TODD-DICKEY NURSING AND REHABILITATION

712 W 2ND ST, LEAVENWORTH, IN 47137 (812) 739-2292
Government - County 62 Beds AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
85/100
#103 of 505 in IN
Last Inspection: May 2024

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

Overview

Todd-Dickey Nursing and Rehabilitation has a Trust Grade of B+, which means it is above average and recommended for families considering care options. It ranks #103 out of 505 facilities in Indiana, placing it in the top half of the state, and it is the only option in Crawford County. The facility is improving, with reported issues decreasing from four in 2022 to three in 2024. Staffing has a moderate rating of 3 out of 5 stars, with a turnover rate of 36%, which is better than the state average of 47%, indicating that staff tend to stay longer and build relationships with residents. While the facility has no fines on record, which is a positive sign, there have been some concerning incidents. For example, one resident suffered second-degree burns after spilling hot coffee due to inadequate assistance, and there were issues with catheter care for multiple residents, including improper monitoring and hygiene practices. Overall, Todd-Dickey has strengths in its rating and staffing stability, but families should be aware of the specific care incidents that need improvement.

Trust Score
B+
85/100
In Indiana
#103/505
Top 20%
Safety Record
Moderate
Needs review
Inspections
Getting Better
4 → 3 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
36% turnover. Near Indiana's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Indiana facilities.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 34 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Indiana. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
○ Average
7 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural issues.
★★★★★
5.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★★★★★
5.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2022: 4 issues
2024: 3 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (36%)

    12 points below Indiana average of 48%

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 36%

Near Indiana avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Chain: AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 7 deficiencies on record

1 actual harm
Oct 2024 1 deficiency 1 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

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff provided effective assistance with drinking in accordance with the plan of care and failed to implement effectiv...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff provided effective assistance with drinking in accordance with the plan of care and failed to implement effective interventions to prevent the spillage of hot coffee to a resident with upper extremity tremors for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents. (Resident B) This deficient practice resulted in the resident spilling the hot coffee and sustaining second degree burns on right lateral chin, right and left thighs; and a third degree burn on right upper inner groin area. Findings include: On 10/1/24 at 10:35 a.m., Resident B was observed resting in bed with her eyes open and watching television. The resident was observed with tremors of persistent movement to the arms, hands, and head. The incident report, dated 9/5/24 at 7:15 a.m., indicated Resident B spilled coffee on her lap with blisters to her right upper thigh and reddened area to her bilateral legs and right lower arm. The facility preventative measures were for staff to provide the resident with a cup with a lid. The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 10/1/24 at 10:54 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, dementia, anxiety, impulsiveness, and tremors. The significant status changes minimum data set (MDS) assessment, dated 8/5/24, indicated the resident's cognition was moderately impaired. The resident required staff assistance with set up for eating and drinking. The care plan, dated 7/10/24, indicated the resident was a nutritional risk related to a history of malnutrition, tremors, and self-feeding issues. The care plan lacked interventions related to tremors and self-feeding issues. The care plan, dated 7/12/24, indicated the resident required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL's) and staff were to assist Resident B with eating and drinking when needed. The care plan lacked the level of assistance needed related to the number of staff needed or how much assistance Resident B needed with eating and drinking. The nursing to therapy referral, dated 7/23/24 at 2:58 p.m., indicated the resident complained of tremors that refrained her from using eating utensils. The occupational therapy (OT) evaluation, dated 7/26/24, indicated the resident was recently referred to be evaluated by therapy. The resident had an increase in tremors and a decline in fine motor coordination which led to difficulty with self-feeding and ADL tasks. The nursing to therapy referral, dated 8/7/24 at 10:48 a.m., indicated the resident was complaining of difficulty in using her water cup at bedside due to the weight of the water in the cup. The resident continued to have tremors to her hands and arms. The resident's care plan or dietary staff notes lacked any implemented interventions related to the resident's difficulty with holding her cup, after the 8/7/24 therapy referral. The occupational therapy note, dated 9/4/24, indicated the resident and caregiver were educated on the resident's difficulties with self-feeding related to increased difficulty with scooping food onto her utensils. The Certified Occupational Therapy Assistant (COTA) 4 explained the adaptive equipment the resident could use to make self-feeding easier for the resident. The therapist will continue to observe the resident during mealtimes to assess for a scoop plate. The note lacked any documentation related to the resident's difficulties handling liquids or a cup. The progress note, dated 9/5/24 at 7:15 a.m., indicated the resident was up in the dining room and requested a cup of coffee. The resident was given the coffee and dropped the coffee on her lap. The resident was immediately taken to her room and her clothing was removed. The resident's skin was already red and showed signs of blisters (The note lacked where the redness occurred). Cool towels were applied to all the resident's red areas. The facility wound management report, dated 9/5/24 between 1:11 p.m. and 1:14 p.m., indicated the resident had acquired three burned areas related to hot coffee. - Wound 1 was a superficial burn to the resident's right lower inner arm and measured 19 cm (centimeters) in length and 8.2 cm in width with no depth. The area was pink in color with no blisters. Staff were to cleanse the area, apply a thin layer of Silvadene (a cream that treats and prevents wound infections for burns) topically and wrap with gauze twice daily. - Wound 2 was a partial thickness burn to the resident's right top thigh area and measured 39.5 cm in length and 27 cm in width with no depth. The area was blistered, moist, painful, and reddened. Staff were to cleanse the area, apply a thin layer of Silvadene topically, and wrap with gauze twice daily. - Wound 3 was a superficial burn to the resident's left top thigh area and measured 8 cm in length and 11 cm in width. The area was painful, reddened and blanched with pressure. No blisters were observed. Staff were to cleanse the area, apply a thin layer of Silvadene topically, and wrap with gauze twice daily. The clinical record lacked documentation related to a burn on the resident's right lower facial area. The physician's order, dated 9/6/24, indicated staff were to continue to cleanse all the resident's burned areas, apply a thin layer of Silvadene cream, and cover with Mepitel (a dressing used to protect the wound and skin). Then apply border gauze (a type of wound dressing that consists of three layers and was used to protect and absorb wounds) to secure. The physician's order, dated 9/11/24, indicated staff were to continue to cleanse all the resident's burned areas, apply a thin layer of Silvadene cream and cover with xeroform dressing (a dressing for low draining wounds). Then apply border gauze to secure. The wound care center history and physical note, dated 9/12/24 at 12:30 p.m., indicated Resident B presented to the wound care center with her family member related to burns acquired in the nursing home from hot coffee. The wound care center detailed assessment, dated 9/12/24 at 12:30 p.m., indicated the resident presented to the center with the following wounds: - Wound 2 involved the resident's right groin area and upper medial leg. The resident had a second-degree burn (involving the first two layers of skin. These may present as deep reddening of the skin, pain, blisters, glossy appearance from leaking fluid, and possible loss of some skin). The wound measured 25 cm in length, 16 cm in width with a depth of 0.2 cm, full thickness without exposed support structures. The wound had a large amount of serosanguineous (a combination of blood and serum) exudate (drainage), slough (yellow/white material in the wound bed), and with a fat layer exposed. The treatment ordered was Santyl (debriding treatment), staff were to apply a nickel thick amount to wound bed, with a Vaseline gauze over the Santyl and cover with an abdominal pad daily (ABD). The resident's right medial upper leg had a first-degree burn (involving the top layer of skin. These may present as red and painful to touch, and the skin will show mild swelling). The wound measured 2.2 cm in length, 2.4 cm in width with a depth of 0.1 cm, full thickness without exposed support structures, large amount of serosanguineous exudate and slough. The treatment ordered was bacitracin (helps prevent burns from becoming infected) to the wound bed, staff were to apply Vaseline gauze, cover with ABD pad, and secure with gauze daily. - Wound 3 involved the resident's left medial upper thigh. The resident had a second-degree burn. The wound measured 3 cm in length, 4 cm in width with a depth of 0.1 cm, full thickness without exposed support structures. The wound had a medium amount of serosanguineous exudate and with a fat layer exposed. The treatment ordered was bacitracin to wound bed, staff were to apply Vaseline gauze, cover with ABD pad, and secure with gauze wrap. - Wound 4 involved the resident's right lateral chin. The resident had a second-degree burn. The wound measured 0.3 cm in length, 0.5 cm in width with a depth of 0.1 cm, full thickness without exposed support structures, a small amount of serosanguineous exudated. The treatment ordered was bacitracin to the wound bed daily. The wound care center note, dated 9/12/24, lacked any documentation related to the resident's right lower inner arm burn that was identified on 9/5/24 as Wound 1 on the facility wound management note. The facility skin and wound note, dated 10/1/24 at 2:47 p.m., indicated the following: -Wound 2 was located on the resident's right groin area. The wound was a third-degree burn (third-degree burns penetrated the entire thickness of the skin and permanently destroy tissue. These present as loss of skin layers, often painless and dry, leathery skin. Skin may appear charred or have patches that appear white, brown, or black). The area measured 4.2 cm in length, 18 cm in width with a depth of 0.2 cm. The wound contained 80% (percent) slough with a heavy amount of serosanguineous exudate. The exposed tissues were the epithelium and dermis. A wound debridement was completed to 100% of the wound and necrotic tissue was removed. The wound was to be cleansed with wound cleanser, patted dry, apply Santyl cream and covered with ABD/bordered gauze daily. - Wound 3 was located on the resident's left thigh. The wound was a third-degree burn. The wound measured 0.5 cm in length, 1.5 cm in width with a depth of 0.1 cm with a small amount of serosanguineous exudate. The exposed tissue was epithelium. The wound was to be cleansed with wound cleanser, apply xeroform and bordered gauze daily. The facility wound note, dated 10/1/24, lacked documentation related to the resident's Wound 1 identified on the facility wound note, dated 9/5/24; or Wound 4 identified on the Wound Care Center assessment, dated 9/12/24. During an interview on 10/1/24 at 10:35 a.m., the resident's family member indicated the wound nurse had been in that morning for treatment to her family member's burn wounds. The resident had a third-degree burn to her right upper thigh and a second-degree burn to her left upper thigh. The resident had severe tremors, and the family member was unsure why there was no lid on the coffee cup to prevent spillage. On 10/1/24 at 11:00 a.m., during an observation of the coffee maker in the facility kitchen, the industrial coffee maker was observed to be set at 200 degrees Fahrenheit. The ED indicated they do not individually temp the coffee. The industrial coffee maker was set at 200 degrees Fahrenheit. The standard was between 205 to 215 degrees Fahrenheit and they set their' s below the standard at 200 degrees Fahrenheit. The industrial coffee maker was observed to be set at 200 degrees Fahrenheit. On 10/1/24 at 11.07 a.m., during an observation of the coffee temperatures in the two residents' dining rooms, the coffee being served by staff was tempted to be at 140 degrees Fahrenheit. On 10/1/24 at 11:30 a.m., a request was made for the facility policy on hot liquids. On 10/1/24 at 12:30 p.m., the Executive Director (ED) indicated the facility did not have a policy on hot liquids. The ED and Director of Nursing (DON) indicated they did not do hot liquid evaluations. The ED indicated that the resident, had always drank coffee. The DON indicated Resident B was able to eat and drink with no issues. The resident had a couple of hospital stays. After her second hospital stay, they had therapy take a look at the resident. She would not eat; she was paranoid and had mental status changes. Speech could not evaluate her because she refused. The family member could get her to eat. They sent her to neurology, and they put her on Gabapentin for her tremors. She had lethargy and increased tremors. They decreased the Gabapentin. There was no need for an evaluation as the family member was assisting the resident with meals. She was up for meals, still having tremors and staff were supervising. During an interview on 10/2/24 at 9:16 a.m., the Executive Director (ED) indicated the resident was seen by the occupational therapist assistant on 9/4/24 for assistive devices and felt at that time a lid was not needed. The facility staff were aware the resident had tremors; however, the tremors were inconsistent. The ED provided a typed noted completed on 10/2/24 and dated 9/4/24 from COTA 4. The typed noted indicated the following: The resident and resident's caregiver were educated on the different types of adaptive equipment. Adaptive equipment suggested were a scoop plate, weighted silverware, and lids on cups. The resident observed on 9/4/24 with a plastic lid on a regular cup. The resident completed drinking tasks without problems. The resident demonstrated minimum tremors during treatment session. At this time, due to the resident's alertness and minimum tremors, lids on cups were not recommended. On 10/2/24 at 9:42 a.m., an observation of the resident's wound was made with the DON and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 8. The resident's area to her right groin wound (Wound 2) was observed to be 18 cm in length, 4 cm in width with a depth of 0.1 cm. Scar tissue was observed around the peri-wound. Approximately 70% of the wound was covered with yellow slough. There was no odor. The left thigh wound (Wound 3) was observed to be 2 cm in length and 2 cm in width with no depth. The wound bed was observed to be pink with no slough. Scar tissue was observed to the top of the wound. The resident denied any pain or discomfort. During an interview 10/2/24 at 9:45 a.m., Certified Nursing Aide (CNA) 5 indicated the day of the incident, she heard someone crying and another CNA 6 was taking the resident to her room. Resident B shakes really bad, and it comes and goes. She could not recall if the resident had tremors that day, but some days she had them and some days she did not. There were plenty of days that she needed a lid for her cup to prevent her from spilling the liquid. She was aware the resident had tremors. During an interview on 10/2/24 at 9:47 a.m., CNA 6 indicated it was breakfast time and CNA 7 handed Resident B a cup of coffee. The coffee was really hot that day. She heard something drop. She walked over and saw that the coffee had spilled on Resident B. She took the resident to her room, removed her clothing and put cold wash cloths on the reddened areas. Her skin was red when she removed the resident's clothing. She did not recall if the resident was having tremors that day, but she was aware the resident did have tremors. During an interview on 10/2/24 at 11:00 a.m., COTA 4 indicated she had spent time with the resident on 9/4/24. When she went in the room, the resident was abed, and her family member was at her bedside. The resident had a couple of hospital stays and after she came back from her second one, she was very paranoid. She quit eating and thought the staff were poisoning her food. On 9/4/24, when she saw the resident, she was coming out of showing signs of paranoia. The family member asked her about assistive devices, and she spoke with her about a scoop plate, weighted utensils, and a lidded cup if it came to that. On 9/4/24, the resident's tremors were minimal, and she was alert and oriented. When her lunch tray came, her cup had a lid on it. She put a straw in the top of the lid and the resident did fine drinking. She was aware the resident had tremors, and the tremors would come and go and were very inconsistent. It was a very short time when the incident occurred that the resident could feed herself. During a telephone interview on 10/2/24 at 11:09 a.m., CNA 7 indicated on the morning of the incident, they were getting the breakfast trays ready. She asked Resident B if she wanted coffee, and she said yes. She poured the resident some coffee and it was hot. She placed the coffee on the residents' table, out of the resident's reach, because it was hot. She went back to the food cart and was told the resident had spilled her coffee. She and CNA 6 took the resident to her room, got her undressed and placed cold cloths on the reddened areas. After that she left the resident's room to finish the meal service. She had never seen the resident with a lid on her cup. She had no idea how the resident reached the coffee cup or if someone else gave it to her. The resident's tremors were not as bad that day as they usually were. She was aware the resident had tremors. The resident had always gotten coffee before when she wanted it, without a lid on her cup, and she did not recall the resident ever having a lid on her coffee. On 10/2/24 at 12:38 p.m., the resident was observed resting in bed with her eyes closed and her call light in reach. Tremors were observed ongoing to the arms, hands, and head. Resident B's family member indicated the day before the incident occurred, COTA 4 came in and told her she was getting ready to put an order in for her family member to have a lid on her drinks. COTA 4 told her that her family member had eaten her meal well the day before. Her family member could not handle the weight of cups because she was shaking so badly. Burn Exposure Chart, www.antiscald.com, indicated .that a person will receive a second degree burn in 3 seconds of exposure and third degree burn in 5 seconds of exposure to water of 140 [degrees Fahrenheit] . Occupational-Therapy-Scope-of-Practice, www.research.aota.org/practice, 2024 American Occupational Therapy Association, .Occupational therapy services may be provided by two levels of practitioners: (1) the occupational therapist and (2) the occupational therapy assistant, as well as by occupational therapy students under appropriate supervision (AOTA, 2018). Occupational therapists function as autonomous practitioners, are responsible for all aspects of occupational therapy service delivery and are accountable for the safety and effectiveness of the occupational therapy service delivery process. The occupational therapy assistant delivers occupational therapy services only under the supervision of and in partnership with the occupational therapist (AOTA, 2020b). When the term occupational therapy practitioner is used in this document, it refers to both occupational therapists and occupational therapy assistants (AOTA, 2015a) . The Past noncompliance began on 9/5/24. The deficient practice was corrected by 9/12/24 after the facility implemented a systemic plan that included the following actions: All staff were educated on assist to feed which included all residents that needed assistance were assisted timely, temperature of fluids were appropriate and to resident preference, and the use of specialty cups/lids appropriately (9/11/24); Coffee temperature monitoring was implemented (9/5/24); All residents were observed to ensure no issues with cups and eating (9/5/24); Drink lids provided to all units and on hydration carts (9/8/24); Vendor completed inspection of coffee maker and ensured no temperature malfunctions (9/12/24). This Citation relates to Complaint IN00442615 3.1-45(a)(2)
May 2024 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0745 (Tag F0745)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Deficiency Text Not Available

Read full inspector narrative →
Deficiency Text Not Available
Jan 2024 1 deficiency
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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure medication errors did not occur for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for medication administration. (Resident C) Findings include: 1. The c...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure medication errors did not occur for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for medication administration. (Resident C) Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident C was reviewed on 1/17/24 at 1:02 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, congestive heart failure, depression, anxiety and hypertension. The incident report, dated 6/10/23 at 1:33 p.m., indicated Resident C had a medication error. The resident was sent to the hospital and diagnosed with a urinary tract infection. The progress note, dated 6/10/23 at 8:15 a.m., indicated QMA (Qualified Medication Aide) 4 administered the wrong medication to Resident C. The physician was notified with orders to obtain vital signs every 4 hours, check blood sugars every shift, hold the resident's morning medication, and to administer the resident's 12 p.m. medications as ordered. Review of the medication error report, dated 6/15/23, indicated QMA 4 administered Resident D's morning medications to Resident C which included the following: - Baclofen (medication for muscle spasms) 20 mg (milligrams) - Centrum Silver supplement - Divalproex (medication for convulsions) 1,500 mg - Metformin (medication for diabetes) 500 mg - Neurontin (medication used for pain) 400 mg - Oxcarbazepine (medication used for seizures) 600 mg - Paxil (antidepressant) 30 mg The clinical record lacked documentation of a physician's order for the above medications. The written statement from QMA 4, dated 6/13/23, indicated on 6/10/23, QMA 4 had two residents left to pass medications to, Resident C and Resident D. QMA 4 had both resident's medications ready. Prior to administration, QMA 4 was distracted when her aides asked her some questions along with a resident. She planned to go to Resident C's room. She grabbed Resident D's cup of medications instead of Resident C's and administered Resident D's medications to Resident C. When she returned to the medication cart, QMA 4 immediately realized the mistake and the physician was notified. During an interview on 1/17/24 at 1:19 p.m., QMA 4 indicated on the morning of 6/10/23, she only had two residents left to administer medication. She had gotten distracted when a couple of aides approached her during her medication pass. She planned to administer medication to Resident C and then Resident D. She grabbed Resident D's medications rather than Resident C's. She realized what she had done right after that. She reported to the charge nurse, DON, family and physician and followed the orders provided by the physician. On 1/18/24 at 10:49 a.m., QMA 4 indicated the 5 rights of medication administration were right person, right medication, right time, right dose and right route. On 1/18/24 at 9:40 a.m., the Executive Director provided a current copy of the document titled Medication Errors dated 11/02. It included, but was not limited to, Policy .It is the policy of this provider to ensure residents residing in the facility are free of medication errors . On 1/18/24 at 9:40 a.m., the Executive Director provided a current copy of the document titled Medication Administration dated 2/2010. It included, but was not limited to, Procedure Steps .Medications are prepared for one resident at a time .Perform the 5 rights of medication .Right Resident 2. The clinical record for Resident D was reviewed on 1/18/24 at 9:51 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, cerebral palsy, convulsions, diabetes and depression. Review of the June 2023 medication administration record indicated the resident had the following morning medications ordered: - Baclofen 20 mg at 8:00 a.m. - Centrum Silver, one tablet between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. - Divalproex 1,500 mg between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. - Metformin 500 mg between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. - Neurontin 400 mg at 8:00 a.m. - Oxcarbazepine 600 mg between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. - Paxil 30 mg between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. The Past noncompliance began on 6/10/23. The deficient practice was corrected by 6/15/23 after the facility implemented a systemic plan that included the following actions: All staff were educated on Medication pass policy/procedure which included the preparation of medications for one resident at a time and performing the 5 rights of medication administration of right person (6/15/23); one on one teaching and a medication pass observation completed with QMA 4. (6/15/23) 3.1-48(c)(2)
May 2022 4 deficiencies
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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure accuchecks (blood glucose level monitoring) were performed as ordered, and insulin pens were primed prior to administr...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure accuchecks (blood glucose level monitoring) were performed as ordered, and insulin pens were primed prior to administration of insulin for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for insulin administration. (Residents 258 and 9) Findings include: 1. During an observation on 5/17/22 at 8:42 a.m., LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) 1 dispensed medications for Resident 258. She prepared amlodipine 5 mg (milligrams), aripiprazole 2 mg, citalopram 40 mg, ezetimibe 10 mg, farxiga 5 mg, and meloxicam 7.5 mg, by removing the medications out of the packaging and placing them directly into her bare, ungloved hand, and then placing the medication into a clear medication cup with bare fingers. The resident's order for an accucheck to be completed at 7:00 a.m. was highlighted in red as late. During an interview 5/17/22 at 8:45 a.m., LPN 1 indicated the Unit Manager had performed her accuchecks for her. She did not know if Resident 258 had received her accucheck and insulin, she would have to ask the unit manager if she had completed the task. During an interview on 5/17/22 at 8:48 a.m., the Unit Manager indicated she had not completed Resident 258's accucheck or administered her insulin. During an observation on 5/17/22 at 8:52 a.m., the Unit Manager obtained supplies and tested Resident 258's blood glucose level. The resident indicated during this time she had already eaten her breakfast. The resident's blood glucose level was 152 mg/dL. During an observation on 5/17/22 at 9:00 a.m., the Unit Manager attached the pen needle to Resident 258's tujeo insulin pen and dialed the pen to 35 units and administered the insulin to the resident's left upper quadrant. She did not prime the pen prior to the administration. The clinical record for Resident 258 was reviewed on 5/20/22 at 10:55 a.m. The diagnosis included, but was not limited to, type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications. The physician's order, dated 5/13/22, indicated the resident received Tujeo SoloStar U300 Insulin 35 units twice daily between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m., and between 5:00 p.m., and 10:00 p.m. The physician's order, dated 5/14/22, indicated staff were to perform an accucheck daily at 7:00 a.m. and notify the physician if the accu check was below 60 or greater than 250 mg/dL. During an interview, on 5/17/22 at 8:55 a.m., the Unit Manager indicated she didn't realize the resident had an accucheck due. Typically the nurses did their accuchecks, and she was not necessarily responsible for them, but the nurse was the only nurse on the hall and they decided the Unit Manager would do the accuchecks for her to give some relief to the nurse. 2. During an observation on 5/17/22 at 11:37 a.m., The Unit Manager checked Resident 9's blood glucose level. The resident's blood glucose level registered as 216 mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter). The unit manager indicated the resident would receive her sliding scale insulin as well as the routine insulin. During an observation on 5/17/22 at 11:40 a.m., the Unit Manager applied a disposable needle to Resident 9's Humalog Kwikpen and dialed the pen to 20 units. She did not prime the needle or perform an air shot. She entered Resident 9's room, and administered 20 units of Humalog subcutaneously to the resident's left upper quadrant. The clinical record for Resident 9 was reviewed on 5/20/22 at 10:09 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic polyneuropathy. The care plan, initiated on 11/10/21 and last revised on 2/21/22, indicated the resident was at risk for adverse effects of hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia related to use of glucose lowering medications and or diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. The interventions included, but were not limited to, medications as ordered and monitor blood sugars as ordered. The physician's order, started on 3/30/22, indicated the resident received humalog kwikpen 100 unit/mL (milliliter) per sliding scale, as follows: If Blood Sugar is less than 60, call MD. If Blood Sugar is 0 to 150, give 0 Units. If Blood Sugar is 151 to 200, give 2 Units. If Blood Sugar is 201 to 250, give 4 Units. If Blood Sugar is 251 to 300, give 6 Units. If Blood Sugar is 301 to 400, give 8 Units. If Blood Sugar is 401 to 450, give 10 Units. If Blood Sugar is 451 to 500, give 12 Units. If Blood Sugar is greater than 500, call MD three times daily at 7:00 a.m., 11:00 a.m., and 4:00 p.m. The physician's order, started on 11/9/21, indicated the resident received insulin lispro insulin pen 100 unit/mL, 16 units subcutaneously three times daily at 7:00 a.m., 11:00 a.m., and 4:00 p.m. During an interview on 5/20/22 at 9:56 a.m., the DON (Director of Nursing) indicated Resident 9's accucheck had been performed late by the Unit Manager because the order for the accu check had not been put on the correct flowsheet. When the resident admitted , it had been put in her medications flowsheet instead of the diabetic flowsheet. Her accu check order being on the wrong flow sheet was the root cause of the late administration. If an administration was scheduled for 7:00 a.m., they had from 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. to administer it. An hour after the administration time it would turn red, and when it turned red it indicated the medication was late. Nursing staff had been instructed to prime insulin pens prior to use. Priming insulin pens was a standard of practice and the pharmacy had instructed them on how to do the priming when the pens first came out. During an interview on 5/20/22 at 10:33 a.m., the DON indicated she did not have a policy on the timing of accu checks, however she would expect staff to adhere to the same standards of medication administration for timing. If it was an accucheck for sliding scale insulin, the accucheck would be obtained before meals. The Insulin Pen Administration Skills Competency Procedure Steps, last reviewed 10/2019, provided on 5/17/22 at 2:11 p.m. by the DON, included, but was not limited to, . 8. Attach pen needle by twsting the needle onto the end of the insulin pen. 9. Pull off and remove outer pen needle protective cap and cover. 10. Prime the pen by dialing 2 units. (A small drop of insulin should be visible. If insulin does not appear, repeat) . 3.1-37(a)
CONCERN (D)

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

Staffing Information (Tag F0732)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the nurse staffing informaatiion was posted daily for 4 of 5 survey days. Findings include: The following observations were made betw...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the nurse staffing informaatiion was posted daily for 4 of 5 survey days. Findings include: The following observations were made between 5/16/22 and 5/20/22: The staff posting could not be located on 5/17/22 at 9:30 a.m. The ED (Executive Director) indicated the location was in the hall by the DON (Director of Nursing). The holder was empty. The staff posting on 5/18/22 at 9:00 a.m., and 12:00 p.m., indicated a date of 5/17/22. The staff posting on 5/19/22 at 8:50 a.m., and 11:10 a.m., indicated a date of 5/17/22. The staff posting on 5/20/22 at 9:48 a.m. indicated a date of 5/19/22. During an interview on 5/20/22 at 11:15 a.m., the ED indicated the scheduler was responsible for posting the daily staff schedule. During an interview on 5/20/22 at 11:38 a.m., the DNS indicated the scheduler had worked the night shift and posted yesterday's staffing schedule that night, so she couldn't get the schedule out during the day. The Posted Nurse Staffing Data and Retention Requirements policy, dated July, 2019, was provided by the DON on 5/20/22 at 11:38 a.m. The policy included, but was not limited to, . The facility must post the following information at the beginning of each shift . 11. The nurse staffing data must be posted in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors. 12. The Nursing Staffing Data should be updated each shift if there are changes to the daily posting . 3.1-17(b)
CONCERN (D)

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

Unnecessary Medications (Tag F0759)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure timely administration of medication for 2 of 34 administrations observed. (Residents 257 and 33) Findings include: 1. ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure timely administration of medication for 2 of 34 administrations observed. (Residents 257 and 33) Findings include: 1. During an observation of medication administration on 5/17/22 at 8:37 a.m., LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) 1 administered buspirone 5 mg, lorazepam 1 mg, and four tablets of primodone 50 mg to Resident 257. The medications were scheduled to be given at 7:00 a.m. and were highlighted in red in the EMAR (electronic medication record) as late. The clinical record for Resident 257 was reviewed on 5/20/22 at 11:15 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, Parkinson's disease, depression, generalized anxiety disorder, and polyneuropathy. The physician's order, dated 5/2/22, indicated to administer buspirone tablet 5 mg three times daily at 7:00 a.m., 12:00 p.m., and 5:00 p.m. The physician's order, dated 5/4/22, indicated to administer primodone 50 mg tablet with a dosage of 200 mg, three times daily at 7:00 a.m., 12:00 p.m., and 5:00 p.m. The physician's order, dated 5/5/22, indicated to administer lorazepam 1 mg tablet three times daily at 7:00 a.m., 12:00 p.m., and 5:00 p.m. 2. During an observation of medication administration on 5/17/22 at 9:16 a.m., LPN 1 administered labetalol 300 mg, baclofen 5 mg, and hydralazine 50 mg to Resident 33 The medications were scheduled to be given at 7:00 a.m. and were highlighted in red in the EMAR (electronic medication record) as late. The clinical record for Resident 33 was reviewed on 5/20/22 at 11:11 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage, essential hypertension benign neoplasm of unspecified adrenal gland, traumatic hemorrhage of cerebrum with loss of consciousness of unspecified duration, hyperlipidemia, and hyperaldosteronism. The physician's order, dated 5/11/21, indicated to administer baclofen 5 mg three times daily at 8:00 a.m., 12:00 p.m., and 4:00 p.m. The physician's order, dated 11/22/21, indicated to administer hydralazine 50 mg four times daily at 8:00 a.m., 12:00 p.m., 4:00 p.m., and 8:00 p.m The physician's order, dated 11/29/21, indicated to administer labetalol 300 mg (millikgrams) twice daily at 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. During an interview, on 5/17/22 at 9:27 a.m., LPN 1 indicated she was the only nurse on the hall and had to administer medications to 26 to 28 residents. She typically ran late when she had that patient load. During an interview, on 5/20/22 at 9:56 a.m., the DON (Director of Nursing) indicated they tried to use four hour time frames for medications but if the medication had a specific time of administration, such as 7:00 a.m., they had to be administered within an hour before or after the scheduled time. One hour after the scheduled time it would turn red on the EMAR, which indicated the medication was late. The most current Medication Pass Procedure policy, last reviewed 12/2016, provided on 5/17/22 at 2:11 p.m., by the DON, included, but was not limited to, . Procedure Steps . 1. Medications administered within 60 minutes before and/or after time ordered . 3.1-48(c)(1)
CONCERN (E)

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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure proper catheter care, handling of the indwelling urinary catheter bag or tubing, and monitoring of urinary output or f...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure proper catheter care, handling of the indwelling urinary catheter bag or tubing, and monitoring of urinary output or fluid intake for 4 of 4 residents reviewed for indwelling urinary catheters. (Residents 29, 25, 31, and 55) Findings include: 1. During an observation on 5/16/22 at 11:30 a.m., Resident 29's indwelling urinary catheter was at the bedside with 500 mL (milliliters) of tea colored urine in the catheter bag and tubing with a heavy amount of yellow mucus in the tubing but clear urine in the catheter bag. The resident indicated he had an infection and blood clots in the catheter bag. He wished the staff would take the catheter out. During an observation on 5/17/22 at 10:42 a.m., the resident was in his wheelchair participating in an activity in the dining room. The indwelling urinary catheter was hanging below the wheelchair. The catheter tubing was directly touching the floor. The urine in the bag was visible with 400 mL of yellow gold colored urine. The catheter tubing was resting directly on the floor. During an observation of catheter care for Resident 29, on 5/19/22 at 8:59 a.m., CNA (Certified Nursing Aide) 3 pulled down the resident's brief and with 3 swipes of the same area of the wipe and cleaned the crease to the right of the penis. She obtained another wipe and with 2 swipes of the same area of the wipe cleaned the right crease again. The resident was rolled onto his left side and the bowel was cleaned from the rectal area, using 2 swipes with the same area of the wipe from the testicles to the coccyx. She did this in the same manner 11 times. The resident was rolled onto his right side and the catheter bag was raised over the resident and placed onto the left side of the bed. LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) 4, obtained a wipe and with 7 swipes with the same area of the wipe, she cleaned from the testicles to the coccyx. She obtained a wipe and cleaned the resident with 7 swipes again with the same area of the wipe from the testicles to the coccyx. She obtained a wipe and with 3 swipes with the same area of the wipe, cleaned under the testicles. She obtained a wipe and with 13 swipes with the same area of the wipe, cleaned from the testicles up the right and left creases in a back to front direction. The clinical record for Resident 29 was reviewed on 5/18/22 at 1:36 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, Parkinson's disease, Iron deficiency anemia, benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms, urinary tract infection, obstructive and reflux uropathy, and retention of urine. The care plan, dated 04/26/22 and last revised on 4/26/22 indicated the resident required an indwelling urinary catheter due to: obstructive uropathy related to BPH. The interventions, dated 4/26/22, included, but were not limited to, avoid obstructions in the drainage, change the catheter per MD (physician's) order, do not allow tubing or any part of the drainage system to touch the floor, encourage fluids, keep catheter system a closed system as much as possible, manipulate tubing as little as possible during care, monitor urinary output, position the bag below the level of the bladder, provide assistance for catheter care, report signs of a UTI (urinary tract infection), staff to record urinary output in mL, and store collection bag inside a protective dignity pouch. The Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment, dated 3/2/22, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The resident was dependent with assistance for toileting. The physician's orders indicated the following: - Foley catheter care, the nurse was to record the output every shift with a start date of 4/25/22. - Document in mLs all fluids taken with medications, every shift with a start date of 11/16/18. - Urinalysis/Culture and Sensitivity Indications: complaints of pain in left lower quadrant dated 4/8/22. - Urinalysis/Culture and Sensitivity with a date of 4/11/22. - Cefdinir capsule 300 mg (milligrams) orally every 12 hours with a start date of 4/26/22. Discontinued on 4/27/22. - Bactrim DS tablet 800-160 mg (milligrams) orally daily with a start date of 4/27/22. Discontinued on 4/27/22. - Bactrim DS 800-160 mg orally twice daily with a start date of 4/28/22 to 5/1/22. - Lasix tablet 20 mg once daily starting 7/29/21. The Treatment Administration History, on 5/2/22 and 5/14/22 during the 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. shift, lacked documentation of urine output. On 5/10/22 during the 6:00 a.m., to 2:00 p.m. shift, lacked documentation of urine output. The Treatment Administration History, on 4/13/22 during the 6:30 a.m., to 2:30 p.m. shift, lacked documentation of fluid intake. The Treatment Administration History, on 3/7/22 during the 6:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. shift, lacked documentation of fluid intake. The nurse's note, dated 4/07/22 at 8:50 p.m., and recorded late on 4/8/22 at 12:12 a.m., indicated the resident was yelling out with complaints of pain to the left lower quadrant of the abdomen. He indicated he had a kidney stone and wanted to go to the emergency room. The nurse's note, dated 4/15/22 at 1:24 p.m., indicated the physician had reviewed the resident's recent laboratory results and ordered an appointment with a nephrologist, related to the resident's deteriorated kidney function. The nurse's note, dated 4/25/22 at 9:42 p.m., indicated the resident returned at 9:20 p.m., from a local hospital. He had a foley catheter 16 French placed and a diagnosis of a UTI. The physician ordered Cefdinir to start 4/26/22. The physician's order note, dated 4/27/22 at 12:49 a.m., indicated the resident was seen on 4/26/22 for transitional care and a follow-up from an emergency room visit. The follow-up call to the emergency room indicated from the information scanned, clearly revealed the patient had a foley catheter placed and it was difficult with a smaller caliber foley catheter being used. He had bacteria in his urine, which could be due to the urinary retention and not a classic UTI. In either case his bacteria was present and the ER doctor started him on an antibiotic and this will continue for short time. The nurse's note, dated 4/27/22 at 09:21 p.m., indicated the resident's urine was yellow with mucous present and was started on Bactrim DS today. The nurse practitioner 30 day visit note, dated 5/02/22 at 11:50 a.m., indicated the resident went to the ER last week for a UTI and urinary retention. The Urinalysis revealed 3+ blood and 4+leukocytes. The resident had a follow up appointment tomorrow with a urology center to evaluate the need for the ongoing indwelling foley catheter and/or to treat the resident for a bladder outlet obstruction. During an interview, on 5/19/22 at 9:25 a.m., CNA 3 indicated when performing catheter care she would wipe from front to back on the creases to each side of the penis, using one wipe with each downward motion. She would clean the penis in a circular motion at the tip of the penis. She would then clean down the tubing, from the penis down. 2. During an observation, on 5/18/22 at 9:42 a.m., Resident 25's indwelling urinary catheter was hanging on the left side of his bed. The catheter bag was full and the drain tube was hanging loose toward the floor. During an observation on 5/18/22 at 12:17 p.m., CNA 5 performed catheter care on Resident 25 with CNA 6, present. CNA 5, used sanitary wipes and with 3 swipes of the same area of the wipe and cleaned to each side of the penis. She obtained another wipe and with 2 swipes of the same area of the wipe cleaned down the crease to the left side of the penis. With 2 swipes of the same area of the wipe she cleaned the scrotum. She obtained a fresh wipe and with 2 swipes of the same area of the wipe cleaned the tip of the penis around the catheter tubing. The clinical record was review for Resident 25 on 5/18/22 at 8:55 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a cerebral infarction affecting the left non-dominant side, focal traumatic brain injury, dementia, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, morbid (severe) obesity due to excess calories, and lack of coordination. The care plan, dated 4/26/22 and last revised on 4/26/22, indicated the resident required an indwelling urinary catheter due to neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. The interventions, dated 4/26/22, included, but were not limited to, avoid obstructions in the drainage, change the catheter per MD order, do not allow tubing or any part of the drainage system to touch the floor, encourage fluidsc, keep the catheter system a closed system as much as possible, manipulate tubing as little as possible during care, monitor urinary output, position the catheter bag below the level of the bladder, provide assistance with catheter care, report signs of UTI, staff to record urinary output in mL, and store collection bag inside a protective dignity pouch. The Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 3/9/22, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The resident was dependent for assistance for toileting. The physician's orders included the following: - Foley catheter care, nurse to record output every shift every shift with a start date of 12/8/21. - Document in mLs all fluids taken with medications every shift with a start date of 1/13/21. The nurse's note, dated 3/02/22 at 6:21 a.m., indicated the resident had blood coming out of his catheter and it was leaking out from the catheter tubing. The nurse's note, dated 4/12/22 at 6:33 a.m., indicated the nurse noticed a substantial amount of blood in the urine this morning, on the last bed check. The nurse's note, dated 4/12/22 at 9:31 p.m., indicated the resident continued to have blood in urine this shift, only had 100 mL of bloody urine output this shift. The nurse's note, dated 4/13/22 at 12:09 p.m., indicated the hospice nurse was in the facility and she irrigated the catheter. The input of the solution went in easily with no return noted. She removed the foley catheter and gave orders to monitor the urine output, if no output was observed and there was no abdominal distention by 4:00 p.m. today, to call the hospice company to get further instructions and notify a hospital. The nurse's note, dated 4/13/22 at 4:07 p.m., indicated the resident voided at this time, two small bloody lines were noted, not clumped, like a clot would be, but was in a line approximately 1 cm (centimeter) long. The urine on the blanket was clear in color. The hospice nurse was notified the resident had voided. She indicated she was coming to visit him later this evening. The nurse practitioner's note, dated 4/18/22 at 11:59 a.m., indicated a recent urine culture was reviewed. Bactrim 800 mg, two times daily for 7 days, through 4/25/22, was ordered for a 3 organism UTI. The bacteria was proteus, mrsa (methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus), and pseudomonas (carbapenem resistant). The nurse's note, dated 4/20/22 at 7:01 p.m., indicated the hospice nurse was in this shift and an 18 French with 10 mL bulb foley catheter was inserted. The nurse's note, dated 5/07/22 at 9:29 p.m., indicated the resident had some urine leaking around the foley catheter bulb. It was deflated and only 8 mL was in the bulb and 10 mL of NS (Normal Saline) was put back in. Positive urine flow was attained and there was no complaints of pain or discomfort. The nurse's note, dated 5/11/22 at 1:32 p.m., indicated the indwelling urinary catheter was patent to bedside drain with dark yellow urine of an adequate amount. The Treatment Administration History, on 5/12/22 during the 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. shift lacked documentation of urinary output. The Treatment Administration History, on 5/13/22 during the 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. shift lacked documentation of urinary output. The Treatment Administration History, on 4/21/22 during the 10:00 p.m., to 6:00 a.m. shift lacked documented urinary output. The Treatment Administration History, on 3/2/22, 3/4/22, and 3/24/22 on the 10:00 p.m., to 6:00 a.m. shift on 3/2/22, 3/4/22, and 3/23/22 lacked documentation of urinary output. The Treatment Administration History, on 3/4/22 during the 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. shift lacked documentation of additional 240 mL of fluid intake. The Treatment Administration History, on 313/22 during the 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. shift lacked documentation of additional 240 mL of fluid intake. The Treatment Administration History, on 3/5/22, 3/8/22, 3/13/22, and 3/31/22 on the 6:00 a.m., to 2:00 p.m. shift lacked documentation of urinary output. The Treatment Administration History, on 2/25/22 on the 6:00 a.m., to 2:00 p.m., shift lacked documentation of urinary output. The Treatment Administration History, on 1/10/25, 1/21/22, 1/25/22, and 1/29/22 on the 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. shift lacked documentation of urinary output. The Treatment Administration History, on 1/22/22 on the 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., shift lacked documentation of urinary output. 3. During an observation on 5/16/22 at 10:10 a.m., the urine in the indwelling urinary catheter tubing and bag was a rusty red color for Resident 31. The resident indicated the catheter was supposed to be removed, but his appointment at the hospital appointment was cancelled. He wanted it removed, because of the discomfort. During an observation on 5/18/22 at 9:40 a.m., of the resident's indwelling urinary catheter bag and tubing, the urine in the lower half of the tubing was bloody, but the upper half of the urine in the tubing was yellow in color. There was only slight sediment in the tubing. The catheter bag was a quarter full of bloody urine. During an observation of catheter care on Resident 31, on 5/19/22 at 9:50 a.m., by CNA 7, she pulled down the brief and obtained a wipe. She cleaned the penis down the shaft to the tip of the penis. She cleaned in a downward motion, down the creases to the side of the penis. She obtained a wipe and with 2 swipes with the same area of the wipe, cleaned the right crease. She obtained a wipe and cleaned the penis down the shaft to the tip of the penis and obtained a clean wipe and cleaned down the penis to the tip again. She obtained a wipe and cleaned under the penis to the tip. She cleaned down onto the scrotum. She cleaned down the left crease, in a back to front direction. She cleaned down the shaft to the tip of the penis with 2 swipes with the same area of the wipe. She obtained a wipe and cleaned under the penis. She lifted the catheter bag above the resident, who was lying flat on his back, to remove the pajama bottoms. She folded the catheter bag to slip it down the pant leg. Orange urine with sediment was observed running back toward the urethra. She again lifted the catheter bag to slip the brief off the resident. She lifted the catheter bag again to remove the brief. She lifted the catheter bag again to put a clean brief on the resident. She lifted the catheter bag again to remove and readjust the brief. She lifted the catheter bag again to put it through the pajama bottoms, folding it in half to pull it through. Urine was observed running up and down the tubing. The clinical record for Resident 31 was reviewed on 5/16/22. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, disorganized schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, hypertensive chronic kidney disease with stage 1 through stage 4 chronic kidney disease, benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms, Obstructive and reflux uropathy, anemia, hydronephrosis, muscle weakness, unsteadiness on feet, lack of coordination, dehydration, presence of urogenital implants, and retention of urine. The care plan, dated 3/28/22 and last revised on 4/13/22, indicated the resident required an indwelling urinary catheter for obstructive bladder outlet due to benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms, was at risk for infection related to indwelling catheter. The interventions, dated 3/28/22, included, but was not limited to, observe for leakage, record outputs, notify the MD of any abnormal observations, avoid lying on top of tubing. measure and record intake and output, position the bag below the level of the bladder, and provide catheter care every shift and as needed. The admission MDS assessment, dated 4/3/22, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The resident required partial to moderate assistance for toileting. The physician's orders included the following: - cephalexin capsule; 500 mg orally, three times daily, with a start date of 5/16/22. - Change the foley catheter and urinary drainage bag as needed for dislodgement, leakage or occlusion, as needed with a start date of 3/28/22. - Foley catheter care, nurse to record the output every shift with a start date of 3/28/22. The Urinalysis, dated 5/15/22, indicated >100 HPF, 4+ bacteria, 4+ WBC (white blood cell) clumps, occult blood fecal positive. >100,000 cfu/ (colony forming unit) escherichia coli. A nurse's note, dated 4/14/22 at 1:46 p.m., indicated the resident's indwelling urinary catheter was patent and draining clear yellow urine to the bedside drainage bag. A physician's note, dated 5/11/22 at 11:40 p.m., indicated the resident was going to have his indwelling urinary catheter taken out tomorrow. The physician talked with the resident about his creatinine of 2.9 mg/dL (per deciliter). He discussed needing to see nephrologist with the resident. The indwelling urinary catheter was damaged and was taken out. A nurse's note, dated 5/15/22 at 6:29 a.m., indicated the resident had 600 mL (milliliters) of urine in the indwelling urinary catheter bag. The resident had a large amount of urine in his brief. The catheter was removed, and the bulb had only 3 mL of sterile water. The catheter was hardly inserted. 2 unsuccessful indwelling urinary catheter insertion attempts were performed. A second nurse made a successful insertion of the indwelling urinary catheter. The urine was cloudy and yellow upon insertion A nurse's note, dated 5/15/22 at 1:33 p.m., indicated resident had bright red blood in his brief. The bathroom was checked, and bright red blood was observed on the floor and in the toilet. The resident had a large bowel movement in the toilet and the urine in catheter bag was bloody. The resident was weak, dizzy, and shaking. His blood pressure dropped when going from a lying to a sitting position. The resident was sent to a local hospital at 10:15 a.m. The local hospital was called at 1:30 p.m., and he was being admitted to the hospital for a gastrointestinal bleed. A nurse's note, dated 5/15/22 at 9:00 p.m., indicated the resident returned from the hospital emergency room with a diagnosis of a UTI, chronic anemia, and dehydration. The resident was given fluids while at the hospital and Rocephin. On 5/16/22 the resident was to start Keflex 500 mg 3 times daily for 10 days for the UTI. The indwelling urinary catheter was patent and draining well. The urine in the catheter bag was bloody. A nurse's note, dated 5/16/22 at 5:37 a.m., indicated the resident's indwelling urinary catheter was draining well through the night. 1000 mL of blood-tinged urine was measured. The antibiotic was started on this date for the UTI. During an interview on 5/16/22 at 10:10 a.m., the resident indicated he was recovering from a bad kidney infection. The catheter was changed yesterday, and it turned bloody afterwards. His urine had been yellow before it was changed. During an interview on 5/19/22 at 10:05 a.m., CNA 7 indicated for catheter care on a male resident, she would clean the front area. She would then pull back the foreskin away from the opening and clean from the tip down. She would fold the wipe between swipes and toss it. She would clean from the outside in (creases to each side, then the penis). She would then hold the tubing and clean down it. During an interview, on 5/19/22 at 12:39 p.m., the DON, indicated the resident had e-coli (escherichia coli bacteria) in the urine when the urinalysis was completed. He was able to take himself to the bathroom for bowel movements and was educated on keeping clean. 4. During an observation, on 5/19/22 at 9:36 a.m., CNA 6 performed catheter care for Resident 55. She unfastened the brief and obtained a wipe. She cleaned down the shaft of the penis, using 2 swipes with the same area of the wipe. The bed was lowered and the catheter bag in a dignity pouch landed on the floor. The clinical record for Resident 55 was reviewed on 5/10/22 at 2:03 p.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to chronic kidney disease stage 4 (severe), type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic chronic kidney disease, Urinary tract infection, benign prostatic hyperplasia without lower urinary tract symptoms, and neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. The care plan, dated 1/14/21, indicated the resident required an indwelling urinary catheter due to: neurogenic bladder. The interventions, dated 1/14/21, included, but were not limited to, do not allow tubing or any part of the drainage system to touch the floor, encourage fluids, manipulate tubing as little as possible during care, monitor urinary output, position bag below level of bladder, provide assistance for catheter care, and staff to record urinary output in mL. The Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 3/31/22, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. He was dependent on assistance for toileting. The nurse's note, dated 3/23/22 at 11:50 a.m., indicated a family member and the renal doctor discussed the current BMP (basic metabolic panel) focusing in on the creatinine level with concern on the increase in the lab. She spoke with both the resident and the family about their wishes to not proceed with treatments to aid in lowering the level specifically dialysis. Both resident and family agreed that dialysis was not an option with the health of the resident and the NP agreed it would not improve his quality of life. Palliative care was suggested. The nurse's note, dated 3/24/22 at 10:00 a.m., indicated the resident was complaining that the foley catheter was hurting and it was, replaced without difficulty instant returning light yellow urine. The nurse's note, dated 5/11/22 at 2:24 a.m., indicated the indwelling urinary catheter changed without incident. A number 18 French catheter with 10 mL bulb anchored to the bedside with clear yellow urine. The physician's orders included, but were not limited to the following: - Furosemide tablet 40 mg, orally, once a day starting on 8/30/21 - Cath orders: foley catheter care, Nurse to record output every shift, starting on 1/14/21 - Change foley catheter every 3 weeks once a day on Tuesdays, starting on 12/12/21. During an interview on 5/19/22 at 12:39 p.m., the DON indicated catheter care was ordered for every shift. Staff should perform hand hygiene and apply gloves. They should clean the creases to each side of the penis first, then the penis. They should clean in a circular motion, from the tip of the meatus of the penis and work around and down. The wipe should be discarded after each swipe, but could be folded and swiped. The tubing should then be cleaned by holding the tube at the tip of the penis and cleaning down the tube. During an interview, on 5/20/22 at 10:51 a.m., LPN 2, indicated she monitored residents for symptoms of a UTI, such as temperature, urinary output, sediment, urine color, pain, burning, fluid intake. The Indwellling Urinary Catheter Care, Emptying Drainage Bag & Catheter Removal, last reviewed December 2012 was provided by the Executive Director on 5/19/22 at 1:43 p.m. The policy included, but was not limited to, . 7. Using the non-dominant hand retrieve a wet soaped washcloth, cleanse the catheter in circular motion for about 10 cm (4 inches). Start where the catheter enters the meatus and down toward the drainage tube. 8. Change area on the washcloth or retrieve a new washcloth for consecutive passes along the catheter tubing. Do not rewipe the catheter . 3.1- 41(a)(1)
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

  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Grade B+ (85/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Indiana.
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Indiana facilities.
  • • 36% turnover. Below Indiana's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • 7 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
Bottom line: Generally positive indicators. Standard due diligence and a personal visit recommended.

About This Facility

What is Todd-Dickey Nursing And Rehabilitation's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns TODD-DICKEY NURSING AND REHABILITATION an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Indiana, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.

How is Todd-Dickey Nursing And Rehabilitation Staffed?

CMS rates TODD-DICKEY NURSING AND REHABILITATION's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 36%, compared to the Indiana average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Todd-Dickey Nursing And Rehabilitation?

State health inspectors documented 7 deficiencies at TODD-DICKEY NURSING AND REHABILITATION during 2022 to 2024. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 6 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.

Who Owns and Operates Todd-Dickey Nursing And Rehabilitation?

TODD-DICKEY NURSING AND REHABILITATION is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility is operated by AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 62 certified beds and approximately 58 residents (about 94% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in LEAVENWORTH, Indiana.

How Does Todd-Dickey Nursing And Rehabilitation Compare to Other Indiana Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Indiana, TODD-DICKEY NURSING AND REHABILITATION's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (36%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Todd-Dickey Nursing And Rehabilitation?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"

Is Todd-Dickey Nursing And Rehabilitation Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, TODD-DICKEY NURSING AND REHABILITATION has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Indiana. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Todd-Dickey Nursing And Rehabilitation Stick Around?

TODD-DICKEY NURSING AND REHABILITATION has a staff turnover rate of 36%, which is about average for Indiana nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Todd-Dickey Nursing And Rehabilitation Ever Fined?

TODD-DICKEY NURSING AND REHABILITATION has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.

Is Todd-Dickey Nursing And Rehabilitation on Any Federal Watch List?

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