date of 2/14/23 at 1:45 p.m. revealed 1. The change in condition, symptoms or signs I am calling about is/are: Falls 2. This started on: 2/14/23 3. What time of day did this start: Afternoon 1. The resident is in the nursing home for: Long Term Care .4. Is the resident on warfarin/coumadin? No 4c. is the resident on another anticoagulant drug? (e.g. Aspirin, Plavix, Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban, Apixaban) Yes .Skin Evaluation 16. describe skin changes: No changes observed 16n. document location and details: Site: Left lower leg (front) Description: possible tibia fracture . Pain Evaluation 17. Is the resident cognitively able to rate their pain scale? Yes 17a. Rate pain on a scale of 0 to 10 (0=no pain, 4-5=moderate pain, 10=excruciating pain): 10 17b. Is the pain: acute 17c. Pain location: Musculoskeletal pain 17h. Describe musculoskeletal pain: Marked localized bruising, swelling, or pain over joint or bone, with or without recent fall. 17k. Specify exact location of pain: Site: Left lower leg (front) Description: possible tibia fracture .20. Since the change in condition occurred have the symptoms or sign gotten: Worse 21. Things that make the condition or symptoms worse are: activity 22. Things that make the condition of symptoms better are: pain medication .25. Summarize your observations and evaluation: Transfer to ER Hospital for treatment .2. Reported to primary care clinician: [Resident #3's physician] 3. Date and time of clinician notification: 2/14/23 2:08 p.m. 4. Orders obtained from the clinician: Other 4a. Specify other: Transfer to ER Hospital. 5. Name of Family/healthcare agent notified: [Resident #3's family member] 6. Date and time of family notification: 2/14/23 2:06 p.m. A phone interview was conducted on 2/27/23 at 3:13 p.m. with Resident #3's family member, she said It wasn't a fall it was a drop; my mother was in her room she needed a diaper change so she could go to activities this is a routine for her, she required a sit to stand, the CNA wheeled her out of the room into the hallway to change her diaper. I spoke to some of the nurses and that is supposably their new way of doing diaper changes is out in the hall. The CNA gets my mother, wheels her into the hallway, my mother tells her that's the wrong strap to the machine, the CNA said don't worry about it it'll be fine. My mother said no I am worried about it, that's the wrong strap. The CNA said it'll be fine and proceeded to use the strap and lift my mother up using the machine, The strap breaks, my mother falls to the floor, the machine flipped in the air and hit my mother's leg breaking her leg in two places. The ambulance was called this all happened on 2/14/23. She is still in the hospital. She is not doing good because of her other problems which they warned us about an [AGE] year-old women needing surgery is a risk. And every problem they warned us about she had. Her heart stopped twice, they had her on a respirator then they took her off the respirator and now she's on oxygen. Her Blood pressure tanked to 58/30, Her kidney's stops working no urine output at all. Her A-fib [Atrial Fibrillation] starts acting up. I'm in the ICU [intensive care unit] with her on 2/16/23 and she starts bleeding internally. They could not get her into surgery, they had to come to her. A tube went down her throat and into her stomach. Then she's back on the respirator and then taken off the respirator for the second time and back on oxygen. Then she got a tube through her nose down into her stomach for 5 days. Then that came out on Saturday. They did surgery on her leg, there was 2 breaks, she now has rods, screws all inserted in her leg permanently. My mother told me this whole story when I came to the hospital in between all her screaming because of the pain she was in. She told the same story to all the doctors and paramedics. The paramedics found her with the machine on her in the hallway, they even came back to the hospital to see my mom because they said it was such a horrific accident. When the administrator called me about what happened she said I feel so bad your mom was like my mom and I said to her well my mom did not give birth to you so yeah. A CNA is a Certified Nurse assistance that is someone who is trained on how to use these machines. The Sunday prior to the accident my brother was visiting my mom and the CNA said she does not know how to use the machine my brother asked her how is it you don't know how to work the machine and she said I don't know how to work it. My mother said here I will show you. [The NHA] said she was currently in the process training the staff on how to use the machine. I said what do you mean you are training them now. They are supposed to have training on this before they even get hired and she's telling me they are using real life people as practice dummies. The Director told me I understand you are very upset, and I want to assure you that the staff are being trained but they should already be trained she shouldn't just now be training them. Since then, the director called me back saying they have suspended her [Staff P, CNA] pending investigation and then they called me again and have since fired her and reported her licenses. A phone interview was conducted on 3/1/23 at 3:31 p.m. with Resident #3's physician. She stated I am very familiar with [Resident #3] I have worked with her for the last 3 years. I was immediately notified about the fall from someone, I'm not sure who called me, but I was notified that she had fallen, and it was suspected that her leg was broken. She was in a lot of pain, and I believe we had her sent out versus us getting X-rays. The hospitalist [hospital physician] will call me once the resident is done with their hospital stay to give an update, but I have not talked to anyone from the hospital. But middle to end of last week my Nurse Practitioner talked to someone and let me know that she {Resident #3] was not doing well, she had a really bad fracture and was having complications. The resident has severe lumbosacral disease which leaves her unable to use her legs which could lead to brittle bones, but I don't think we have any sort of osteoporosis on her. My understanding is that the resident had a fall from the lift, and the lift fell on the resident. I also heard another story regarding the lift so it's hard to say exactly what happen but the more reliable source I heard was the aid used a lift inappropriately, she used the wrong sling, the resident told her it was the wrong sling and the resident fell from the machine and the machine tipped and fell on the resident. I will say other than this event she was well taken care of . A phone interview was conducted on 3/1/23 at 3:34 P.M. with Staff P, CNA she stated, oh no the machine did not fall on the resident that would have meant we would've had to pick it back up off the resident and we did not have to do that. Review of Resident #3's hospital records revealed she sustained an acute displaced (bone breaks into two or more pieces and moves out of alignment) markedly comminuted (bone broken into three or more pieces) fracture involving the mid to proximal (near the knee) tibia (larger bone of the lower leg, also called the shin bone) . as well as an acute comminuted mildly displaced proximal fibular (outer smaller bone of the lower leg) fracture. Review of the hospital physician's notes dated 2/23/23 revealed [Resident #3] is an [AGE] year-old female with severe tricuspid regurgitation [heart valve does not close properly], moderate mitral regurgitation [heart valve does not close properly], suspected underlying heart failure with preserved ejection fraction [the heart pumps normally but too stiff to fill properly] on diuretics chronically, A-fib [atrial fibrillation, an irregular heart rhythm] on Eliquis, history of CVA[cerebral vascular accident], hypertension, DM 2 [diabetes mellitus 2] with peripheral neuropathy, hyperlipidemia [high levels of fat in the blood] who was admitted to [Hospital] following fall with tibia and fibula fracture. She is status post intramedullary nailing [permanent rod placed in the cavity of a bone to treat a fracture] 2/15. She developed gaseous distention concerning for ileus [when the intestines stop moving correctly and cannot push food through] versus obstruction/pseudoobstruction, CT [computerized tomography scan] abdomen pelvis showed marked gastric distention, possible transition and duodenum. NG [nasal gastric] tube was placed for decompression. She had acute anemia requiring transfer to the ICU [intensive care unit] with hypotension/shock. Echocardiogram showed EF [ejection fraction] 60 to 65%, severely dilated left and right atria [heart valve], severe pulmonary hypertension, severe tricuspid regurgitation. She received transfusions, EGD [esophagogastroduodenoscopy] revealed erosive esophagitis, adherent blood and edema with erosions and erythema, PPI [proton pump inhibitor] started, last transfusion 2/21. Additional issues have included but are not limited to hypernatremia [high concentration of sodium in the blood. Further hospital physician note review dated 2/23/23 revealed Plan - I reviewed the different disease trajectories for patients with multiple medical comorbidities, advanced age, acute event and introduced the idea of refocusing hopes and life goals as the timeline progresses and modifying what the expectations are for levels of functional ability and daily quality of life targets. Reviewed high possibility of development of cycle of frailty including more frequent hospitalizations and decline in overall performance status if she is not well able to participate with physical therapy and regain mobility. Daughter voiced agreement and stated she had discussed this previously with another physician prior to the surgery. --In light of possibility of further progressive decline offered outpatient palliative medicine referral for ongoing goals of care conversations following this hospitalization and trial of SNF [Skilled Nursing Facility]/rehab. Family declines at this time. --Reviewed what-ifs and family had questions about prognosis and including DIL[dangerous illness list] inquiring about possibility of hospice down the line. Reviewed mod-high [moderate to high] of 6mo-1yr mortality [6 month to 1 year mortality], particularly if mobility is not regained in light of multiple medical comorbidities. Review of Resident #3's Post Fall Review by IDT [interdisciplinary team] Team dated 2/15/23 revealed 1. In Attendance, Unit Manager, Risk Manager, DON [Director of Nursing], Social Services, Therapy, PT [Physical Therapy], OT [Occupational Therapy], ST [Speech Therapy], Reviewed details of resident's recent fall, .4. Comments, IDT meeting. Sent to ED [Emergency Department] for Eval and treatment, Staff educated re: staffing for mechanical lift, determining proper sling size for mechanical lift. Inventory all mechanical lift slings; invite [Medical Equipment Company]. Review of Resident #3's Incident Report dated Tuesday February 14, 2023, at 1:45 p.m. revealed, General Information, Type: Fall, Incident Location: Hallway/Corridor, Activity: Transfer, Reported by: [Staff Q, RN], Witness(es): [Staff P, CNA], .Cognition Prior to Incident: Oriented X3, Cognition after Incident: Oriented x3, Injuries, Type: R/O [rule out] Fracture, Location: Left Lower Leg, Date/Time: 2/14/23 1:45 p.m., Details: Left lower leg-external curvature and rotated, Actions, Skin assessment completed, Pain Assessment, Investigative Statements, Resident: [Resident #3] stated that she told the CNA she was using the incorrect sling and that the blue sling was the right one for her not the red one. And the CNA continued to use the red sling for the transfer., Staff interviews, No Staff Interviews. Review of facility's Sit-to-Stand Lift (Brand Name) Usage Procedure undated, revealed a sizing chart which indicated the red sling was a size medium and the blue sling was a size large. An interview was conducted on 3/1/23 at 1:15 p.m. with Staff T, Educator, she stated, on orientation I do lift education and lift competency check off. We also have a mentor check off sheet which also indicates the staff are competent in the use of lifts. The week [Staff P, CNA] was in orientation I was not here so the competencies did not get done and her mentor check offs, she didn't turn that in. Review of the facility's Transfer Equipment 2 people education dated 2/7/23 revealed 13 employes were present for the education but [Staff P, CNA] was not located on the sign in education sheet indicating she did not receive the training. Review of Staff P, CNA's employee file revealed she was hired on 12/12/2022 and was terminated on 2/24/23 for transferring a resident in a sit to stand lift, with her last day of work being 2/14/23. The resident started slipping from the sling and was lowered to the floor. She sustained a fracture of the left tibia and fibula during the procedure. [Staff P, CNA] disregarded the following facility protocols for mechanical lift transfers. 1. 2 staff members must be present when transferring a resident with a mechanical lift. 2. The proper size sling must be used. An interview was conducted on 2/28/23 at 12:04 p.m. with the Director of Therapy he said, No we don't have anything to do with lifts. In rehab we want them off the lifts and gaining more function. Usually nursing makes the decision if the residents need a lift or not. Once we do our assessment on the resident then we tell them why this person is one person assist or two person assist, but that's later on in the admission. Once the resident comes into the building that's when nursing decides if they need a lift or not. We are not the ones who make the decision on the lifts. Unless they have specific stuff like the resident has a broken hip then we will tell nursing that they cannot use a lift. [Resident #3] was on case load from 1/20/23-2/14/23 there is nothing in our notes regarding lifts for her. They [Therapists] did mention and recommend a sit to stand lift on her evaluation. Transfer to wheelchair via sit-to-stand lift, that's all they mentioned, which indicates that is how she transfers. She is a long-term resident who utilized a sit to stand for transfers since before January 20th, 2023. That was not something that changed she has always been using that. I cannot see any lift assessment for her. An interview was conducted with the DON on 2/28/23 at 12:21 p.m. she said So, after [Resident #3's] fall we actually assessed all the residents who are using lifts maybe ten days ago, after [Resident #3's] to make sure that we have the appropriate lift for everyone. [Staff S, Informatics Specialist] and [Staff R, RN] did the assessment. [Staff S, Informatics Specialist] is an LPN [Licensed Practical Nurse] and [Staff R. RN] is an RN. They determined what type of lift and slings or belts they needed for all the residents who are needing a lift. The criteria to use a sit to stand lift if they can bear partial weight and can't be an amputee. For the [complete body lift] the criteria is they are not able to bear weight at all they can use the Complete body lift. There are sizes for the sling for the Complete body lift and there is a Velcro belt for the sit to stand lift that comes in small, medium, large, and extra-large and [Staff R. RN] and [Staff S, Informatics Specialist] determined what size sling and belt those residents needed. They based their measurements on the manufacture's recommendations they measured the residents from mid shoulder to gluteal fold and based on that measurement they were able to ascertain what size sling they needed. The waist belt we had an in-service from the vendor they said the waist belt has to have at least a 2-inch overlap on the belt. This information is in the Kardex that the CNA's have access to in the [Electronic Medical Record]. The new residents who are admitted if they can't bear weight or partial weight bearing the nurses have been educated on how to determine the sling and belt sizes and have been checked off on their competency. To be honest with you the residents that were transferred with lifts before we put everything in place, I'm not sure what the process was the staff just knew what lift and what color band around the sling the residents needed and that band around the sling determines what size it is. For the waist belts the staff just knew what color each resident needed. I'm new I just started in October. There was no formal process before this, this is what we discovered they would just ask a nurse or another CNA or the CNA that was on shift before them would tell them what they used. An interview was conducted with [Staff R. RN] on 2/28/23 at 12:41 p.m. she said I worked with therapy and staff we identified who used a mechanical lift then I entered that information on the Kardex so all staff could see how a resident could transfer. I participated in the training on how to do the measuring of slings and belts, but I did not measure anyone. All I did[TRUNCATED]
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 F0725 (Tag F0725)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, facility policies, interviews with facility staff, the resident's physician, Medical Direc...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, facility policies, interviews with facility staff, the resident's physician, Medical Director and family members, the facility failed to provide supervision, education and corrective action in response to incidents in order to prevent falls with injury for 1 resident (#3 ) out of 12 residents sampled for falls. Resident #3 was a long-term nursing care resident who was at risk for falls admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 2/14/23 to an acute care hospital for a fall with injury. On 2/14/23 at 1:45 pm a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) did not follow facility policy and independently used the sit to stand lift for Resident #3. The CNA did not use the appropriate size waist belt during the transfer even after Resident #3, who was assessed to have no cognitive deficits, told the CNA she was using the incorrect sling [waist belt] and that the blue sling was the right one for her not the red one. The CNA continued to use the wrong supportive waist belt and continued to use the sit to stand lift independently which resulted in Resident #3 sustaining a fracture of both bones of the lower leg which required surgical repairment. Resident #3 suffered multiple complications after the surgery, required intensive care and remained hospitalized on [DATE]. The facility was unable to provide documentation of the CNA's training on the lift during orientation. The facility's response to the incident did not address communicating individual resident sling size with staff. Additionally, based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide supervision to prevent multiple falls in the facility's secured unit. A review of the facility's incident list revealed on 2/25/23, 2/26/23 and 2/27/23, 16 falls occurred in the facility. Ten of the 16 falls were unwitnessed and occurred on the secured unit to Residents #8, #9, #19, #11, #12, #13, #14, #15, #16 and #17. The residents who resided on the secured unit due to severe cognitive impairment, were observed unattended in the common area or with limited supervision on 4 of 4 days of the survey, (2/27/23, 2/28/23, 3/01/23 and 3/02/23). This placed them at risk for falls, accidents, and potentially injurious interactions between residents. The actual serious physical harm to Resident #3, likelihood of death to Resident #3, likelihood of serious harm to residents who require mechanical lifts, and very likely risk of serious harm, injury or death from a fall to the facility's residents who are at risk for falls resulted in the finding of on-going immediate jeopardy starting on 2/14/23. Findings included: An interview was conducted on 2/27/23 at 5:31 p.m. with Staff Q, Registered Nurse (RN) who said . [Resident #3] room was in a quad room [four person room, with 2 residents on the left side of an entrance hallway and 2 residents on the right side of an entrance hallway], and I was in one of the rooms taking care of another resident when I heard the resident yelling my leg! my leg! my leg! The CNA [Staff P, CNA] was also screaming [Staff Q, RN]! [Staff Q, RN]! Come help! The resident was in the hallway of the quad, I think [Staff P, CNA] was trying to transfer her to the bathroom, the bathroom is also in the hallway of the quad, I heard her screaming and I came out saw the resident and yelled for help because she was about to hit the floor, she was suspended on the lift. Her left leg was out past the foot plate towards the shift bar of the mechanical lift. The resident was in the strap that goes on like a belt around her waist and the straps were still hooked onto the sit to stand machine. Her two arms were still holding on to the handles of the machine. Both sides of the belt straps were still attached to the sit to stand. Her right leg was on the foot plate. She was slipping off of the belt I don't know if it was tight enough or what but she never touched the ground at this point. I think when [Staff P, CNA] noticed [Resident #3] was going to hit the ground that's when she started to call out. The hallway door was closed, I opened it and called out for help. The CNA was not touching the resident, the CNA was holding onto the remote of the machine with one hand and reaching for the wheelchair with the other and telling me to get the wheelchair to put the resident back into the wheelchair but I told her the resident was too low to put her back into her chair we need to lower her to the ground so I got behind the resident and supported her head and guided her to the floor and the CNA pressed the remote to lower the sit to stand which lowers the resident. We lowered the resident completely to the ground, the CNA removed the lift from the area and that's when I noticed her leg is facing an asymmetrical position and now, she was yelling, and the pain is too much and at that point 911 was called. Because of the pain, we couldn't touch her, and other people came to help, and we put pillows under her head and stayed with her until the paramedics came. I did not see the sit to stand on the resident. I don't think it fell on her, It is a very heavy machine and I don't think if it fell on the resident the CNA would not have been able to pick it up and get the resident back into the position I found her in. It's just my opinion but what I think might have happened was her leg got caught under the foot plate and when she was lifted up it could have broke but like I said that is just my opinion because her break was just above her ankle. But that is why we are supposed to have 2 people when they use the mechanical lifts, one to operate it and one to guide the resident. The CNA did not do that, that day. I don't know why she didn't use two people. She floats around all the units but she has worked with this resident before so she cannot say she doesn't know how she was supposed to be transferred. The CNA told me she was taking the resident to the bathroom. The resident did have a brief on, but she told me she was taking her to the toilet. And usually that's what they do when they take someone to the toilet they transfer them from the wheelchair onto the sit to stand with two people, wheel them into the bathroom, one person pulls down their clothes and the other lowers them onto the toilet while the other person guides them onto the toilet, the resident uses the bathroom, the staff member cleans them up, puts their clothes back up and then they wheel the resident back to the wheelchair and lowers them back onto the wheelchair. The resident never comes off of the lift they are strapped to it the entire time. The resident did not have a strap around her legs to stabilize her legs against the padded cushion of the sit to stand, no A phone interview was conducted on 2/28/23 at 2:11 p.m. with Staff P, CNA, who operated the mechanical lift at the time of Resident #3's fall. She stated I know when I wrote my initial letter about [Resident #3] I was emotional and all over the place. But, when I put her in the machine and we went up she kind of slipped, she did not hit the floor and once the nurse came, she told me to put her on the floor. My first instinct was to not let her touch the floor. I just didn't want her to touch the floor at all. I was holding the resident on her side she was still attached to the machine and then [Staff Q, RN] said let's put her on the floor [Staff Q, RN] said we aren't getting her back onto the wheelchair so I took the controller and lowered her down with the machine as low as it possibly could, unhooked her and we lowered her to the floor. The belt was Velcro'd on pretty decently .I was never told there was different sizes or different colored slings and belts .That day I was just getting off my 30-minute break and [Staff Q, RN] was saying my lights were on and people were waiting for me to take them to the restroom . so I was trying to prioritize who I saw first. I had one person in bed with a call light on, I had one person who was continent and then [Resident #3]. I went and saw the resident who was in their bed, they told me that they had already been helped so I turned off their light and then I heard the two women arguing about who has been waiting longer to go to the bathroom. [Resident #3] had her wipes and her brief in her lap and the other resident had her towels and I knew she was continent and she said she had been holding it for 30 minutes, so I put her on the sit-to-stand lift and took her to the bathroom, I came back out and put her back in her chair. Then I was going to take [Resident #3] to the bathroom and she had already soiled herself and as I was strapping her waist belt on and hooking her onto the machine, just as I did earlier that morning when I got her out of bed, I was talking to her apologizing to her for her wait and telling her I understand her frustration I didn't mean to frustrate her because when I was taking the other lady to the bathroom I could hear her arguing, well not arguing she was just expressing how she felt. But I don't want to use me talking to her as an excuse that I was distracted. As I was strapping the belt on her she was trying to strap it on herself, and she was trying to tell me how other people do it and I told her that I'm not the other CNA's I feel more comfortable doing it my way and then I told her I am going to lift you up and as I was lifting her up I was explaining to her you're wet let me take you to your room to change you and she said she said no I want to get changed right here and then everything happened so fast the resident was slipping, I grabbed her because I didn't want her to hit the floor, I called out for [Staff Q, RN] and [Staff Q, RN] came and that's when we lowered her to the floor. When I got back from break there was no one on the floor, everyone was doing their own thing except [Staff Q, RN] because she was the one who told me about my lights. I did not have another staff member right there with me because everyone was doing their own thing and when I got off break there was no one in the hallways and I just felt this sense of urgency because people needed to use the toilet and people are yelling at each other and I just wanted to help the residents. I did not have two people with me either time I used the sit to stand for both of them. So, the way the room worked is there is a door off the hallway and then there is a bathroom in the corridor of the hallway and 4 rooms that branch off that corridor; I was in the corridor with [Resident #3] and the other lady that is in one of the other rooms in [Resident #3's] hallway. [Staff Q, RN] was in one of the other residents' rooms in that hallway, but she was not right next to me when I used the lift. I had worked there for about 2 months before this happened . Review of Resident #3's admission record revealed she was an [AGE] year-old female resident admitted to the facility on [DATE] from an acute care hospital and discharged on 2/14/23 back to an acute care hospital. Resident #3 had diagnoses that included congestive heart failure, muscle weakness, dysphagia, type 2 diabetes with chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes with diabetic peripheral angiopathy without gangrene, diabetic neuropathy, dementia, pulmonary hypertension, anemia, hyperlipidemia, atherosclerosis, bipolar disorder current episode hypomanic, disorder of bone density and structure of right lower leg, primary osteoarthritis left hip and right knee, sciatica left side, localized edema, chronic kidney disease stage 3A, age related osteoporosis without current pathological fracture, generalized anxiety disorder, nonrheumatic mitral valve insufficiency, atrial fibrillation, other specified disorders of bone density and structure of the left forearm, pharyngoesophageal phase and vitreous degeneration, bilaterally. Review of Resident #3's progress note dated 2/14/23 at 13:45 p.m. revealed Resident had a fall incident. 2/14/23 1:45 PM resident is alert and oriented. Resident was Transferring at time of incident. Pain is noted. Resident sent to emergency room for evaluation. Neuro Checks immediate after. Physician notified Responsible party notified. Guardian Notified. Supervisor notified. Review of Resident #3's quarterly minimal data set (MDS) dated [DATE] section C, cognitive patterns, revealed she had a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 indicating no cognitive deficits. Section G, functional status, revealed Resident #3 had impairment on both sides of her lower extremities. For transfers Resident #3 required extensive assistance with two plus person's physical assist. Toilet use revealed Resident #3 required extensive assistance with two plus person's physical assist. Section H, bowel and bladder, revealed Resident #3 was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of Resident #3's Task List Report revealed a task with an initiated date of 4/21/2022 and a resolved/cancelled date of 2/14/2023. The position(s) indicated the task was for Certified Nursing Aide. to Transfers: Sit to stand lift, Assist x2 [times 2] Everyday. Qshift [every shift]: Day (7-3), Night (11-7), Evening (3-11). Everyday, Qshift Night (7-7). Further review of February's task documentation revealed Staff P, CNA signed off Transfers: Sit to Stand lift, assist X2 on 2/14/23 at 8:59 a.m. Review of Resident #3's care plan initiated on 2/14/2019 revealed a focus of The staff have identified that I am at risk for falls because of these risk factors: weakness, impaired mobility, dementia, History of falls, Incontinence, use of opioid medication, dizziness, DM [diabetes mellitus] with neuropathy; Dx [diagnosis] of Osteoporosis with increased risk for pathological fractures. The goal revealed I will be free of major injury due to a fall through next review. Interventions included but are not limited to, .I will notify staff my need for assistance when I have a bowel or bladder accident. Toilet me upon rising before and after meals at hs [hours of sleep] and when needed . Assist of 2 staff with transfers using sit-to-stand lift. Further care plan review revealed a care plan with an initiated date of 2/14/2019 revealed a focus of I need assistance with activities of daily living because of muscle weakness, pain, dizziness, impaired mobility. The goal revealed I like to maintain a neat and tidy appearance. Staff will assist as needed to help maintain that goal through next review. Interventions included but are not limited to, 2 female staff to be present when caring for resident Assist of 2 staff using sit-to-stand for transfers . Review of Resident #3's Clinical Physician Orders revealed a physician's order with a start date of 2/14/2023 TRANSFER TO ER [EMERGENCY ROOM] HOSPITAL FOE [sic] EVALUATION AND TREATMENT FOR POSSIBLE TIBIA FRACTURE OF THE LEFT LEG. Review of Resident #3's Change in Condition Evaluation with an effective date of 2/14/23 at 1:45 p.m. revealed 1. The change in condition, symptoms or signs I am calling about is/are: Falls 2. This started on: 2/14/23 3. What time of day did this start: Afternoon 1. The resident is in the nursing home for: Long Term Care .4. Is the resident on warfarin/coumadin? No 4c. is the resident on another anticoagulant drug? (e.g. Aspirin, Plavix, Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban, Apixaban) Yes .Skin Evaluation 16. describe skin changes: No changes observed 16n. document location and details: Site: Left lower leg (front) Description: possible tibia fracture . Pain Evaluation 17. Is the resident cognitively able to rate their pain scale? Yes 17a. Rate pain on a scale of 0 to 10 (0=no pain, 4-5=moderate pain, 10=excruciating pain): 10 17b. Is the pain: acute 17c. Pain location: Musculoskeletal pain 17h. Describe musculoskeletal pain: Marked localized bruising, swelling, or pain over joint or bone, with or without recent fall. 17k. Specify exact location of pain: Site: Left lower leg (front) Description: possible tibia fracture .20. Since the change in condition occurred have the symptoms or sign gotten: Worse 21. Things that make the condition or symptoms worse are: activity 22. Things that make the condition of symptoms better are: pain medication .25. Summarize your observations and evaluation: Transfer to ER Hospital for treatment .2. Reported to primary care clinician: [Resident #3's physician] 3. Date and time of clinician notification: 2/14/23 2:08 p.m. 4. Orders obtained from the clinician: Other 4a. Specify other: Transfer to ER Hospital. 5. Name of Family/healthcare agent notified: [Resident #3's family member] 6. Date and time of family notification: 2/14/23 2:06 p.m. A phone interview was conducted on 2/27/23 at 3:13 p.m. with Resident #3's family member, she said It wasn't a fall it was a drop; my mother was in her room she needed a diaper change so she could go to activities this is a routine for her, she required a sit to stand, the CNA wheeled her out of the room into the hallway to change her diaper. I spoke to some of the nurses and that is supposably their new way of doing diaper changes is out in the hall. The CNA gets my mother, wheels her into the hallway, my mother tells her that's the wrong strap to the machine, the CNA said don't worry about it it'll be fine. My mother said no I am worried about it, that's the wrong strap. The CNA said it'll be fine and proceeded to use the strap and lift my mother up using the machine, The strap breaks, my mother falls to the floor, the machine flipped in the air and hit my mother's leg breaking her leg in two places. The ambulance was called this all happened on 2/14/23. She is still in the hospital. She is not doing good because of her other problems which they warned us about an [AGE] year-old women needing surgery is a risk. And every problem they warned us about she had. Her heart stopped twice, they had her on a respirator then they took her off the respirator and now she's on oxygen. Her Blood pressure tanked to 58/30, Her kidney's stops working no urine output at all. Her A-fib [Atrial Fibrillation] starts acting up. I'm in the ICU [intensive care unit] with her on 2/16/23 and she starts bleeding internally. They could not get her into surgery, they had to come to her. A tube went down her throat and into her stomach. Then she's back on the respirator and then taken off the respirator for the second time and back on oxygen. Then she got a tube through her nose down into her stomach for 5 days. Then that came out on Saturday. They did surgery on her leg, there was 2 breaks, she now has rods, screws all inserted in her leg permanently. My mother told me this whole story when I came to the hospital in between all her screaming because of the pain she was in. She told the same story to all the doctors and paramedics. The paramedics found her with the machine on her in the hallway, they even came back to the hospital to see my mom because they said it was such a horrific accident. When the administrator called me about what happened she said I feel so bad your mom was like my mom and I said to her well my mom did not give birth to you so yeah. A CNA is a Certified Nurse assistance that is someone who is trained on how to use these machines. The Sunday prior to the accident my brother was visiting my mom and the CNA said she does not know how to use the machine my brother asked her how is it you don't know how to work the machine and she said I don't know how to work it. My mother said here I will show you. [The NHA] said she was currently in the process training the staff on how to use the machine. I said what do you mean you are training them now. They are supposed to have training on this before they even get hired and she's telling me they are using real life people as practice dummies. The Director told me I understand you are very upset, and I want to assure you that the staff are being trained but they should already be trained she shouldn't just now be training them. Since then, the director called me back saying they have suspended her [Staff P, CNA] pending investigation and then they called me again and have since fired her and reported her licenses. A phone interview was conducted on 3/1/23 at 3:31 p.m. with Resident #3's physician. She stated I am very familiar with [Resident #3] I have worked with her for the last 3 years. I was immediately notified about the fall from someone, I'm not sure who called me, but I was notified that she had fallen, and it was suspected that her leg was broken. She was in a lot of pain, and I believe we had her sent out versus us getting X-rays. The hospitalist [hospital physician] will call me once the resident is done with their hospital stay to give an update, but I have not talked to anyone from the hospital. But middle to end of last week my Nurse Practitioner talked to someone and let me know that she {Resident #3] was not doing well, she had a really bad fracture and was having complications. The resident has severe lumbosacral disease which leaves her unable to use her legs which could lead to brittle bones, but I don't think we have any sort of osteoporosis on her. My understanding is that the resident had a fall from the lift, and the lift fell on the resident. I also heard another story regarding the lift so it's hard to say exactly what happen but the more reliable source I heard was the aid used a lift inappropriately, she used the wrong sling, the resident told her it was the wrong sling and the resident fell from the machine and the machine tipped and fell on the resident. I will say other than this event she was well taken care of . A phone interview was conducted on 3/1/23 at 3:34 P.M. with Staff P, CNA she stated, oh no the machine did not fall on the resident that would have meant we would've had to pick it back up off the resident and we did not have to do that. Review of Resident #3's hospital records revealed she sustained an acute displaced (bone breaks into two or more pieces and moves out of alignment) markedly comminuted (bone broken into three or more pieces) fracture involving the mid to proximal (near the knee) tibia (larger bone of the lower leg, also called the shin bone) . as well as an acute comminuted mildly displaced proximal fibular (outer smaller bone of the lower leg) fracture. Review of the hospital physician's notes dated 2/23/23 revealed [Resident #3] is an [AGE] year-old female with severe tricuspid regurgitation [heart valve does not close properly], moderate mitral regurgitation [heart valve does not close properly], suspected underlying heart failure with preserved ejection fraction [the heart pumps normally but too stiff to fill properly] on diuretics chronically, A-fib [atrial fibrillation, an irregular heart rhythm] on Eliquis, history of CVA[cerebral vascular accident], hypertension, DM 2 [diabetes mellitus 2] with peripheral neuropathy, hyperlipidemia [high levels of fat in the blood] who was admitted to [Hospital] following fall with tibia and fibula fracture. She is status post intramedullary nailing [permanent rod placed in the cavity of a bone to treat a fracture] 2/15. She developed gaseous distention concerning for ileus [when the intestines stop moving correctly and cannot push food through] versus obstruction/pseudoobstruction, CT [computerized tomography scan] abdomen pelvis showed marked gastric distention, possible transition and duodenum. NG [nasal gastric] tube was placed for decompression. She had acute anemia requiring transfer to the ICU [intensive care unit] with hypotension/shock. Echocardiogram showed EF [ejection fraction] 60 to 65%, severely dilated left and right atria [heart valve], severe pulmonary hypertension, severe tricuspid regurgitation. She received transfusions, EGD [esophagogastroduodenoscopy] revealed erosive esophagitis, adherent blood and edema with erosions and erythema, PPI [proton pump inhibitor] started, last transfusion 2/21. Additional issues have included but are not limited to hypernatremia [high concentration of sodium in the blood. Further hospital physician note review dated 2/23/23 revealed Plan - I reviewed the different disease trajectories for patients with multiple medical comorbidities, advanced age, acute event and introduced the idea of refocusing hopes and life goals as the timeline progresses and modifying what the expectations are for levels of functional ability and daily quality of life targets. Reviewed high possibility of development of cycle of frailty including more frequent hospitalizations and decline in overall performance status if she is not well able to participate with physical therapy and regain mobility. Daughter voiced agreement and stated she had discussed this previously with another physician prior to the surgery. --In light of possibility of further progressive decline offered outpatient palliative medicine referral for ongoing goals of care conversations following this hospitalization and trial of SNF [Skilled Nursing Facility]/rehab. Family declines at this time. --Reviewed what-ifs and family had questions about prognosis and including DIL[dangerous illness list] inquiring about possibility of hospice down the line. Reviewed mod-high [moderate to high] of 6mo-1yr mortality [6 month to 1 year mortality], particularly if mobility is not regained in light of multiple medical comorbidities. Review of Resident #3's Post Fall Review by IDT [interdisciplinary team] Team dated 2/15/23 revealed 1. In Attendance, Unit Manager, Risk Manager, DON [Director of Nursing], Social Services, Therapy, PT [Physical Therapy], OT [Occupational Therapy], ST [Speech Therapy], Reviewed details of resident's recent fall, .4. Comments, IDT meeting. Sent to ED [Emergency Department] for Eval and treatment, Staff educated re: staffing for mechanical lift, determining proper sling size for mechanical lift. Inventory all mechanical lift slings; invite [Medical Equipment Company]. Review of Resident #3's Incident Report dated Tuesday February 14, 2023, at 1:45 p.m. revealed, General Information, Type: Fall, Incident Location: Hallway/Corridor, Activity: Transfer, Reported by: [Staff Q, RN], Witness(es): [Staff P, CNA], .Cognition Prior to Incident: Oriented X3, Cognition after Incident: Oriented x3, Injuries, Type: R/O [rule out] Fracture, Location: Left Lower Leg, Date/Time: 2/14/23 1:45 p.m., Details: Left lower leg-external curvature and rotated, Actions, Skin assessment completed, Pain Assessment, Investigative Statements, Resident: [Resident #3] stated that she told the CNA she was using the incorrect sling and that the blue sling was the right one for her not the red one. And the CNA continued to use the red sling for the transfer., Staff interviews, No Staff Interviews. Review of facility's Sit-to-Stand Lift (Brand Name) Usage Procedure undated, revealed a sizing chart which indicated the red sling was a size medium and the blue sling was a size large. An interview was conducted on 3/1/23 at 1:15 p.m. with Staff T, Educator, she stated, on orientation I do lift education and lift competency check off. We also have a mentor check off sheet which also indicates the staff are competent in the use of lifts. The week [Staff P, CNA] was in orientation I was not here so the competencies did not get done and her mentor check offs, she didn't turn that in. Review of the facility's Transfer Equipment 2 people education dated 2/7/23 revealed 13 employes were present for the education but [Staff P, CNA] was not located on the sign in education sheet indicating she did not receive the training. Review of Staff P, CNA's employee file revealed she was hired on 12/12/2022 and was terminated on 2/24/23 for transferring a resident in a sit to stand lift, with her last day of work being 2/14/23. The resident started slipping from the sling and was lowered to the floor. She sustained a fracture of the left tibia and fibula during the procedure. [Staff P, CNA] disregarded the following facility protocols for mechanical lift transfers. 1. 2 staff members must be present when transferring a resident with a mechanical lift. 2. The proper size sling must be used. An interview was conducted on 2/28/23 at 12:04 p.m. with the Director of Therapy he said, No we don't have anything to do with lifts. In rehab we want them off the lifts and gaining more function. Usually nursing makes the decision if the residents need a lift or not. Once we do our assessment on the resident then we tell them why this person is one person assist or two person assist, but that's later on in the admission. Once the resident comes into the building that's when nursing decides if they need a lift or not. We are not the ones who make the decision on the lifts. Unless they have specific stuff like the resident has a broken hip then we will tell nursing that they cannot use a lift. [Resident #3] was on case load from 1/20/23-2/14/23 there is nothing in our notes regarding lifts for her. They [Therapists] did mention and recommend a sit to stand lift on her evaluation. Transfer to wheelchair via sit-to-stand lift, that's all they mentioned, which indicates that is how she transfers. She is a long-term resident who utilized a sit to stand for transfers since before January 20th, 2023. That was not something that changed she has always been using that. I cannot see any lift assessment for her. An interview was conducted with the DON on 2/28/23 at 12:21 p.m. she said So, after [Resident #3's] fall we actually assessed all the residents who are using lifts maybe ten days ago, after [Resident #3's] to make sure that we have the appropriate lift for everyone. [Staff S, Informatics Specialist] and [Staff R, RN] did the assessment. [Staff S, Informatics Specialist] is an LPN [Licensed Practical Nurse] and [Staff R. RN] is an RN. They determined what type of lift and slings or belts they needed for all the residents who are needing a lift. The criteria to use a sit to stand lift if they can bear partial weight and can't be an amputee. For the [complete body lift] the criteria is they are not able to bear weight at all they can use the Complete body lift. There are sizes for the sling for the Complete body lift and there is a Velcro belt for the sit to stand lift that comes in small, medium, large, and extra-large and [Staff R. RN] and [Staff S, Informatics Specialist] determined what size sling and belt those residents needed. They based their measurements on the manufacture's recommendations they measured the residents from mid shoulder to gluteal fold and based on that measurement they were able to ascertain what size sling they needed. The waist belt we had an in-service from the vendor they said the waist belt has to have at least a 2-inch overlap on the belt. This information is in the Kardex that the CNA's have access to in the [Electronic Medical Record]. The new residents who are admitted if they can't bear weight or partial weight bearing the nurses have been educated on how to determine the sling and belt sizes and have been checked off on their competency. To be honest with you the residents that were transferred with lifts before we put everything in place, I'm not sure what the process was the staff just knew what lift and what color band around the sling the residents needed and that band around the sling determines what size it is. For the waist belts the staff just knew what color each resident needed. I'm new I just started in October. There was no formal process before this, this is what we discovered they would just ask a nurse or another CNA or the CNA that was on shift before them would tell them what they used. An interview was conducted with [Staff R. RN] on 2/28/23 at 12:41 p.m. she said I worked with therapy and staff we identified who used a mechanical lift then I entered that information on the Kardex so all staff could see how a resident could transfer. I participated in the training on how to do the measuring of slings and belts, but I did not measure anyone. All I did[TRUNCATED]
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure appropriate infection prevention and contro...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure appropriate infection prevention and control standards were maintained, related to preventing the spread of scabies for three of four resident care areas. Findings included: A tour of the D-wing (400 hall) on 2/27/23 at 10:20 a.m. was conducted. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] had a sign on door for contact precautions. An interview was conducted with Staff Y, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Unit Manager (UM). Staff Y, LPN stated the room was vacant, however the previous resident was on contact precautions for scabies. From the hallway through the open-door Staff KK, Maintenance was observed in the room working on an empty bed. Staff KK was observed in the room without wearing any gloves or protective gown. Staff Y, LPN stated Staff KK was taking down a specialty bed used by the previous resident and she confirmed Staff KK should have worn a gown and gloves while working in the room. On 2/27/23 at 10:50 a.m. and interview was conducted with Staff Y, LPN. She stated said had spoken with Staff KK about wearing a gown. She stated Staff KK told her he was working on the bed and did not know he needed a gown. Staff Y said she explained to him that scabies live on the bed and he was at risk of spreading them if he did not have on personal protective equipment (PPE). She said Staff KK was receptive to her input. She said she also called his supervisor to help educate the other maintenance staff on following Transmission Based Precautions (TBP) and using PPE when entering resident rooms where isolation precautions are posted. On 2/27/23 at 12:44 p.m. Resident #25 was heard yelling, Where's my lunch. An unidentified Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was collecting meal trays and placing them on a tray cart. Clean and used meal trays were observed on the same cart. Photographic evidence obtained. The CNA took a clean tray off the cart and entered Resident #25's room. Resident #25's room had a sign on door for contact precautions directing staff to gown and glove prior to entering the room. Resident #25 was listed as being on contact precautions for scabies. The CNA was observed to not don a gown or gloves when entering the room. The CNA exited the room carrying a used meal tray and placed it on the cart. The CNA was not observed performing hand hygiene after exiting room. On 2/28/23 at 10:00 a.m. a review of the medical record indicated Resident #20 had an order for contact precautions. The resident's room was observed to have no sign or Personal Protective Equipment indicating contact precautions were in place. An interview was conducted with Staff Z, LPN, UM who stated the resident was taken off precautions last week and the order was not discontinued. The Director Of Nursing (DON) and Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) Coordinator were interviewed on 2/28/23 at 10:40 a.m. They stated there were residents with scabies scattered in the facility and they have been treating them. They stated the Dermatology Consultant confirmed the last case on 2/15/23. They described a plan to treat the B-wing (200 hall) by treating and showering all the residents on the same day. The B-wing is a secure unit with 14 residents in 8 rooms all on contact precautions for scabies. They stated, We can't confine the residents to their rooms so we're trying to do the entire unit at once. They said contaminated linen is supposed to go into melt away bags. The ADON said they are treating the entire secure unit as contact precautions. The ADON did not verbalize any special precautions being taken for staff on the unit, she said they are expected to gown and glove when entering contact precaution rooms but not when entering the unit. They stated the policy is to bag all the personal clothing items for residents and keep them in the bag tied up for 14 days until the bugs die. Staff HH, Laundry was interviewed on 2/28/23 at 11:30 a.m. during a tour of the laundry facility. Staff HH said most laundry came from B wing this morning because they are doing a major clean. Staff HH could not say with confidence how many melt away bags he received in the morning but he estimated two. He stated all laundry is treated and transported the same. He stated there are no special procedures for contaminated laundry other than the melt away bags. He stated his manager lets him know when scabies are in the building but he gowns and gloves every time he sorts laundry because he wants to protect himself. He stated personal items never go into melt away bags because the bags do not always melt completely and some residents complained about residue on their personal items. Staff KK stated in the 6 years he has been with the facility this is the worse scabies outbreak he has seen. On 2/28/23 at 2:15 p.m. a tour was conducted throughout the facility of rooms listed on contact precaution. The facility had 25 rooms listed on contact precautions. Photographic evidence obtained. Facility rooms on contact precautions included the following: A wing rooms 111, 112, 113, 118, 120, 121, 122, 126, 127, 131, 136 B wing rooms 202, 203, 204, 210, 219, 230, 232, 233 C wing had no rooms D wing rooms 404, 413, 417, 419, 426, 431 The following discrepancies were observed: Rooms 120, 122, 203, 210 did not have contact precaution signs or Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) available outside of the rooms. rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] had contact precaution signs on doors but no PPE available outside the rooms. rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] had PPE carts outside of room entrance but no sign on door. On 2/28/23 at 2:50 p.m. an interview was conducted with Staff C, CNA, outside of the room for Resident #14 and Resident #9. Staff C stated she did not think the residents were on contact precautions and left to get the nurse to answer the question. Staff C returned with Staff H, LPN and stated the room was cleaned and the residents were no longer on isolation. A review of medical record for the Resident #14 and Resident #9 revealed physician orders for contact precautions for scabies starting on 2/23/23 with and end date of 3/9/23. The ADON and Infection Control and Prevention Coordinator were interviewed on 3/1/23 at 2:47 p.m. They stated, The first case we had was a resident on C-wing who was admitted with scabies on 1/13/23. He was treated at the hospital. He was not treated for scabies here, he just went on precautions then was moved from C-wing to A-wing. The next case was on 1/24/23 with another resident that was admitted with a diagnosis of scabies. After that we had 6 residents on D-wing with a suspicious rash. At that time there was no connection we could identify. There were 4 staff members treated for scabies that were working with the residents. We try to keep residents in their rooms and redirect them back to their rooms when they do leave. We have looked at this and don't have an answer to how this spread. Resident personal clothes stay bagged for 3 days then the scabies die and the clothes can get laundered. On 3/2/23 at 12:04 p.m. Resident #29 was interviewed. The resident stated, Today is my first clear day. She stated the facility had to taken down the contact precautions sign on the door yet and confirmed she had been diagnosed with scabies. She stated, I Don't know how I got them but I'm cleared up now and they have not taken down the sign. I am free today. I was on precautions for about two weeks. I went downstairs for the first time in a while. I was confined to my room for two weeks and it was frustrating. On 3/2/23 at 12:04 contact precaution signs were observed on doors leading into B-wing, the secure unit. An interview was conducted with Staff BB, LPN who stated she did not know why there were signs on the outside doors and it is unusual to have them there. rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] were observed with contact precaution signs on the room doors. Staff BB said the hall was cleared and the signs had not been removed yet. Staff BB stated she did not think anyone entering the B-wing needed to gown and glove despite the signage on the door. On 3/2/23 at 12:46 p.m. Staff S, Registered Nurse (RN), ICP stated rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] were on contact precautions, confirmed by physician orders. On 3/2/23 at 3:15 p.m. Staff T, CNA was observed entering room [ROOM NUMBER] without donning gown or gloves. A contact precaution sign was observed on the door and a PPE cart was present at the room entrance. Staff LL was observed carrying sheets and preparing to change the bed. Staff LL stated he thought the residents were cleared from isolation and went to ask another staff member if he needed to wear a gown and gloves to enter the room. Staff LL returned with Staff MM, CNA who stated the residents were cleared and the signs just were not removed from the door. The residents were listed on the roster provided from ICP as on contact precautions. An interview was conducted with Staff Z, LPN, UM. She confirmed staff should wear PPE in room [ROOM NUMBER] and the residents were still on contact precautions for presumptive scabies. A review of facility policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Program, Revised 7/22 indicated the following: : .5. Isolation Protocol: a. Standard precautions shall be observed for all residents. b. A resident with and infection or communicable disease shall be placed on isolation precautions as recommended by current CDC guidelines for Isolation Precautions. A copy of the guidelines are available at each nurses' station. c. Residents will be placed on the least restrictive isolation precaution for the shortest duration possible under the circumstances. d. When a resident on isolation precautions must leave the resident care unit/area, the charge nurse on that unit/area shall communicate to all involved departments the nature of the isolation and shall prepare the resident for transport in accordance with the current isolation precaution guidelines. .8. Equipment Protocol: a. All reusable items and equipment requiring special cleaning, disinfection, or sterilization shall be cleaned in accordance with our current procedures governing the cleaning and sterilization of soiled or contaminated equipment. d. The central supply clerk will decontaminate equipment with a germicidal detergent prior to storing for reuse. e. All contaminated disposable items shall be discarded in a waste receptacle lined with a RED plastic bag. A review of facility policy titled Scabies Procedure and Treatment for Residents, revised 1/30/22 indicated the following: .PRE-ELIMITE UNIT CLEANING GUIDELINES 4. The 7-3 and 3-11 shift staff will work together to bag up all clothing, linen, and pillows, stuffed animals, or articles that the resident has had direct contact with. Roommate's articles will be treated in the same manner. 5. Doubled clear bags will be used to signify that the contents are contaminated and need to be treated accordingly. Belongings that are not washable will be treated with dryer heat or will be sealed and bagged (after being sprayed with RC spray of a similar product) for a 48-hour period. If a Housekeeper is available they will be asked to assist. 6. Cleaning of the wheelchair will be done with rubbing motions and cleaning will also be done following the post-treatment shower. If a shower chair of stretcher was used for transport, they will be cleaned in the same manner. (Virex or a similar product will be used.) A review of facility policy titled Infectious Waste and Linen, revised 11/30/23 indicated the following: .Infectious linens are double bagged and washed by laundry separately.
CONCERN (F) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a clean, comfortable, home-like environment, related to not providing clean serviceable linen, on four of four resi...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a clean, comfortable, home-like environment, related to not providing clean serviceable linen, on four of four resident care areas. The resident census in the facility was 230. Findings included: An interview was conducted on 2/27/23 at 10:10 a.m. with Staff MM, CNA. She stated .They took away our wipes for the residents and now we have to use towels and wash clothes to clean the residents up and now we are always short on linen. Those towels are so rough, and these residents' skin are so frail. No matter how much warm water you use or how gently you wipe it is so still so rough on their skin and sometimes the residents have been sitting in their stool at night because the night shift doesn't have any linen so when we change them in the morning we are having to wipe the dried stool off the residents with those rough towels because they won't let the residents have the wipes anymore. An interview was conducted on 2/27/23 at 10:12 a.m. with Staff QQ, CNA. She confirmed there are no linens available and agreed the towels are rough on the residents skin and now because they don't have wipes for the residents they are expected to clean up stool with the towels and then send them down the laundry to be cleaned. She said they were expected to clean the resident's face and dry them off after a shower using the same towels that were used to clean up stool and stated, that's not right. An interview was conducted on 2/27/23 at 10:16 a.m. with Staff NN, CNA who stated .the facility is low on linens and when asked if pillowcases are used to clean up the residents she stated you gotta do what you gotta do when you don't have what you need. An observation was conducted on 2/27/23 at 10:17 a.m. of the C-wings linen closet on the low side. The closed was observed to have 7 towels and 0 washcloths. Photographic evidence obtained. An observation was conducted on 2/27/23 at 10:26 a.m. of C-wings linen closet on the high side. The closed was observed to have 15 towels and 2 washcloths. Photographic evidence obtained. On 2/28/23 at 10:00 a.m. an interview was conducted with Staff Y, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Unit Manager (UM) who stated, We don't have much linen and today we have not received any. It all went downstairs where they are cleaning this morning. An interview was conducted on 2/28/23 at 10:45 a.m. with Staff BB, CNA. She stated, Today we have enough linens but yesterday was terrible we did not have hardly anything. Sometimes we will have enough to get us through the morning shift, but I don't know what the 3-11 staff do. Yesterday luckily family provided wipes, and other supplies so we can do our job. If we don't have the supplies the resident has to wait unfortunately. The facility laundry area was observed on 2/28/23 at 11:30 a.m. with Staff HH, Laundry Services. Staff HH explained the linen process and stated, Linen is stocked in the afternoon before laundry staff leave for the day. Dirty linen is transported to laundry in the morning and washed. The first cart goes to the floor around 10:00 a.m. with additional laundry delivered at roughly 12:30 p.m., 3:00 p.m., and 4:30 p.m. There is not enough linen inventory for a delivery before we get the first load done and delivered. We did a facility sweep 2-3 weeks ago and found a lot of linen in resident rooms and closets. On 2/28/23 at 1:45 p.m. an interview was conducted with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA). The NHA said she was working with corporate to increase their linen inventory. The NHA stated she had requested an increased budget for linen. She explained, We do not have a third shift in laundry and we need to increase our inventory. The NHA provided facility linen inventory sheets for review. Photographic evidence taken. She said On February 20th, 2023, was the first increase in my budget for linens. Currently chemicals and linens are in the same budget. They should be separate budgets, so I requested them to be split up. Corporate increased the linen budget on Valentine's Day (2/14/23) and again on 2/20/23 for linens. I will have to ask the corporate purchaser if they raised my budget or split my budget for linens that I'm not sure of. We don't have a third shift to do laundry, so I need more linens that's why I am requesting for an increase in budget. On 3/2/23 at 10:30 a.m. Staff GG, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was observed in a room assisting with morning care. Staff GG was heard telling the resident, I'll make your bed when I get linen. An interview was conducted with Staff GG who stated the linen was not usually available until 1:30-2:00 p.m. and many beds stay unmade for the morning. She stated, Most of the time it's not a problem because residents want to stay up. They don't usually want to get back to bed until after lunch. Staff GG said if she needs linen before it is delivered, she has to call and ask for someone to get the linen brought up. An interview was conducted on 3/2/23 at 10:30 a.m. with Resident #31. She stated her roommate had to wait for a shower because there were no towels. She said her roommate's shower was about 3 hours late because they had to wait for towels to get delivered to the floor. Resident #31 said sometimes she does not get a top sheet because it is needed for someone else. She stated they get a bottom sheet and a blanket because that is all there is. On 3/2/23 at 12:04 p.m. Resident #29 stated she had seen a shortage of towels and gowns. She stated, They cut the laundry hours about three weeks ago. The last load is picked up around 3 or 4 p.m. Towels are scarce, sometimes we have to wait up to an hour for a shower because there are not towels. I do not see anyone picking up laundry after 3:00 p.m. If you do not get a gown or towel by six in the evening you have to wait until the first load in the morning around 8:30 a.m. A review of the facility policy titled Linen Distribution, revised 11/30/22 indicated the following: Policy: The Laundry Department is responsible for distributing clean linen items to designated areas in the facility at specific times. Purpose: To provide the nursing department with adequate supply of linens in order to facilitate and administer high quality resident care, as well as, to promote a comfortable environment for the residents. Procedure: Distribution times Clean linen will be distributed to the nursing units at approximately: 6:30 a.m., 2:00 p.m., and 10:00 p.m. Supplemental Linen Requests In addition to scheduled linen delivery times, the Laundry Department will make supplemental deliveries to the nursing units as the need arises but only at the request of the nursing unit. After hours linen needs The Laundry Department operates between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 11:30 p.m. every day of the week. If a need for additional linen arises, the Nursing Supervisor is authorized to enter the laundry department and remove the needed linen items from the clean linen inventory. In this case, the supervisor will leave documentation which will indicate the types of linen items removed as well as the quantity of each item. Linen Carts Laundry personnel maintain the responsible for delivering well stocked linen carts to the wings and transferring the empty carts back to the laundry after nursing personnel have removed the necessary items from the linen carts.
Dec 2022 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure reporting in accordance with regulations and facility polic...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure reporting in accordance with regulations and facility policy for two (Residents #1 and #2) of two residents reviewed for incidents of alleged abuse. Findings included: Facility logs of all reportable incidents for the months of November 2022 and December 2022 were requested and provided. Review of the logs revealed no events in December, and two events in November: 11/08/2022 related to Resident #1, and 11/10/2022 related to Resident #2. Review of the medical records for both residents did not reveal any documentation related to these events. During an interview conducted on 12/16/2022 at 12:43 p.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed she was the facility abuse coordinator. Regarding the incidents, she consulted facility investigation files to provide information. Regarding the incident on 11/08/2022 related to Resident #1, she stated Resident #1 had alleged Staff B, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) made her feel as though he did not want to take care of her and she was a bother. The DON stated no allegation of physical abuse was made. She stated Resident #1 reported Staff B always seemed like he was in a hurry and that things had to be done his way rather than how she wanted to be taken care of. Resident #1 also alleged the bed linens of her roommate had not been changed in a month. The DON stated an investigation begun on 11/08/2022 and included conducting interviews with Resident #1, her roommate, and two other residents in Staff B's assignment. The DON stated Staff B was suspended pending investigation but he got upset about the suspension and resigned from employment at the facility and never returned. The DON stated she inspected the roommate's linens that day and found them to be fresh and clean. She stated the incident was reported to Department of Children and Families (DCF) who did not accept the case, and no reporting was made to law enforcement. She stated as far as she knew or could find, no federal reporting was done regarding the allegation but stated the facility's previous administrator had handled that part so she could not be certain. Regarding the incident on 11/20/2022 related to Resident #2, the DON stated the resident had alleged a big man who she identified as Staff C, CNA grabbed her when he transferred her, and it hurt her and she was afraid of him and did not want him taking care of her. Resident #2 also reported Staff C spoke to her about racial issues and she did not like that. The DON stated the previous administrator reported it to DCF and filed an adverse incident report, no reporting to law enforcement. The DON stated DCF did accept that case and interviewed the resident but did not substantiate the allegation. The DON stated the facility's investigation revealed Staff C had never been assigned to take care of Resident #2. The DON stated Resident #2 did have a bruise on her left leg that she said happened when Staff D threw her up in the air. The investigation revealed Resident #2 had a fall on 12/06/2022 and was treated with a blood thinner from 09/28/2022-11/30/2022 for a blood clot in her left leg which meant the bruise was from being on the blood thinner and her fall. The DON confirmed she had performed a physical assessment of Resident #2. She stated she looked at the resident's torso because the resident reported that was where she was grabbed but she did not have any marks in that area. The DON stated assignments sheets for Staff C were reviewed and he had never been assigned to care for Resident #2. She said her interview with Staff C confirmed that. The DON stated the facility was made aware of Resident #2's allegation from her daughter who called the DON directly because the resident had reported it to her. The DON stated Resident #2's daughter had stated she thought her mother was having some paranoia and was not concerned about abuse. Resident #1 was interviewed on 12/16/2022 at 1:30 p.m. and confirmed the allegation made on 11/08/2022 regarding the behavior of Staff C, CNA. She stated she and Staff C had always gotten along but one morning he had come in angry at women and so she reported his behavior to a facility social worker. Resident #1 stated the social worker told her Staff C had already quit that morning. No other details related to actions taken by the facility were reported by Resident #1. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] in the resident's medical record revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which meant the resident was not cognitively impaired. There were no symptoms of delirium or indicators of psychosis documented on the MDS. Resident #2 was interviewed on 12/16/2022 at 2:05 p.m. regarding the abuse allegation made 11/10/2022. Resident #2 did not name the staff member involved but stated that he was a large strong man who grabbed her and threw her up in the air. She stated she had screamed, and he dropped her on the bed. She stated she was afraid of him. Resident #2 stated she had not seen that staff member since the event, and he had not provided care for her since. She stated a facility unit manager talked to her about the incident. Review of the MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 14 which meant the resident was not cognitively impaired. There were no indicators of hallucinations or delusions documented on the MDS. A follow up interview was conducted with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the DON on 12/16/2022 at 3:57 p.m. They confirmed the former administrator had managed both incidents and had not responded to their attempts to contact for more information. They confirmed no federal reporting had been done regarding the allegation made by Resident #2. The DON stated she thought reporting was not indicated because she had concluded the investigation within the two-hour time limit and her findings were that the allegation of abuse was unfounded. The DON and NHA confirmed the allegation should have been reported because in the resident's statement she used key words that gave concern for abuse. Regarding Resident #1, the DON said there was no reporting of any kind on this one that we know of. Facility policy titled, The Elder Justice Act and Reporting Suspected Crimes Against Residents Policy and Procedure revised 08/2022 was reviewed and revealed: I. Duty to Report B. The Facility has a duty to report all alleged violations of abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, as well as the results of all investigations of alleged violations pursuant to 42 CFR 483.12(c). V. When to Report? B. Alleged Violations under 42 CFR 483.12(c) a. Immediately (for alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property but not later than: i. 2 hours-if the alleged violation involves abuse or results in serious bodily injury ii. 24 hours-if the alleged violation does not involve abuse and does not result in serious bodily injury. iii. Results of all investigations of alleged violations-within 5 working days of the incident. An Alleged violation is defined as a situation or occurrence that is observed or reported by staff, resident, relative, visitor or others but has not yet been investigated and, if verified, could be noncompliance with the Federal requirements related to mistreatment, exploitation, neglect, or abuse, including injuries of unknown source, and misappropriation of resident property
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that thorough investigation was conducted in response to re...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that thorough investigation was conducted in response to resident allegations of abuse for two (Resident #1 and #2) of two residents reviewed for incidents of alleged abuse. Findings included: Facility policy titled, The Elder Justice Act and Reporting Suspected Crimes Against Residents Policy and Procedure revised 08/2022 was reviewed and revealed: I. Duty to Report B. The Facility has a duty to report all alleged violations of abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, as well as the results of all investigations of alleged violations pursuant to 42 CFR 483.12(c). V. When to Report? B. Alleged Violations under 42 CFR 483.12(c) a. Immediately (for alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property but not later than: i. 2 hours-if the alleged violation involves abuse or results in serious bodily injury ii. 24 hours-if the alleged violation does not involve abuse and does not result in serious bodily injury. iii. Results of all investigations of alleged violations-within 5 working days of the incident. An Alleged violation is defined as a situation or occurrence that is observed or reported by staff, resident, relative, visitor or others but has not yet been investigated and, if verified, could be noncompliance with the Federal requirements related to mistreatment, exploitation, neglect, or abuse, including injuries of unknown source, and misappropriation of resident property Facility logs of all reportable incidents for the months of November 2022 and December 2022 were requested and provided. Review of the logs revealed no events in December, and two events in November: 11/08/2022 related to Resident #1, and 11/10/2022 related to Resident #2. Review of the medical records for both residents did not reveal any documentation related to these events. During an interview conducted on 12/16/2022 at 12:43 p.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed she was the facility abuse coordinator. Regarding the incidents, she consulted facility investigation files to provide information. Regarding the incident on 11/08/2022 related to Resident #1, she stated Resident #1 had alleged Staff B, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) made her feel as though he did not want to take care of her and she was a bother. The DON stated no allegation of physical abuse was made. She stated Resident #1 reported Staff B always seemed like he was in a hurry and that things had to be done his way rather than how she wanted to be taken care of. Resident #1 also alleged the bed linens of her roommate had not been changed in a month. The DON stated an investigation begun on 11/08/2022 and included conducting interviews with Resident #1, her roommate, and two other residents in Staff B's assignment. The DON stated Staff B was suspended pending investigation but he got upset about the suspension and resigned from employment at the facility and never returned. The DON stated she inspected the roommate's linens that day and found them to be fresh and clean. She stated the incident was reported to Department of Children and Families (DCF) who did not accept the case, and no reporting was made to law enforcement. She stated as far as she knew or could find, no federal reporting was done regarding the allegation but stated the facility's previous administrator had handled that part so she could not be certain. Regarding the incident on 11/20/2022 related to Resident #2, the DON stated the resident had alleged a big man who she identified as Staff C, CNA grabbed her when he transferred her, and it hurt her and she was afraid of him and did not want him taking care of her. Resident #2 also reported Staff C spoke to her about racial issues and she did not like that. The DON stated the previous administrator reported it to DCF and filed an adverse incident report, no reporting to law enforcement. The DON stated DCF did accept that case and interviewed the resident but did not substantiate the allegation. The DON stated the facility's investigation revealed Staff C had never been assigned to take care of Resident #2. The DON stated Resident #2 did have a bruise on her left leg that she said happened when Staff D threw her up in the air. The investigation revealed Resident #2 had a fall on 12/06/2022 and was treated with a blood thinner from 09/28/2022-11/30/2022 for a blood clot in her left leg which meant the bruise was from being on the blood thinner and her fall. The DON confirmed she had performed a physical assessment of Resident #2. She stated she looked at the resident's torso because the resident reported that was where she was grabbed but she did not have any marks in that area. The DON stated assignments sheets for Staff C were reviewed and he had never been assigned to care for Resident #2. She said her interview with Staff C confirmed that. The DON stated the facility was made aware of Resident #2's allegation from her daughter who called the DON directly because the resident had reported it to her. The DON stated Resident #2's daughter had stated she thought her mother was having some paranoia and was not concerned about abuse. Resident #1 was interviewed on 12/16/2022 at 1:30 p.m. and confirmed the allegation made on 11/08/2022 regarding the behavior of Staff C, CNA. She stated she and Staff C had always gotten along but one morning he had come in angry at women and so she reported his behavior to a facility social worker. Resident #1 stated the social worker told her Staff C had already quit that morning. No other details related to actions taken by the facility were reported by Resident #1. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] in the resident's medical record revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which meant the resident was not cognitively impaired. There were no symptoms of delirium or indicators of psychosis documented on the MDS. Resident #2 was interviewed on 12/16/2022 at 2:05 p.m. regarding the abuse allegation made 11/10/2022. Resident #2 did not name the staff member involved but stated that he was a large strong man who grabbed her and threw her up in the air. She stated she had screamed, and he dropped her on the bed. She stated she was afraid of him. Resident #2 stated she had not seen that staff member since the event, and he had not provided care for her since. She stated a facility unit manager talked to her about the incident. Review of the MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 14 which meant the resident was not cognitively impaired. There were no indicators of hallucinations or delusions documented on the MDS. A follow up interview was conducted with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the DON on 12/16/2022 at 3:57 p.m. They confirmed the former administrator had managed both incidents and had not responded to their attempts to contact for more information. They confirmed no federal reporting had been done regarding the allegation made by Resident #2. The DON stated she thought reporting was not indicated because she had concluded the investigation within the two-hour time limit and her findings were that the allegation of abuse was unfounded. The DON and NHA confirmed the allegation should have been reported because in the resident's statement she used key words that gave concern for abuse. Regarding Resident #1, the DON said there was no reporting of any kind on this one that we know of.
Jan 2022 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations, and interviews the facility failed to ensure dignity rights were upheld during dining for ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations, and interviews the facility failed to ensure dignity rights were upheld during dining for three residents (#124, #166, and #167) of forty dependent residents on one of four nursing units (the 400 hall, D unit), related to staff standing to provide feeding assistance, and not ensuring the residents were fed at the same time as their roommates. Findings included: Review of the face sheet in the admission record for Resident #124 revealed she was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis of unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance. A review of the MDS (minimum data set) assessment dated [DATE] reflected a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) could not be conducted because the resident was rarely/never understood. Further review of the assessment under section G, functional status, showed Resident #124 required limited assistance of one person for eating. A review of the physician's orders reflected a diet order dated 5/18/20 NAS (no added salt) regular texture, thin consistency. On 1/24/22 at 12:38 PM, an observation was conducted on the D wing nursing unit, 400 hall. Resident #124 was noted sitting in her wheelchair in her room in front of her television; her roommate in A bed was eating lunch. Resident #124 did not have a lunch tray. At 12:44 PM on 01/24/22 an observation was conducted. Staff I, CNA (certified nursing assistant) delivered a lunch tray to Resident #124. Staff I set up the tray for Resident #124, moved the tray in front of the resident, and stood next to her. Staff I began feeding Resident #124. A chair was noted in the corner near the head of Resident #124's bed. On 1/25/22 at 8:40 AM an observation was conducted during the breakfast meal on the 400 hall, D wing nursing unit. Resident #124 was sitting in her wheelchair next to the television with her eyes closed. There was a breakfast tray on the over the bed table in front of her, which still had the lids on the food items. Resident #124's roommate in A bed also had a breakfast tray and was eating. No one was noted assisting Resident #124 with the breakfast meal. On 1/25/22 at 8:52 AM another observation was conducted. Staff I, CNA was standing next to Resident #124 assisting with the breakfast meal. Resident #124 was sitting in her wheelchair with the overbed table in front of her and the breakfast tray on it. An interview was conducted with Staff I during the observation. Staff I, CNA said Resident #124 needs cues and help to get started. The CNA stated, She forgets to use silverware, so her daughter likes her to have finger food. If she won't feed herself then I stay. Staff I continued setting up the breakfast tray and encouraging Resident #124 to wake up and eat. Staff I started assisting Resident #124 with juice and oatmeal, while continuing to stand over her. Another interview was conducted during the observation. Staff I, CNA said she usually stands to provide assistance with the meal. Further observation on 1/25/22 at 9:09 AM revealed Staff I, CNA continued standing over Resident #124 to assist with breakfast. There was a chair in the corner of the room. On 1/25/22 at 9:17 AM another observation showed Staff I, CNA continuing to stand over Resident #124 while feeding her the breakfast meal. Review of the face sheet in the admission record for Resident #167 revealed she was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. A review of the MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed a BIMS could not be completed because the resident is rarely/never understood. Review of section G, functional status reveled Resident #167 required extensive assistance of one person for eating. Review of the physician's orders showed a diet order dated 2/9/21 regular diet, regular texture, thin consistency. On 01/24/22 at 12:23 PM, an observation was conducted during dining services on the D wing nursing unit, 400 hall. Staff G, restorative CNA (certified nursing assistant) removed a lunch tray from the dining cart and entered Resident #167's room. Staff G, restorative CNA delivered the tray to Resident #167's roommate in B bed. Staff G sat in the chair next to Resident #167's roommate and began feeding her. Resident #167 was lying in her bed with her eyes open and the television on. The privacy curtain between the two residents was open. On 1/24/22 at 12:52 PM an observation was conducted on the 400 hall of the D wing nursing unit. The last tray on the dining cart was delivered. An interview was conducted with Staff G, restorative CNA at that time. Staff G said she did not know the reason Resident #167 did not have a tray. At 12:54 PM on 1/24/22 another observation was conducted. There was a lunch tray on the overbed table in front of Resident #167. Staff G, restorative CNA sat in the chair next to Resident #167 and began assisting her with the lunch meal. Thirty-one minutes had passed since the resident's roommate received her tray and was assisted with her lunch. On 1/25/22 at 8:35 AM, an observation was conducted on the D wing. Resident #167 was lying in her bed with her eyes open. Her roommate had a breakfast tray, and Staff J, restorative CNA was assisting her with the meal. Resident #167 did not have a breakfast tray. Further observation on 1/25/22 at 8:39 AM revealed Staff H, CNA delivered a breakfast tray to Resident #167 and set it up. On 1/25/22 at 8:43 AM an observation showed the breakfast tray was set up for Resident #167 and she had her right hand on her orange juice cup. She was not eating or drinking. At 8:44 AM an interview was conducted with Staff J, restorative CNA, who was assisting Resident #167's roommate with breakfast. She said Resident #167 can start but she needs help to finish. She stated, The CNA isn't coming so I try to help her. Staff J confirmed Resident #167 needs help with eating. On 1/25/22 at 8:48 AM an interview was conducted with Staff H, CNA. Staff H said Resident #167 does need feeding assistance. Staff H stated, I have four feeds. The lady from therapy feeds Resident #167's roommate. Staff H confirmed residents who share a room have to eat at the same time. On 1/25/22 at 8:59 AM an observation showed Staff J, restorative CNA was sitting next to Resident #167 feeding her the breakfast meal that had been set up sixteen minutes earlier. Resident #167's roommate was finished eating. Review of the face sheet in the admission record for Resident #166 reflected an admission diagnosis of unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance A review of the MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS could not be completed because Resident #166 was rarely/never understood. Further review of the assessment under section G, functional status, showed Resident #166 required extensive assistance of one person for eating. Review of the physician's orders dated 8/24/21, reflected a regular diet, pureed texture, thin consistency. On 1/25/22 at 8:57 AM, an observation was conducted on the D wing nursing unit. Resident #166 was in his bed awake; there was a breakfast tray on the overbed table next to the head of the bed. All the food items were still covered with lids. Resident #166's roommate also had a breakfast tray and was eating his breakfast. On 1/25/22 at 9:00 AM an observation was conducted. Staff H, CNA came in Resident #166's room and set up his breakfast tray. An interview was conducted with Staff H during the observation. Staff H said the breakfast trays came up around 8:30. Further observation on 1/25/22 at 9:03 AM revealed Staff H, CNA was standing next to Resident #166 encouraging him to take some oatmeal. An interview was conducted during the observation. Staff H stated, we're not supposed to stand. We have to sit. On 1/26/22 at 9:54 AM an interview was conducted with the unit manager, Staff D, RN (registered nurse) on the D wing nursing unit. Staff D said staff should be seated and confirmed there was adequate staff on the unit. She stated, Not all staff are in house. Some are contract. That shouldn't matter. Trays should not be left in front of residents who need to be fed. They can always ask for assistance from their hall partner or myself. The unit clerk is a CNA. She can help, if the residents aren't being fed in a timely manner. Staff D continued In the perfect world, two staff would feed them at the same time. It's not possible all the time. On 1/26/22 at 1:56 PM an interview was conducted with the DON (director of nursing). The DON said staff need to be seated. She said they do not normally feed residents at the same time unless there is enough staff to feed bed A and bed B at the same time. If not, they would get the tray for one resident and feed them, and then go to the dining cart and get the tray and feed the other resident. She stated, With not having dining room it's really hard to feed multiple people at a time. I would hate to have one resident eating and the other one not. The DON also said it was not acceptable for a resident to wait a half hour to be fed.
CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a care plan was implemented, related to the u...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a care plan was implemented, related to the use of hearing devices for one (Resident #154) of four sampled residents. Findings included: Review of the admission Record revealed Resident #154, was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Esophageal Obstruction, Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder. On 1/24/22 at 11:37 AM an observation identified Resident #154 sitting in a wheelchair. The resident's hearing aids were not observed on bedside table, nor observable in the resident's left or right ear. An interview was attempted with resident; she pointed to her ears indicating she was not able to hear to communicate. Resident #154 was observed on 01/25/22 at 10:15 AM wearing glasses and reading. Hearing aids were not observed in resident's room or visually in the left and right ear. On 1/26/22 at 09:08 AM an observation revealed Resident #154 was seated in her room; no hearing aids were observed in either ear or on the bedside table. A review of Resident #154 Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE] revealed Cognitive (Section C) Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) 13, indicating the resident was cognitively intact; and Section B for Hearing, Speech and Vision with moderate difficulty hearing. A review of Residents #154 care plan, dated 12/24/21-1/5/22, identified the following: Focus: I have difficulty with communication due to hearing loss. I have use of hearing aid. Goal: I will understand what is said as evidenced by appropriate verbal or physical response through next review. Interventions: Ensure availability and functioning of hearing aids. Assist resident with putting in and taking out. On 01/25/22 at 10:15 AM an interview was conducted with Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse, who said she was not aware of Resident #154's hearing aids, and referred to Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) for questions. On 1/26/22 at 09:14 AM an interview was conducted with Staff B, CNA. She stated, This is the first day I have had [Resident #154] this week, I am not sure if she wears hearing aids or if they are in. On 1/26/22 at 09:39 AM a subsequent interview was conducted with Staff B, CNA. The CNA stated, I checked for [Resident #154] hearing aids, they are not in the room, and she does not have them in, I am not sure if she has them here. An interview was conducted on 01/26/22 at 09:39 AM with Staff A, LPN. She stated, I checked on [Resident #154] hearing aids on 1/25/22, she came from the Assisted Living Facility (ALF). I contacted the ALF and I shared (Resident #154) did not arrive with hearing aids to facility. I also contacted Unit Manager to share the information for follow-up for the Resident to see if we can help. In an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 1/26/21 at 01:56 PM she said Care Plans are created, implemented, and monitored by Nursing Services and the MDS team. She said her expectation is that care plan interventions are implement and followed. A facility-provided policy titled Care Plans-Resident Centered and dated May 2018, showed the purpose, To provide necessary care planning that results in care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being consistent with the resident comprehensive assessment and plan of care. Continued review revealed The care plan includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care.
CONCERN (D)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a skin tear was identified and assessed, and ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a skin tear was identified and assessed, and physician's orders for treatment were obtained for one (Resident #154) of four sampled residents. Findings included: Review of the admission Record revealed Resident #154, was admitted to the facility on [DATE] which included Diagnosis of Esophageal Obstruction, Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder. A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) identified on 1/19/22 Cognitive (Section C) Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) 13, indicating the resident's cognition was intact. On 01/24/22 at 11:37 AM, Resident #154 was observed sitting in a wheelchair. The resident's left hand was observed with an adhesive dressing, the size of half dollar, located at the base of third finger. The resident was not interviewable and was noted dressed and groomed. On 01/25/22 at 10:15 AM an observation of Resident #154 revealed an open skin area at the base of middle finger, approximately the size of a penny; a dressing was not noted on the wound. An interview was conducted on 1/25/22 at 10:15 AM with Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). She stated, Looks like a skin tear on left hand, I saw the bandage and looks like she took it off. The LPN said she was not aware of skin tear. A Record Review for Resident #154 revealed no documentation of the skin tear, and no physician's orders for treatment, prior to 1/25/22. Review of the Care Plan initiated 12/24/21 revealed: Focus: I am at risk for impaired skin integrity and prone to bruising and skin tears. Goal: Skin tears will be managed with early detection and treatment through next review Date initiated 12/24/21 identified with Target date 03/30/2022. Interventions included monitoring placement of extremities during transfers and mobility to prevent/limit skin tears and bruises, administer treatments as ordered and monitor for effectiveness. In an interview with Staff C, Unit Manager (UM) on 01/26/22 at 09:16 AM stated, We discussed Resident #154 left hand on our call yesterday when we became aware of it. The UM said the Physician had been informed of the skin tear. During an interview with Staff D, Registered Nurse (RN) on 1/26/22 at 9:42 AM, she stated, I just assessed and changed the left-hand dressing and measured skin tear. An additional document review on 1/26/22 at 09:56 identified Resident #154 had a left dorsal skin tear, measuring 0.5cm (centimeters) x[by] 0.2cm x 0.0cm non-flapped skin tear, wound care provided, monitoring. During interview on 01/26/22 at 01:56 PM with Director of Nursing (DON), she said she would expect a CNA to report a new skin condition or skin tear to the nurse assigned for an assessment, reporting and interventions. A facility policy was requested skin tears, skin assessments and reporting to the Physician/Physician Orders on 1/27/22; however, the facility was unable to provide.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0802 (Tag F0802)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure sufficient staff were availab...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure sufficient staff were available to provide dining services in a timely manner for three residents (#124, 166, and 167) of forty dependent residents on one of four nursing units (the 400 hall, D unit). Findings included: Review of the face sheet in the admission record for Resident #167 revealed she was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. A review of the MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed a BIMS could not be completed because the resident is rarely/never understood. Review of section G, functional status reveled Resident #167 required extensive assistance of one person for eating. Review of the physician's orders showed a diet order dated 2/9/21 regular diet, regular texture, thin consistency. On 01/24/22 at 12:23 PM, an observation was conducted during dining services on the D wing nursing unit, 400 hall. Staff G, restorative CNA (certified nursing assistant) removed a lunch tray from the dining cart and entered Resident #167's room. Staff G, restorative CNA delivered the tray to Resident #167's roommate in B bed. Staff G sat in the chair next to Resident #167's roommate and began feeding her. Resident #167 was lying in her bed with her eyes open and the television on. The privacy curtain between the two residents was open. On 1/24/22 at 12:52 PM an observation was conducted on the 400 hall of the D wing nursing unit. The last tray on the dining cart was delivered. An interview was conducted with Staff G, restorative CNA at that time. Staff G said she did not know the reason Resident #167 did not have a tray. At 12:54 PM on 1/24/22 another observation was conducted. There was a lunch tray on the overbed table in front of Resident #167. Staff G, restorative CNA sat in the chair next to Resident #167 and began assisting her with the lunch meal. Thirty-one minutes had passed since the resident's roommate received her tray and was assisted with her lunch. On 1/25/22 at 8:35 AM, an observation was conducted on the D wing. Resident #167 was lying in her bed with her eyes open. Her roommate had a breakfast tray, and Staff J, restorative CNA was assisting her with the meal. Resident #167 did not have a breakfast tray. Further observation on 1/25/22 at 8:39 AM revealed Staff H, CNA delivered a breakfast tray to Resident #167 and set it up. On 1/25/22 at 8:43 AM an observation showed the breakfast tray was set up for Resident #167 and she had her right hand on her orange juice cup. She was not eating or drinking. At 8:44 AM an interview was conducted with Staff J, restorative CNA, who was assisting Resident #167's roommate with breakfast. She said Resident #167 can start but she needs help to finish. She stated, The CNA isn't coming so I try to help her. Staff J confirmed Resident #167 needs help with eating. On 1/25/22 at 8:48 AM an interview was conducted with Staff H, CNA. Staff H said Resident #167 does need feeding assistance. Staff H stated, I have four feeds. The lady from therapy feeds Resident #167's roommate. Staff H confirmed residents who share a room have to eat at the same time. On 1/25/22 at 8:59 AM an observation showed Staff J, restorative CNA was sitting next to Resident #167 feeding her the breakfast meal that had been set up sixteen minutes earlier. Resident #167's roommate was finished eating. Review of the face sheet in the admission record for Resident #124 revealed she was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis of unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance. A review of the MDS (minimum data set) assessment dated [DATE] reflected a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) could not be conducted because the resident was rarely/never understood. Further review of the assessment under section G, functional status, showed Resident #124 required limited assistance of one person for eating. A review of the physician's orders reflected a diet order dated 5/18/20 NAS (no added salt) regular texture, thin consistency. On 1/24/22 at 12:38 PM, an observation was conducted on the D wing nursing unit, 400 hall. Resident #124 was noted sitting in her wheelchair in her room in front of her television; her roommate in A bed was eating lunch. Resident #124 did not have a lunch tray. At 12:44 PM on 01/24/22 an observation was conducted. Staff I, CNA (certified nursing assistant) delivered a lunch tray to Resident #124. Staff I set up the tray for Resident #124, moved the tray in front of the resident, and stood next to her. Staff I began feeding Resident #124. A chair was noted in the corner near the head of Resident #124's bed. On 1/25/22 at 8:40 AM an observation was conducted during the breakfast meal on the 400 hall, D wing nursing unit. Resident #124 was sitting in her wheelchair next to the television with her eyes closed. There was a breakfast tray on the over the bed table in front of her, which still had the lids on the food items. Resident #124's roommate in A bed also had a breakfast tray and was eating. No one was noted assisting Resident #124 with the breakfast meal. On 1/25/22 at 8:52 AM another observation was conducted. Staff I, CNA was standing next to Resident #124 assisting with the breakfast meal. Resident #124 was sitting in her wheelchair with the overbed table in front of her and the breakfast tray on it. An interview was conducted with Staff I during the observation. Staff I, CNA said Resident #124 needs cues and help to get started. The CNA stated, She forgets to use silverware, so her daughter likes her to have finger food. If she won't feed herself then I stay. Staff I continued setting up the breakfast tray and encouraging Resident #124 to wake up and eat. Staff I started assisting Resident #124 with juice and oatmeal, while continuing to stand over her. Another interview was conducted during the observation. Staff I, CNA said she usually stands to provide assistance with the meal. Further observation on 1/25/22 at 9:09 AM revealed Staff I, CNA continued standing over Resident #124 to assist with breakfast. There was a chair in the corner of the room. On 1/25/22 at 9:17 AM another observation showed Staff I, CNA continuing to stand over Resident #124 while feeding her the breakfast meal. Review of the face sheet in the admission record for Resident #166 reflected an admission diagnosis of unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance A review of the MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS could not be completed because Resident #166 was rarely/never understood. Further review of the assessment under section G, functional status, showed Resident #166 required extensive assistance of one person for eating. Review of the physician's orders dated 8/24/21, reflected a regular diet, pureed texture, thin consistency. On 1/25/22 at 8:57 AM, an observation was conducted on the D wing nursing unit. Resident #166 was in his bed awake; there was a breakfast tray on the overbed table next to the head of the bed. All the food items were still covered with lids. Resident #166's roommate also had a breakfast tray and was eating his breakfast. On 1/25/22 at 9:00 AM an observation was conducted. Staff H, CNA came in Resident #166's room and set up his breakfast tray. An interview was conducted with Staff H during the observation. Staff H said the breakfast trays came up around 8:30. Further observation on 1/25/22 at 9:03 AM revealed Staff H, CNA was standing next to Resident #166 encouraging him to take some oatmeal. An interview was conducted during the observation. Staff H stated, we're not supposed to stand. We have to sit. On 1/26/22 at 9:54 AM an interview was conducted with the unit manager, Staff D, RN (registered nurse) on the D wing nursing unit. Staff D said staff should be seated and confirmed there was adequate staff on the unit. She stated, Not all staff are in house. Some are contract. That shouldn't matter. Trays should not be left in front of residents who need to be fed. They can always ask for assistance from their hall partner or myself. The unit clerk is a CNA. She can help, if the residents aren't being fed in a timely manner. Staff D continued In the perfect world, two staff would feed them at the same time. It's not possible all the time. On 1/26/22 at 1:56 PM an interview was conducted with the DON (director of nursing). The DON said staff need to be seated. She said they do not normally feed residents at the same time unless there is enough staff to feed bed A and bed B at the same time. If not, they would get the tray for one resident and feed them, and then go to the dining cart and get the tray and feed the other resident. She stated, With not having dining room it's really hard to feed multiple people at a time. I would hate to have one resident eating and the other one not. The DON also said it was not acceptable for a resident to wait a half hour to be fed. Review of the policy, Nursing Services Staffing, last review date of 11/6/21, reflected the following information: Policy Statement: It is the policy of this facility to have sufficient, competent staff on each shift to provide direct care and services to meet the needs of the residents based on the acuity. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. Staff are scheduled so that at a minimum, residents receive an average of two and a half hours of care. 2. Facility will have sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate competencies and skill sets to provided nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, as determined by resident assessments and individual plans of care and considering the number, acuity, and diagnoses of the facility's resident population in accordance with the facility assessment.
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?"
  • "What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
  • "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 7 life-threatening violation(s), Special Focus Facility, 2 harm violation(s), $592,514 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 59 deficiencies on record, including 7 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $592,514 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 a substantiated abuse finding. Extreme caution advised. Explore alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Aventura At The Bay's CMS Rating?

AVENTURA AT THE BAY does not currently have a CMS star rating on record.

How is Aventura At The Bay Staffed?

Staff turnover is 63%, which is 17 percentage points above the Florida average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 79%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Aventura At The Bay?

State health inspectors documented 59 deficiencies at AVENTURA AT THE BAY during 2022 to 2025. These included: 7 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 2 that caused actual resident harm, and 50 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 Aventura At The Bay?

AVENTURA AT THE BAY 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 AVENTURA HEALTH GROUP, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 274 certified beds and approximately 183 residents (about 67% occupancy), it is a large facility located in SAINT PETERSBURG, Florida.

How Does Aventura At The Bay Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, AVENTURA AT THE BAY's staff turnover (63%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Aventura At The Bay?

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?" "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations, the substantiated abuse finding on record, and the facility's high staff turnover rate.

Is Aventura At The Bay Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, AVENTURA AT THE BAY has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). Inspectors have issued 7 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility is currently on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes nationwide). The facility has a 0-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 Aventura At The Bay Stick Around?

Staff turnover at AVENTURA AT THE BAY is high. At 63%, the facility is 17 percentage points above the Florida average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 79%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?

Was Aventura At The Bay Ever Fined?

AVENTURA AT THE BAY has been fined $592,514 across 3 penalty actions. This is 15.2x the Florida average of $39,004. 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 Aventura At The Bay on Any Federal Watch List?

AVENTURA AT THE BAY is currently on the Special Focus Facility (SFF) watch list. This federal program identifies the roughly 1% of nursing homes nationally with the most serious and persistent quality problems. SFF facilities receive inspections roughly twice as often as typical nursing homes. Factors in this facility's record include 7 Immediate Jeopardy findings, a substantiated abuse finding, and $592,514 in federal fines. Facilities that fail to improve face escalating consequences, potentially including termination from Medicare and Medicaid. Families considering this facility should ask for documentation of recent improvements and what specific changes have been made since the designation.