BROOKSIDE CARE STRATEGIES

505 N GAVIN ST, MUNCIE, IN 47303 (765) 289-1915
For profit - Limited Liability company 42 Beds Independent Data: November 2025 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
0/100
#436 of 505 in IN
Last Inspection: September 2024

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

Overview

Brookside Care Strategies in Muncie, Indiana, has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. With a state ranking of #436 out of 505, they are in the bottom half of Indiana facilities, and #12 out of 13 in Delaware County means there is only one local option that performs worse. The facility is showing some improvement, as the number of issues decreased from 22 in 2024 to 8 in 2025. However, staffing is a weakness, with only 1 out of 5 stars in that category and less RN coverage than 80% of other Indiana facilities, which can impact care quality. Specific incidents raised serious red flags, including failing to allow a resident to return after an emergency visit, which left them at risk of harm, and a case where a resident was physically abused, resulting in a severe head injury that required stitches. While there are no fines reported, the facility still has a long way to go in addressing these critical issues.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Indiana
#436/505
Bottom 14%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
22 → 8 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
45% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Indiana facilities.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 28 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Indiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
⚠ Watch
59 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Overall Rating
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Staff Levels
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Care Quality
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 22 issues
2025: 8 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in fire safety.

The Bad

1-Star Overall Rating

Below Indiana average (3.1)

Significant quality concerns identified by CMS

Staff Turnover: 45%

Near Indiana avg (46%)

Higher turnover may affect care consistency

The Ugly 59 deficiencies on record

2 life-threatening 5 actual harm
Sept 2025 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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a cognitively impaired resident was free from staff-to-resident verbal abuse for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. (Resident B) F...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a cognitively impaired resident was free from staff-to-resident verbal abuse for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. (Resident B) Finding includes:Resident B's clinical record was reviewed on 9/25/25 at 11:49 a.m. Diagnoses included Asperger's syndrome, unspecified altered mental status, malignant neoplasm of parotid gland, and generalized anxiety disorder. An 8/26/25, significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated Resident B was severely cognitively impaired. Behaviors included other behavioral symptoms not directed towards others and rejection of care. The resident quired substantial staff assistance for oral hygiene, toileting hygiene, bathing, upper and lower body dressing, and footwear assistance. He required set-up assistance from staff for ambulation and transfers. Resident B's current care plans included the following:A 6/7/23 problem of impaired safety awareness related to Asperger's syndrome. Interventions included calling family as/if needed.A 9/2/25 problem of potential for psychosocial wellbeing related to an allegation with staff. Interventions included allow the resident time to answer questions and verbalize feelings, perceptions and fears (9/2/25), observe/document the resident's usual response to problems: external- expects others to control problems or leaves to fate or luck, internal - how individual makes own changes(9/2/25), when conflict arises, move residents to a calm safe environment and allow the resident to share their feelings (9/2/25).A progress note, dated 9/2/25 at 11:31 a.m., indicated a maintenance staff member had a verbal altercation with Resident B on 8/29/25. The resident continued to deny any distress and continued with his daily routine. Review of a facility reported incident, dated 8/29/25 at 10:01 a.m. indicated the following: Description added On 8/29/25 it was reported to the Administrator that Resident B was in a verbal altercation with a maintenance staff member. No injury was noted. Follow up indicated the investigation was completed. The allegation was substantiated, and the involved staff member was terminated from employment.A review of the facility investigation file, provided by the facility after entrance on 8/25/25, contained the following information:A handwritten statement from QMA 2, dated 8/29/25 at 7:00 a.m., indicated QMA 2 was at the medication cart and Resident B was seated in the chair next to the door. Resident B was doing his repetitive verbalizations with multiple questions, stood up and reached out towards QMA 2 with open arms and palms. QMA 2 was in the process of redirecting Resident B by putting her arm up in a halting position, explained that it was inappropriate behavior, and he needed to sit down. Before QMA 2 could finish redirecting Resident B, the Maintenance Assistant 4 came from behind QMA 2 and got close to Resident B. Resident B then told Maintenance Assistant 4 to shut up. Maintenance Assistant 4 responded to Resident B by telling him to shut up. Maintenance Assistant 4 then told Resident B to touch me. The resident moved towards the Maintenance staff member then with open arms and palms open and extended. Maintenance Assistant 4 then told Resident B, If you touch me, I will put you on the ground. The resident understood it was a threat and quickly left. Maintenance Assistant 4 then turned to QMA 2 and said, See? He's smarter than that. He does his thing and then mouths off. He spoke poorly of Resident 8 in front of QMA 2 and other staff. A handwritten statement from LPN 3, dated 8/29/25, indicated Resident B was in the front lobby at approximately 6:40 a.m. Maintenance Assistant 4 was also in the front lobby and was provoking Resident 8 to approach Maintenance Assistant 4. When Resident B did approach Maintenance Assistant 4, Maintenance Assistant 4 told the resident, If you put your hands on me, I'll lay you on the floor. The resident told Maintenance Assistant 4 to shut up and Maintenance Assistant 4 told the resident to shut up. Resident 8 was removed from the situation and sat in the chair in the lobby with staff supervision before being taken to shower. A typed statement, dated 8/29/25, indicated the Maintenance Assistant 4 reported he was doing his early morning check at the facility. Resident B had the nurse cornered in the building and was grabbing her butt and breast. Maintenance Assistant 4 stepped in to intervene and asked the resident to stop. The resident made a step towards Maintenance Assistant 4 and Maintenance Assistant 4 stated, Don't come any closer or I will put you on the floor. Maintenance Assistant 4 felt the nurse was distressed and needed his intervention. Maintenance Assistant 4 stated he knew he should not have said that as soon as it came out of his mouth.A Termination Documentation Form, dated 8/29/25, indicated Maintenance Assistant 4 was terminated upon conclusion of an investigation regarding a verbal altercation with a resident.During an interview on 9/25/25 at 1:48 p.m., LPN 3 indicated she was at the nurse's station by the computer on the morning of 8/29/25 and witnessed the verbal altercation between Resident B and Maintenance Assistant 4. Resident B was up and as usual with his repetitive verbalizations near the medication cart in front of the nurse's station where QMA 2 was standing. Maintenance Assistant 4 started getting on Resident B to not touch QMA 2. No physical contact was made, but Maintenance Assistant 4 was antagonizing Resident B. Maintenance Assistant 4 dared the resident to come at him and threatened the resident to lay him out on the ground if the resident put his hands on Maintenance Assistant 4. Both Resident B and Maintenance Assistant 4 told each other to shut up. LPN 3 jumped up from the nurse's station and started around the corner, but QMA 2 had placed herself in between to remove the resident from Maintenance Assistant 4. Resident B then walked away. Maintenance Assistant 4 was at the nurse's station desk and said, I can't stand Resident B. He never used to be like that, and he knows what he is doing. Then Maintenance Assistant 4 left the building. LPN 3 indicated the witnessed intimidation and threatening statements from Maintenance Assistant 4 to Resident B was verbal/mental abuse. She had never seen Maintenance Assistant 4 be abusive to any residents prior to this, but Maintenance Assistant 4 seemed uncomfortable when he came into the building.During a telephone interview on 9/25/25 at 2:57 p.m., Maintenance Assistant 4 indicated on 8/29/25 he was at the nurse's desk in the morning and Resident B, who spits and scratches himself, was getting aggressive with the QMA. Maintenance Assistant 4 told Resident 8 to stop and leave the QMA alone, then the resident started coming toward him. He told the resident to get away from him as he did not want to deal with him on that day. He said, Resident B knows what he is doing if he can ask for milk and cookies. He told the resident, We will end up being on the ground. He was suspended pending an investigation. Administration called him a little later and told him they watched the video surveillance, and he was being terminated for being verbally abusive to a resident. He indicated what he said was inappropriate. According to his facility education, it was abusive to humiliate, intimidate, or threaten the residents.During a telephone interview, on 9/26/25 at 8:23 a.m., QMA 2 indicated she witnessed a verbal altercation between Maintenance Assistant 4 and Resident B early in the morning on 8/29/25. Resident B had a lot of repetitive vocalizations which was his usual. Due to cognitive impairments, Resident B did not recognize personal space, but he did not mean any harm. The resident required frequent redirection throughout every day. She was preparing medications that morning and Resident B was asking repetitively for water and if he could go outside while standing near QMA 2. Maintenance Assistant 4 walked in and walked between her and Resident B. She did not recall what was said prior, but Maintenance Assistant 4 told Resident 8 to come at him in a provoking manner. Resident B started towards Maintenance Assistant 4 because the resident does not understand a lot of things. Then Maintenance Assistant 4 took a step forward and told the resident he would put him on the floor. When Maintenance Assistant 4 threatened to put the resident on the floor, the resident turned and went away from Maintenance Assistant 4. Then Maintenance Assistant 4 turned to QMA 2 and said, Sometimes you just have to put them in their place. QMA 2 and LPN 4 discussed that they needed to report the incident immediately to the Administrator. QMA 2 remained near the front door to ensure Maintenance Assistant 4 did not return to the building while LPN 3 called and notified the Administrator. On 9/26/25 at 11:33 a.m., the Administrator indicated LPN 3 notified him via telephone on 8/29/25 a little before 7:00 a.m. about a verbal altercation between Resident B and Maintenance Assistant 4. He was aware Maintenance Assistant 4 had left the building, so he called corporate human resources and notified them that Maintenance Assistant 4, who worked between two sister facilities, needed suspended immediately pending an investigation. The investigation outcome was termination of Maintenance Assistant 4 due to verbal abuse to a resident.A current facility policy, revised 5/2024 and titled Abuse Prevention, Identification, and Reporting Policy, provided by the DON on 9/25/25 at 11:15 a.m., indicated the following: Policy: To establish guidelines for preventing, identifying, and reporting abuse. All residents have the right to be free from abuse. Residents must not be subjected to abuse by anyone, including, but not limited to, facility staff, other residents, consultants or volunteers, staff of other agencies serving the resident, family members or legal guardians, friends, or other individuals.This citation relates to Intake 2603715.3.1-27(b)
Aug 2025 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify a resident's representative regarding change in condition for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for change in condition. (Resident C)Finding...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify a resident's representative regarding change in condition for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for change in condition. (Resident C)Finding includes: Resident C's record was reviewed on 8/19/25 at 12:31 p.m. Medical diagnoses included paranoid schizophrenia, hypertension, and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (acid reflux).A 5/27/25, quarterly, quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) indicated the resident was mildly cognitively impaired.A nurse's note, dated 7/22/25 at 12:39 p.m. indicated the resident was found cool, clammy, tachycardic (high heart rate), and hypertensive (high blood pressure). The resident was encouraged to take her blood pressure medication and drink fluids, but verbally refused and swatted at a cup containing the medication. The note lacked notification of family or the resident representative.A progress note dated 7/22/25 at 2:57 p.m. indicated the resident was excessively sweating, tachycardic, hypertensive, and tachypneic (high respiratory rate) and continued to refuse medications and fluids. The nurse practitioner (NP) was contacted and an order received to send the resident to the emergency room (ER). The resident's representative was informed of the transfer.During an interview with the Infection Preventionist (IP) on 8/20/25 at 1:56 p.m., she indicated Resident C was a very private person, but would often say hello to her during the day. On the morning of 7/22/25, the resident did not say hello to her and was not acting at her baseline. The IP noted the resident was cold, restless, and sweaty. The IP informed the DON, who attempted to get the resident to drink fluids and take her medication. The resident adamantly refused. Around approximately 2 p.m., a CNA approached the IP and indicated the resident remained altered, tachycardic, and more restless than previously. The IP called the NP, who told her to send the resident to the ER.During an interview with the DON, on 8/21/25 at 9:18 a.m., she indicated Resident C was a very private person and frequently refused her medications. On 7/22/25, the DON was approached by staff who indicated the resident was altered and had an elevated blood pressure. The DON attempted to give the resident her blood pressure medication, but the resident verbally refused and swatted at the medicine cup. The DON indicated later on that day, she was approached by the IP, who indicated the resident remained altered and was being sent to the hospital.During an interview with LPN 7 on 8/21/25 at 10:33 a.m., she indicated when a change of condition occurred, the resident would be assessed first, then depending on the condition of the resident, the provider and family would be contacted.During an interview with the DON on 8/21/25 at 10:40 a.m. she indicated when she worked with Resident C on 7/22/25, she was not acting at her baseline. When a change of condition was identified, staff were supposed to fill out an electronic interaction (e-Interact) form, which included notification of family or the resident representative.During an interview with the DON on 8/22/25 at 10:59 a.m., she indicated nursing staff were expected to contact family and resident representatives when a change of condition was identified and this would be charted in a progress note.A current facility policy, titled Change in a Resident's Condition or Status, and provided by the DON on 8/22/25 at 11:05 a.m. indicated the following, .Our facility shall promptly notify the resident, his or her Attending Physician, and representative (sponsor) of changes in the resident's medical/mental condition and/or status (e.g., change in level of care, billing/payments, resident rights, etc.) .4. Unless otherwise instructed by the resident, a nurse will notify the resident's representative when: .b. There is a significant change in the resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial status; .e. It is necessary to transfer the resident to a hospital/treatment center This citation relates to Complaint 2588630.3.1-5(a)(2)3.1-5(a)(3)
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 F0745 (Tag F0745)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide social services regarding financial management regarding the management of cash savings and spending down of resources...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide social services regarding financial management regarding the management of cash savings and spending down of resources to remain eligible for Medicaid for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for assistance to manage finances. ( Resident C and D)Findings include:1.During an interview, Resident C's representative indicated the resident's funds had not been managed correctly. The resident had cash funds stored in the Social Service office, not the business office. There was no method to account for what funds had been spent. At the time of discharge, the representative was given cash in the amount of $700 dollars, and the family thought their loved one should have more money. The facility staff informed them the resident purchased lots of snacks, when they questioned the amount of money returned to them.During an interview on 8/21/25 at 1:00 p.m., the Administrator indicated he had not known Resident C had cash in the Social Service office until he witnessed it being given to the family at the resident's discharge.During an interview on 8/21/25 at 1:08 p.m., the Social Services Director (SSD) indicated the following:She had stored Resident C's personal money in a locked file cabinet in the Social Service office. She had received $900.00 in cash from the resident shortly after the resident's admission. The resident had a fear of banks. The SSD had not had the resident sign any form or paperwork indicating her money was stored in the SSD's office. The SSD had not kept a record of money the resident had received, nor had she had the resident sign any receipt for said money. The SSD had not talked to the resident's family member about the money being locked in the SSD office. She had not considered if the money would be covered by the surety bond or facility insurance. She had not developed any type of care plan for the resident regarding the safety and use of her money, which was stored in the SSD office. She had made purchases for the resident using said money. She had given the resident every receipt. The resident mostly purchased snacks. She was unsure if the Administrator was aware of said money being in the SSD office. She had given Resident C's family member $700 dollars at the time of the resident's discharge.Resident C's clinical record was reviewed on 8/19/25 at 12:31 p.m. Diagnoses included paranoid schizophrenia and hypertension.A 5/27/25, quarterly, Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated Resident C was moderately cognitively impaired and required assistance with decision making.2. A current, facility, 8/19/25, Trail Balance resident funds statement indicated Resident D had a current balance of $20,619.36. A resident specific quarterly statement indicated Resident D received a deposit of $22,466.00 in March 19, 2025. The facility was the resident's representative payee.Four letters addressed to Resident D, titled Resident Funds Balance Notification, dated April 30, 2025, May 30, 2025, June 30, 2025, and July 31, 2025 indicated the following: This letter is to notify you that your current Resident Funds Balance is within $200.00 or exceeding what is allowed under Medical Assistance. Please contact your Social Worker within the next 7 days to discuss ways to assure continuance of Medicaid benefits. None of the 4 letters indicated the information had been verbally shared with the resident, nor did it indicated assistance had been offered.During an interview on 8/21/25 at 10:00 a.m., Resident D indicated he didn't believe he had any extra money to spend. If he had extra money, he'd really like to look into a different place to live. Additionally, if he had to stay at the facility, he'd spend his money on clothes and room decorations such as posters. During an observation at this time, the resident's room lacked any room decorations.Resident D's record was reviewed on 8/19/25 at 2:29 p.m. Current diagnoses included hypertension, diabetes, major depressive disorder, and unspecified dementia. The resident received Medicaid benefits.A 7/11/25, significant change, MDS assessment indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired and required assistance with decision making.A current 8/19/25 care plan indicated the resident had impaired decision making. The care plan originated 11/2024.A current 12/10/24 care plan indicated the resident had an alteration in mental functioning due to mental health diagnoses. The clinical record lacked documentation or plan of care regarding the resident's need to spend his money in order to remain eligible for Medicaid.During an interview on 8/21/2025 at 11:38 a.m., the Business Office Manager indicated the facility had no documentation of action taken to assist Resident D in spending his resources. The Corporate Director of Business Office Operation had told her because the resident had nine months to spend down his resources, the facility had not needed to assist the resident yet. The cooperate consultant hadn't assisted him yet and planned to come and start Monday, 8/25/25. This citation relates to Complaint 2588630. 3.1-34(a)
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 F0568 (Tag F0568)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents, for whom the facility managed funds, or their representatives, received quarterly funds statements for 2 of 3 residents r...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents, for whom the facility managed funds, or their representatives, received quarterly funds statements for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for quarterly statements. (Residents F and H)Findings include:A current 8/19/25, facility Trail Balance resident funds statement indicated the facility managed personal funds for 32 residents. Residents E, F and H names were listed on the account list.Quarterly statements were requested of facility management for review for Residents E, F, and H. Residents F and H did not have quarterly statements for review. During an interview on 8/20/25 at 1:36 p.m., the Administrator and Business Office Manager both indicated that quarterly statements had not been given to residents who did not have a responsible party to receive them. This had been an error and residents should have received the statements themselves.A current, 2017, facility policy titled, Deposit of Resident Funds, provided by the Business Office Manager on 8/20/21 at 1:38 p.m., indicated The resident is provided a confidential quarterly statement on funds on deposit with the facility.This citation relates to Complaint 2588630. 3.1-6(g)
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 F0570 (Tag F0570)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a surety bond in sufficient amount to safeguard all resident funds. This deficient practice had the potential to impact 32 of 32 re...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a surety bond in sufficient amount to safeguard all resident funds. This deficient practice had the potential to impact 32 of 32 residents for whom the facility managed funds. Findings include: Review of a current 8/19/25, facility Trail Balance resident funds statement indicated the facility managed resident funds for 32 residents.Review of the facility's current, April 1, 2022, surety bond agreement indicated the resident funds were covered in liability surety for the amount of $30,000.00 (thirty thousand dollars).A review of bank statements for July 2025 (7/1/25 to 7/31/25), June 2025 (5/31/25 to 6/30/25) and May 2025 (5/1/25 to 5/30/25) indicated 23 days had a daily ledger balance greater than $30,000.00 as follows: 7/3/25 $41,381.03, 7/7/25 $41,422.03, 7/9/25 $43,429.03, 7/13/25 $42,740.03, 7/16/25 $43,099.03, 7/21/25 $31,950.82, 7/22/25 $32,192.32, 7/23/25 $31,869.32, 7/25/25 $31,773.27, 7/28/25 $30,109.89, 6/3/25 $42,544.15, 6/4/25 $48,374.65, 6/5/25 $39,050.65, 6/6/25 $37,644.65, 6/9/25 $38,670.65, 6/11/25 $38,802.65, 5/2/25 $42,023.85, 5/7/25 $42,188.85, 5/8/25 $42,658.85, 5/9/25 $47,217.85, 5/12/25 $46,917.85, 5/14/25 $46,096.55, and 5/21/25 $30,107.55.During an interview on 8/20/25 at 9:30 a.m., the Business Office Manager indicated the facility did not complete the reviews to ensure the surety bond was sufficient for the coverage of the balance of resident funds. It was completed through the home office.A current, 2017, facility policy titled, Management of Residents' Personal Funds, provided by the Business Office Manager on 8/20/21 at 1:38 p.m., indicated .Should the facility manage the resident's funds, the facility will act as a fiduciary of the resident funds and hold, safeguard manage, and account for the personal funds of the resident. This citation relates to Complaint 2588630. 3.1-6(i)
Feb 2025 2 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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure insulin administration for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for insulin administration. (Resident B and C) Findings include: 1. Resident B'...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure insulin administration for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for insulin administration. (Resident B and C) Findings include: 1. Resident B's clinical record was reviewed on 2/19/25 at 11:50 a.m. Diagnoses included type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), unspecified altered mental status, unspecified poly neuropathy, and long term use of insulin. A physician's order, dated 1/3/25, indicated Lantus (a diabetic medication to treat to DM), administer 30 units subcutaneously in the morning. The electronic medication administration record (eMAR) indicated the medication had not been administered. The progress notes lacked documentation regarding the missed dose. A physician's order, dated 9/10/24, indicated Lispro (a diabetic medication to treat to DM), administer 10 units subcutaneously before meals. The eMAR indicated the medication had not been administered on 1/2/25 for the 4:00 p.m. dose. An administration note indicated the resident only took 4 units and lacked indication of physician notification regarding decreased administered dose. A physician's order, dated 9/10/24, indicated Lispro, administer per sliding scale: If 150-179, give 1 unit; if 180-209, give 2 units; if 210-239, give 3 units; if 240-269, give 4 units; if 270-299, give 5 units; if greater than 300, administer 6 units and recheck. If not resolved, contact provider. To be administered four times a day. The eMAR indicated the medication had not been administered and lacked a blood sugar reading on 1/1/25 for the 8:00 p.m. dose, and 1/2/25 for the 5:00 p.m. dose. The progress notes lacked documentation regarding missed doses. 2. The clinical record for Resident C was reviewed on 2/19/25 at 3:30 p.m. Diagnoses included type one diabetes mellitus. A current physician's order, dated 1/31/25, indicated Novolog (medication to treat DM), administer 5 units subcutaneously before meals in addition to sliding scale as indicated. The eMAR lacked indication the medication had been administered on 1/11/25 and 1/12/25 at 4:00 p.m. The progress notes lacked documentation regarding missed doses. A current physician's order, dated 5/24/24, indicated Novolog, administer per sliding scale before meals. The eMAR lacked indication the medication had been administered on 1/11/25 and 1/12/25 at 4:00 p.m. The progress notes lacked documentation regarding missed doses. 3. The clinical record for Resident D was reviewed on 2/20/25 at 3:50 p.m. Diagnoses included type two diabetes mellitus and hypoglycemia. A current physician's order, dated 1/24/25, indicated Humalog, administer per sliding scale subcutaneously before meals and at bedtime. The eMAR lacked indication the medication had been administered on 2/2//25 at 4:00 p.m. and 2/10/25 at 8:00 p.m. The progress notes lacked documentation regarding missed doses. During an interview on 2/20/25 at 11:22 a.m., the DON indicated the staff were failing to sign off medication administration. There should not be blank spaces on the eMAR. This citation relates to Complaints IN00452299 and IN00453678. 3.1-37(a)
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

Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the multi-use blood glucose monitoring device was sanitized per manufacturer's guidelines during a random observation o...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the multi-use blood glucose monitoring device was sanitized per manufacturer's guidelines during a random observation of blood glucose testing. Findings include: During an observation of blood glucose testing on 2/20/25 beginning at 11:34 a.m., QMA 2 removed a blood glucose testing meter from the top drawer of the medication cart. She wiped the device with an alcohol swab. At 11:35 a.m., she entered Resident G's room and placed the cup with the device on the overbed table. She donned gloves, swabbed the resident's finger with an alcohol wipe, and obtained the sample and reading. At 11:39 a.m., she removed her gloves and wiped the device with an alcohol swab and performed hand hygiene. At 11:40 a.m., she entered Resident H's room and placed the cup with the device on the overbed table. She donned gloves and swabbed Resident H's finger and obtained the sample and reading. At 11:42 a.m., she removed her gloves and wiped the device with an alcohol swab and returned to the medication cart, placing the device back into the top drawer. During an interview on 2/20/25 at 11:44 a.m., QMA 2 indicated an alcohol swab was used to sanitize the blood glucose monitoring device between residents. They only had the one device on that medication cart to use for multiple residents. During an interview on 2/20/25 at 12:04 p.m., the DON indicated an alcohol wipe was not sufficient to use to sanitize the multi-use glucose monitoring device. A Manufacturer's policy, undated, titled, Cleaning and Disinfecting the [Manufacturer's name] Blood Glucose Monitoring System, provided by the Scheduler on 2/20/25 at 2:43 p.m., included the following: .Cleaning and Disinfecting .The disinfecting procedure is needed to prevent the transmission of bloodborne pathogens. Only wipes with EPA registration numbers listed below have been validated for use in cleaning and disinfecting the meter .Meter surfaces must remain wet according to contact times listed in the wipe manufacturer's instructions This citation relates to Complaints IN00452299 and IN00453678. 3.1-18(b)
Jan 2025 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

Abuse Prevention Policies (Tag F0607)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed implement their abuse prohibition policy to ensure the safety of residents when an employee accused of abuse was permitted to remain in the fa...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed implement their abuse prohibition policy to ensure the safety of residents when an employee accused of abuse was permitted to remain in the facility during the investigation into the allegation. (Resident B and Care Specialist (CS) 1) Findings include: Resident B's clinical record was reviewed on 1/8/25 at 11:09 a.m Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic pain syndrome, hypertension, convulsions, psychoactive substance abuse and anxiety. Review of the most current significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/12/24, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. During an interview on 1/8/25 at 12:18 p.m., CS 1 indicated she was informed that Resident B had alleged she kicked the resident's foot. She was unaware of any physical contact with the resident. CS 1 indicated she was not suspended pending investigation, but instructed to stay away from Resident B. During an interview on 1/8/25 at 1:10 p.m., the Administrator indicated Resident B told him CS 1 had kicked the resident's foot and felt it had been done intentionally. The resident demanded the Administrator call the State Agency, police and the ombudsman. Resident B indicated he did not want CS 1 to enter his room or interact with him in the future. The Administrator indicated, after an investigation was initiated, he explained the allegation and the resident wishes to CS 1, but did not suspend the employee after the allegation was made and the allegation was investigated. He indicated the employee was not suspended because the incident had already been resolved. A current policy, dated 12/1/21, titled Incident or Alleged Abuse was provided by the Administrator on 1/8/25 at 11:20 a.m. The policy indicated the following: Procedure 6. If the suspected abusive individual is an employee, it is the responsibility of the supervisor at the time of the incident, if other than the Administrator, to suspend the abusive employee until the incident can be fully investigated. This citation relates to Complaints IN00449819 and IN00449116. 3.1-28(a)
Sept 2024 15 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

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the Indiana Department of Health for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident C) Finding includes: D...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the Indiana Department of Health for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident C) Finding includes: During an interview on 9/24/24 at 10:02 a.m., the Administrator indicated, on 8/11/24, Resident C reported an allegation of Resident D touching her breast that day in the common area. The Administrator had a file of the facility's investigation. Video surveillance had been reviewed for the specified time frame and the allegation was unsubstantiated by the facility. The facility had not reported the alleged abuse to the Indiana Department of Health. During an interview on 9/25/24 at 4:52 p.m., the Administrator indicated he felt Resident C's abuse allegation was not required to be reported the State of Indiana due to the resident's history of false allegations and the investigation results. The facility followed Indiana Department of Health guidelines for reporting of alleged abuse. A current facility policy, dated 2/1/23 and titled ABUSE PREVENTION AND PROHIBITION POLICY, provided by the Administrator on 9/22/24 at 4:30 p.m., indicated the following: .PURPOSE .To ensure the resident's right to remain free from verbal, sexual, physical, and mental abuse, mistreatment, neglect, corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion, and exploitation .PROCEDURES .RESIDENT TO RESIDENT . 3. The Administrator and/or DON, SSD, shall be notified of the incident immediately .6. The incident shall be reported to the state/certification agency, the ombudsman, and Adult protective Services as applicable per guidelines supplied by the department of health Review of the Indiana Department of Health policy titled Long Term Care Abuse and Incident Reporting Policy, effective date 12/8/24 through 12/8/24 and retrieved from https://www.in.gov/health/ltc/files/LTC-Abuse-Reporting.pdf indicated the following: .B. Types of Incidents Reportable Under Federal and State Rules .ii. Sexual contact 1. Required to report: Touching a resident's sexual organs and the resident being touched indicates the touching is unwanted through verbal or non-verbal cues Cross reference F610. This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00442950. 3.1-28(c)
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

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to conduct a complete and thorough investigation of alleged sexual abuse for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for abuse. (Resident C) Findings includ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to conduct a complete and thorough investigation of alleged sexual abuse for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for abuse. (Resident C) Findings include: Confidential interviews were conducted during the course of the survey and indicated the following: Approximately three weeks ago, it was reported to the Social Services Director (SSD) and the Administrator that a male resident,without consent, touched Resident C's breast while seated in a high-backed reclining mobility chair near the entrance of the facility. The location was close to the surveillance camera and the alleged perpetrator was still a resident in the facility. It was reported to the SSD and the Administrator on the date it occurred. During an interview on 9/23/24 at 4:45 p.m., the Administrator indicated the facility had not received any allegations of resident to resident inappropriate touching from 8/3/24 to 9/22/24. The facility's investigations provided from 8/3/24 to 9/22/24 lacked alleged abuse investigations for Resident C or Resident D. During an interview on 9/24/24 at 10:02 a.m., the Administrator indicated, on 8/11/24, Resident C had reported to him an allegation of Resident D touching her breast that day in the common area. The Administrator had a file of the facility's investigation. Video surveillance had been reviewed for the specified time frame and the allegation was unsubstantiated by the facility. The alleging resident also had a known history of false allegations. Review of the facility's investigation indicated it included a statement of alleged abuse by Resident C reported to the Administrator, an interview with Resident D by the SSD (who denied touching Resident C), a summary of the follow-up with Resident C, and two photo snips from the video surveillance. It was unable to be determined who was in the photos due to the size (both approximately the size of a postage stamp). The facility's investigation did not include the following: the time the information was reported to the Administrator, the time the alleged event occurred, and the time the follow-up was completed. The investigation lacked a skin assessment of Resident C and additional interviews held with staff or other residents regarding abuse or incidence of inappropriate touching. 1. Resident C's clinical record was reviewed on 9/24/24 at 2:03 p.m. Diagnoses included, general anxiety, moderate major depressive disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder. The clinical record lacked documentation of allegations of sexual abuse during the period from 8/1/24 to 9/24/24. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 8/26/24, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. She had a functional limitation in range of motion for her upper and lower extremities on both sides. A wheelchair was used for mobility. The resident was dependent on staff for dressing, toileting, mobility and personal hygiene. The resident had a current care plan, last revised on 9/24/24, regarding false accusations that peers had touched her inappropriately. Interventions included investigate accusations as needed (1/17/23). 2. Resident D's clinical record was reviewed on 9/24/24 at 2:19 p.m. Current diagnoses include, major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and bipolar disorder. The resident had a current care plan, last revised 12/8/23, regarding hypersexuality related to kissing peers in the cheek and allegations of inappropriate touching. Interventions included investigate all allegations (5/7/22). A quarterly MDS assessment, dated 8/27/24, indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired and displayed no maladaptive behaviors during the assessment period. During an interview on 9/25/24 at 3:40 p.m., the SSD indicated Resident C came to the SSD office after her smoke time on 8/11/24 (she could not remember if it was the 11:00 a.m. smoke break or the 1:30 p.m. smoke break) and reported to her that Resident D touched her on the side of her breast while they were sitting in the common area just before the smoke break. The resident suggested they review the surveillance cameras. The SSD reported the above information immediately to the Administrator and they began the investigation. She interviewed Resident D, who denied touching Resident C. The SSD had not interviewed other residents to ensure they had not been affected. She had not interviewed staff regarding the allegation because she thought the Administrator interviewed the staff members. When she assisted with investigations regarding abuse allegations, she just interviewed who the Administrator told her to interview. The Administrator determined who needed interviewed based on the individual investigations. The facility would not know if other residents were affected if there were no additional interviews. During an interview on 9/25/24 at 1:09 p.m., CNA 19 indicated she had worked on 8/11/24. She was not asked any questions by Administration nor included in an investigation of an abuse allegation between Resident C and Resident D regarding inappropriate touching. During an interview on 9/25/24 at 1:17 p.m., QMA 5 indicated she was familiar with all of the residents in the building. She was not asked any questions by Administration nor included in an investigation of an abuse allegation between Resident C and Resident D regarding inappropriate touching. During an interview on 9/25/24 at 1:25 p.m., CNA 20 indicated she was not asked any questions by Administration nor included in an investigation of an abuse allegation between Resident C and Resident D regarding inappropriate touching. During an interview, while the clips of the video surveillance were reviewed on 9/25/24 at 4:52 p.m., the Administrator indicated he requested the video surveillance from the corporate office for 8/11/24 from 1:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. The facility did not have access to the video surveillance from 1:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. The corporate staff sent him five photos from the surveillance footage during the requested time frame for review, rather than the entire video for the requested timeframe. The time snips were at 1:01 p.m., 1:06 p.m., 1:16 p.m., 1:26 p.m., and 1:31 p.m. The time snips provided by corporate did not show Resident D touching Resident C's breast in the five photos. The Administrator had been made aware of Resident C's previous false allegations of sexual abuse when he started at the facility in February. Since that time, he was not aware of any further reports of sexual abuse from Resident C until the allegation on 8/11/24. Other resident and staff interviews were not included in the investigation because he stopped the investigation due to a lack of evidence found in the five photos provided from corporate. He believed the facility followed Indiana State guidelines for thorough investigations of alleged abuse. A current facility policy, dated 2/1/23, titled ABUSE PREVENTION AND PROHIBITION POLICY, provided by the Administrator on 9/22/24 at 4:30 p.m., indicated the following: PURPOSE .To ensure the resident's right to remain free from verbal, sexual, physical, and mental abuse, mistreatment, neglect, corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion, and exploitation .SEXUAL ABUSE: Inappropriate touching of any resident . PROCEDURES . Upon receipt of an allegation of abuse, the Executive Director shall immediately investigate and document all his/her relevant findings and outcome . Facility investigation of suspected abuse will include: 1. Time, Date, Place, and Individuals present. 2. Description of the event as reported. 3. Response of staff at the time of the event: 4. Follow-up action; and 5. Administrator's review . PROCEDURE: The investigation is the process to try to determine what happened .a. Investigation of abuse: When an incident or suspected incident of abuse is reported, the Administrator or designee will investigate the incident with the assistance of appropriate personnel. The investigation will include: i. Who was involved ii. Resident's statements . iv. Involved staff and witness statements of events. v. A description of the resident's behavior and environment at the time of the incident vi. Injuries present including a resident assessment. vii. Observation of resident and staff behaviors during the investigation This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00442950. 3.1-28(d)
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0655 (Tag F0655)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for 1 of 1 resident revi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for pressure ulcers. (Resident 31) Finding includes: Resident 31's clinical record was reviewed on 9/24/24 at 2:42 p.m. She admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included pain in the right lower leg, alcohol abuse in remission, and stage 3 chronic kidney disease. The clinical record lacked a baseline care plan. During an interview on 9/26/24 at 2:51 p.m., RN 10 indicated a Braden Scale risk assessment should have been completed on admission to the facility. The risk for pressure ulcers was a guide to determine what pressure ulcer prevention interventions were implemented. During an interview on 9/26/24 at 4:27 p.m., the DON indicated she was unable to provide a copy of the resident's baseline care plan because it was not developed on admission. A current facility policy, dated 1/2023, titled Pressure Ulcer/Wound Care, provided by the Infection Preventionist on 9/26/24 at 10:25 a.m., indicated the following: Policy: . It is the Policy . that each resident who enters the facility without pressure ulcers, does not develop pressure ulcers unless the individual's clinical condition demonstrates that they are unavoidable . Procedure: . 19. Care plan is updated to reflect assessment and planned interventions. Cross Reference F686. 3.1-30(a)
CONCERN (D)

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assess a resident upon admission for risk of pressure...

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 assess a resident upon admission for risk of pressure ulcers and failed to develop and and implement interventions to prevent the development of pressure ulcers when risk was identified. (Resident 31) Finding includes: During an observation on 9/23/24 at 10:12 a.m., Resident 31 was in bed in her room. During an observation on 9/23/24 at 12:54 p.m., the resident was in her bed on her back. She was covered from toes to chin. During an observation on 9/24/24 at 1:44 p.m., the resident was asleep in her bed on her back. Her legs were bent at the knees with her heels directly against the mattress. During an observation on 9/24/24 at 2:24 p.m., the resident was in bed in her room and resting while covered with a blanket. Resident 31's clinical record was reviewed on 9/24/24 at 2:42 p.m. She admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included, pain in the right lower leg, alcohol abuse in remission, and stage 3 chronic kidney disease. An admission Skin Observation Tool, dated 6/19/24, indicated the resident's had no skin issues. An admission Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 6/27/24, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. She lacked any rejection of care behaviors. The resident was dependent on staff assistance for bathing, lower body dressing, transfers, and putting on and taking off footwear. She required substantial assistance for toileting and rolling left and right. The resident was at risk for pressure ulcers and did not have any pressure ulcers or other skin concerns. Skin treatments included a pressure reducing device for the bed. A current physician's order, dated 6/25/24, included to complete skin assessments on days shift every Tuesday. The clinical record lacked an admission Braden Scale For Predicting Pressure Sore Risk. The first Braden Scale For Predicting Pressure Sore Risk was dated 8/7/24, seven weeks after admission, and indicated the resident was at risk for developing pressure injuries. A Nurse Practitioner's wound evaluation, dated 7/2/24 at 7:09 a.m., indicated the resident's left and right heel deep tissues injuries were first visualized on this date. The left heel was with deep purple discoloration that measured 1.0 centimeter (cm) length (L) by 1.0 cm width (W), circular shape, and skin intact. The right heel was with deep purple discoloration that measured 1.0 cm L x 2.5 cm W, more linear in shape and skin intact. A current physician's order, dated 7/2/24, included apply skin preparation wipes to bilateral heels topically three times a day for deep tissue injuries, float heels while in bed, turn frequently, and a low air loss bed was recommended. A care plan, initiated on 7/3/24, indicated the resident had an activity of daily living self-care performance deficit including eating, bed mobility, transfers, and toileting. Interventions included, assist as indicated with bed mobility (7/3/24) and extensive assistance of one staff was indicated for eating (7/3/24). A current care plan, initiated on 7/15/24, indicated the resident had episodes of refusing boots to her feet and removed the boots after they were placed on the resident's feet. Interventions included, attempt to place the boots on each time care is provided (7/19/24) and explain the importance of care (7/15/24). A care plan, initiated on 8/7/24, indicated the resident was at risk for pressure ulcers related to required assistance with bed mobility and incontinence. Interventions included, administer treatments as ordered and monitor for effectiveness (8/7/24) and monitor nutritional status (8/7/24). A current physician's order, dated 8/30/24, included place the pressure relief boots on the resident's feet at all times, except when bathing. The clinical record lacked weekly skin assessments of the bilateral heel wounds to include a description and measurements of each wound on 9/5/24 and 9/19/24. A Nurse Practitioner's wound evaluation, dated 9/24/24 at 12:19 p.m., indicated the resident's left heel wound was with purple localized discoloration and measured 2 cm L x 2 cm W, with intact skin. The left heel wound etiology was deep tissue. The right heel wound was with purple localized discoloration and measured 5 cm L by 7 cm W, with intact skin. A current physician's order, dated 9/25/24, included administer a protein supplement mixed with applesauce/juice/water every day in the morning for wounds. Review of the Resident Matrix, provided by the Administrator on 9/22/24 at 3:20 p.m., indicated the resident had an unstageable pressure ulcer (a full-thickness skin and tissue loss where the stage of the injury is uncertain because the base of the wound is covered by dead tissue). During an observation on 9/26/24 at 8:38 a.m., the resident was in bed asleep on her back. Her legs were bent at the knee and feet were covered with a sheet. During an interview on 9/26/24 at 9:41 a.m., the DON indicated Resident 31 did not have any skin impairment on admission. Some of the weekly skin assessments lacked measurements and descriptions. She was unable to locate additional weekly wound assessments in the clinical record. During an observation on 9/26/24 at 11:38 a.m., Resident 31 was in the dining room, seated in a wheelchair at the table. She wore non-skid socks. Pressure relief boots were not in place. During an observation on 9/26/24 at 2:30 p.m., Resident 31 was in bed on her back with her knees bent and her eyes open. Her feet were covered with a blanket. During an interview on 9/26/24 at 2:51 p.m., RN 10 indicated a Braden Scale risk assessment should have been completed on admission to the facility. The resident's risk for pressure ulcers was a guide to determine what pressure ulcer prevention interventions were implemented. During an interview on 9/26/24 at 3:47 p.m., Resident 31 indicated she did not have any wounds when she admitted to the facility. She was unable to turn herself in bed and required assistance from staff for repositioning. She did not have pressure relief boots on her feet. During the interview, CNA 22 entered the residents room and brought a pair of pressure relief boots. The CNA indicated the DON had requested she bring them to the resident. During a wound observation on 9/26/24 from 3:49 p.m. to 3:57 p.m., accompanied by the DON, Resident 31 was on her back in bed with one pillow under her calves, and her knees bent. Due to her legs being bent at the knee, the resident's heels were resting slightly against the bed. She did not have pressure relief boots in place. The DON demonstrated the right heel wound measured 5 cm L by 2.5 cm W, approximately the size of a quarter, and contained a dark maroon scab that covered the base of the wound. The edges were beginning to detach and wound depth was unable to be determined. The left heel wound measured 1.0 cm L by 1.0 cm W, approximately the size of a pencil-top eraser, and contained a dark maroon scab that covered the base of the wound. The depth was unable to be determined. During the observation, the DON indicated she believed the right heel was an unstageable pressure ulcer and the left heel was scabbed. After the skin protectant was applied to both heels, the area was allowed to dry, pressure relief boots were applied, and a pillow was placed back under the resident's calves. The resident did not resist the pressure relief boots during the observation. The resident was not offered to reposition in bed prior to staff leaving the resident's room. During an interview on 9/26/24 at 3:58 p.m., CNA 22 indicated Resident 31 required total assistance for med mobility and up to two-person assistance. The resident was cooperative with care. The CNA was unaware of any specific turn and reposition schedule for the resident. Resident 31 did not have pressure relief boots when she admitted and she was unaware of any pressure ulcer prevention interventions in place to prevent pressure ulcers. The pressure relief boots were added after she developed the pressure ulcers and the resident was non-compliant with the pressure relief boots. A current facility policy, dated 1/2023, titled Pressure Ulcer/Wound Care, provided by the Infection Preventionist on 9/26/24 at 10:25 a.m., indicated the following: Policy: . It is the Policy . that each resident who enters the facility without pressure ulcers, does not develop pressure ulcers unless the individual's clinical condition demonstrates that they are unavoidable . Procedure: . 12. Document resident's skin condition. If Pressure Ulcer is present, nurse will measure LxWxD [length by width by depth] and record stage, measurement, color, drainage, and odor on weekly basis or with any significant change . 14. Document preventative measures and equipment used . 15. Braden Scale skin assessment is completed upon: a. Admission, then weekly times 3 3.1-40(a)(1) 3.1-40(a)(2)
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0742 (Tag F0742)

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 implement care plan interventions to de-escalate a re...

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 implement care plan interventions to de-escalate a resident experiencing a behavioral difficulty in a common area with peers for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for behavior management. (Resident 13) Findings include: Confidential interviews were conducted throughout the survey. During a 9/24/24 confidential interview, a resident indicated that Resident 13 was out of control the previous night. Resident 13 beat on walls, punched holes, and threw furniture. He threw furniture that almost hit people. The interviewed resident indicated they were scared. Resident 13's record was reviewed on 9/24/24 at 2:20 p.m. Current diagnoses included schizophrenia, profound intellectual disability, generalized anxiety disorder, and borderline personality disorder. An 8/15/24, quarterly, Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated Resident 13 was severely cognitively impaired and had displayed both physical behavioral symptoms directed towards others and not directed towards others, four to six days of the assessment period. The resident had the following care plan problems/needs: I have behaviors not directed towards others as evidenced by placing self on floor, crawling on floor, pulling on hand railing making it become loose, threatening to throw self on the floor, exposing self, threatening to urinate on wall/floor, spitting, banging on walls, med carts, etc., initiated on 9/22/21 and revised on 9/24/24. Approaches to this problem included the following: Ensure that peers and others are giving him 'space' when he is placing his self on the floor to ensure safety of others until resident is able to be calmed or taken to a quite area, initiated on 3/27/24. Give resident space, initiated on 4/5/24. Offer to take resident to a quite area, initiated on 3/25/24. Resident 13 has behaviors of yelling out in common area, yelling that he was given the wrong medication, yelling for a doctor, for us to call Dr. [name], etc, initiated: 5/28/22 and revised on: 9/23/24. Approaches to this problem included: If in a common area/high activity area, please take me to my room to assist me. Staff will ensure that resident is given space when yelling out, initiated: 3/27/24. Resident 13 has self-injurious behaviors of placing/throwing self on floor, crawling on floor, laying in middle of halls, banging on walls, hitting at the floor and slapping his stomach, banging on hand rails, hitting elbow on wall, banging head on the floor, swinging bedside table in circles, tipping over tables and chairs, etc., initiated on 6/15/22 and revised on 9/24/24. Approaches to this problem included the following: Assist with removing peers from area, initiated on 9/24/24. Ensure that resident is given space when having behaviors, attempt to keep others away from resident until he can be taken to a quite area, or calmed down to ensure safety of others, initiated on 3/27/24. Try to assist resident to safe area, initiated on 6/11/23 and revised on 8/13/23. I have potential to be physically aggressive to others related to poor impulse, grab at others, or/and attempt to/or hit/bite at others, try to choke staff/place arm around staffs' necks, spit at staff, attempt to hit staff, poke his fingers in staff faces, bite others, tip over/toss chairs/tables, etc, incident with peer 3/23/24, initiated on 2/6/21 and revised on: 9/24/24. Approaches to this problem included when resident is agitated, attempt to assist resident to area away from peers, etc. A 9/22/24 at 2:39 p.m., Behavior Note indicated Resident 13 was upset after having a soda, he wanted staff to get him another soda, but he was a quarter short and staff was trying to find a quarter for him. He laid down on the floor, was slapping his stomach, hitting his head on the ground, yelling out,and slapping the floor. Staff found a quarter for him, and got him a soda, however the resident still kept putting himself on the ground and yelling. During an observation on 9/23/24 at 10:06 a.m., Resident 13 was seated at the table in the dining/activity area. He was interacting with his peers. A 9/23/24 at 2:47 p.m., Social Service Note indicated Resident 13 placed his self on the floor and was slapping his stomach and the floor, yelling out and hitting is head on the ground. The resident was upset when staff were looking for a quarter due to needing a quarter to get a pop out of the machine. After a quarter was found resident continued to yell out for several more minutes, then stopped. A 9/23/24 at 5:08 p.m. Behavior Note indicated, Resident 13 came out of his room and placed himself on the floor very slowly and began yelling for a doctor, staff unable to redirect resident. The resident made his way to the nursing carts, and began banging and hitting the med carts and yelling. No behavioral interventions attempted were indicated in the clinical record. A 9/23/24 at 10:00 p.m., Behavior Note indicated Resident 13 was pounding on the walls and the doors. The resident threw a table at another resident and then punched a hole in the wall. An injection of diphenhydramine was effective and the resident was calm so far the rest of the evening. A 9/24/24 at 6:49 a.m., Behavior Note indicated the resident began to bang on dining room table this morning before breakfast calling for a doctor, staff was unable to redirect resident for several minutes. resident eventually got up from the table and began walking the hallway. Will continue to monitor. A 9/24/24 at 7:53 a.m., Social Service Note indicated the previous evening, Resident 13 came out of his room, placed his self on the floor, started yelling out for an unknown doctor, screaming that he was given the wrong medication, etc. Staff asked resident if he would like something to eat and he stated that he wanted a peanut butter and mayonnaise sandwich. Staff got the resident the requested sandwich from the kitchen and resident allowed for staff to assist him with getting up and in the wheelchair while he ate. As soon as he finished the sandwich, the resident threw himself on the floor again and started to yell out. Staff was able to redirect resident and resident calmed down. After writer left, resident started having behaviors again of yelling out, banging and hitting the medication carts, lasting several minutes. The resident calmed down for a few minutes and then he started to pound on the walls, throwing a table and punched a hole in the wall. No peers were around resident at the time of behavior. Staff notified the psychiatric nurse practitioner and a new order was given for diphenhydramine 25 mg [an antihistamine which is also used for sleep] via intramuscular injection to be administered. PRN [as needed] administered and effective with no further behaviors. A new order was received to send the resident out for evaluation at psychiatric unit. A message was left for the resident's representative. No behavioral interventions attempted were indicated in the clinical record. A 9/24/24 at 10:34 a.m. Social Service Note indicated the resident had been accepted at a Neuro-Psych hospital where they would receive and evaluation and treatment. The resident was scheduled for transport at 8:45 p.m. A 9/24/24 at 10:36 a.m. Nurse's Note indicated the resident's behavior increased during the day of 9/23/24 and the Nurse Practitioner gave orders for the resident to be admitted to a psychiatric facility for evaluations and treatment. During an observation on 9/24/23 at 2:38 p.m., Resident 13 was walking in the hallway. During an interview on 9/24/24 at 3:53 p.m., RN 17 indicated she had obtained the order for diphenhydramine for Resident 13 the evening on 9/23/24. She was told the resident punched walls and doors. He put a hole in the wall. RN 17 witnessed him hit doors and walls. There were a lot of residents in the area. She herself did not attempt to remove the resident or his peers from the area. During an interview on 9/24/24 at 4:31 p.m., CNA 18 indicated she witnessed Resident 13 after he began his behavioral event on 9/23/24. As she entered the area, a resident stated he threw a table and almost hit them. An over bed table was on its side on the floor. Resident 13 was hitting walls. He hit the wall under the bay window and put a hole in it. There were four or more residents in the area. Some residents just sat and watched. One resident tried to get too close and was told to stay back. Resident 13 hit the walls, windows, and the door a number of times. CNA 18 did not attempt to remove Resident 13 or his peers from the area. During an observation an interview on 9/24/24 at 4:47 p.m., the Administrator indicated the security cameras, which were mounted on the walls to cover the dining area and lounge, were controlled by the corporate office. The corporate office had informed him the cameras were not working properly during the resident's behavioral episode. He was able to provide a single photo of the area, which was not completely visible due to a stink bug being on the lens. During an observation on 9/24/24 at 4:55 p.m., the Administrator moved medication and treatment carts from in front of the bay window in the lounge and displayed a patched area where the resident had put a hole the previous evening. During an interview on 9/25/24 at 4:02 p.m., the Social Services Director indicated the resident's care plan indicated staff should try to remove the resident or his peers when Resident 13 was having an explosive behavioral episode. A current, undated, facility policy, titled, Care Strategies Behavior Management Program, which was provided by the DON on 9/26/24 at 1:59 p.m., indicated the following: .The facility will treat, or make referrals to provide appropriate intervention in establishing a plan to treat for those residents identified as needing 'Behavioral Management' 3.1-43(a)(1)
CONCERN (D)

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure shift to shift narcotic count and reconciliation was completed for 2 of 2 carts reviewed for medication reconciliation. (West cart a...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure shift to shift narcotic count and reconciliation was completed for 2 of 2 carts reviewed for medication reconciliation. (West cart and East cart) Findings include: 1. During a medication storage observation of the [NAME] medication cart, on 9/22/24 at 11:21 a.m., accompanied by QMA 6, the Narcotic Count Sheet was reviewed and the following dates lacked shift to shift count and reconciliation signatures of controlled medications: a. August 2024- lacked a narcotic card count: 19th, 20th, 21st, 22nd, 23rd, 24th, 25th, 26th, 27th, 28th, 29th, 30th, and 31st. September 2024- lacked a narcotic card count: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 6th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 14th, 15th, and 16th. b. August 2024- lacked shift-to-shift narcotic reconciliation signatures: 8/16: 10:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m., 8/17: 10:00 p.m. - 2:00 a.m., 8/21: 6:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m., 8/25: 6:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m., 8/27: 6:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m., 8/29: 6:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m., 8/31: 6:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m., September 2024- lacked shift-to- shift narcotic reconciliation signatures: 9/1: 6:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m., 2:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m., and 10:00 p.m. - 12:00 a.m., 9/5: 10:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m., 9/11: 10:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m., 9/14: 2:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. During an interview, at the time of the observation, QMA 6 indicated the narcotic count was completed when the medication cart was transferred from one employee to the next. 2. During a medication storage observation of the East medication cart, on 9/22/24 at 11:38 a.m., accompanied by QMA 5, the Narcotic Count Sheet was reviewed and the following dates lacked shift to shift count and reconciliation signatures of controlled medications: a. August 2024- lacked a narcotic card count: 25th, 27th, 29th, 31st. September 2024- lacked a narcotic card count: 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 12th, 13th, 14th b. August 2024- lacked shift-to-shift narcotic reconciliation signatures: 8/13: 10:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m., 8/15: 6:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m., 8/23: 10:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m., 8/25: 6:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m. September 2024- lacked shift-to-shift narcotic reconciliation signatures: 9/1: 6:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m., 9/3: 10:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m., 9/8: 6:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m., 9/9: 6:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m., 9/11: 6:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m., 9/12: 8:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m., 9/14: 6:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m., 9/15: 6:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m. During an interview, at the time of the observation, QMA 5 indicated the narcotic count sheet was completed by the oncoming nurse and the off going nurse at shift change. During an interview, on 9/22/24 at 1:58 p.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) indicated the expectation for staff was to complete the narcotic count sheet in full at the start and end of each shift. An undated, current facility policy, titled, Controlled Substances, provided by the DON on 9/23/24 at 11:21 a.m., indicated the following: . At each shift change, a physical inventory of controlled medications, as defined by state regulation, is conducted by two licensed clinicians and is documented on an audit record . 3.1- 25(b)(3)
CONCERN (D)

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 observation and interview, the facility failed to appropriately date stored medications, discard expired insulin vials,...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to appropriately date stored medications, discard expired insulin vials, and label medications with resident information in 2 of 2 medication carts observed for medication storage. (West cart and East cart) Findings include: 1. During a medication storage observation of the [NAME] medication cart, on [DATE] at 11:21 a.m., accompanied by QMA 6, the following was observed: a. One Levemir (insulin) vial with approximately 25 units remaining, with an open date of [DATE]. b. Sixty-six (66) single packets of 4% lidocaine (topical anesthetic) patches without resident identifiers or manufacturer container information. During an interview, at the time of the observation, QMA 6 indicated she was not insulin certified and did not know how long insulin was good for. During an interview, at the time of the observation, the Director of Nursing (DON) indicated opened insulin was good for 30 days. 2. During a medication storage observation of the East medication cart, on [DATE] at 11:38 a.m., accompanied by QMA 5, the following was observed: One Humalog (insulin) Kwikpen with approximately 50 units remaining, lacked an open date. During an interview, at the time of the observation, QMA 5 indicated opened insulin was good for 28 days and should be dated when opened. During an interview, on [DATE] at 8:30 a.m., LPN 7 indicated the lidocaine patches in the bottom of the [NAME] medication cart were ordered from a medications supply company instead of from the pharmacy for each individual resident. LPN 7 indicated only two residents utilized the patches. During an interview, on [DATE] at 10:28 a.m., the DON indicated the lidocaine patches on the bottom of the [NAME] medication cart were stock medications and are kept as a commonly used item in the facility. She indicated stock medications do not require resident identifiers. A current facility policy, revised 1/23, titled, Insulin Administration-Use of Kwik Pen, provided by the DON, on [DATE] at 10:59 a.m., indicated the following: .Do not use the pen past the expiration date or more than 28 days after first opening . A current facility policy, revised 11/20, titled, Storage of Medications, provided by the DON, on [DATE] at 10:59 a.m., indicated the following: . Drugs and biological's are stored in the packaging, containers, or other dispensing systems in which they are received . A current facility policy, revised 7/12, titled, Medication Policies, provided by the DON, on [DATE] at 11:21 a.m., indicated the following: .Floor stock medications are kept in the original manufacture's containers with expiration date and lot number clearly visible. A current facility policy, revised 7/12, titled, Provider Pharmacy Requirements, provided by the DON, on [DATE] at 1:22 p.m., indicated the following: .4. The provider pharmacy agrees to perform the following pharmaceutical services, including but not limited to: .e. Labeling all medications in accordance with all state and federal regulations ii. All prescription medications have labels that show: 1. The generic and/or brand name of the product. 2. The strength and dosage form of the medication, including strength per ml of liquid medications, when appropriate. 3. The medication's expiration date. 4. The resident's name. 5. Specific directions for use. 6. Prescriber's name. 7. Dispensing date. 8. Name, address, and telephone number of the dispensing pharmacy. 9. Identification of dispensing pharmacy. 10. Prescription number. 11. Quantity dispensed. 12. Precautionary labels indicating special storage requirements or procedures. 3.1-25(j) 3.1-25(k)
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0577 (Tag F0577)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the most recent survey results were readily accessible to residents and resident representatives. Findings include: A review of the...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the most recent survey results were readily accessible to residents and resident representatives. Findings include: A review of the facility survey binder on 9/22/24 at 10:04 a.m., located behind the nurse's station, indicated the most recent survey included in the survey binder was dated 11/27/23. The additional surveys included in the survey binder were all dated prior to 11/27/23. Signage at the nurse's station indicated to ask for the survey binder. During an interview, on 9/23/24 at 10:11 a.m., the Administrator indicated the survey dated 11/27/23 was the previous annual survey and the survey binder only needed to include annual surveys. He was not aware complaint surveys were required to be included in the survey binder. Review of survey activities conducted by the Indiana Department of Health indicated complaint surveys were conducted on the following dates: 12/21/23, 2/23/24, 3/15/24, 6/20/24, 7/24/24, and 8/20/24. A current facility policy, revised 4/07, titled, Survey Results, Examination of, provided by the Administrator, on 9/23/24 at 2:20 p.m., indicated the following: .2. A copy of the most recent standard survey, including any subsequent extended surveys, follow-up revisits reports, etc. along with state approved plans of correction of noted deficiencies, is maintained in a 3-ring binder located in an area frequented by most residents, such as the main lobby or resident activity center 3.1-3(b)(1)
CONCERN (E)

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

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to implement a grievance process according to facility policy for resident and resident representative concerns. Findings include: During rec...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to implement a grievance process according to facility policy for resident and resident representative concerns. Findings include: During record review on 9/24/24 at 10:30 a.m., the facility grievance binder, provided by the Administrator, indicated the following: The most recent grievance was filed on 1/23/24. During an interview, on 9/24/24 at 10:45 a.m., the Administrator indicated the Social Services Director (SSD) was the grievance official for the facility. During an interview, on 9/24/24 at 10:49 a.m., the SSD indicated she was the facility grievance official. Her grievance process was when a resident made a complaint or expressed a concern, it was investigated and resolved immediately. Since issues were resolved immediately there was no need to write the information on a grievance form. She indicated in the last 9 months, there had not been any concerns or complaints that had not been resolved immediately. A current facility policy, revised 4/17, titled, Grievances/Complaints, Filing, provided by the Administrator, on 9/24/24 at 11:19 a.m., indicated the following: .3. All grievance, complaints, or recommendations stemming from resident or family groups concerning issues of resident care in the facility will be considered. Actions on such issues will be responded to in writing, including a rationale for the response 8. Upon receipt of a grievance and/or complaint, the Grievance Officer will review and investigate the allegations and submit a written report of such findings to the Administrator within five (5) working days of receiving the grievance and/or complaint 11. The Administrator will review the findings of the Grievance Officer to determine what corrective action, if any, need to be taken 3.1-7(b)
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement an infection control program which enabled the facility to analyze patterns of known infectious symptoms, prevent the...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement an infection control program which enabled the facility to analyze patterns of known infectious symptoms, prevent the spread of infection, and/or develop programs to prevent recurrence. Findings include: A record review, on 9/24/24 at 10:20 a.m., of the Infection Control Binder, indicated the Infection Log and color coded mapping was completed utilizing the antibiotic Order Listing Report. This report was not printed until 9/23/24 (after the start of the survey), at which point it was printed for the following months: March 2024, April 2024, May 2024, June 2024, July 2024, August 2024, and September 2024. The tracking log lacked indication of tracking and trending of resident infections prior to 9/23/24. During an interview, on 9/24/24 at 10:35 a.m., the Infection Preventionist (IP) indicated she had only been in this position since 9/11/24 and split her time between two different locations. She had printed out the antibiotic orders for the previous months on 9/23/24 and filled out the Infection Log pages and mapping based on these orders. She was not aware of whom was the IP before her. A current, undated, facility policy, titled, Infection Prevention and Control Program Standards, provided by the Administrator, on 9/22/24 at 4:15 p.m., indicated the following: . establish and maintain an infection control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and help prevent the development and transmission of disease and infection .The facility will investigate, control, and prevent infections by documenting and analyzing the occurrence of nosocomial infections, recommend corrective action, and review findings . 3.1-18(a)
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0917 (Tag F0917)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had safe, comfortable chairs in their rooms for resi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had safe, comfortable chairs in their rooms for resident use. This deficient practice had the potential to impact 34 of 34 of the facilities residents. Findings include: Confidential interviews were completed throughout the survey. 1. During a confidential interview, a resident indicated they would like a chair in their room. They sat on their bed or table. During an observation at that time, the resident sat on their bedside table. 2. During a confidential interview, a resident indicated would like a chair for guests. Visitors usually sit side by side with the resident on the bed. 3. During a confidential interview, a resident indicated it was hard to bring a chair from the dining room if you wanted to sit in a chair. 4. During a confidential interview, a resident indicated they would like a chair in their room. During random observation, the following resident rooms were observed to contain no chair: Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/22/24 at 9:56 a.m. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/22/24 at 10:59 a.m. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/22/24 at 11:46 a.m. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/23/24 at 10:00 a.m. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/23/24 at 10:18 a.m. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/23/24 at 2:54 p.m. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/23/24 at 2:55 p.m. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/23/24 at 2:57 p.m. During an interview on 9/26/24 at 11:04 a.m., the Administrator indicated there was not enough room in resident rooms for a chair. He was not aware residents needed to be provided chairs in their rooms. The residents had not asked for a chair. During an interview on 9/26/24 at 3:19 p.m., the DON indicated the facility did not have a policy about furniture in resident rooms. 3.1-19(m)(4)
CONCERN (F)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure refrigerators functioned at a level to maintain safe food temperatures. This deficient practice had the potential to i...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure refrigerators functioned at a level to maintain safe food temperatures. This deficient practice had the potential to impact 34 of 34 residents who resided in the facility. Findings include: During the initial kitchen tour on 9/22/24 at 9:50 a.m., the following concerns regarding food refrigeration were noted: The standard white, two-section, (freezer on top) refrigerator registered a temperature of 48 degrees Fahrenheit (F). Inside the refrigerator were multiple trays of pre-poured drinks (milk and juices) and blocks of sliced cheeses. During an interview at this time, [NAME] 13 indicated the refrigerator should register between 36 to 38 degrees F. He believed the door may have been left open too long during breakfast meal service. He would let the Dietary Manager know and keep and eye on the temperatures. Review of the Refrigerator Temperature Logs for September 2024 indicated the logs for the three refrigerator and/or freezer units in the facility kitchen had not been completed in multiple days. The white refrigerator and freezer had not had temperatures recorded since 9/18/24, resulting in four days with no documented temperatures. The silver freezer and silver refrigerator had not had any temperature recorded since 9/19/24 resulting in three days with no recorded temperatures. During an interview at this time, [NAME] 13 indicated the temperatures should be recorded daily. During an interview on 9/22/24 at 10:40 a.m., the Dietary Manager indicated she had been informed of the concerns with the white registered. She had turned up the thermostat. She believed the refrigerator had been open too long during the breakfast meal. The Refrigerator Temperature Logs for September 2024, provided by the Dietary Manager on 9/22/24 at 1:40 p.m., contained the following information: The white refrigerator log had 19 entries, all of which were recorded as 38 degrees F. There was no recorded variance in temperature at any time. The silver refrigerator log had 17 entries, all of which were recorded as 38 degrees F. There was no recorded variance in temperature at any time. The log did not contain guidance of acceptable temperature ranges. During an observation of lunch meal preparation on 9/25/24 at 11:20 a.m., the standard white, two-section (freezer on top) refrigerator registered a temperature of 50 degrees F. At this time, [NAME] 14 tested a small glass of orange juice that had been maintained in the white refrigerator. The orange juice registered at 57.6 degrees F. Inside the white refrigerator was two packages of deli ham, three blocks of sliced cheese, three trays of poured milk (approximately 60 glasses), one tray of orange juice glasses, and one tray of grape juice glasses. During an interview on 9/25/24 at 11:56 a.m., the Dietary Manager indicated she had not checked the refrigerator temperature of the white refrigerated since the identified concern on 9/22/24. She had relied on her dietary staff to accurately monitor and record the temperatures. They had indicated all the temperatures had been 40 degrees F or less. During a 9/26/24, 11:33 a.m., interview, [NAME] 13 indicated every facility resident ate meals prepared in the facility kitchen. A current, 2001, facility policy titled, Food Receiving and Storage, which was received by the dietary manager on 9/25/24 at 3:09 p.m., indicated the following: .Refrigerated foods must be stored below 41 [degree sign] F 3.1-21(i)(1)
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0865 (Tag F0865)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement approaches to maintain a Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program to prevent repeat deficiencies....

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement approaches to maintain a Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program to prevent repeat deficiencies. The deficient practice the the potential to impact 34 of 34 residents. Findings include: Review of the Summary Statement of Deficiencies, for the facility's last annual recertification and licensure survey completed on 11/17/23, indicated the facility had deficiencies related to a lack of properly labeled medications and completed shift-to-shift narcotic reconciliation sheets. The plan of correction indicated, Ongoing corrective action will be monitored through the facility Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Program to ensure ongoing compliance. During an interview on 9/26/24 at 4:53 p.m., the Administrator indicated he was unable to provide the facility's most recent QAPI plan because they did not have one. The facility needed a more formal process for QAPI, where minutes were part of the meetings. He did not have any record keeping of the minutes for the meetings that were held. He had reviewed the deficiencies from the last annual survey and was familiar with them. His major focus was on the environmental issues such as cleaning, remodeling, and pest control to ensure the resident's rooms were great for them. He had one audit tool to provide. Continued deficiencies in previous areas of concern indicated the QAPI Plan was ineffective. Review of an Assessment Audit Tool for Pharmacy Services/Procedures/Pharmacist/Records contained the following dates 7/31, 8/7, 8/14, 8/22, and 9/4. The year was excluded. The audit tool was signed by the Administrator dated 9/4/24. It lacked information regarding which medication or treatment cart was audited on the specific dates. Further information was not provided prior to facility exit on 9/26/24. Review of a facility document, dated 2/22/22, titled BROOKSIDE CARE STRATEGIES 2022 QAPI PLAN, provided by the Administrator on 9/22/24 at 4:30 p.m., indicated the following: . RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY . The administrator has responsibility and is accountable to the facility and our corporation for ensuring that QAPI is implemented throughout our organization . HOW OUR FACILITY WILL CONDUCT PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS [PIPS] . Our facility will conduct Performance Improvement Projects that are designed to take a systemic approach to revise and improve care or services in areas that we identify as needing attention. We will conduct PIPS that will lead to changes and guide corrective actions in our systems . An important aspect of our PIPS is a plan to determine the effectiveness of our performance improvement activities and whether the improvement is sustained Cross reference F755 Cross reference F761 3.1-52(b)(2)
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0919 (Tag F0919)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a fully functional call light system for all r...

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 provide a fully functional call light system for all resident rooms and resident bathrooms. This deficient practice impacted 34 of 34 residents who resided in the facility. Findings Include: During random observations of the facility the following resident rooms were noted to have a hand bell or table top bells placed on tables, chest of drawers, and/or refrigerator tops: a. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/22/24 at 9:56 a.m. b. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/22/24 at 10:59 a.m. c. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/22/24 at 11:46 a.m. d. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/23/24 at 10:00 a.m. e. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/23/24 at 10:18 a.m. f. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/23/24 at 2:54 p.m. g. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/23/24 at 2:55 p.m. h. Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] on 9/23/24 at 2:57 p.m. Confidential interviews were conducted during the course of the survey. During a confidential interview, a resident indicated the call lights have never worked since they moved in. They had never lived in a nursing home without call lights. The facility just give them a bell, which had been months ago. During a confidential interview, a resident indicated when they were in the restroom and needed help, they had to yell and hope their roommate or neighbor would get them help. During a confidential interview, a resident indicated the call lights didn't work. Residents were given a bell. The call lights hadn't worked in a long time- maybe four to six months. During a confidential interview, a resident indicated the call light system had been inoperable since they came to the facility. The residents had been provided manual bells. It was difficult to determine which room it came from when a manual bell rang. Resident C was physically unable to ring the manual bell that was provided. The resident summoned assistance by yelling out and was known to use a personal telephone to call the facility at times when assistance was needed. During a confidential interview, an employee indicated the call light system had not been working for at least four to five months. Management was aware and had issued manual bells. It was very difficult to distinguish who needed assistance where when a bell rang without a light indicator. Resident C was not physically able to use a manual hand bell that was provided due to impaired mobility of the upper extremities. During a confidential interview, an employee indicated the whole call light system had been down at least a couple of months. Resident C had successfully used the call light system to summon assistance before it quit working. The resident had not been able to utilize the provided manual bell since the call light system broke. When the resident attempted to use the manual bell, the bell was just knocked over due to limited mobility. The resident yelled out, and at times, called the facility with a personal telephone when staff assistance was needed. During a confidential employee interview at the time of observation, a call light cord outlet in a resident's room, lacked a call light cord. A manual bell was on top of the dresser and out of reach. The call lights had not been working for approximately two months. Management was aware and had provided manual bells to the residents. Due to physical limitations, one resident was unable to ring a manual bell. As a result, the resident yelled out until assistance came or used a personal telephone to call the facility. The resident had previously been able to summon assistance by use of the call light system before it quit working. It took longer for staff to respond to the residents' needs since the call light system quit working. During an interview on 9/24/24 at 4:50 p.m., the Administrator indicated the call light system had been down for a short while. All residents had manual bells. The facility was taking bids and had not yet signed a contract for the systems replacement or repair. During an interview on 9/25/24 at 10:13 a.m., the Maintenance Director indicated the facility was informed the system was total down and needed replaced on September 5, 2024. A current facility policy, revised on 1/2023, titled Policy and Procedure: Call Light, provided by the DON on 9/26/24 at 3:19 p.m., indicated the following: Policy: To see that residents are provided access to a call light . Purpose: To set guidelines to ensure that staff respond promptly to resident's call for assistance and ensure that the call system is in proper working order . Procedure: 1. All facility personnel must be aware if [sic] call lights at all times 3.1-19(u)(1) 3.1-19(u)(2)
MINOR (C)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Staffing Information (Tag F0732)

Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to make nurse staffing information readily available in a readable format to residents and visitors daily for 3 of 3 days reviewed. Findings in...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to make nurse staffing information readily available in a readable format to residents and visitors daily for 3 of 3 days reviewed. Findings include: During an observation, on 9/22/24 at 10:14 a.m., no direct care staffing numbers were posted. During an observation, on 9/23/24 at 10:52 a.m., no direct care staffing numbers were posted. During an observation, on 9/24/24 at 11:08 a.m., no direct care staffing numbers were posted. During an interview, on 9/24/24 at 12:34 p.m., the DON indicated the schedule book was kept at the nurse station, and this was used for staff posting. The schedule book contained the handwritten schedules for staff. During an interview, on 9/24/24 at 1:44 p.m., the Administrator indicated he was not sure what staff posting was missing. He referred to the schedule book as it listed the daily staff schedule, and the shift assigned. A current facility policy, revised 7/16, titled, Posting Direct Care Daily Staffing Numbers, provided by the DON, on 9/24/24 at 2:39 p.m., indicated the following: .1. Within two (2) hours of the beginning of each shift, the number of Licensed Nurse's (RNs, LPNs, and LVNs) and the number of unlicensed nursing personnel (CNAs) directly responsible for resident care will be posted in a prominent location (accessible to residents and visitors) and in a clear and readable format .
Aug 2024 3 deficiencies 2 IJ
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Transfer Requirements (Tag F0622)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to honor a resident's right to return to the facility from an emergency room visit following a resident-to-resident altercation (Resident C). ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to honor a resident's right to return to the facility from an emergency room visit following a resident-to-resident altercation (Resident C). The facility failed to demonstrate inability to meet the resident's needs or that the resident was an immediate danger to others with interventions attempted. The Immediate Jeopardy began on 8/16/24 when the facility discharged the resident with his belongings to a hotel located 26 miles away from the facility, with a two-day paid stay. This deficient practice put the resident at risk for harm related to lack of a safe environment, placing the resident at risk of serious accidents. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 8/22/24, when the facility provided education to managers and nurses regarding transfer and discharge rights, but noncompliance remained at the lower scope and severity of harm that is not Immediate Jeopardy because the resident was found on a sidewalk by police back in the same city the facility is located in and was hospitalized for dehydration and acute kidney injury . Findings include: Review of the Facility Assessment, dated 8/2/24 and provided by the Administrator on 8/21/24 at 9:20 a.m., indicated the facility had an average daily census of 26 and cared for residents with the following needs: psychiatric/mood disorders including psychosis (hallucinations, delusions, etc.) impaired cognition, mental disorder, depression, mania/depression, schizophrenia, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety disorder, and behaviors that needed interventions. The facility's population included five residents with behavioral symptoms and cognitive performance needs and ten with behavioral/mental health needs. Services offered by the facility included, but were not limited to, management of medical conditions and medication-related issues causing psychiatric symptoms and behavior and implementation of interventions to help support residents with psychiatric diagnoses and intellectual or developmental disabilities. Discharge planning included assistance with financial implications, referral to local contact agencies as needed, discharge medication list, and assistance with medical supplies. Resident C's clinical record was reviewed on 8/19/24 at 11:28 a.m. Diagnoses included mild cognitive impairment, alcohol use, history of cerebral infarction, mood disorder, cocaine abuse, and epileptic syndrome. Current medication orders at the time of discharge included acetaminophen (analgesic) 500 mg 2 by mouth every 8 hours as needed for pain, aspirin (antiplatelet) 81 mg by mouth every morning, atorvastatin calcium (for cholesterol) 20 mg by mouth at bedtime, cholecalciferol (Vitamin D supplement) 50 mcg by mouth once daily, Keppra (anticonvulsant) 500 mg by mouth twice daily, and ziprasidone HCL (antipsychotic) 40 mg by mouth twice daily. A current, quarterly, Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 6/6/24, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Behaviors were listed as: Verbal behavioral symptoms directed towards others occurred 1-3 days of the assessment period. Other behavioral symptoms not directed towards others (e.g., physical symptoms such as hitting or scratching self, pacing, rummaging, public sexual acts, disrobing in public, throwing or smearing food or bodily wastes, or verbal/vocal symptoms like screaming, disruptive sounds) occurred 1-3 days of the assessment period. He used a cane or crutches for mobility. He was occasionally incontinent of urine and required assistance of one for dressing the lower part of his body. He was dependent for bathing. A current care plan, dated 3/9/24, indicated Resident C wished to remain at the facility for long term care, and to only be asked about discharge plans on comprehensive assessments. Interventions included: 1. The facility will contact appropriate community agencies if needed. Date Initiated: 3/9/24. 2. Encourage the resident to discuss feelings and concerns about remaining in the facility. Date Initiated: 3/9/24. 3. Observe for and address episodes of anxiety, fear and/or distress. Date Initiated: 3/9/24. 4. Resident will be asked about returning to the community with each full assessment and as needed. Date Initiated: 3/9/24. A current care plan, dated 3/13/24, indicated Resident C had a mood problem related to mood disorder, was being seen by mental health services, and may express the following: trouble concentrating some days, verbal aggression, feeling hopeless at times, missing their independence, feeling like no one cared about them, struggling with conflict and getting along with peers, increased depression, frustration due to having a roommate, and being easily annoyed by peers. Interventions included the following: 1. Administer medications as ordered. Monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness. Date Initiated: 3/13/24. 2. Assist the resident, family, caregivers to identify strengths, positive coping skills and reinforce these. Date Initiated: 3/13/24. 3. Behavioral health consults as needed (psycho-geriatric team, psychiatrist etc.). Date Initiated: 3/13/24. 4. Educate the resident/family/caregivers regarding expectations of treatment, concerns with side effects and potential adverse effects, evaluation, maintenance. Date Initiated: 3/13/24. 5. Mental health clinician will work with resident on building rapport with roommate and help identify ways to experience joy in facility. Date Initiated: 7/22/24. 6. Mental health clinician will work with resident on negative thought no one care and helping identify supports. Date Initiated: 5/20/24. 7. Mental health clinician will work with resident on negative thought of hopelessness/helplessness and identifying strengths. Date Initiated: 3/26/24. 8. Mental health clinician will work with resident on negative thought of loss of control and help identify things in his life he has control over. Date Initiated: 4/30/24. 9. Mental health clinician will work with resident on negative thought of loss of control and identify thing in his control. Date Initiated: 6/17/24. 10. Mental health clinician will work with resident on positive peer interactions and identify ways to take breaks. Date Initiated: 5/27/24. 11. Mental health clinician will work with resident on positives of facility and identify ways to take breaks. Date Initiated: 8/12/24. 12. Mental health clinician will work with resident on ways he contributes to conflict and deep breathing. Date Initiated: 7/29/24. 13. Mental health clinician will work with resident on ways to use compromise and explores ways to use I statements. Date Initiated: 6/10/24. 14. Monitor/document/report PRN any risk for harm to self: suicidal plan, past attempt at suicide, risky actions (stockpiling pills, saying goodbye to family, giving away possessions or writing a note), intentionally harmed or tried to harm self, refusing to eat or drink, refusing med or therapies, sense of hopelessness or helplessness, impaired judgment or safety awareness. Date Initiated: 3/13/24. 15. Monitor/record mood to determine if problems seem to be related to external causes, i.e. medications, treatments, concern over diagnosis. Date Initiated: 3/13/24. 16. Monitor/record/report to MD prn risk for harming others: increased anger, labile mood or agitation, feels threatened by others or thoughts of harming someone, possession of weapons or objects that could be used as weapons. Date Initiated: 3/13/24. 17. Monitor/report to Nurse any risk for harm to self or suicidal idealization. Date Initiated: 3/13/24. 18. Observe for signs and symptoms of mania or hypomania racing thoughts or euphoria; increased irritability; frequent mood changes; pressured speech; flight of ideas; marked change in need for sleep; agitation or hyperactivity. Date Initiated: 3/13/24. A current care plan, dated 3/19/24, indicated the resident had the potential to be verbally aggressive with threatening behavior. Interventions included the following: 1. Administer medications as ordered. Monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness. Date Initiated: 3/19/24. 2. Analyze of key times, places, circumstances, triggers, and what de-escalates behavior and document. Date Initiated: 3/19/24. 3. Assess and anticipate resident's needs: food, thirst. toileting needs, comfort level, body positioning, pain etc. Date Initiated: 3/19/24. 4. Assess resident's coping skills and support system. Date Initiated: 5/3/24. 5. Assess resident's understanding of the situation. Allow time for the resident to express self and feelings towards the situation. Date Initiated: 3/19/24. 6. Monitor behaviors. Document observed behavior and attempted interventions. Date Initiated: 6/21/24. 7. Offer to take resident for a walk, etc. Date Initiated: 8/5/24. 8. Provide positive feedback for good behavior. Emphasize the positive aspects of compliance. Date Initiated: 3/19/24. 9. Psych NP/Psychiatric/Psychogeriatric consult as indicated. Date Initiated: 3/19/24. 10. The resident's triggers for verbal aggression are others getting close to him. The resident's behaviors is de-escalated by keeping wanderers away from him. Date Initiated: 4/29/24. 11. When the resident becomes agitated: Intervene before agitation escalates; Guide away from source of distress; Engage calmly in conversation; If response is aggressive, staff to walk calmly away, and approach later. Date Initiated: 3/19/24. A current care plan, dated 4/1/24, indicated the resident had the potential to be physically aggressive to others, shoving others, attempting to hit others, and hitting others. Interventions included the following: 1. Psychiatric/Psychogeriatric consult as indicated. Date Initiated: 6/20/24. 2. When the resident becomes agitated: Intervene before agitation escalates; Guide away from source of distress; Engage calmly in conversation; If response is aggressive, staff to walk calmly away, and approach later. Date Initiated: 4/1/24. 3. Administer medications as ordered. Monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness. Date Initiated: 4/1/24. 4. Analyze times of day, places, circumstances, triggers, and what de-escalates behavior and document. Date Initiated: 4/1/24. 5. Assess and address for contributing sensory deficits. Date Initiated: 4/1/24. 6. Assess and anticipate resident's needs: food, thirst. toileting needs, comfort level, body positioning, pain etc. Date Initiated: 4/1/24. 7. COMMUNICATION: Encourage seeking out of staff member when agitated. Date Initiated: 4/1424. 8. COMMUNICATION: provide physical and verbal cues to alleviate anxiety. Date Initiated: 4/14/24. 9. Encourage resident to verbalize source of agitation. Date Initiated: 5/23/24. 10. Monitor/document/report PRN any signs or symptoms of resident posing danger to self and others. Date Initiated: 4/1/24. 11. Notify Psych NP of behaviors. Date Initiated: 4/1/24. 12. Offer to take resident to enclosed court yard as/if able when he exhibits any agitation, etc. Date Initiated: 8/16/24. Review of progress notes indicated, on 8/15/24 at approximately 9:35 p.m., Resident C physically assaulted another resident. The police were called and Resident C was taken to the emergency department for evaluation. A police report, dated 8/15/24 at approximately 9:12 p.m., indicated the police were called to the facility in regards to a fight. Staff informed the police that Resident C had stomped on another resident's head (Resident D). The police observed blood on the floor of Resident C's room. When asked, Resident C told the police he had beat his a_ _ and was unsure of how many times he stomped on the other resident's head. The resident told the police he had been woken up by the other resident when they walked into his room. Staff told the police Resident C knew right from wrong and provided statements about what they had witnessed. The police also visited the other resident (Resident D) while they were being seen in the emergency room. The police documented a large gash on the resident's forehead. Resident D remained non-verbal. Review of an emergency department progress note, dated 8/15/24 at 10:23 p.m., indicated Resident C was seen following an altercation. He had been hit in the back, and was experiencing back pain. The nursing facility informed the emergency department the resident was not welcome back there. The resident underwent psychiatric and social work evaluations and no significant behavioral changes were noted. Resident C was to proceed back to Brookside Care Strategies, despite them not wanting to accept him back. Review of a hospital nursing note, dated 8/16/24, indicated the resident verbalized a desire to return to the facility. The resident stated he had been at the facility for approximately one month and considered the facility his home. An emergency department note, dated 8/16/24, indicated Resident C had received a psychiatric and social work evaluation. The resident was being sent back to the facility despite them not wanting to accept him back. The resident had no behavioral changes. A Social Service note, dated 8/16/2024 at 11:03 a.m., indicated the resident was discharged to a homeless shelter located 61 miles from the facility. The resident was given all of his belongings, medications, $20.00 cash, a lighter, and a pack of cigarettes. A Discharge Summary Note, dated 8/16/2024 at 11:18 a.m., indicated the resident was discharged with his face sheet, medications, money, and cigarettes. A Transfer/Discharge Notice, dated 8/16/24, indicated Resident C was discharged to a homeless shelter in downtown Indianapolis, 61 miles away from the facility. The Interdisciplinary, Social Service, and transfer/discharge documentation, dated from 8/15/2024 through 8/16/2024, did not include information to determine the facility provided a thirty-day written notice of impending discharge to Resident C. The clinical record did not contain documentation the resident had returned from the emergency room visit in a condition that was different from baseline that would warrant an emergency discharge. The resident was not given an opportunity to appeal the transfer or make choices on this discharge location. During an interview on 8/19/24 at 2:49 p.m., the Administrator indicated, on 8/16/24, the hospital called and indicated the resident was being released back to the facility. The Administrator did not feel comfortable with the resident being back in the facility due to his behaviors. When the resident arrived at the facility via ambulance, the Administrator met them in the parking lot. He asked the resident if he remembered what had happened the night before. The resident responded that he knew what he had done. Resident C said he knew he was not wanted in the facility and he would sign any paperwork they needed him to sign. He just wanted his cigarettes. The Administrator asked the SSD (Social Service Director) to look for a homeless shelter that could take the resident. The Administrator indicated he gave the resident $20.00, a bag of food, his belongings, and cigarettes. The resident told the Administrator he did not have anyone and he did not need anyone. The Administrator transported the resident to the homeless shelter in his private car. During an interview on 8/20/24 at 9:18 a.m., a representative from the named homeless shelter indicated Resident C had not been admitted . No one by that name and date of birth had been in the shelter for over a decade. During an interview on 8/20/24 at 3:47 p.m., the Administrator indicated he had taken the resident to the homeless shelter, but he did not feel it was safe. He took the resident to another town (26 miles from facility) and paid for a two-night stay at a hotel. The hotel would provide the resident with breakfast. The resident said he would contact his brother. The undated face sheet, included, but was not limited to, information to contact two family members in the event of an emergency. The family members could not be contacted for interview using the information on the face sheet. During the survey, the whereabouts of the resident could not be determined until on, 8/22/24 at 11:00 a.m., when the Administrator provided a referral sent from a local hospital requesting a bed for Resident C. The referral indicated the resident had arrived at the hospital on 8/18/24. The Administrator indicated he was told the resident had been picked up by the police after being found lying on the sidewalk in front of a local homeless shelter. Local police were contacted during the survey and no report was available. Review of an 8/18/24 emergency room report indicated Resident C was being admitted to the hospital for treatment of dehydration, acute kidney injury, and abnormal laboratory values after being found on the sidewalk outside of a shelter. The hospital was able to treat the dehydration with intravenous fluids, but the resident continued to have elevated creatine kinase (CK) levels (indicative of heart, muscle, or brain injury or excessive drug or alcohol use). The facility discharge policy was requested on 8/21/24 at 9:50 a.m. and again at 10:10 a.m., when a partial copy of a Discharge Policy dated 1/2023 was provided. The Administrator indicated, on 8/21/24 at 11:05 a.m., he was awaiting a copy of the policy from the corporate offices. Review of a facility policy, dated December 2016, and titled Transfer or Discharge Notice, provided by the DON on 8/21/24 at 11:45 a.m., indicated the facility shall provide a thirty-day written notice of an impending transfer or discharge. The notice would be given as soon as practicable but before the transfer or discharge: a. The transfer is necessary for the resident's welfare and the resident's needs cannot be met in the facility; c. The safety of individuals in the facility is endangered: 5. The reasons for the transfer or discharge will be documented in the resident's medical record; 11. in determining the transfer location for a resident, the decision to transfer to a particular location will be determined by the needs, choices and best interest of the resident. Review of a current facility policy provided by the Administrator on 8/21/24 at 9:50 a.m., dated 1/2023 and titled Resident Discharge indicated the purpose was to provide guidelines for discharging a resident for including, but not limited to, needs cannot be met or the resident's clinical and behavioral status endangered the health and safety of other residents. The immediate jeopardy that began on 8/16/24 was removed on 8/22/24, when the facility provided education to managers and nurses regarding transfer and discharge rights, but noncompliance remained at the lower scope and severity of harm that is not Immediate Jeopardy because the resident was found on a sidewalk by police back in the city the facility is located in and was hospitalized for dehydration and acute kidney injury. This citation relates to Complaint IN00440457. 3.1-12(a)(3) 3.1-12(a)(4)
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Safe Transfer (Tag F0626)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure facility policies were implemented to allow a resident to re...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure facility policies were implemented to allow a resident to return to the facility for care following an emergency room visit. The resident was not provided adequate notice to appeal the discharge prior to being transported to and left at a hotel 26 miles away from the facility. The Immediate Jeopardy that began on 8/16/24, when the facility failed to allow a resident to return to the facility after a hospital visit per facility policy. This deficient practice put the resident at risk for harm related to lack of a safe environment, placing the resident at risk of serious accidents. The Administrator, Social Services Director (SSD), and the Housekeeping Supervisor were notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on 8/20/24 at 4:37 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed when the facility completed education of management and nurses regarding discharge rights and the facility policy for resident discharge on [DATE], but noncompliance remained at the lower scope and severity of isolated, no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm. Findings include: Review of the Facility Assessment, dated 8/2/24 and provided by the Administrator on 8/21/24 at 9:20 a.m., indicated the facility had an average daily census of 26 and cared for residents with the following needs: psychiatric/mood disorders including psychosis (hallucinations, delusions, etc.) impaired cognition, mental disorder, depression, mania/depression, schizophrenia, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety disorder, and behavior plural? that needed interventions. The facility's population included five residents with behavioral symptoms and cognitive performance needs and ten with behavioral/mental health needs. Services offered by the facility included, but were not limited to, management of medical conditions and medication-related issues causing psychiatric symptoms and behavior and implementation of interventions to help support residents with psychiatric diagnoses and intellectual or developmental disabilities. Discharge planning included assistance with financial implications, referral to local contact agencies as needed, discharge medication list, and assistance with medical supplies. Resident C's clinical record was reviewed on 8/19/24 at 11:28 a.m. Diagnoses included mild cognitive impairment, alcohol use, history of cerebral infarction, mood disorder, cocaine abuse, and epileptic syndrome. A current, quarterly, Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 6/6/24, indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Behaviors were listed as: Verbal behavioral symptoms directed towards others occurred 1-3 days of the assessment period. Other behavioral symptoms not directed towards others (e.g., physical symptoms such as hitting or scratching self, pacing, rummaging, public sexual acts, disrobing in public, throwing or smearing food or bodily wastes, or verbal/vocal symptoms like screaming, disruptive sounds) occurred 1-3 days of the assessment period. He used a cane or crutches for mobility. He was occasionally incontinent of urine and required assistance of one for dressing the lower part of his body. He was dependent for bathing. Review of progress notes indicated, on 8/15/24 at approximately 9:35 p.m., Resident C physically assaulted another resident. The police were called and Resident C was taken to the emergency department for evaluation. Review of an Emergency Department Progress note, dated 8/15/24 at 10:23 p.m., indicated Resident C was seen following an altercation. He had been hit in the back, and was experiencing back pain. The nursing facility informed the emergency department the resident was not welcome back there. The resident underwent psychiatric and social work evaluations and was to proceed back to Brookside Care Strategies despite them not wanting to accept him back. No significant behavioral changes were noted. An emergency department note, dated 8/16/24, indicated Resident C had received a psychiatric and social work evaluation. The resident was being sent back to the facility despite them not wanting to accept him back. Review of a hospital nursing note, dated 8/16/24, indicated the resident verbalized a desire to return to the facility. The resident stated he had been at the facility for approximately one month and considered the facility his home. A Social Service note, dated 8/16/2024 at 11:03 a.m., indicated the resident was discharged to a homeless shelter located 61 miles from the facility. The resident was given all of his belongings, medications, $20.00 cash, a lighter, and a pack of cigarettes. A Discharge Summary Note, dated 8/16/2024 at 11:18 a.m., indicated the resident was discharged with his face sheet, medications, money, and cigarettes. A Transfer/Discharge Notice, dated 8/16/24, indicated Resident C was discharged to a homeless shelter in downtown Indianapolis, 61 miles away from the facility. The Interdisciplinary, Social Service, and transfer/discharge documentation, dated from 8/15/2024 through 8/16/2024, did not include information to determine the facility provided a thirty-day written notice of impending discharge to Resident C. The clinical record did not contain documentation the resident had returned from the emergency room visit in a condition that was different from baseline that would warrant an emergency discharge. The resident was not given an opportunity to appeal the transfer or make choices on this discharge location. During an interview on 8/19/24 at 2:49 p.m., the Administrator indicated, on 8/16/24, the hospital called and indicated the resident was being released back to the facility. The Administrator did not feel comfortable with the resident being back in the facility due to his behaviors. When the resident arrived at the facility via ambulance, the Administrator met them in the parking lot. He asked the resident if he remembered what had happened the night before. The resident responded that he knew what he had done. Resident C said he knew he was not wanted in the facility and he would sign any paperwork they needed him to sign. He just wanted his cigarettes. The Administrator asked the SSD (Social Service Director) to look for a homeless shelter that could take the resident. The Administrator indicated he gave the resident $20.00, a bag of food, his belongings, and cigarettes. The resident told the Administrator he did not have anyone and he did not need anyone. The Administrator transported the resident to the homeless shelter in his private car. During an interview on 8/20/24 at 9:18 a.m., a representative from the named homeless shelter indicated Resident C had not been admitted . No one by that name and date of birth had been in the shelter for over a decade. During an interview on 8/20/24 at 3:47 p.m., the Administrator indicated he had taken the resident to the homeless shelter, but he did not feel it was safe. He took the resident to another town (26 miles from facility) and paid for a two-night stay at a hotel. The hotel would provide the resident with breakfast. The resident said he would contact his brother. The undated face sheet, included, but was not limited to, information to contact two family members in the event of an emergency. The family members could not be contacted for interview using the information on the face sheet. During the survey, the whereabouts of the resident could not be determined until on, 8/22/24 at 11:00 a.m., when the Administrator provided a referral sent from a local hospital requesting a bed for Resident C. The referral indicated the resident had arrived at the hospital on 8/18/24. The Administrator indicated he was told the resident had been picked up by the police after being found lying on the sidewalk in front of a local homeless shelter. Local police were contacted during the survey and no report was available. Review of an 8/18/24 emergency room report indicated Resident C was being admitted to the hospital for treatment of dehydration, acute kidney injury, and abnormal laboratory values after being found on the sidewalk outside of a shelter. The hospital was able to treat the dehydration with intravenous fluids, but the resident continued to have elevated creatine kinase (CK) levels (indicative of heart, muscle, or brain injury or excessive drug or alcohol use). The facility discharge policy was requested on 8/21/24 at 9:50 a.m. and again at 10:10 a.m., when a partial copy of a Discharge Policy dated 1/2023 was provided. The Administrator indicated, on 8/21/24 at 11:05 a.m., he was awaiting a copy of the policy from the corporate offices. Review of a facility policy, dated December 2016, and titled Transfer or Discharge Notice, provided by the DON on 8/21/24 at 11:45 a.m., indicated the facility shall provide a thirty-day written notice of an impending transfer or discharge. The notice would be given as soon as practicable but before the transfer or discharge: a. The transfer is necessary for the resident's welfare and the resident's needs cannot be met in the facility; c. The safety of individuals in the facility is endangered: 5. The reasons for the transfer or discharge will be documented in the resident's medical record; 11. in determining the transfer location for a resident, the decision to transfer to a particular location will be determined by the needs, choices and best interest of the resident. Review of a current facility policy provided by the Administrator on 8/21/24 at 9:50 a.m., dated 1/2023 and titled Resident Discharge indicated the purpose was to provide guidelines for discharging a resident for including, but not limited to, needs cannot be met or the resident's clinical and behavioral status endangered the health and safety of other residents. The immediate jeopardy that began on 8/16/24 was removed on 8/22/24, when the facility provided education to managers and nurses regarding transfer and discharge rights. This citation relates to Complaint IN00440457. 3.1-12(a)(4)(A) 3.1-12(a)(4)(C) 3.1-12(a)(4)(D)
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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a cognitively impaired resident who wandered (Resident D) was free from resident-to-resident physical abuse perpetrated...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a cognitively impaired resident who wandered (Resident D) was free from resident-to-resident physical abuse perpetrated by a resident known to be physically abusive towards others when approached (Resident C) for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. This deficient practice resulted in Resident D sustaining a head laceration and required emergent treatment at the hospital with six sutures to repair. Findings include: Review of an Incident Report sent to the Indiana Department of Health's reporting system indicated, on 8/15/24 at 9:01 p.m., Resident D was found lying on the floor in Resident C's room. Resident D had a laceration on the left side of his head and bruising to his chest and head. Resident C indicated there had been an altercation. A local police department's case report, dated 8/15/24 and provided by the Director of Nursing (DON) on 8/21/24 at 10:25 a.m., indicated as the officer got to the door of Resident C's room, blood was observed on the floor inside the entryway. Resident C was asked about what happened and he advised that Resident D had walked into his room while he was asleep. Resident C was unsure how many times he stomped on Resident D's head. Resident C also stated that he had thoughts of harming others. An employee had indicated to the officer they had not seen the incident, but witnessed Resident C standing over the top of Resident D while yelling. Resident C's clinical record was reviewed on 8/19/24 at 11:28 a.m. Diagnoses included mild cognitive impairment, alcohol use, history of cerebral infarction, mood disorder, cocaine abuse, and epileptic syndrome. A current care plan, revised on 5/3/24, indicated the resident had potential to be verbally aggressive and had threatening behaviors when others were loud, repetitive, or when there lacked space at a dining room table he wanted to sit. An intervention indicated the resident's triggers for verbal aggression were when others come too close to him. The behaviors were de-escalated by keeping wanderers away from him. The most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 6/6/24, indicated resident was cognitively intact, had verbal behaviors directed at others on one to three days during the assessment period and physical behaviors directed towards himself on one to three days during the assessment period. A current care plan, revised on 6/20/24, indicated the resident had potential to be physically aggressive to others, shoved others, and attempted to hit others. Interventions included intervene before agitation escalates, guide away from source of distress, engage in conversation, and if aggressive, walk away and approach later. The resident was to be encouraged to seek out a staff member when agitated. On 8/16/24, an intervention was added to this care plan to offer to take resident to the courtyard if agitated. A Behavior Management Monthly Review, dated 8/6/24, indicated Resident C had 18 incidents of verbal behaviors, 16 incidents of physical behaviors and 18 incidents of yelling in a common area. The behaviors currently being monitored were verbal yelling and physical behaviors in common areas. The report indicated the interventions were successful. A social services progress note, dated 8/12/24 at 10:54 a.m., indicated the resident had seen the mental health provider on 8/9/24. During the session, the resident had expressed to the clinician his frustration with loud peers. He wished he could live on his own. The clinician worked with the resident on positives of living in the facility and helped him identify ways to take breaks. A nurse's note, dated 8/15/24, indicated Resident C was in his room when he attacked another resident. Resident C indicated he had been trying to sleep. Resident C boasted about stomping on the other resident's head. The police removed Resident C from the facility and took him to the emergency department. The clinical record for Resident D was reviewed on 8/20/24 at 10:08 a.m. Diagnoses included mild neurocognitive disorder without behavioral disturbances, anxiety disorder, psychotic disorder, and insomnia. A current care plan, initiated on 9/5/23, indicated the resident had periods of restlessness. Interventions included to involve the resident in diversional activities as possible and to redirect the resident away from doors. A current care plan, revised on 1/10/24, indicated the resident was a wanderer related to impaired safety awareness, wandering up and down the halls. Interventions included to distract resident from wandering by offering pleasant diversions, structured activities, food, conversation, television, a book, and to ensure safety with wandering. The care plans lacked a interventions regarding supervision to manage Resident D wandering and entering other resident rooms. A current care plan, revised 4/4/24, indicated the resident had potential to be physically aggressive and agitated and at times, felt he was protecting others. Interventions included to increase activities and one on one's (continuous supervision) when resident showed increased wandering behaviors and monitor and document signs and symptoms of the resident posing danger to self and others. A current care plan, revised 5/3/24, indicated the resident had impaired verbal communication as evidenced by absent speech, weak voice, problems finding correct words and decreased auditory comprehension. Interventions included to ask mostly yes or no questions, give him 5-10 seconds to respond, speak slowly and simply with a reassuring, calm tone, and use non-verbal gestures (i.e.: thumbs up, thumbs down, smile, etc.) An annual MDS assessment, dated 7/30/24, indicated the resident had a severe cognitive deficit and major mental illness. The resident had unclear speech and difficulty communicating some words or finishing thoughts. He usually understood others, but missed some part or intent of conversations. He had episodes of wandering on one to three days of the assessment period. He required substantial assistance for eating and was dependent on staff for hygiene, toileting, showering, and dressing. He was independent with ambulation. A progress note, dated 8/16/2024 at 3:15 a.m., indicated Resident D returned to the facility from the emergency room with six sutures to the left side of his forehead, with multiple scratches on his face, neck and chest. During an interview on 8/19/2024 at 2:49 p.m., CNA 1 indicated, on the evening of 8/15/24, staff heard someone yelling for help. CNA 1 found Resident D on the floor of Resident C's room. Resident C was standing over Resident D. Resident C appeared aggressive and Resident D was laying on the floor in a pool of blood. Resident C told CNA 1 he had beaten Resident D because he had woken him up. CNA 1 asked if he had kicked Resident D, and Resident C stated he had stomped him six to seven times. CNA 1 stayed with Resident C while other staff members removed Resident D from the room. During an interview on 8/19/2024 at 3:30 p.m., QMA 2 indicated she had heard a faint yell. CNA 1 had found Resident D on the ground, bloody, and Resident C was standing over him. QMA 2 and CNA 1 stood between the residents. QMA 2 indicated she went with Resident D and held pressure to his head until the ambulance arrived. She asked Resident C what he had done, and he indicated he had stomped on Resident D's head. During an interview on 8/19/24 at 3:46 p.m., the DON indicated the staff had heard someone yell out for help, and she observed Resident D in Resident C's room, laying on the floor. Resident D had blood on his head and on the floor. CNA 1 was trying to keep Resident C from Resident D. The DON indicated she left the room and called for more help. CNA 1 stayed with Resident C. The staff removed Resident D from the room while the DON called the police and the ambulance. During an interview on 8/20/2024 at 1:26 p.m., RN 3 indicated Resident C had a prior incident two months ago when he had shoved Resident D. RN 3 indicated she verbalized her concerns related to Resident C staying in the facility due to his behaviors. The staff asked Resident C if he wanted to go to go to a homeless shelter and he responded no. On 8/22/24 at 9:29 a.m. CNA 4 indicated Resident C remained in his room much of the time, but when he was out, he had a flashy temper. Noise seemed to irritate him. The staff would try to redirect him to his room, which was mostly effective. She was not aware of any other interventions for his behaviors. The resident kept his blinds closed and just wanted to be left alone. On 8/22/24 at 9:41 a.m., Activity Aide 5 indicated Resident C kept to himself a lot. He would become verbally aggressive if someone got close to him. The Activity Aide calmed him down by talking with him and providing reassurance. She would talk with him when someone got close to him and reassure him, they were not approaching him. Sometimes he could not be calmed or redirected. She knew of no other interventions to try other than talking to him and redirecting him. On 8/22/24 at 9:54 a.m., QMA 6 indicated Resident C remained in his room most of the time. Noise bothered him and he would go off. When a person got too close to him, he became agitated and would have behaviors. The QMA knew to move other resident's away from Resident C and redirect him to his room. She tried to assure when Resident C was seated with other residents to eat in the dining room that they were not loud. She was unaware of other interventions to manage the resident's behaviors. On 8/22/24 at 10:08 a.m., the Activities Director indicated a couple of months ago, she was assisting Resident D, who lacked balance, as he walked by Resident C's table in the main dining room. Resident C stood from his chair and punched Resident D in the chest. On another occasion, Resident C was outside, and another resident bumped Resident C's leg with his wheelchair, and Resident C stood up and began to yell and curse the other resident. The staff were able to calm him down. During an interview on 8/22/24 at 9:32 a.m., CNA 4 indicated Resident D wandered up and down the hallways most of the day, every day. Resident D couldn't sit for any length of time. He went into other's rooms frequently and was easily redirected. She was unaware of other interventions for his wandering, but to redirect him to the hallway. During an interview on 8/22/24 at 9:42 a.m., Activity Aide 5 indicated Resident D was very sweet and wandered up and down the hallways. He would go into other resident's rooms. She indicated she would redirect him out of other's rooms when she saw him enter them or found him in someone else's room. During an interview on 8/22/24 at 9:47 a.m., QMA 6 indicated Resident D mostly walked up and down in the hallway and would go into other resident's rooms. He was easily redirected, but could become agitated at times. He would calm, and cooperated upon re-approaching. During an interview on 8/22/24 at 10:04 a.m., the Human Resources Director indicated Resident D was very sweet and wandered up and down the hallways. She had seen him enter other resident's rooms. He entered her office at times and was easily re-directed. During an interview on 8/20/24 at 1:03 p.m., CNA 21 indicated when Resident D returned to the facility from the emergency department, he was reluctant to leave his room. Staff encouraged him to continue his normal activities and assured him he was safe. During an observation on 8/22/24 at 10:30 a.m., Resident D was observed walking up and down the length of the hallway. The resident would stop occasionally and hold on the rail and adjust his shoe, then continue to ambulate in the hall. During an observation on 8/22/24 at 1:07 p.m., Resident D was ambulating in the hallway with an unsteady gait. He entered another resident's room, who was not in the room during the observation. The resident stood in the corner of the room and looked around and entered the bathroom. No staff were observed in the area. A current facility policy, revised 5/2024, titled, Abuse Prevention, Identification, and Reporting Policy, provided by the Administrator on 8/2/24 at 9:24 a.m., indicated the following: All residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, exploitation, corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion and any physical or chemical restraint not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms It shall be the policy of the facility to follow the Indiana Department of Health Policies and Procedures for Long-term Care Abuse and Incident Reporting . This citation relates to complaint IN00441003. 3.1-27(a)(1)
Jul 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications received from the contracted pharmaceutical company were labeled appropriately for 1 of 9 residents review...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications received from the contracted pharmaceutical company were labeled appropriately for 1 of 9 residents reviewed for medication use. Findings include: During a medication administration observation on 7/23/24 at 5:29 a.m., two bottles of oral Nystatin (antifungal) were observed in the medication cart and lacked labeling with resident identifiers and instructions. Bottle 1 lacked the resident's name, dosage and time/frequency the medication was to be given. The bottle also had a sticker with an opened date of 7/10/24. Bottle 2 lacked the resident's name, dosage, and time/frequency the medication was to be given. During an interview, on 7/23/24 at 5:29 a.m., RN 1 indicated she did not know to whom the medications were prescribed. There were two residents who were currently prescribed the medication. No other bottles of Nystatin were observed in the medication carts. The medications should have been labeled with the residents name and directions for use. During an interview, on 7/23/24 at 9:31 a.m., the DON indicated she did not know to whom the medication was prescribed, nor how it was received from the pharmacy without the appropriate labels. A current facility policy, dated 7/12, titled Provider Pharmacy Requirements and provided by the DON on 7/24/24 at 12:00 p.m., indicated the following: Procedure: ii. All prescription medications have labels that show: 1. The generic and/or brand name of the product. 2. The strength and dosage form of the medication, including: strength per ml of liquid medications, when appropriate. 3. The Medication's expiration date. 4. The resident's name. 5. Specific directions for use. 6. Prescribers name. 7. Dispensing date. 8. Name, address, and telephone number of the dispensing pharmacy. 9. Identification of dispensing pharmacist. 10. Prescription number. 11. Quantity dispensed. 12. Precautionary labels indicating special storage requirements or procedures. This citation relates to Complaint IN00438969. 3.1-25(j)
Feb 2024 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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide supervision to prevent a sexual interaction between two cog...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide supervision to prevent a sexual interaction between two cognitively impaired residents for 2 out of 5 residents reviewed for abuse. (Resident E and Resident F) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident E was reviewed on 2/22/24 at 2:33 p.m Diagnoses include dementia with behaviors, stage 3 kidney disease, and hypertension. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. The clinical record for Resident F was reviewed on 2/22/24 at 2:43 p.m Diagnoses include severe dementia with agitation, delirium, and anxiety disorder. No MDS information available due to being newly admitted to the facility. Review of a facility self reportable, dated 2/15/24 at 3:05 p.m., indicated on 2/14/24 at 6:01 p.m., upon entering the room of Resident E, CNA 2 observed Resident F standing in front of Resident E while sitting in his wheelchair. Resident F had the front of her night gown pulled up and Resident E had his hands inside her briefs. When CNA 2 asked what they were doing, Resident E pulled his hands out of Resident F's brief. Resident F was escorted out of the room and redirected back the her room. CNA 2 reported the interaction to the LPN 1. During an interview on 2/22/24 at 12:37 p.m., RN 4 indicated Resident E had a history of being inappropriate toward female staff members. During an interview on 2/22/24 at 1:09 p.m., CNA 2 indicated she observed Resident E and Resident F in a sexually inappropriate interaction. Resident E had his hands inside Resident F's brief. CNA 2 asked them what they were doing and Resident E removed his hands from the brief and smelled his fingers. Resident F was escorted back to her room and the interaction was reported to the LPN 1. During an interview on 2/22/24 at 3:23 p.m., CNA 3 indicated Resident E had a history of saying inappropriate comments to staff members and had tried to touch staff members inappropriately. Undated screen shots were reviewed with the Administrator on 2/23/24 at 8:36 a.m. The Administrator indicated the corporate office provided the screen shots for the date and time of the reported incident. The screen shots showed Resident F standing in the doorway of Resident E's room. The next screen shot showed CNA 2 escort Resident F out of the room. The Administrator indicated the corporate office had been unable to send any further video for the date and time requested. A current, undated facility policy, titled Abuse Prevention And Prohibition Policy, provided by the Administrator on 2/23/24 at 11;40 a.m., indicated the following: .Purpose To ensure the resident's right to remain free from verbal, sexual, physical, and mental abuse, mistreatment, neglect, corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion, and exploitation. Sexual Abuse: Inappropriate touching of any resident Definitions (C) Sexual contact, including fondling of a resident by an employee, agent or other resident, by force, threat, deprivation, duress, coercion, through use of position or authority, or any sexual contact with a resident where there was no pre-existing relationship. Procedures All employees who have reasonable cause to believe a resident has suffered abuse or an injury of unknown origin are responsible for reporting that information to the Executive Director or upon his/her absence, to a supervisor. If to a supervisor, he/she shall pass along the information to the Executive Director immediately This citation relates to Complaint IN00428567. 3.1-27(a)(1)
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff reported an incident of inappropriate sexual contact b...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff reported an incident of inappropriate sexual contact between 2 cognitively impaired residents to the Administrator immediately, which delayed the submission and reporting of the incident within the required timeframe to the appropriate State Agencies for 1 of 3 facility reported incidents reviewed. (Resident E and Resident F) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident E was reviewed on 2/22/24 at 2:33 p.m Diagnoses include dementia with behaviors, stage 3 kidney disease, and hypertension. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. The clinical record for Resident F was reviewed on 2/22/24 at 2:43 p.m. Diagnoses include severe dementia with agitation, delirium, and anxiety disorder. No MDS available due to being recently admitted to the facility. Review of a facility self reportable, dated 2/15/24 at 3:05 p.m., indicated on 2/14/24 at 6:01 p.m., upon entering the room of Resident E, CNA 2 observed Resident F standing in front of Resident E while sitting in his wheelchair. Resident F had the front of her night gown pulled up and Resident E had his hands inside her briefs. When CNA 2 asked what they were doing, Resident E pulled his hands out of Resident F's brief. Resident F was escorted out of the room and redirected back the her room. CNA 2 reported the interaction to the LPN 1. During an interview on 2/22/24 at 10:53 a.m., the Administrator indicated LPN 1 did not report the interaction between the residents until the day after it occurred. It should have been reported immediately. After the facility conducted their investigation, LPN 1's employment was terminated for not reporting the incident and taking appropriate actions immediately. A current, undated, facility policy titled Abuse Prevention And Prohibition Policy, provided by the Administrator on 2/23/24 at 11;40 a.m., indicated the following: Procedures Resident to Resident 1. Staff shall intervene immediately and assess the immediate needs of the resident(s) 2. The involved residents shall be separated and shall not remain near one another to eliminate the recurrence of abusive behavior. 3. The Administrator and/or DON, Social Service Director, shall be notified of the incident immediately. 4. Appropriate documentation shall be completed relative to the individual incident (report of concern, incident/accident report, etc.) and initial notification of responsible party and physician and/or Psych NP made and documented. 6. The incident shall be reported to the state/certification agency, the ombudsman, and Adult protective [sic] Services as applicable per guidelines supplied by the department of health. Sexual Abuse: Inappropriate touching of any resident Definitions (C) Sexual contact, including fondling of a resident by an employee, agent or other resident, by force, threat, deprivation, duress, coercions, through use of position or authority, or any sexual contact with a resident where there was no pre-existing relationship. Procedures All employees who have reasonable cause to believe a resident has suffered abuse or an injury of unknown origin are responsible for reporting that information to the Executive Director or upon his/her absence, to a supervisor. If to a supervisor, he/she shall pass along the information to the Executive Director immediately. This citation relates to Complaint IN00428567. 3.1-28(c)
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 F0744 (Tag F0744)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based record review and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement individualized care plan interventions and monit...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based record review and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement individualized care plan interventions and monitoring of behaviors for a cognitively impaired resident with dementia for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for behaviors. (Resident E) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident E was reviewed on 2/22/24 at 2:33 p.m Diagnoses include dementia with behaviors, stage 3 kidney disease, and hypertension. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. Review of a facility self reportable, dated 2/15/24 at 3:05 p.m., indicated on 2/14/24 at 6:01 p.m., upon entering the room of Resident E, CNA 2 observed a cognitively impaired female resident standing in front of Resident E while sitting in his wheelchair. The female resident had the front of her night gown pulled up and Resident E had his hands inside her briefs. When CNA 2 asked what they were doing, Resident E pulled his hands out of the female resident's brief. The female resident was escorted out of the room and redirected back the her room. Review of a Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner note, dated 1/16/24, indicated the resident had been seen for touching staff inappropriately. Review of the clinical record lacked indication of monitoring the behavior of Resident E touching staff inappropriately. No care plan interventions were included in the clinical record for this behavior. During an interview on 2/22/24 at 12:37 p.m., RN 4 indicated Resident E had a history of being inappropriate toward female staff members. During an interview on 2/22/24 at 3:23 p.m., CNA 3 indicated Resident E had a history of saying inappropriate comments to staff members and tried to touch staff members inappropriately. During an interview on 2/23/24 at 10:57 a.m., the Social Service Director (SSD) indicated she had no reports from staff related to Resident E's behaviors for inappropriate touching. The SSD had not reviewed the Psych NP noted and had not been aware of the concern. This citation relates to Complaint IN00428567. 3.1-37(a)
Nov 2023 7 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Transfer Notice (Tag F0623)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide notice of transfer/discharge to a representative of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman for 1 of 2 residents reviewed ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide notice of transfer/discharge to a representative of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for hospitalization. (Resident 17) Findings include: Resident 17's clinical record was reviewed on 11/14/12 at 10:55 a.m. Diagnoses included epilepsy, schizophrenia, and profound intellectual disabilities. The resident was transferred to the hospital on 9/19/23 and returned to the facility on 9/20/23. The clinical record lacked an Ombudsman notification for a transfer/discharge on this date. A progress note, dated 9/19/23 at 11:10 p.m., indicated the resident threw himself onto the floor resulting in a cut above his right eye. The nurse practitioner was notified and an order to send the resident to the emergency room was obtained. A progress note, dated 9/20/23 at 11:23 a.m., indicated the resident returned to the facility via two emergency medical technicians (EMT) on a stretcher. During an interview on 11/16/23 at 2:57 p.m., the SSD indicated she updated her Monthly Discharges and Transfers form using her dashboard every morning and found this method easier to keep track of instead of waiting until the end of the month and running the Census Report. Since the resident did not have a census event for this emergency room transfer, she would not have known to include his name on her form. Review of the current policy, a letter provided by the Office of the State Long Term Care Ombudsman, dated 6/28/19, provided by the SSD on 11/17/23 at 3:03 p.m., indicated the following: .When a resident is transferred on an emergency basis to an acute care facility but is expected to return, the Office of the State Long Term Care Ombudsman (SLTCO) must be notified 3.1-12(a)(6)(A)(iv)
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0726 (Tag F0726)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff were trained on proper technique when administering from an insulin pen for 1 of 2 residents observed for insulin...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff were trained on proper technique when administering from an insulin pen for 1 of 2 residents observed for insulin administration. (Resident 16) Findings include: During a medication administration observation for Resident 16 on 11/16/23 at 7:17 a.m., QMA 4 administered insulin per physician order using a Novolog FlexPen insulin pen. QMA 4 dialed the pen dose to 2 and administered into the resident's abdomen. She did not prime the new needle prior to administration. Review of resident's clinical record was completed on 11/15/23 at 1:09 p.m. Diagnoses included diabetes mellitus-type II and diabetic neuropathy. A current physician's order, dated 3/9/23, indicated Novolog FlexPen per sliding scale. During an interview on 11/16/23 at 8:05 a.m., QMA 4 indicated she had not completed an airshot after placing a new needle on the insulin pen. She had looked for any air bubbles in the top of the pen, but was not aware she needed to prime the needle. A current facility policy, revised 1/2023, titled, Insulin Administration-Use of Kwik Pen, provided by the DON on 11/16/23 at 12:17 p.m., indicated the following: .Procedure: .9. PRIME the pen. (Turn the dose knob to select two units, hold the pen with the needle pointing up. Tap the cartridge holder to gently collect the air bubbles at the top and push the dose knob until it stops at 0 3.1-37(a)
CONCERN (D)

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure narcotics were reconciled per facility policy for 2 of 2 medication carts reviewed for medication storage. (East and [...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure narcotics were reconciled per facility policy for 2 of 2 medication carts reviewed for medication storage. (East and [NAME] carts) Findings include: 1. During a medication storage observation of the East cart, accompanied by LPN 5 on 11/17/23 at 10:38 a.m., the Narcotic Count Sheet record was reviewed and the following dates lacked shift to shift reconciliation of controlled medications: In October 2023- 10/13 on evening and night shifts, 10/14 on day and evening shifts, 10/15, 10/16 on all three shifts, 10/18 on day and evening shifts, 10/19 on all three shifts, 10/20, 10/21 on day and evening shifts, 10/22 on all three shifts, 10/23 on day and evening shifts, 10/24, 10/25, 10/26, 10/27, 10/28, 10/29, 10/30 on all three shifts. In November 2023- 11/1, 11/2, 11/3, 11/4, 11/5 on all three shifts, 11/6 on day and evening shifts, 11/7, 11/8, 11/9 on all shifts, 11/10 on night shift, 11/11 on all shifts, 11/12 on day and evening shifts, 11/13 on all three shifts, 11/14 on third shift, 11/15, 11/16 on all three shifts, 2. During a medication storage observation of the [NAME] cart, accompanied by LPN 5 on 11/17/23 at 10:40 a.m., the Narcotic Count Sheet record was reviewed and the following dates lacked shift to shift reconciliation of controlled medications: In October 2023- 10/23 on day and evening shifts, 10/24 on all three shifts, 10/25 on evening and night shifts, 10/26 on evening and night shifts, 10/27 on all three shifts, 10/28 on evening and night shifts, 10/30 on evening and night shifts, 10/31 on day shift. In November 2023- 11/1 on evening and night shifts, 11/2 on evening shift, 11/3 on all three shifts, 11/4 on day and evening shifts, 11/5 on all three shifts, 11/6 on day and evening shifts, 11/7 on day shift, 11/8 on night shift, 11/9 on evening and night shifts, 11/10, 11/13 on all three shifts, 11/14 on evening shift, 11/15 on evening and night shifts. During an interview on 11/17/23 at 10:38 a.m., LPN 5 indicated nurses should sign the Narcotic Count Sheet at the beginning and end of each shift worked. During an interview on 11/17/23 at 1:00 p.m., the DON indicated the expectation for all nursing staff was for a narcotic count to be done between the incoming nurse and the outgoing nurse. Both staff members were to sign the Narcotic Count Sheet. Review of the current, revised 7/12, policy titled Medication Storage, provided by the Administrator on 11/17/23 at 12:52 p.m., indicated the following: . 4. There should be a system of medication records that enables periodic accurate reconciliation and accounting of controlled medications. 5. At the change of custody, a physical inventory of all controlled medications is conducted by two licensed nurses and is documented 3.1-25(b)(3)
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure medication bottles were labeled per facility pharmacy policy. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 21 of 21 residents w...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure medication bottles were labeled per facility pharmacy policy. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 21 of 21 residents who resided in the facility. Findings include: During an observation of the locked medication storage room on 11/17/23 at 10:45 a.m., accompanied by LPN 5, two bottles of omeprazole (a medication to treat heartburn) 20 milligrams (mg) were without resident identifier labels. During an interview at the time of the observation, LPN 5 indicated the medication bottle lacked proper labeling. During an interview on 11/17/23 at 1:00 p.m., the DON indicated the pharmacy would not send unlabeled medications to the facility and was unsure where the bottles would have came from. Review of a current policy, revised on 7/12, titled Pharmacy Services, provided by the DON on 11/17/23 at 1:14 p.m., indicated the following: . ii. All prescription medications have labels that show: .4. The resident's name. 5. Specific directions for use. 6. The prescriber's name. 7. Dispensing date. 8. Name, address, and telephone number of the dispensing pharmacy. 9. Identification number of the dispensing pharmacist 3.1-25(j)
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

Room Equipment (Tag F0908)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain clean and uncluttered laundry facilities, clean bathroom air...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain clean and uncluttered laundry facilities, clean bathroom air vents, and safe closet doors during random observations of the facility. Findings include: During a medication administration observation on 11/16/23 at 8:08 a.m., Resident 19 indicated he felt his sinus pressure was related to the debris in the bathroom ceiling fan, where you could not even see the fan blades for all the lint and mouse droppings. During an observation with QMA 4 at the time of the medication administration, the bathroom air vent had a large amount of dark, thick, dust-like debris. The bathroom walls were had a large number of gnats on them. The wall to the right of the heating and air unit was bowed out from the wall. On 11/16/23 at 8:10 a.m., room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed with the right bi-fold closet door out of the track and hanging loose. On 11/16/23 at 12:56 p.m., room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed with the right bi-fold closet door out of the track and hanging loose. On 11/13/23 at 11:09 a.m., room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed with one side of the bi-fold closet door out of the track and hanging loose. On 11/16/23 at 10:14 p.m., room [ROOM NUMBER] was observed with both inner sides of the bi-fold doors were out of the slide track and hanging loose. On 11/16/23 at 10:14 a.m., facility dining room was observed with gnats flying around the room. On 11/16/23 at 10:15 a.m., room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bathroom air vent was observed with a large amount of lint and debris on it. On 11/16/23 at 9:36 a.m., the laundry room was observed accompanied by the Housekeeping Manager. The small room had bleach and other chemicals placed on the floor which was un-tiled. Staff sorted dirty clothes in the doorway of the laundry room. Blankets were on the floor behind the washing machine. The clean laundry delivery storage filled in the hallway due to lack of space in the clean area. There was an open window in the laundry room with visible lint covering the screen. The Housekeeping Manager indicated during observation the blankets should not be behind the washer and maintenance was responsible for cleaning behind the washer and dryer. During an interview on 11/16/23 at 10:44 a.m., the Maintenance Director indicated he oversaw two buildings. The laundry staff was responsible for all cleaning inside the laundry area, which included behind the machines. During an interview on 11/16/23 at 11:24 a.m., the Administrator indicated pest control came to the facility monthly to treat for spiders, gnats, and mice, or when requested. The bathroom air vents had been cleaned on 10/21/23.
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

Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility was free from pests and rodents. Findings include: During a confidential interview on 11/16/23, a staff member indicate...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility was free from pests and rodents. Findings include: During a confidential interview on 11/16/23, a staff member indicated mice were observed frequently in the halls and resident rooms. The facility cat had a mouse in his mouth in the hallway the morning of 11/15/23. During a confidential interview on 11/16/23 at 2:11 p.m., a staff member indicated the facility had a gnat and mouse problem. During a confidential interview on 11/16/23 at 2:18 p.m., a staff member indicated there was a mouse problem in the facility and they were seen frequently in inside the facility. During an observation in Resident 19's bathroom, all four walls had a large number of gnats and many were observed flying around the room. Gnats were observed flying in the hallway and dining area. During an interview on 11/16/23 at 11:24 a.m., the Administrator indicated pest control came to the facility monthly to treat for spiders, gnats, and mice. The pest control provider would come to the facility for other treatments as requested. A current facility policy, revised May 2008, titled, Pest Control, provided by the Administrator on 11/17/23 at 1:10 p.m., included the following: .Policy Statement .Our facility shall maintain an effective pest control program. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. This facility maintains an on-going pest control program to ensure that the building is kept free of insects and rodents This citation relates to Complaint IN00421732. 3.1-19(f)(4)
CONCERN (E)

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

MDS Data Transmission (Tag F0640)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to submit Minimum Data Set (MDS) information to CMS (Centers for Medic...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to submit Minimum Data Set (MDS) information to CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) in a timely manner for 7 of 16 resident assessments reviewed. (Residents 10, 18, 19, 22, 24, 29, and 134) Findings include: The record of resident 10 was reviewed on 11/14/23 at 9:39 a.m. The resident's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], indicated a status of Exported. The record of resident 18 was reviewed on 11/16/23 at 2:28 p.m. The resident's Discharge Return Not Anticipated MDS, dated [DATE], indicated a status of Exported. The record of resident 19 was reviewed on 11/16/23 at 1:40 p.m. The resident's Discharge Return Anticipated MDS, dated [DATE], indicated a status of Exported, and an Entry MDS, dated [DATE], indicated a status of Exported. The record of resident 22 was reviewed on 11/14/23 at 11:30 a.m. The resident's Annual MDS, dated [DATE], indicated a status of Exported. The record of resident 24 was reviewed on 11/14/23 at 2:40 p.m. The resident's Discharge Return Not Anticipated MDS, dated [DATE], indicated a status of Exported, and an Entry MDS, dated [DATE], indicated a status of Export Ready. The record of resident 29 was reviewed on 11/14/23 at 2:56 p.m. The resident's Discharge Return Anticipated MDS, dated [DATE], indicated a status of Exported, and an Entry MDS, dated [DATE], indicated Exported. The record of resident 134 was reviewed on 11/14/23 at 1:22 p.m. The resident's Entry MDS, dated [DATE], indicated a status of Export Ready. During an interview on 11/16/23 at 3:00 p.m., the MDS Coordinator indicated the terms Exported and Export Ready were for MDS assessments that are prepared to send to CMS. The assessments had not been submitted to CMS due to a lack of security clearance for submitting to CMS's program at this time. This issue had been identified on 10/11/23 and this facility was the only one in the company having the issue. During an interview on 11/17/23 at 1:13 p.m., the Administrator indicated staff use the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual as the facilities policy for MDS assessment.
Aug 2023 3 deficiencies 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

Deficiency F0740 (Tag F0740)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized behavior plan that maximized the resident's dignity for 1 of 5 residents reviewed (Resident B) when...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized behavior plan that maximized the resident's dignity for 1 of 5 residents reviewed (Resident B) when the SSD indicated to Resident B he would be able to be discharged to a group home if he had good behavior for 14 days. This practice resulted in his fixation on the date he was to be discharged to go to a group home and contributed to his increased frustration and behaviors of self harm, yelling at staff, throwing items, and banging his head, which lead to an inpatient stay at a psychiatric hospital. Findings include: Review of video footage with audio, on 8/29/23 at 11:00 a.m., indicated on 8/19/23 Resident B was being escorted in his wheelchair to his room from the nurses station area. CNA 12 pushed his wheelchair while CNA 23 walked backwards holding his legs from touching the ground. LPN 8 held a gown on the right side of him to shield the other staff member from him spitting on them. As they entered his room, a staff member called Resident B a nasty a--. Resident B's clinical record was reviewed on 8/29/23 at 10:38 a.m. Diagnoses included uncomplicated alcohol dependence, Wernicke's encephalopathy, delusional disorders, mild cognitive impairment of uncertain or unknown etiology, other seizures, drug induced subacute dyskinesia, major depressive disorder, recurrent severe without psychotic features, generalized anxiety disorder, psychotic disorder with hallucinations due to known physiological condition, impulse disorder, and diffuse traumatic brain injury with loss of consciousness of unspecified duration, subsequent encounter. His medications included levetiracetam (treat seizures) 250 mg (milligram) three times daily, divalproex sodium (treat seizures) 375 mg twice daily, quetiapine fumarate (treat psychotic features) 150 mg at bedtime, brexpiprazole (treat mood disorders) 3 mg daily, and folic acid-vitamin B6-vitamin B12 (treat Wernicke's encephalopathy) daily. Special instructions on his orders indicated, per his mother, Resident B could call her twice daily only from 12:30 p.m. - 1:00 p.m. (after lunch) and 5:30 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. (after dinner). If he yelled at others or was being inappropriate, the call could be held. An admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment, dated 7/21/23, indicated he was cognitively intact. He required extensive assistance of one staff member for bed mobility, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene. He required extensive assistance of two staff members for transferring. He required supervision with locomotion on and off the unit. He used a wheelchair. He had delusions (misconceptions or beliefs that are firmly held, contrary to reality) and other behavioral symptoms not directed towards others (e.g., physical symptoms such as hitting or scratching self, pacing, rummaging, public sexual acts, disrobing in public, throwing or smearing food or bodily wastes, or verbal/vocal symptoms like screaming, disruptive sounds) that occurred one to three days during the assessment period. His current care plans included the following: He had behaviors of yelling out in common areas (7/17/23). His interventions included to allow him time to voice frustrations (revised 8/12/23), approach calmly and in a soothing, non-judgmental manner (revised on 8/12/23), assess for pain and toileting needs (revised 8/12/23), give him your full attention to answer questions he had (revised 8/9/23), if he was in the common area/high activity area, please take him to his room to assist him (revised 8/12/23), offer him a snack or a drink (revised 8/12/23), praise him for all appropriate behaviors (8/22/23), take him to a quiet area (revised 8/12/23), and talk to him about the feelings and rights of others who are exposed to the negative behavior (8/21/23). He had the potential for psychosocial well-being problem related negative interaction with staff (7/25/23). His interventions included allow him time to answer questions and to verbalize feelings, perceptions, and fears (7/25/23), monitor/document his usual response to problems: internal and external (7/25/23), monitor/document his feelings relative to incident with peer (7/25/23), when conflict arose, remove him to a calm, safe environment and allow him to vent/share his feelings (7/25/23). He had the potential to be verbally aggressive by yelling and cursing at staff, calling staff derogatory names, etc. (revised 8/9/23). His interventions included analyze of key times, places, circumstances, triggers, and what de-escalates behavior and document (revised 8/12/23), assess his understanding of the situation, allow time for him to express himself and feelings towards the situation (revised 8/12/23), provide positive feedback for good behavior, emphasize the positive aspects of compliance (revised 8/12/23), when he became agitated; intervene before agitation escalate, guide him away from the source of distress, engage calmly in conversation, if his response was aggressive, staff were to walk away calmly and approach later (revised 8/12/23). He had behaviors of throwing items i.e.: books, water pitcher, threatening to tip over medication carts, pour water on computers, throw feces on staff, throwing cups, etc.(revised 8/16/23). His interventions included ask him what you can do to help him (8/21/23), explain to him the behavior was inappropriate (8/12/23), offer to take him to quiet area to talk (revised 8/12/23), praise him for appropriate behavior (8/22/23), remove him from the area (revised 8/12/23), specific behavior management intervention: ask him if he would like to call his mother (revised 8/12/23), talk to him about the feelings and rights of others who are exposed to negative behavior (revised 8/12/23), and turn on soothing music (8/16/23). He had a behavior problem of self injurious behavior by banging on table, hitting the wall, threatening to break a window, etc. (revised 8/18/23). His interventions included answer his questions (8/18/23), approach/speak in a calm manner (revised 8/12/23), divert attention as necessary (revised 8/12/23), monitor behavior episodes and attempt to determine underlying cause, consider location, time of day, persons involved, and situations, document behavior and potential causes (revised 8/12/23), praise any indication of his progress/improvement in behavior (revised 8/12/23), remove from situation and take to alternate location as needed (8/12/23), and turn on soothing music for him in a quiet area (8/16/23). He had the potential to be physically aggressive i.e.: threats of harm to staff, scratching staff, etc. (revised 8/21/23). His interventions included to analyze times of day, places, circumstances, triggers, and what de-escalates behavior and document (revised 8/12/23), assess and address for contributing sensory deficits (revised 8/12/23), assess and anticipate resident's needs: food, thirst. toileting needs, comfort level, body positioning, pain etc. (revised 8/12/23), assist to set goals for more pleasant behavior and assist verbalization of source of agitation (8/21/23), when he became agitated, intervene before agitation escalates, guide him away from source of distress, engage calmly in conversation, if response is aggressive; staff were to walk away calmly and approach later (revised 8/12/23). His progress notes indicated the following: On 8/1/23 at 8:49 a.m., he continued to ask staff when was leaving to go to a group home. Staff replied he would need to change his behaviors to go to group home. He was agreeable. He then continued to ask the same questions. On 8/1/23 at 6:30 p.m., he came to the nurses station several times that shift and asked when he could go to the group home and asked the nurse to write it down. When he was reminded he had it on his notepad, he would get loud and cuss. He was reminded his behaviors had to improve prior to him discharging from the facility. He stated understanding and his behavior improved for only short amount of time before it started all over again. On 8/19/23 at 12:07 p.m., he was in the common area yelling at staff. He continued to make threats about harming himself and other residents. He called staff racial slurs and made bigoted statements. The nurse practitioner was aware of the situation, and no new orders were given. The facility was advised to give redirection to the date of potential discharge. On 8/19/23 at 2:31 p.m., he continuously yelled and shouted out racial slurs and derogatory names such b--ches, chubby, and fat a--. He was redirected to his room where he began to throw various items such as remotes, dresser pieces and his trash can. He took a water pitcher and threw it into the hallway, barely missing a staff member. He made threats to staff that he would take the dresser and beat you upside the head, [racial slur]. He continued to make threats of harm to staff. On 8/19/23 at 2:59 p.m., a staff member came into to help IT (Information Technology) to get the internet and the phone working. Resident B proceeded to threaten to throw urine and water pitchers on the staff member. The staff member was on the phone with IT and could not react to Resident B's questions. He was creating a hostile environment. On 8/19/23 at 6:03 p.m., he hocked up his spit, threatening to spit on an African- American staff member. He called staff names, when redirected by four staff members to his room, he began to spit on staff multiple times. He grabbed a CNA by her chest and began to scratch another CNA. He threw items and caused destruction in his room. He cursed loudly while continuing to spit. 911 was called by a staff member due to their injuries. The DON, psychiatric nurse practitioner, the administrator in training, and the manager on duty was aware. EMTs escorted him via ambulance. His mother was called and made aware of the situation. On 8/20/23 at 4:45 a.m., he returned from the local hospital via stretcher. He was awake and alert to person and place. He was transferred from stretcher to bed. A report from nurse at the ER indicated he was totally calm and cooperative while at the ER, other than he refused lab work when he first arrived. He agreed to lab work shortly after he refused. He had no other behaviors. No new orders were received. He denied any wants/needs at that time and his call light was in reach. On 8/21/23 at 12:53 p.m., he resorted to yelling for staff across the room, to get their attention for a continuously repeated reading of today's date and when he could depart. He continued to repeat requests for reading today's date. This would not change, but his behaviors were definitely belligerent. If staff did not stop in their tracks to repetitively answer today's date and his potential departure date. He would curse and threaten self harm or toss something at staff. He had no means or the mental capacity to harm himself. On 8/21/23 at 11:34 p.m., an SSD note indicated he could be easily redirected, but due to memory issues and behaviors he was redirected hundreds of times a day. His behaviors and questions on the date and when he was leaving were repetitively asked. It was difficult to get him on a task due to this complication of his disease process. At times, his memory was better than others. On 8/22/23 at 6:22 p.m., he sat at the nurses station consistently asked questions, Can I call my mom? and Its August 22nd, and I am leaving August 3? He carried around paper with this statement. Staff reminded him that only if behaviors decreased and if he followed his plan of care. He would state I am going to hurt myself tonight. Staff tried to console him and he started with the same repetitive questions. This behavior had been constant for the last an hour and a half and he rotated between the staff. He had been unable to be redirected. He was listened to and he was talked to about his current plan of care and goals, they were ineffective and would often worsen the behaviors. On 8/23/23 at 10:35 a.m., he sat in his wheelchair outside of the Human Resource office, where the morning meeting was going on. The Administrator opened the door, answered his repetitive question regarding the date and when he could leave. The door was shut to commence with the meeting. He started yelling and cussing saying he was going to kill himself. The office door was opened and he was bashing his head into the door and door knob repetitively. Staff intervened and separated him from the door. The NP was notified and gave an order to send to him to the ER for evaluation, treatment and to be sent for a psych stay. 911 was called. On 8/23/23 at 3:29 p.m., he returned to the facility with a diagnoses of a UTI, and he quickly began cursing and threatened to harm self. On 8/23/23 at 6:31 p.m., he had been demanding since returning from the hospital. He was reminded to be patient with staff who answered his questions and he was going to go to psychiatric hospital as soon as a bed was confirmed this evening or Thursday the 24th. He was very verbally repetitive. If staff didn't answer his repetitive questions, he would threaten to harm self. He went so far as to say he was going to break the mirror on the wall with his head. He tried to bang his head on the wall. He was reminded him to be kind and to stop threatening to harm self every time someone does not answer him immediately. He yelled across the room to get staff's attention. He was called some of the staff the N word, as well. On 8/24/23 at 7:55 p.m., he was on a leave of absence to an inpatient psychiatric hospital. Confidential interviews were conducted during the course of the survey. During a confidential interview, it was indicated Resident B was very confused. He knew he was confused, he wanted to know why he repeated himself and why he couldn't remember things. They tried to think of things to get his mind off his notebook. He constantly said he was going to kill himself or hurt himself and said he did not like living like that. He wanted to live in a group home. The SSD had told him he was going to a group home if he didn't have behaviors for two weeks. The SSD started writing the date in a notebook he carried. They told him if he had a behavior they would push the date back. The confidential interview didn't know why they gave him a date and then changed it if he had a behavior. They heard the SSD and the Environmental Supervisor tell him he had to stay longer because he had behaviors. The confidential interview felt this made him have more behaviors and frustrated him. They kept telling him he had to go two more weeks because he had a behavior. During an interview with the Interim Administrator, on 8/29/23 at 2:12 p.m., she indicated she started at the facility on 8/20/23. She became aware of the incident with staff and Resident B, on 8/25/23, while investigating a workman's comp issue. She was told Resident B had hurt two staff members during a behavior incident with Resident B on 8/19/23 at 5:20 p.m., and it lead her to view the video footage. After watching the video, she reported the incident to the State Agency and suspended the three staff members. They said Resident B had behaviors most of the day on 8/19/23. They tried to give him a date for discharge, they told him if he didn't have behaviors for 14 days he could go to the group home. There was a facility behavior care specialist that had a good relationship with him, and tried to redirect him. She was able to calm him after the incident. Another resident, Resident D, was protective of the staff. He watched Resident B's behaviors increase and he was going to potentially intervene by using metal from a cat food can to hurt Resident B. She thought the staff were trying to remove Resident B from the situation to keep him safe as well as others. He was to the point where he was unmanageable. Staff called the police, they came and took him to a local hospital, and the hospital sent him back to the facility. CNA 12 called Resident B a nasty a--. She tried to contact CNA 12 and she did not show up for work. The nurse practitioner had made some changes to his medication and attempted to do things in-house. During an interview with the Administrator, on 8/29/23 at 2:53 p.m., she indicated Resident B had a notebook that said he was going to a group home. She had initially thought he was really going to a group home. She spoke with the SSD about what group home he was going to, and she told her he wasn't going to a group home. He had to be good for 14 days before he could go. During an interview with the SSD, on 8/29/23 at 4:02 p.m., she indicated she was working on finding a group home for Resident B. She had reached out to three group homes. One was close to where his family lived. They said he could not have physical/aggressive behaviors for 14 to 30 days. He had not been accepted yet. She told him when he met his goals, she would fax the group homes the information they needed. Everyday they wrote the date and how many days he had left at the facility before he was going to a group home. He carried the notebook around with him all day. He threatened to throw urine at the staff, he made self injurious threats. A couple weekends ago, he was spitting, threatened to throw urine, called staff names and threw a dresser drawer into the hall. If there were a lot of people around, he wanted all the attention focused on him. If there were less people around, he was more controllable . An undated current facility policy, titled ABUSE PREVENTION AND PROHIBITION POLICY, provided by the Interim DON, on 8/30/23 at 11:00 a.m., indicated the following: .Policy .Residents residing in this facility will be treated with dignity and respect in accordance with their individual needs. They will not be subjected to verbal .and mental abuse .VERBAL ABUSE: Threatening a resident verbally, raising your voice to a resident in a scolding or abrupt manner, using offensive term/words .MENTAL ABUSE .saying anything to a resident which might cause him/her to worry or become alarmed .threats of punishment or deprivation This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00416170. 3.1-27(a)(1) 3.1-27(b)
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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from verbal abuse by CNA 12 for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident B). Findings include:...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from verbal abuse by CNA 12 for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident B). Findings include: Review of video footage with audio, on 8/29/23 at 11:00 a.m., indicated on 8/19/23 Resident B was being escorted in his wheelchair to his room from the nurses station area. CNA 12 pushed his wheelchair while CNA 23 walked backwards holding his legs from touching the ground. LPN 8 held a gown on the right side of him to shield the other staff member from him spitting on them. As they entered his room, a staff member called Resident B a nasty a--. Resident B's clinical record was reviewed on 8/29/23 at 10:38 a.m. Diagnoses included uncomplicated alcohol dependence, Wernicke's encephalopathy, delusional disorders, mild cognitive impairment of uncertain or unknown etiology, other seizures, drug induced subacute dyskinesia, major depressive disorder, recurrent severe without psychotic features, generalized anxiety disorder, psychotic disorder with hallucinations due to known physiological condition, impulse disorder, and diffuse traumatic brain injury with loss of consciousness of unspecified duration, subsequent encounter. His medications included levetiracetam (treat seizures) 250 mg (milligram) three times daily, divalproex sodium (treat seizures) 375 mg twice daily, quetiapine fumarate (treat psychotic features) 150 mg at bedtime, brexpiprazole (treat mood disorders) 3 mg daily, and folic acid-vitamin B6-vitamin B12 (treat Wernicke's encephalopathy) daily. An admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment, dated 7/21/23, indicated he was cognitively intact. He required extensive assistance of one staff member for bed mobility, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene. He required extensive assistance of two staff members for transferring. He required supervision with locomotion on and off the unit. He used a wheelchair. He had delusions (misconceptions or beliefs that are firmly held, contrary to reality) and other behavioral symptoms not directed towards others (e.g., physical symptoms such as hitting or scratching self, pacing, rummaging, public sexual acts, disrobing in public, throwing or smearing food or bodily wastes, or verbal/vocal symptoms like screaming, disruptive sounds) that occurred one to three days during the assessment period. His current care plans included the following: He had behaviors of yelling out in common areas (7/17/23). His interventions included to allow him time to voice frustrations (revised 8/12/23), approach calmly and in a soothing, non-judgmental manner (revised on 8/12/23), assess for pain and toileting needs (revised 8/12/23), give him your full attention to answer questions he had (revised 8/9/23), if he was in the common area/high activity area, please take him to his room to assist him (revised 8/12/23), offer him a snack or a drink (revised 8/12/23), praise him for all appropriate behaviors (8/22/23), take him to a quiet area (revised 8/12/23), and talk to him about the feelings and rights of others who are exposed to the negative behavior (8/21/23). He had the potential for psychosocial well-being problem related negative interaction with staff (7/25/23). His interventions included allow him time to answer questions and to verbalize feelings, perceptions, and fears (7/25/23), monitor/document his usual response to problems: internal and external (7/25/23), monitor/document his feelings relative to incident with peer (7/25/23), when conflict arose, remove him to a calm, safe environment and allow him to vent/share his feelings (7/25/23). He had the potential to be verbally aggressive by yelling and cursing at staff, calling staff derogatory names, etc. (revised 8/9/23). His interventions included analyze of key times, places, circumstances, triggers, and what de-escalates behavior and document (revised 8/12/23), assess his understanding of the situation, allow time for him to express himself and feelings towards the situation (revised 8/12/23), provide positive feedback for good behavior, emphasize the positive aspects of compliance (revised 8/12/23), when he became agitated; intervene before agitation escalate, guide him away from the source of distress, engage calmly in conversation, if his response was aggressive, staff were to walk away calmly and approach later (revised 8/12/23). He had behaviors of throwing items i.e.: books, water pitcher, threatening to tip over medication carts, pour water on computers, throw feces on staff, throwing cups, etc.(revised 8/16/23). His interventions included ask him what you can do to help him (8/21/23), explain to him the behavior was inappropriate (8/12/23), offer to take him to quiet area to talk (revised 8/12/23), praise him for appropriate behavior (8/22/23), remove him from the area (revised 8/12/23), specific behavior management intervention: ask him if he would like to call his mother (revised 8/12/23), talk to him about the feelings and rights of others who are exposed to negative behavior (revised 8/12/23), and turn on soothing music (8/16/23). He had a behavior problem of self injurious behavior by banging on table, hitting the wall, threatening to break a window, etc. (revised 8/18/23). His interventions included answer his questions (8/18/23), approach/speak in a calm manner (revised 8/12/23), divert attention as necessary (revised 8/12/23), monitor behavior episodes and attempt to determine underlying cause, consider location, time of day, persons involved, and situations, document behavior and potential causes (revised 8/12/23), praise any indication of his progress/improvement in behavior (revised 8/12/23), remove from situation and take to alternate location as needed (8/12/23), and turn on soothing music for him in a quiet area (8/16/23). He had the potential to be physically aggressive i.e.: threats of harm to staff, scratching staff, etc. (revised 8/21/23). His interventions included to analyze times of day, places, circumstances, triggers, and what de-escalates behavior and document (revised 8/12/23), assess and address for contributing sensory deficits (revised 8/12/23), assess and anticipate resident's needs: food, thirst. toileting needs, comfort level, body positioning, pain etc. (revised 8/12/23), assist to set goals for more pleasant behavior and assist verbalization of source of agitation (8/21/23), when he became agitated, intervene before agitation escalates, guide him away from source of distress, engage calmly in conversation, if response is aggressive; staff were to walk away calmly and approach later (revised 8/12/23). His progress notes indicated the following: On 8/19/23 at 12:07 p.m., he was in the common area yelling at staff. He continued to make threats about harming himself and other residents. He called staff racial slurs and made bigoted statements. The nurse practitioner was aware of the situation, and no new orders were given. The facility was advised to give redirection to the date. On 8/19/23 at 2:31 p.m., he continuously yelled and shouted out racial slurs and derogatory names such b--ches, chubby, and fat a--. He was redirected to his room where he began to throw various items such as remotes, dresser pieces and his trash can. He took a water pitcher and threw it into the hallway, barely missing a staff member. He made threats to staff that he would take the dresser and beat you upside the head, [racial slur]. He continued to make threats of harm to staff. On 8/19/23 at 2:59 p.m., a staff member came into to help IT (Information Technology) to get the internet and the phone working. Resident B proceeded to threaten to throw urine and water pitchers on the staff member. The staff member was on the phone with IT and could not react to Resident B's questions. He was creating a hostile environment. On 8/19/23 at 6:03 p.m., he hocked up his spit, threatening to spit on an African- American staff member. He called staff names, when redirected by four staff members to his room, he began to spit on staff multiple times. He grabbed a CNA by her chest and began to scratch another CNA. He threw items and caused destruction in his room. He cursed loudly while continuing to spit. 911 was called by a staff member due to their injuries. The DON, psychiatric nurse practitioner, the administrator in training, and the manager on duty was aware. EMTs escorted him via ambulance. His mother was called and made aware of the situation. On 8/20/23 at 4:45 a.m., he returned from the local hospital via stretcher. He was awake and alert to person and place. He was transferred from stretcher to bed. A report from nurse at the ER indicated he was totally calm and cooperative while at the ER, other than he refused lab work when he first arrived. He agreed to lab work shortly after he refused. He had no other behaviors. No new orders were received. He denied any wants/needs at that time and his call light was in reach. Confidential interviews were conducted during the course of the survey. During a confidential interview, it was indicated Resident B was very confused. He knew he was confused, he wanted to know why he repeated himself and why he couldn't remember things. They tried to think of things to get his mind off his notebook. He constantly said he was going to kill himself or hurt himself and said he did not like living like that. He wanted to live in a group home. The SSD had told him he was going to a group home if he didn't have behaviors for two weeks. The SSD started writing the date in a notebook he carried. They told him if he had a behavior they would push the date back. The confidential interview didn't know why they gave him a date and then changed it if he had a behavior. They heard the SSD and the Environmental Supervisor tell him he had to stay longer because he had behaviors. The confidential interview felt this made him have more behaviors and frustrated him. They kept telling him he had to go two more weeks because he had a behavior. During an interview with the Interim Administrator, on 8/29/23 at 2:12 p.m., she indicated she started at the facility on 8/20/23. She became aware of the incident with staff and Resident B, on 8/25/23, while investigating a workman's comp issue. She was told Resident B had hurt two staff members during a behavior incident with Resident B on 8/19/23 at 5:20 p.m., and it lead her to view the video footage. After watching the video, she reported the incident to the State Agency and suspended the three staff members. They said Resident B had behaviors most of the day on 8/19/23. They tried to give him a date for discharge, they told him if he didn't have behaviors for 14 days he could go to the group home. There was a facility behavior care specialist that had a good relationship with him, and tried to redirect him. She was able to calm him after the incident. Another resident, Resident D, was protective of the staff. He watched Resident B's behaviors increase and he was going to potentially intervene by using metal from a cat food can to hurt Resident B. She thought the staff were trying to remove Resident B from the situation to keep him safe as well as others. He was to the point where he was unmanageable. Staff called the police, they came and took him to a local hospital, and the hospital sent him back to the facility. CNA 12 called Resident B a nasty a--. She tried to contact CNA 12 and she did not show up for work. The nurse practitioner had made some changes to his medication and attempted to do things in-house. During an interview with the Administrator, on 8/29/23 at 2:53 p.m., she indicated Resident B had a notebook that said he was going to a group home. She had initially thought he was really going to a group home. She spoke with the SSD about what group home he was going to, and she told her he wasn't going to a group home. He had to be good for 14 days before he could go. During an interview with the SSD, on 8/29/23 at 4:02 p.m., she indicated she was working on finding a group home for Resident B. She had reached out to three group homes. One was close to where his family lived. They said he could not have physical/aggressive behaviors for 14 to 30 days. He had not been accepted yet. She told him when he met his goals, she would fax the group homes the information they needed. Everyday they wrote the date and how many days he had left at the facility before he was going to a group home. He carried the notebook around with him all day. He threatened to throw urine at the staff, he made self injurious threats. A couple weekends ago, he was spitting, threatened to throw urine, called staff names and threw a dresser drawer into the hall. If there were a lot of people around, he wanted all the attention focused on him. If there were less people around, he was more controllable . An undated current facility policy, titled ABUSE PREVENTION AND PROHIBITION POLICY, provided by the Interim DON, on 8/30/23 at 11:00 a.m., indicated the following: .Policy .Residents residing in this facility will be treated with dignity and respect in accordance with their individual needs. They will not be subjected to verbal .and mental abuse .VERBAL ABUSE: Threatening a resident verbally, raising your voice to a resident in a scolding or abrupt manner, using offensive term/words .MENTAL ABUSE .saying anything to a resident which might cause him/her to worry or become alarmed .threats of punishment or deprivation This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00416170. 3.1-27(a)(1) 3.1-27(b)
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 F0943 (Tag F0943)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure yearly dementia in-service training was conducted for 2 of 5 staff members reviewed for employee records (RN 15 and LPN 8). Finding...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure yearly dementia in-service training was conducted for 2 of 5 staff members reviewed for employee records (RN 15 and LPN 8). Findings include: Employee records were reviewed on 8/30/23 at 9:15 a.m. RN 15's last dementia training was completed on 6/1/22. LPN 8's last dementia training was completed on 2/23/22. During an interview with the Interim DON, on 8/30/23 at 12:46 p.m., she indicated the facility could not locate a policy regarding training at that time. No further information was provided prior to exit. This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00416170. 3.1-19(u)
Aug 2023 2 deficiencies 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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** A. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from resid...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** A. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from resident to resident physical abuse for 2 of 6 residents reviewed for abuse (Residents P and N). Resident P experienced being bitten by Resident N. He was sent to the hospital and required antibiotics to treat the resulting wound. B. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from verbal abuse by a staff member for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident J). Findings include: A. During an interview with Resident P, on 8/9/23 at 12:36 p.m., he indicated he was bitten on his wrist by Resident N about two weeks ago. It was the second time he had been bitten while at the facility, but not by the same person. Resident N was pi--ing him off and everyone around him was telling Resident N to shut up so he put his hand over his mouth and he bit him. He bled like a stuck pig. The area hurt after he was bitten but it didn't hurt now, unless he bumped it. He was sent to the hospital, where they wrapped his arm and put him on an antibiotic. Resident N was a dumb a--. During the interview, Resident P's left wrist had two irregular shaped, dime sized scabs on it and the top of his left hand was bruised. Resident P's clinical record was reviewed on 8/9/23 at 9:52 a.m. Diagnoses included other specified disorders of brain, slurred speech, personal history of traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, chronic, and major depressive disorder, recurrent severe without psychotic features. His medications included duloxetine (depression) 30 mg (milligram) daily, divalproex sodium (mood stabilizer) 500 mg three times daily, risperidone (antipsychotic) 0.75 mg twice daily, and medroxyprogesterone acetate (hypersexuality)10 mg daily. He was administered amoxicillin potassium clavulanate (antibiotic) 875-125 mg every 12 hours for his left arm for seven days (7/21/23 - 7/28/23). A quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set), dated 6/18/23, indicated he was severely cognitively impaired. He did not exhibit behaviors. He required extensive assistance of one staff member for transfers. He required supervision when walking in his room or the corridor. He used a walker and a wheelchair. He had a care plan for the potential for psychosocial well-being problems related to the incident with his peer (7/21/23). His interventions included consult with: pastoral care, social services, psychiatric services, etc. (7/21/23), encourage participation to make his own decisions (7/21/23), monitor/document his usual response to problems: Internal - how individual made his own changes, External - expected others to control problems or leaves to fate, or luck (7/21/23), and when conflict arose, remove him to a calm safe environment and allow him to vent/share feelings (7/21/23). He had a revised care plan for a history of physical aggression towards staff such as hitting, pushing, and shaking fists and placing hand over others mouth, etc. (7/21/23). His interventions included analyze times of day, places, circumstances, triggers, and what de-escalated the behavior and document (12/9/22), assess and address for contributing sensory deficits (12/9/22), encourage seeking out of staff member when agitated (7/21/23), and when he became agitated: intervene before agitation escalated, guide him away from sources of distress, engage calmly in conversation, if his response was aggressive, staff were to walk calmly away, and approach him later (12/9/22). His nurses notes indicated the following: An incident note, dated 7/21/23 at 12:57 a.m., indicated Resident P was sitting with another resident who was yelling, and he put his hand over the other resident's mouth. The other resident grabbed his arm and bit him on the arm, wrist, and hand. The aide and the nurse separated the residents. His arm was cleaned and the nurse called for an ambulance. He returned from the hospital with a dressing on his arm and antibiotics were given. His vitals were taken. A Social Service note, dated 7/21/23 at 10:41 a.m., indicated the night prior, Resident P was sitting by the nurses station next to a peer. The peer started yelling out and Resident P placed his hand over the peer's mouth and the peer bit him. The staff were able to separate them immediately and get them each to a safe area. The staff cleaned the area and he was sent to the hospital to be treated. He returned with a dressing to his arm and he was given antibiotics. He was unable to recall the incident this morning and he denied any psychosocial distress. A Nurse Practitioner (NP) visit note, dated 7/21/23, indicated the NP was notified the night prior, Resident P was involved in a peer to peer physical altercation. He allegedly put hand over another resident's mouth and the peer bit him. An order was given to send him to the ER (Emergency Room) where his wound was addressed and he was started on antibiotic therapy. Today, he was at his baseline. No psychosocial distress was noted. His left arm was bandaged with bruising on his hand and his arm area. A skin/wound note, dated 7/22/23 at 4:49 p.m., indicated he had some large purple bruising on both hands and bite marks located on his left hand. There was swelling present and some drainage at the site. A nurses note, dated 7/22/23 at 4:51 p.m., indicated the resident had complaints of pain and discomfort at the site of the bite. A new dressing was applied due to drainage. A Social Service note, dated 7/24/23 at 2:20 p.m., indicated he denied any psychosocial distress related to incident with peer and he was unable to recall what happened. A social service note, dated 7/26/23 at 4:43 p.m., indicated he had no recall of the incident with the peer from last week and denied any psychosocial distress. Resident N was observed on 8/9/23 at 12:30 p.m. ambulating in the hallway near his room. He was talking loudly to himself with extra emphasis to each last word of a phrase he spoke loudly (don't do drugs, don't steal you will go to jail). He ambulated into his room and sat on his bed and continued to speak loudly to himself. Resident N's clinical record was reviewed on 8/9/23 at 10:15 a.m. Diagnoses included schizophrenia, profound intellectual disabilities, syngap1-related intellectual disability and generalized anxiety disorder. His medications included doxepin (anxiety) 50 mg three times daily, risperidone (schizophrenia) 1 mg in the afternoon and 4 mg twice daily, trazodone (insomnia) 150 mg daily, olanzapine (schizophrenia) 5 mg three times daily, perampanel (convulsions) 6 mg daily, benztropine mesylate (epilepsy) 1 mg twice daily, lacosamide (epilepsy) 200 mg twice daily and clobazam (convulsions) 10 mg twice daily. A significant change MDS, dated [DATE], indicated he was moderately cognitively impaired. He did not exhibit behaviors. He required supervision while walking in the corridor, and locomotion on and off the unit. He walked in his room independently. He had a revised behavior care plan for yelling out in the common area. He yelled he was given the wrong medication and yelled for Dr. Bombay, etc. (8/8/23). His interventions included allow him time to voice frustration (5/28/22), approach calmly and in a soothing, non-judgmental manner (5/28/22), assess for pain and toileting needs (5/28/22), if in a common area/high activity area, please take him to his room to assist him (5/28/22),offer him a shower (6/26/23), offer him a snack or drink (5/28/22), offer to call his father for him to talk to (6/13/22), and turn the TV to Dukes of Hazard, Smokey and the Bandit, Batman, etc. (6/26/23). He had a revised care plan for repetitive verbalizations i.e.: will yell over and over for Dr. Bombay, talk about dogs, etc. (5/28/22). His interventions included allow him to express feelings and concerns (5/28/22),establish a caring relationship with him (5/28/22), offer him a Dr. Pepper (6/13/22), offer him a shower (6/13/22), praise him for attempts to gain attention appropriately (5/28/22), relay accurate information to him (5/28/22), talk to him in a calm voice (6/13/22), and try to determine the reason for preoccupation with questions and verbalization (5/28/22). He had a revised care plan for the potential to be physically aggressive to others related to poor impulse control, grabbing at others, or/and attempting to/or hit/bite at others, tried to choke staff/placed arm around the staffs neck, he spat at the staff, he attempted to hit the staff, he poked his fingers in the staff faces', and bite others, etc. (7/21/23). His interventions included two staff members were to redirect him with aggression/increase agitation for safety (6/11/23), when he was agitated attempt to assist him to an area away from peers (6/11/23), and when he became agitated; intervene before the agitation escalated, guide him away from the source of distress, engage him calmly in conversation, if his response was aggressive, staff were to walk calmly away, and approach him later (12/6/21). He had a revised care plan for the potential to be physically aggressive to others related to poor impulse, grab at others, or/and attempt to/or hit/bite at others, try to choke staff/place arm around staffs neck, spit at staff, attempt to hit staff, poke his fingers in staff faces, bite others, etc. (7/21/23). His interventions included assess and address for contributing sensory deficits (12/6/21), assess and anticipate his needs: food, thirst. toileting needs, comfort level, body positioning, pain etc. (12/6/21), monitor/document/report PRN (as needed) any sign or symptoms of resident posing danger to self and others (12/6/21), observe for any attempts to bite others and redirect as/if needed (5/15/23), offer snack/Dr. Pepper (7/21/23), offer to call his father for him to talk to (7/21/23), offer to put on Smokey and the Bandit, Dukes of Hazard, or Batman (7/21/23), and offer to take him outside for a walk (7/18/23). A behavior note, dated 5/6/23 at 9:21 a.m., indicated he had been quietly walking around the common area dining room, hall, and lounge. A female resident was heard yelling out from in the front of the nurse's station. Resident N was found standing beside a female resident who was in her Broda (high back chair with wheels) chair with top of her right hand bruised and a bleeding from a skin tear. The QMA reported he just had her hand in his mouth. The residents were separated immediately. Resident N stated he wouldn't had to hurt her if she didn't hurt him. He was redirected to his room. A nurses note, dated 6/1/23 at 10:42 a.m., indicated he was readmitted from an inpatient stay at a neuropsychiatric hospital. He was started on 15-minute checks. An incident note, dated 6/7/23 at 10:33 p.m., indicated Resident N was being escorted to his room, as he had an increase in aggressive behaviors. Per the nurse report, Resident N bit her on her shoulder and placed his arm around her neck tightly. He then followed her as she came to the nurses station where he continued with his behaviors, throwing himself onto the floor and banging his body onto the floor. A call was placed to 911 dispatch to report incident. The police and EMT's arrived at the facility and Resident N continued shouting and threw himself on the floor. He was escorted by stretcher to a local hospital ER. A nurses note, dated 6/8/23 at 7:15 a.m., indicated he was transferred to a local psychiatric hospital. An admission summary note, dated 6/9/23 at 8:05 p.m., indicated he was readmitted to the facility from being treated for aggression, paranoid schizophrenia, and TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury). There were no new orders or changes received from his hospital discharge. The Psychiatric NP was in the facility and new orders were received to increase his risperidone 1 mg to three times daily from twice daily. He was calm and cooperative at the time, walking through-out facility with his visitor. He was alert to self and some situations. He was able to verbalize simple needs. His speech was loud and clear and his hearing was adequate. An incident note, dated 7/21/23 at 3:42 a.m., indicated Resident N was sitting by the nursing station along side another resident. Resident N was yelling and the other resident put his hand over his mouth. He grabbed the other residents arm and bit him. An aide and a nurse separated the residents and made sure they were in a safe area. The ambulance was called for both residents. Resident N did calm down and went with the ambulance people with no problems. A nurses note, dated 7/21/23 at 3:45 a.m., indicated Resident N arrived back from the hospital. He had no new orders from the hospital. He walked up and down the hallway talking to himself. He was asked if he wanted to lay down and rest. He declined and stated he wasn't tired. A social service note, dated 7/21/23 at 10:35 a.m., indicated Resident N was yelling by the nurses station. A peer was sitting next to him and placed his hand over his mouth. He grabbed the peers arm and bit him. During an interview with the Social Service Director, on 8/9/23 at 11:46 a.m., she indicated Resident P had verbal and physical behaviors. There were no other recent incidents besides putting his hand over Resident N's mouth. Resident N repetitively talked, he would put himself on the floor, bang on the wall, and he bit someone else months ago. She was not sure where the biting was coming from, but Resident P did put his hand over his mouth. She was not able to find anyone to take Resident N for a psychiatric stay. B. Review of a facility-reported incident, dated 7/25/23, indicated a staff member had expressed agitation towards a resident verbally. During an interview with Resident J, on 8/9/23 at 12:13 p.m., he indicated he did not have any concerns with the staff members in the facility and everyone was nice to him. He asked what the date was and that he would be going home on August 22. On 8/9/23 at 4:48 p.m., Resident J was observed sitting in his wheelchair in front of nurses station talking with staff. Resident J's clinical record was reviewed on 8/8/23 at 12:43 p.m. Diagnoses included alcohol dependence, Wernicke's encephalopathy, delusional disorders, mild cognitive impairment of uncertain or unknown etiology, drug induced subacute dyskinesia, major depressive disorder, recurrent severe without psychotic features, generalized anxiety disorder, and psychotic disorder with hallucinations due to known physiological condition. His medications included, divalproex sodium (mood stabilizer) 750 mg twice daily, valbenazine tosylate (tardive dyskinesia) 40 mg daily, lithium carbonate (mood disorders)150 mg twice daily, quetiapine fumarate (depression) 300 mg at bedtime and 50 mg daily. An admission MDS, dated [DATE], indicated he was cognitively intact. He had delusions. He had other behavioral symptoms not directed towards others (e.g., physical symptoms such as hitting or scratching self, pacing, rummaging, public sexual acts, disrobing in public, throwing or smearing food or bodily wastes, or verbal/vocal symptoms like screaming, disruptive sounds that occurred one to three days of the assessment period. He required supervision for locomotion on and off the unit. He had an impairment on one side of his lower extremity. He used a wheelchair. He had a care plan for the potential for psychosocial well-being problem related negative interaction with staff (7/25/23). His interventions included allow the him time to answer questions and to verbalize feelings, perceptions, and fears (7/25/23), monitor/document his usual response to problems: Internal - how individual makes own changes, External - expects others to control problems or leaves to fate, or luck (7/25/23), Monitor/document his feelings relative to incident with peer (7/25/23), when conflict arises, remove him to a calm safe environment and allow him to vent/share feelings (7/25/23). He had a behavior care plan for yelling in the common areas (7/17/23). His intervention included allow him time to voice frustrations (7/17/23), approach him calmly and in a soothing, non-judgmental manner (7/17/23), assess for pain and toileting needs (7/17/23), if he was in common area/high activity area, please take him to his room to assist him (7/17/23), and offer him a snack or a drink (7/17/23). During an interview with the Social Service Director, on 8/9/23 at 11:46 a.m., she indicated she followed up with Resident J afterwards, and they completed an investigation and reported the allegation. Dietary Aide 12 did not have a history of saying things to the residents like that. Resident J would ask repetitive questions, for example, what date was it, when was he going to the group home, and why did he have to stay at the facility. During a phone interview with Dietary Aide 12, on 8/9/23 at 2:27 p.m., he indicated his employment at the facility was terminated because Resident J wanted to call his mom and he was throwing a fit. While he was trying to get the phone for him, he tried to run over three or four nurses with his wheelchair near the nurse's desk. Resident J was about to hit him with his wheelchair, and was threatening to kill himself and the staff. The Dietary Aide was very touchy about the staff being hurt by the residents. He heard Resident J had assaulted police officers in the past. He had also attacked a nurse, bit her, and put her in a head lock. He told the resident not to be a f--king d--k. Resident J had alcoholic dementia, he wasn't going to remember anything that he said to him, and getting mad at him was pointless. He apologized to Resident J for cussing at him. He was just being over protective of the nurses. During an interview with the DON, on 8/9/23 at 12:42 p.m., she indicated she had heard Dietary Aide 12 called Resident J a d--k, but she did not hear it herself. Review of a current facility policy titled, ABUSE PREVENTION AND PROHIBITION POLICY, provided by the Interim Administrator, on 8/8/23 at 12:31 p.m., indicated the following: .Policy .Residents residing in this facility will be treated with dignity and respect in accordance with their individual needs. They will not be subjected to physical, verbal .abuse This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00413773. 3.1-27(a)(1) 3.1-27(b)
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

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to assess for root cause of falls and update care plans for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for falls (Resident K and L). Findings include: 1. The...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to assess for root cause of falls and update care plans for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for falls (Resident K and L). Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident K was reviewed on 8/8/2023 at 11:17 a.m. Diagnoses included bipolar disorder, overactive bladder, dementia with anxiety, depression, conversion disorder with seizures, and fibromyalgia. A post fall risk assessment, dated 6/23/2023, indicated the resident was a high risk for falls. A progress note, dated 7/1/2023 at 7:50 a.m., indicated the resident had a witnessed fall. The resident indicated she lost her balance and fell, hitting her head on a table. The fall resulted in a small cut on her left side of her head by the hair line measuring 0.05 cm (centimeters) length x 0.05 cm width. A post fall risk assessment, dated 7/1/2023, indicated the resident was a high risk for falls. A current care plan for the problem of falls, dated 7/23/2019, was last revised on 3/8/2020. The most recent fall care plan intervention was dated 5/4/2023. The facility failed to review the fall to determine a root cause, and did not develop and implement new interventions to prevent further falls. 2. The clinical record for Resident L was reviewed on 8/8/2023 at 12:14 p.m. Diagnoses include dementia, anxiety, hypothyroidism, hypertension, muscle weakness, acute kidney failure, dysphagia, unsteady on feet, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and pain. A quarterly fall risk assessment, dated 5/24/2023, indicated the resident was a low risk for falls. A progress note, dated 6/29/2023 11:28 a.m., indicated the resident was found on the bathroom floor. The resident stated she was trying to put her pants on when she fell. No injuries were noted. A post fall risk assessment, dated 6/29/2023, indicated the resident was a moderate risk for falls. A current fall risk care plan was initiated on 2/22/2023. The clinical record lacked care plan revision or intervention updates. During an interview on 8/9/2023 at 12:20 p.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) indicated when a fall occurred, the charge nurse put the details in the risk management form. They would then call the DON with the details of the fall. A daily report of falls and behaviors was printed and reviewed during the next morning meeting. The IDT (Interdisciplinary Team) should document a note in the chart of the meeting results and the care plans should be updated. A current facility policy, dated 1/1/2022, titled Comprehensive Resident Centered Care Plans was provided by the DON on 8/9/2023 at 4:50 p.m. and indicated the following: Updating Care Plans: 1. Care plans are modified between care plan conferences when appropriate to meet the resident's current needs, problems and goals. 2. Stand-up meetings of the Director of Nursing, Social Services Coordinator (if appropriate), MDS Coordinator, dietary, Activity Director and Therapy Professional are held to review the current status of skilled residents and determine needed interventions to meet resident goals. 3.The Care Plan will be updated and/or revised for the following reasons: a. Significant change in the resident's condition. b. A change in planned interventions. c. Goals are obtained and new goals established to meet current resident needs and/or goals .7. All residents are discussed with the interdisciplinary Team [sic] to provide continued appropriate interventions based on the resident's goals, care needs, and discharge planning No further information was provided prior to exit. This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00411964. 3.1-31(a)
May 2023 2 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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

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 prevent physical abuse of a dependent resident (Resid...

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 prevent physical abuse of a dependent resident (Resident E) by another resident (Resident B) for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. Findings include: Review of a facility self reportable, dated 5/7/2023 at 9:01 a.m., indicated Resident B was observed taking Resident E's right hand and biting it, breaking the skin. Resident E had been sitting in a high-backed reclining wheelchair. The altercation was unprovoked. Resident E had to be administered wound care and placed on antibiotic therapy. During an observation on 5/11/2023 at 10:27 a.m., Resident E was observed sitting in their high-backed reclining wheelchair in the common area. They had discoloration and a scabbed area to the back of their right hand. The clinical record for Resident E was reviewed on 5/12/2023 at 12:09 p.m. Diagnoses include, anxiety disorder, depressive disorder, deaf, severe dementia with agitation and mood disturbance. The current annual MDS, dated [DATE], indicated Resident E required extensive assistance for bed mobility, toilet use, personal hygiene, eating and dressing. The resident had severe cognitive impairment. A current care plan, revised 1/22/2019, indicated the resident had a communication problem related to hearing deficit. The resident was legally deaf and did not utilize sign language or understanding of written language. A nursing progress noted, dated 5/9/2023 at 1:27 p.m., indicated Resident E was bit by another resident on the right hand. The on-call provider ordered a x-ray of the had, which was negative for fractures. Antibiotic therapy was started on 5/8/2023. Review of current physician orders indicated a 5/8/23 order for amoxicillin-pot clavulanate (antibiotic) oral tablet 875-125 mg every 12 hours by mouth for post-bite treatment of the top of their hand for 10 days. The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 5/11/2023 at 9:50 a.m. Diagnoses included schizophrenia, intractable epilepsy with status epilpticus, and profound intellectual disabilities. The current, quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/16/2023, indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. A psychological Nurse Practitioner note, dated 4/30/2023 at 12:09 p.m., indicated Resident B was being seen for an acute increase in physical aggression, agitation, paranoia and delusions. Re-direction of the resident was difficult. A nursing progress note, dated 5/6/2023, indicated Resident B had been quietly walking around common areas. Staff heard a female resident yell out (Resident E). Resident B was observed standing next to Resident E, who was sitting in her high-backed reclining wheelchair. The top of Resident E's hand was bruised and bleeding. Staff reported Resident B had Resident E's hand in their mouth. A current care plan, last revised on 5/8/2023, indicated the resident had potential to be physically aggressive to others related to poor impulse, grabbing at others, or/and attempting to hit at others. Interventions included the following: administer medications as ordered and monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness, assess and address for contributing sensory deficits, assess and anticipate resident's needs: food, thirst. toileting needs, comfort level, body positioning, pain, etc., monitor/document/report any sign or symptom of resident posing danger to self and others. When the resident becomes agitated: intervene before agitation escalates, guide away from source of distress, and engage calmly in conversation. If response is aggressive, staff to walk calmly away, and approach later. The care plan lacked any interventions or documented review for biting behaviors. During an interview on 5/11/2023 at 10:52 a.m., LPN 2 indicated Resident B had shown biting behaviors in the past. LPN 2 indicated the resident had attempted to bite her on the face. She was unable to give a specific date of the incident, but thought it happened earlier this year. She may not have documented the incident, although behaviors should be documented in the clinical record. During an interview on 5/11/2023 at 11:25 a.m., the Social Service Director indicated the resident's history of biting behaviors had not been addressed in the resident's care plan. Approximately two months ago, the resident had tried to bite a staff member. All behaviors should be documented in the clinical record and the SSD reviewed the charting during the MDS period. During an interview on 5/11/2023 at 1:34 p.m., Qualified Medication Aide (QMA) 1 indicated they were present when Resident B bit Resident E. They had stepped away from the medication cart, looked up and he (Resident B) had her (Resident E) whole hand in his mouth. QMA 1 stated Resident B said she (Resident E) was mean to him, so he was mean to her. Resident E was started on antibiotic therapy immediately. Review of an untitled document titled Your Rights and Protections as a Nursing Home Resident, retrieved from www.cms.gov indicated the following: .You have the right to be treated with dignity and respect .You have the right to be free from verbal, sexual, physical, and mental abuse Cross reference F740. This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00407659. 3.1-27(a)(b)
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 F0740 (Tag F0740)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a behavioral management program to provide in...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a behavioral management program to provide individualized interventions to prevent resident to resident altercations, as evidenced by Resident B biting Resident E on the back of the right hand, resulting in broken skin and antibiotic therapy. Findings include: Review of a facility self reportable, dated 5/7/2023 at 9:01 a.m., indicated Resident B was observed taking Resident E's right hand and biting it, breaking the skin. Resident E had been sitting in a high-backed reclining wheelchair. The altercation was unprovoked. Resident E had to be administered wound care and placed on antibiotic therapy. The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 5/11/2023 at 9:50 a.m. Diagnoses included schizophrenia, intractable epilepsy with status epilpticus, and profound intellectual disabilities. The resident had recently been admitted to a neuropsychiatric inpatient facility for evaluation and treatment. The current, quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/16/2023, indicated the resident required extensive assistance for transfers, toilet use, and personal hygiene. They required supervision and set up for walking and locomotion. The resident was moderately cognitively impaired. A nursing progress note, dated 2/12/2023 at 6:40 p.m., indicated Resident B bit a CNA on the hand during a period of behaviors when the CNA was attempting to re-direct the resident. A nursing progress note, dated 2/12/2023 at 6:27 a.m., indicated Resident B had attempted to bite an unknown female resident. A psychological Nurse Practitioner note, dated 4/30/2023 at 12:09 p.m., indicated Resident B was being seen for an acute increase in physical aggression, agitation, paranoia and delusions. Re-direction of the resident was difficult. A nursing progress note, dated 5/6/2023, indicated Resident B had been quietly walking around common areas. Staff heard a female resident yell out (Resident E). Resident B was observed standing next to Resident E, who was sitting in her high-backed reclining wheelchair. The top of Resident E's hand was bruised and bleeding. Staff reported Resident B had Resident E's hand in their mouth. A current care plan, last revised on 5/8/2023, indicated the resident had potential to be physically aggressive to others related to poor impulse, grabbing at others, or/and attempting to hit at others. Interventions included the following: administer medications as ordered and monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness, assess and address for contributing sensory deficits, assess and anticipate resident's needs: food, thirst. toileting needs, comfort level, body positioning, pain, etc., monitor/document/report any sign or symptom of resident posing danger to self and others. When the resident becomes agitated: intervene before agitation escalates, guide away from source of distress, and engage calmly in conversation. If response is aggressive, staff to walk calmly away, and approach later. The care plan lacked any interventions or documented review for biting behaviors. The clinical record for Resident E was reviewed on 5//12/2023 at 12:09 p.m. Diagnoses include, anxiety disorder, depressive disorder, deaf, severe dementia with agitation and mood disturbance. The current annual MDS, dated [DATE], indicated Resident E required extensive assistance for bed mobility, toilet use, personal hygiene, eating and dressing. The resident had severe cognitive impairment. A current care plan, revised 1/22/2019, indicated the resident had a communication problem related to hearing deficit. The resident was legally deaf and did not utilize sign language or understanding of written language. A nursing progress noted, dated 5/9/2023 at 1:27 p.m., indicated Resident E was bit by another resident on the right hand. The on-call provider ordered a x-ray of the had, which was negative for fractures. Antibiotic therapy was started on 5/8/2023. Review of current physician orders indicated a 5/8/23 order for amoxicillin-pot clavulanate (antibiotic) oral tablet 875-125 mg every 12 hours by mouth for post-bite treatment of the top of their hand for 10 days. During an observation on 5/11/2023 at 10:27 a.m., Resident E was observed sitting in their high-backed reclining wheelchair in the common area. They had discoloration and a scabbed area to the back of their right hand. During an interview on 5/11/2023 at 10:52 a.m., LPN 2 indicated Resident B had shown biting behaviors in the past. LPN 2 indicated the resident had attempted to bite her on the face. She was unable to give a specific date of the incident, but thought it happened earlier this year. She may not have documented the incident, although behaviors should be documented in the clinical record. During an interview on 5/11/2023 at 11:25 a.m., the Social Service Director indicated the resident's history of biting behaviors had not been addressed in the resident's care plan. Approximately two months ago, the resident had tried to bite a staff member. All behaviors should be documented in the clinical record and the SSD reviewed the charting during the MDS period. During an interview on 5/11/2023 at 1:34 p.m., Qualified Medication Aide (QMA) 1 indicated they were present when Resident B bit Resident E. They had stepped away from the medication cart, looked up and he (Resident B) had her (Resident E) whole hand in his mouth. QMA 1 stated Resident B said she (Resident E) was mean to him, so he was mean to her. Resident E was started on antibiotic therapy immediately. During an interview on 5/12/2023 at 2:50 p.m., QMA 3 indicated an event when Resident B was in the common area with two other residents. The residents were starting to argue and the QMA intervened. Resident B got up from the table and started banging his elbow on the wall. The QMA tried to give the resident a key he had dropped on the floor. The key was to a safe the resident kept in his room and staff used it as a distraction. When the QMA tried to give the key to Resident B, the resident bit the QMA's hand. The QMA had a bruise, but the bite did not break the skin. During an interview on 5/12/2023 at 3:46 p.m., LPN 4 indicated approximately one month prior, Resident B attempted to bite her on the arm. LPN 4 believed she charted the incident, but no documentation of the incident was found in the clinical record. Behaviors should be documented in the clinical record. During an interview on 5/12/2023 at 3:26 p.m., the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) indicated the following: This is a behavioral facility There has not really been a set program in place. But we are trying to develop one. We educate on re-direction, approach. I do not believe we have any written plan. Behaviors are monitored through the charting. During an interview on 5/12/2023 at 3:56 p.m., the Administrator, Director of Nursing, and the ADON indicated the facility was a behavioral facility and did not have a behavioral management program in place. The Administrator indicated the facility had been working on a program with anticipated implementation in June 2023. This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00407659. 3.1-43(a)(1)
Mar 2023 2 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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident rooms were maintained in a hygienic m...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident rooms were maintained in a hygienic manner for 1 of 3 resident rooms reviewed for environment (room [ROOM NUMBER]). Findings include: During an observation on 3/14/2023 at 11:07 a.m., a damaged area, approximately 5 inches long x 6 inches wide was located behind a two drawer nightstand against a wall in resident room [ROOM NUMBER]. The area had no plaster, and the visible surface was covered with a black substance. CNA 4 indicated, during the observation, the dark area looked like mold. The CNA had never seen the area before, and had not seen anything like it in any of the other rooms. During an observation of the wall on 3/14/2023 at 11:24 a.m., accompanied by the Administrator, he indicated he had not seen the area before, and had not been informed about it. The black substance appeared to be mold and whoever saw it should have put it on a maintenance sheet. During an interview, on 3/14/2023 at 11:37 a.m., the Maintenance Director indicated they were unaware of mold or hole in resident room [ROOM NUMBER]. Someone should have filled out a work order and reported the area. During an interview on 3/14/2023 at 1:38 p.m., the Housekeeping Supervisor indicated maintenance concerns were to be documented on a work order sheet, located in the maintenance binder. Resident rooms were cleaned daily. During an interview on 3/14/2023 at 2:40 p.m., QMA (Qualified Medication Aide) 10 indicated maintenance concerns were to be documented on a work order sheet, located in the maintenance binder. No further information was provided. This Federal tag relates to Complaint IN00403055. 3.1-19(f)(5)
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 F0925 (Tag F0925)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure an effective pest control program was in place to prevent rodent droppings on food products in the dry storage room. T...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure an effective pest control program was in place to prevent rodent droppings on food products in the dry storage room. This deficient practice had the potential to effect 39 of 39 residents who received meals prepared in the facility kitchen. Findings include: During a kitchen observation on 3/14/2023 at 9:49 a.m., rodent droppings were readily observed in the dry food storage room floor, on top of boxed food items, and on food cans. During an observation on 3/14/2023 at 9:56 a.m., [NAME] 1 indicated there were mice droppings in the dry storage room. The facility had an issue with mice, and they were treating it, but the mice still managed to get into the facility through holes in the walls outside. During an observation on 3/14/2023 at 12:10 p.m., accompanied by the Administrator, he indicated there were mice droppings present in the dry storage room, but traps had been set by the pest control company. No traps were located in the dry storage room during the observation. The Administrator did not know why the traps were not present. No one had reported concerns with mice in the kitchen. During an interview on 3/14/2023 at 1:53 p.m., the Administrator indicated [NAME] 1 should have immediately cleaned the dry storage room after the mice droppings were identified and reported it to him. The mice droppings were still present over three hours after the cook was made aware. No one had reported any pest concerns in the dry storage room. The pest control company did routine monthly service. If the facility had an issue with pests, the company would come out to service the need. Review of the pest control service log indicated the last service was on 2/14/2023. This visit included treatment for rodent control on the building perimeter. No further information provided by the facility. This Federal tag relates to Complaint IN00403055. 3.1-19(f)(4)
Feb 2023 3 deficiencies 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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

A resident was harmed · 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 protect the residents' right to be free from physical...

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 protect the residents' right to be free from physical abuse by Resident C and Resident E for 4 of 4 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident B and Resident D). This deficient practice resulted in fear and tearfulness for Resident B, and using the reasonable person concept, would cause fear and anxiety for Resident D. Findings include: 1. During an interview with Resident B, on 2/24/23 at 11:28 a.m., she indicated Resident C had grabbed her by her neck and choked her, she didn't know why she had done it. She had been crying, but she was somewhat okay now. Review of Resident B's nurse's notes indicated the following: On 2/10/23 at 5:30 p.m., the CNA called the nurse to Resident B's room. The CNA had just been coming back up the hall and saw Resident C in the room, hitting Resident B and choking her. She had stopped Resident C and separated the residents. The nurse spent several minutes calming Resident B and doing relaxed breathing exercises. Resident B said thank you. I love you, grandma, and she didn't want Resident C with her no more. Fifteen-minute checks were initiated. The Administrator, and the psychiatric NP (Nurse Practitioner) were notified. On 2/10/23 at 7:17 p.m., a social service note indicated Resident C was in her room when staff walked by and observed Resident C hugging Resident B aggressively. The staff had separated the residents immediately. Nursing completed a skin assessment, and she denied any distress related to the incident. She was moved to another room and her care plan was updated. During an interview with RN 26, on 2/24/23 at 1:30 p.m., she indicated she saw nothing. She charted just what the aide told her. There was no indication that Resident C had her hands on Resident B. Resident B said Resident C was choking her and had hit her in her breast. She did not have red marks; she had a tiny pale mark on her right clavicle area. Resident B was dramatic. This day, Resident B had asked why there was a camera and she indicated to her cameras don't lie. Resident C had escalated the day in question. She did believe Resident C had touched Resident B, and went to her bedside, but she had never seen Resident C be physically violent. She punched at the air and got loud, very loud. She did not see Resident C push Resident D down, as she was sitting behind the nurse's station at the time, and she couldn't see over the desk. She couldn't remember who, but someone else said later it wasn't a push. During an interview with CNA 13, on 2/24/23 at 2:16 p.m., she indicated she was assisting another resident when she heard CNA 7 hollering for a nurse. She went to Resident B's and C's room and saw that she was in bed with Resident C's hands around her neck, her face was red, and she was gasping for air. They were trying to separate them, but Resident C kept trying to get to her, and CNA 7 was in the middle of them. The nurse was not in the room yet, so she went to get her. Once they got them separated, she tried to talk to Resident C, and for her to think about what she was doing and had tried to redirect her. She had never seen Resident C put her hands on another resident. She would get worked up every once in a while and was known to yell at residents and slam doors. She liked her privacy and didn't like for people to go through her stuff. During an interview with CNA 17, on 2/24/23 at 2:31 p.m., he indicated he heard staff screaming for help and entered Resident B's room. Resident B and C were mostly separated when he entered the room. Resident B's face was red and her lips were blue. She was lying in bed, with her covers on, and Resident C was on the side of her bed, between her bed and the window. Resident C was actively swinging at Resident B, and was hitting her on the side of her head with the side of her hand. CNA 7 was behind Resident C, trying to pull her off Resident B. They had to physically remove Resident C from the room for Resident B's safety. He spent between 30 to 40 minutes walking with Resident C, trying to calm her down while nurses were checking on Resident B. She calmed down, but was still in a distressed state, and she was not excited to see the EMTs at the facility. She didn't normally assault anyone. She would scream almost to the point of passing out and could almost be manic. She had behaviors, but not violent with the residents. She gave a lot of warning signs before she would get violent. During an interview with Laundry Aide 8, on 2/24/23 at 4:12 p.m., she indicated Resident C was in the hallway rambling, and doing her schizophrenic thing at the nurse's station. Resident D was standing near the short wall, and she intentionally pushed Resident D with both hands on her chest, and she fell to the floor and onto her bottom, another resident was behind her and bent down to keep her from hitting her head on the half wall. Resident D was helped up off the floor and didn't act like she was hurt. Resident C kept acting out, rambling and swinging at RN 26 but didn't hit her. She refused to go on the ambulance. A couple CNAs got her to go outside and got her on the gurney. She seemed to have her screaming outbursts more often. She had never seen her touch another resident or staff until that day. Resident B was shook up by what Resident C had done to her. During an interview with CNA 7, on 2/27/23 at 10:02 a.m., she indicated she took a resident to her room, and when she walked back by Resident B and C's room, Resident C was yelling and screaming. The curtain was pulled but it looked like Resident C was pounding on something. Resident C was on Resident B's right side between her bed and the window, she was pounding on Resident B with the bottom of her fist in her chest area Resident B was screaming but couldn't hear her because of her voice is so low, then Resident C had both hands around Resident B's neck and was choking her. Resident B was turning blue. She started yelling and screaming for help. CNA 17 walked past the room and grabbed Resident C's other hand and redirected her out of the room. CNA 17 also yelled for help. RN 26 came down to the room and checked Resident B's neck. Once Resident C was removed from the room she immediately started pushing and yelling at staff in the halls. She pushed Resident D down hard with both hands to her chest area and Resident D hit the floor. She was yelling and cussing and telling everyone to get out of her way, they tried to calm her down. RN 26 immediately tried to step in front of Resident D while they were helping her up and Resident C started hitting RN 26. By then the EMTs were at the facility and they couldn't force her to go. Herself and another aide proceeded to grab Resident C from hitting other residents and she kicked QMA 24 in the leg. She had never seen Resident C be aggressive or have physical contact with another resident. She would just go off, by yelling and screaming. Resident B's clinical record was reviewed on 2/24/23 at 9:42 a.m. Diagnoses included major depressive disorder, recurrent, down syndrome, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, mild cognitive impairment of uncertain or unknown etiology, need for assistance with personal care, and muscle weakness (generalized). Her medications included hydrocodone-acetaminophen (narcotic pain reliever) 5-325 mg (milligram) twice daily, fluoxetine (treat depression) 20 mg daily, asenapine maleate (treat mental disorders) 10 mg twice daily, trazodone (treat sleep disorder) 200 mg daily, and olanzapine (treat mental disorders) 15 mg daily. An admission MDS (Minimum Data Set), dated 1/30/23, indicated she was moderately cognitively impaired. She required limited assistance for bed mobility and locomotion on and off the unit. She required extensive assistance for transfer, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene. She required supervision for walking in her room and the corridor. She used a wheelchair. She had verbal behavioral symptoms directed towards others (e.g., threatening others, screaming at others, cursing at others) that occurred one to three days during the assessment period. She had other behavioral symptoms not directed towards others (e.g., physical symptoms such as hitting or scratching self, pacing, rummaging, public sexual acts, disrobing in public, throwing or smearing food or bodily wastes, or verbal/vocal symptoms like screaming, disruptive sounds) that occurred one to three days during the assessment period, and she wandered one to three days during the assessment period. She had a current care plan for the potential for psychosocial well-being problem, related to an incident with a peer, initiated on 2/10/23. Her interventions were initiated on 2/10/23 and included the following: pastoral care, social services, psychiatric services, etc., encourage participation from resident who depends on others to make own decisions, increase communication between resident/family/caregivers about care and living environment: explain all procedures and treatments, medications, results of labs/tests, condition, all changes, rules, options, monitor/document resident's usual response to problems: internal - how she made her own changes, external - expects others to control problems or leaves to fate, or luck, provide opportunities for her and family to participate in care, when conflict arises, remove residents to a calm safe environment and allow to vent/share feelings. 2. Review of Resident D's nurse's notes indicated the following: On 2/2/23 at 8:15 a.m., Resident D was walking in the hallway, and Resident E came up behind her, and hit her in the neck and upper back area. There were no skin issues, distress or discomfort noted. On 2/10/23 at 5:45 p.m., in the front, left side of the nurse's station, a CNA asked the nurse if she had seen Resident C reach between the EMTs and push Resident D down to the ground. ROM (Range of Motion) was checked, and she was able to move all four extremities without difficulty. She had no signs or symptoms of pain or discomfort. She had no verbal response, per her baseline. She was free of reddened, discolored, or open areas. She was assisted onto her feet by two CNAs, with extensive assistance. She walked away into the dining room. On 2/24/23 at 1:30 p.m., Resident D was observed ambulating independently in the hall and common area. On 2/27/23 at 10:27 a.m., she was observed sitting on the couch in the common area with her head down. On 2/27/23 at 1:00 p.m., she was observed sitting on the couch in the common area. Resident D's clinical record was reviewed on 2/24/23 at 11:18 a.m. Diagnoses include unsteadiness on feet, other lack of coordination, restlessness and agitation, generalized anxiety disorder, muscle weakness (generalized), cognitive communication deficit, delusional disorders, unspecified dementia, severe, with psychotic disturbance, agitation, anxiety, and other behavioral disturbance. Medications included buspirone (treat anxiety) 10 mg four times daily, medroxyprogesterone acetate (treat hypersexual behaviors) 5 mg daily, escitalopram oxalate (treat depression) 20 mg daily and olanzapine 5 mg twice daily. A quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], indicated she was severely cognitively impaired. She required extensive assistance for bed mobility, transfers and toilet use. She required limited assistance for walking in her room and the corridor, and for locomotion on and off the unit. She required extensive assistance for dressing and personal hygiene. She did not use an assistive device. She had delusions. She had physical behavioral symptoms directed towards others (e.g., hitting, kicking, pushing, scratching, grabbing, abusing others sexually) that occurred one to three days during the assessment period. She had other behavioral symptoms not directed towards others (e.g., physical symptoms such as hitting or scratching self, pacing, rummaging, public sexual acts, disrobing in public, throwing or smearing food or bodily wastes, or verbal/vocal symptoms like screaming, disruptive sounds), she rejected evaluation of care and wandered four to six days of the assessment period. She had a current care plan for the potential for psychosocial well-being problem, related to a peer attempted to smack at her initiated on 2/2/23. Interventions were initiated on 2/2/23 to allow her time to answer questions and to verbalize feelings perceptions, and fears, monitor/document her usual response to problems: internal - how individual made her own changes, external - expects others to control problems or leaves to fate, or luck, when conflict arises, remove residents to a calm safe environment and allow to vent/share feelings. The ADON provided a copy of the 2/10/23 at 5:45 p.m., progress note for Resident D, with a handwritten statement by the ADON dated 2/11/23, indicating the following: Per follow up, it was determined that contact was never made. Nurse did not visually witness and CNA stated it appeared that way but never actually seen contact. So actual push was assumed During an interview with RN 41, on 2/27/23 at 11:27 a.m., she indicated staff were sitting at the nurse's station. Resident E had just come back from the hospital and was having behaviors. Resident D was wandering up and down the hall like she always did. Resident E thought Resident D had on a red sweatshirt that was hers. Resident E open-handed slapped Resident D in the neck and upper back. Resident D just kept walking. Resident E was taken back to her room and Resident D came up by the nurse's station. The incident was reported to Social Service because she was in the building at the time, and she was going to call the Administrator. Skin assessment and vitals were completed under risk management. 3. Resident C's clinical record was reviewed on 2/24/23 at 9:58 a.m. Diagnoses included schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, unspecified intellectual disabilities, post-traumatic stress disorder, delusional disorder and anxiety disorder. Medications included quetiapine fumarate (treat bipolar disorder) 200 mg twice daily, haloperidol (antipsychotic) 5 mg three times daily and buspirone (treat anxiety) 15 mg four times daily. A quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], indicated she was moderately cognitively impaired. She required extensive assistance for bed mobility and toilet use. She required supervision for locomotion on and off the unit. She required limited assistance for dressing and personal hygiene. She did not use an assistive device. She had hallucinations and delusions. She had a behavior care plan, initiated on 8/23/22 and revised on 2/10/23, for yelling out in common areas, cursing, etc. Her interventions were initiated on 8/23/22 and included allow her time to voice frustrations, approach calmly and in a soothing, non-judgmental manner, assess for pain and toileting needs, if in common area/high activity area, please take me to my room to assist me, offer her a snack or drink and psychiatric consult as needed. She had a care plan, initiated on 2/10/23, for was/had potential to be physically aggressive. Her interventions, initiated on 2/10/23, were administer medications as ordered, monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness, analyze times of day, places, circumstances, triggers, and what de-escalates behavior and document, assess and address for contributing sensory deficits, assess and anticipate resident's needs: food, thirst. toileting needs, comfort level, body positioning, pain etc., monitor/document/report PRN any signs or symptoms of resident posing danger to self and others, when the she became agitated: intervene before agitation escalates; guide away from source of distress; engage calmly in conversation; if response is aggressive, staff to walk calmly away, and approach later. Review of her nurses notes indicated the following: On 2/1/23 at 2:37 p.m., she got upset and threw blue water pitcher down the hall. On 2/1/23 at 4:21 p.m., she was in the common area, in the chair when she began to scream out loudly. Another resident was talking to himself when she rose up from the chair and started to yell at him These terrorists, same s---, different day. On 2/10/23 at 1:15 p.m., she had been rapidly pacing the halls and the common areas, while yelling and screaming in very loud aggressive tone on and off all morning. A call was placed to the psychiatric NP with a new order for no caffeinated coffee and to give afternoon Haldol (antipsychotic), early one time. On 2/10/23 at 5:30 p.m., the nurse was called to her room by the CNA that she needed a nurse right now. I need a nurse right now. The CNA said that she was just coming back up the hall and I saw Resident C on Resident B's side of the room and she was hitting her and choking her. She came in and stopped her right away. Resident C was in the hall screaming that the aliens were yelling and being overdosed on melatonin that was really medical marijuana. She was screaming loudly, her voice becoming hoarse and she was unable to be de-escalated. She paced rapidly. Resident C and B were separated, safety ensured, 15 minute checks were initiated immediately and the Administrator and psychiatric NP was notified a new order was received to send her to the emergency room for evaluation and treatment. A social service note, dated 2/10/23 at 5:31 p.m., indicated upon arrival to facility this morning resident was walking rapidly up and down the halls yelling, cursing, and screaming. Not talking to anyone, but just yelling and cursing. She was asked what was wrong and she stated she was being overdosed with melatonin, the aliens kept her up all night and kept yelling as she was walking. She was able to be calmed down. She continued to have episodes of yelling, cursing up and down the halls about every half hour or so this day. Multiple staff attempted to redirect her with multiple interventions and none were successful but for a few minutes at a time. Around 1:20 p.m. the psychiatric NP was notified about her behaviors and she gave an order for staff to administer her 2:00 p.m. Haldol early. She refused and threw the medication at first. After a few minutes, she took the medication as she was yelling and cursing about being drugged, kidnapped, etc. After the medication was administered she calmed for about 45 minutes, but then started to yell and curse again with talking to no one in particular. On 2/10/23 at 5:45 p.m., two EMTs were present with a stretcher to transfer her to the hospital. She refused to get on the stretcher, and stated she was not going. Then, the CNAs reported she had just reached between them and pushed another resident down on the ground. Staff attempted to calm her, and she pointed her finger aggressively at the nurse and screamed harshly that the nurse f-----g killed [NAME] and reached out and hit the nurse on her left forearm and right hand. Resident C was walked out to the ambulance. A social service note, dated 2/10/23 at 7:12 p.m., indicated Resident C was in her room with her roommate, when staff walked by and seen her aggressively hugging her roommate. Staff intervened immediately and they were separated. She was placed on one on ones while the psychiatric NP was called. The NP wanted her sent to the emergency room for evaluation. When EMT's arrived to take her, she refused to go and was yelling, screaming, and hitting staff. She did get on the stretcher and allowed to be taken to the emergency room. An IDT (Interdisciplinary Team) note, dated 2/12/23 at 9:36 a.m., indicated after interviewing staff and residents, during the altercation she had with the EMTs, it was determined she didn't push the other resident. The other resident in question was wondering the halls and happened to be by the altercation. 4. Resident E's clinical record was reviewed on 2/27/23 at 10:25 a.m. Diagnoses included Parkinson's disease, schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, recurrent, anxiety disorder, altered mental status, cognitive communication deficit, unspecified mood [affective] disorder, severe intellectual disabilities, personal history of traumatic brain injury, unspecified convulsions and anoxic brain damage. Her medications included lacosamide (treat seizures) 150 mg twice daily, risperidone 1 mg three times daily, buspirone 15 mg three times daily, lorazepam (treat anxiety) 1 mg three times daily, and divalproex sodium (anticonvulsant) 500 mg three times daily. A quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], indicated she was severely cognitively impaired. She required extensive assistance for bed mobility, transfers and toilet use. She required limited assistance for walking in her room and corridor, locomotion on and off the unit. She required extensive assistance for dressing, and personal hygiene. She had an impairment to one side of her upper extremities. She rejected evaluation or care and wandered one to three days during the assessment period. She had a care plan, initiated on 3/4/21 and revised on 2/2/23, for episodes of physical aggressive and behaviors of throwing items at staff ie: glasses and stuffed animals. She attempted to smack at others due to belief that others had her belongings. Her interventions were initiated on 3/4/21, to administer medications as ordered, monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness, analyze times of day, places, circumstances, triggers, and what de-escalates behavior and document, assess and anticipate her needs: food, thirst. toileting needs, comfort level, body positioning, pain etc., communication: assist verbalization of source of agitation and give positive feedback, give the her as many choices as possible about care and activities, monitor/document/report PRN (as needed) any signs or symptoms of resident posing danger to self and others, when she became agitated: intervene before agitation escalates; guide away from source of distress; engage calmly in conversation; if response is aggressive, staff to walk calmly away, and approach later. A mental health clinician would work with her on positive and negative ways to display her anger initiated on 4/28/21. She had a current care plan problem of potential for a psychosocial well-being problem related to alleged incident with peer initiated on 12/6/21. Her interventions were monitor/document her usual response to problems: internal - how individual makes own changes, external - expects others to control problems or leaves to fate, or luck and when conflict arises, remove residents to a calm safe environment and allow her to vent/share feelings initiated on 12/6/21. Consult with: pastoral care, social services , psychiatric services revised on 12/11/21. Review of her nurses notes indicated the following: On 2/2/23 at 7:41 a.m., she continuously screamed out and yelled at other residents. She thought other resident's items were hers. She attempted to grab items from others. She got upset with redirection and threw her glasses into the dining room. On 2/2/23 at 8:04 a.m. she was walking down the hall when another resident was in the hallway. She believed her shirt was on the other resident. She began to shout and hit the other resident in the back and the neck. They were separated and she was redirected to her room. She continued to shout as she was redirected. A social service note, dated 2/2/23 at 12:42 p.m., indicated she was yelling and screaming, attempted to grab items from others, due to belief that the items were hers, and when staff attempted to redirect her, she became upset and threw her glasses. A little later she was walking down the hall and believed that a peer had on her shirt. She started yelling and smacked at the residents back. A late entry, IDT note dated 2/6/23 at 7:06 p.m., indicated an intervention of 15 minute checks was implemented. She was safe afterwards. An current, undated, facility policy, titled ABUSE PREVENTIONS AND PROHIBITION POLICY, provided by the Administrator on 2/24/23 at 9:41 a.m., indicated the following: PURPOSE: To ensure the resident's right to remain free from .physical abuse .POLICY .Residents residing in this facility will be treated with dignity and respect in accordance with their individual needs. They will not be subjected to physical .abuse Cross reference F609. This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00401525. 3.1-27(a)(1)
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 F0574 (Tag F0574)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure required regulatory and advocacy contact information was posted and available for the 33 residents residing in the facility. Findings...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure required regulatory and advocacy contact information was posted and available for the 33 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: During an interview with Resident F, on 2/27/23 at 2:46 p.m., he indicated his facility-provided resident rights paper declared he could file a complaint with the Indiana Department of Health, and he had requested the phone number to do so. During an observation of the facility postings, on 2/27/23 at 2:57 p.m., there was no posting of regulatory or advocacy contact information. The ADON indicated it was normally posted near the resident rights poster, but a resident might have taken it off there and put it in their room. During an interview with LPN 28, on 2/27/23 3:43 p.m., she indicated she would look for a policy for the posting of contact information, but they would follow the state and federal guidelines. No policy was provided prior to exit. 3.1-4(j)(3)
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

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to report abuse to the State Agency for 2 of 3 abuse incidents reviewed for reporting to State Agency (Resident E and Resident D...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to report abuse to the State Agency for 2 of 3 abuse incidents reviewed for reporting to State Agency (Resident E and Resident D, Resident C and Resident D). Findings include: Resident D's clinical record was reviewed on 2/24/23 at 11:18 a.m. Diagnoses include unsteadiness on feet, other lack of coordination, restlessness and agitation, generalized anxiety disorder, muscle weakness (generalized), cognitive communication deficit, delusional disorders, unspecified dementia, severe, with psychotic disturbance, agitation, anxiety and other behavioral disturbance. She had a current care plan for the potential for psychosocial well-being problems related to a peer having attempted to smack at her, initiated on 2/2/23. Interventions initiated on 2/2/23 were to allow her time to answer questions and to verbalize feelings perceptions, and fears, monitor/document her usual response to problems: internal - how individual made her own changes, external - expects others to control problems or leaves to fate, or luck, when conflict arises, remove residents to a calm safe environment and allow to vent/share feelings. Review of her nurses notes indicated the following: On 2/2/23 at 8:15 a.m., she was walking in the hallway and Resident E came behind her and hit her in the neck and upper back area. There were no skin issues, distress or discomfort noted. A social service note, dated 2/2/23 at 12:44 p.m., indicated she was walking down the hall when a peer smacked at her back. She continued walking down the hall, when asked if she was hit, she said no. Nursing assessed her and there was no redness. She continued with her daily routine of walking up and down the halls. On 2/10/23 at 5:45 p.m., in front and to the left of the nurse's station, a CNA asked the nurse if she had seen Resident C reach between the EMTs and push Resident D down to the ground. ROM (Range of Motion) was checked and she was able to move all four extremities without difficulty. She had no signs or symptoms of pain or discomfort. She had no verbal response, per her baseline. She was free of reddened, discolored, or open areas. She was assisted on to her feet by two CNAs with extensive assistance. She walked away into the dining room, with steady gait and independent of an assistive device. A social service note, dated 2/14/23 at 3:34 p.m., indicated she had no psychosocial distress related to the incident on 2/10/23. She had been up and out of her room all day. Sitting in common area, attended activities, etc . During an interview with Laundry Aide 8, on 2/24/23 at 4:12 p.m., she indicated Resident C was in the hallway rambling and doing her schizophrenic thing at the nurses station. Resident D was standing near the short wall and she intentionally pushed Resident D with both hands on her chest and she fell to the floor and onto her bottom, another resident was behind her and bent down to keep her from hitting her head on the half wall. Resident C kept acting out, rambling and swinging at RN 26 but didn't hit her. She refused to go on the ambulance. A couple CNAs got her to go outside and got her on the gurney. She seemed to have her screaming outbursts more often. She had never seen her touch another resident or staff until that day. Resident D was helped up off the floor and didn't act like she was hurt. During an interview with the Administrator, on 2/24/23 at 3:13 p.m., he indicated he had watched the camera and talked to some of the staff, and his best determination was that Resident C did not push Resident D down. Resident D was a very curious soul and she was in the vicinity when Resident C was being put on the stretcher. He would normally report to the State Agency if a resident was pushed down. During an interview with CNA 7, on 2/27/23 at 10:02 a.m., she indicated once Resident C was removed from her room from an altercation she had with Resident B, she immediately started pushing and yelling at staff. She pushed Resident D down hard with both hands to her chest area and Resident D hit the floor. During an interview with RN 41, on 2/27/23 at 11:27 a.m., she indicated staff were sitting at the nurses station. Resident E had just came back from the hospital and was having behaviors. Resident D was wandering up and down the hall like she always did. Resident E thought Resident D had on a red sweatshirt that was hers. Resident E open-handedly slapped Resident D in the neck and upper back. Resident D just kept walking. Resident E was taken back to her room and Resident D came up by the nurses station. The incident was reported to Social Service because she was in the building at the time and she would call and report it to the Administrator. During an interview with the SSD (Social Service Director), on 2/27/23 at 12:02 p.m., she indicated she was not in the building when the incident happened between Resident E and D, it happened before she got to the facility. As far as she knew, it was reported to the Administrator. She didn't report it to him, but she always talked to the Administrator about stuff like that. During an interview with the DON, on 2/27/23 at 2:18 p.m., she indicated the Administrator had to leave to take a resident to Indianapolis. He had indicated to her he had not reported the incident between Resident E and Resident D, and the incident had not been reported to him. It was kind of unclear about it happening. A current, undated, facility policy, titled ABUSE PREVENTIONS AND PROHIBITION POLICY, provided by the Administrator on 2/24/23 at 9:41 a.m., indicated the following: PROCEDURE: All allegations of abuse .needs to be reported to the ISDH within 2 hours of being reported to the Administrator Cross reference F600. This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00401525. 3.1-28(c)
Jan 2023 2 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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's care plan was revised with new interventions to prevent further falls for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for falls (Resident...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's care plan was revised with new interventions to prevent further falls for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for falls (Resident D). Findings include: Resident D's clinical record was reviewed on 1/26/23 at 9:21 a.m. His diagnoses included essential hypertension, other secondary kyphosis, cervicothoracic region, pain in thoracic spine, generalized anxiety disorder, psychotic disorder with hallucinations due to known physiological condition and unspecified dementia, severe, with agitation and psychotic disturbance. His medications included amlodipine besyl-benazepril (blood pressure) 5-40 mg (milligram) daily, hydrochlorithiazide (blood pressure) 12.5 mg daily, lorazepam (antianxiety) 0.5 mg every six hours, and risperidone (antipsychotic) 0.5 mg daily. A quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment, dated 1/10/23, indicated he was severely cognitively impaired. He required extensive assistance for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene. He required limited assistance for walking in his room and the corridor, locomotion on and off the unit. He was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder. He had a prognosis of less than six months life expectancy. He had experienced two or more falls. He had one fall with injury. Review of his nurses notes indicated the following: On 10/5/22 at 4:22 p.m., he stated he had fallen asleep and fell to the floor. He had some redness on his forehead and a small 0.5 cm (centimeter) x 0.5 cm skin tear to his right elbow. A fall risk assessment, dated 10/5/22, indicated he was at a high risk for falling. His intervention was initiated on 10/5/22 for physical therapy to screen him due to the fall. He had a 10/7/22 initiated care plan that indicated he was at risk for falls due to confusion and gait/balance problems. His interventions initiated on 10/7/22 included assist with toileting, assist with transfers, encourage and assist him to wear non-skid footwear. The clinical record and care plan lacked a new individualized intervention to prevent further falls. On 11/9/22 at 10:45 p.m., he was found on the floor, naked and had started to have a bowel movement. He had a purple area to his left hip that measured 13 cm x 9.5 cm. A fall risk assessment, dated 11/9/22, indicated he was at high risk for falling. The clinical record and care plan lacked a new individualized intervention to prevent further falls. On 11/24/22 at 9:02 p.m., he was found sitting on the floor in his bathroom. He had a skin tear on his left elbow. Neurological and 15 minute checks were started. A fall risk assessment, dated 11/24/22, indicated he was at a high risk for falling. The clinical record and care plan lacked a new individualized intervention to prevent further falls. On 12/25/22 at 4:45 p.m., he was found on the floor between his bathroom and his room, with a blanket under his head. Blood spots were smeared in front of him. He had a skin tear and a bruise on his right elbow. He had a bleeding abrasion to his right eyebrow. Hospice was called about his injuries, and they were instructed to send him to the emergency room. On 12/26/22 at 1:50 a.m., he returned from the emergency room. He had a small laceration to his right eyebrow with dried blood present and purple bruising around it. He had a CT (Computerized Tomography) of his head and spine with negative findings. No new orders were received. The clinical record and care plan lacked a new individualized intervention to prevent further falls. On 12/26/22 at 9:53 p.m., he was found sitting behind the door to his room. He was sitting on his bottom with his legs out in front of him. He had no new injuries. A therapy screen, dated 12/29/23, indicated he had severe cognitive deficits, and he would not benefit from therapy services due to cognitive status and he was on hospice. He was unable to actively participate in therapy services due to his cognitive deficit. The clinical record and care plan lacked a new individualized intervention to prevent further falls. On 1/10/23 at 1:49 a.m., a noise was heard in Resident D's room. He was found sitting on the floor with blood on his face. He had a cut above his left eye. He was sent to the emergency room. On 1/10/23 at 4:58 a.m., he returned from the hospital with no new orders. He had cervical spine and head x-rays that showed no injuries. He had an abrasion to his face with no stitches, or staples. He was on neurological and fifteen minutes checks. A fall risk assessment, dated 1/10/23, indicated he was at a high risk for falling. The clinical record and care plan lacked a new individualized intervention to prevent further falls. On 1/17/23 at 6:30 p.m., he had a witnessed fall in the dining room after dinner. He was seen trying to sit down on an orange cone. He fell to the floor with his feet straight out in front of him. The orange cone was used for the wet floor, which was dry at the time. The intervention was for the orange cone to be removed when the floor was dry. Staff were made aware. No injuries were observed and he did not hit his head. A fall risk assessment, dated 1/17/23, indicated he was at a high risk for falling. A care plan intervention initiated on 1/17/23 was orange cone was to be removed once the floor was dry. The clinical record and care plan lacked a new individualized intervention to prevent further falls. On 1/18/23 at 1:10 p.m., blood was noticed on the floor in Resident D's room. He had bleeding to his forehead. His forehead was cleaned and revealed a large hematoma. The bleeding was from a small area in the hematoma and had started to form a clot. He complained of pain to his right foot. He was sent to the emergency room for evaluation and treatment. A fall risk assessment, dated 1/18/23, indicated he was at a high risk for falling. A review of the emergency room visit, on 1/18/23, indicated he had a chest x-ray, CT of cervical spine, and CT of his head with no injuries noted. The clinical record and care plan lacked a new individualized intervention to prevent further falls. On 1/18/23 at 8:06 p.m., Resident D was sent to a sister facility per family's request. During an interview with the DON, on 1/26/23 at 9:46 a.m., she indicated Resident D had already been planning to move to a sister facility as he needed a safety unit and Brookside was not a good fit for him. He was on hospice, declining, and not steady on his feet towards the end of his stay. They would put him in a wheelchair and walk with him to the shower room. After his falls, they completed a fall note and initiated 15 minute checks. The IDT (Interdisciplinary Team) reviewed care plans. Because of his falls, staff coddled him. He forgot he could not walk. After a fall they would add interventions to the care plan. During an interview with LPN 13, on 1/26/23 at 11:04 a.m., she indicated Resident D had dementia. He was able to walk independently. The past couple weeks, he had declined and was combative and wanted to stay in bed a lot. He would just get up and didn't know how to use the call light for assistance. He kept falling because he was weak. They would put him in a wheelchair and he would get right up and walk. They monitored him closer. The interventions they would initiate were educating the resident, rearranging the resident's room, therapy evaluations and 15 minute checks. The new intervention should be added to the care plan and charted in the clinical record. During an interview with the MDS Coordinator, on 1/26/23 at 11:28 a.m., she indicated she attended the IDT meetings when she was able to. The floor nurse normally created the intervention after a fall but they worked together as a team. During an interview with the DON, on 1/27/23 at 11:20 a.m., she indicated staff were to put interventions in place after a resident fell. They communicated the new intervention after a fall with the CNAs. During an interview with CNA 5, on 1/27/23 at 11:25 a.m., she indicated was not aware if she was able to see the fall interventions on the electronic heath record. As she looked on the computer, she clicked on a couple different tabs and then clicked on the care plan tab to bring up the resident's care plans. During an interview with the ADON, on 1/27/23 at 12:52 p.m., she indicated Resident D was a frail older man, and had come to them due to behaviors at a previous facility. He was resistant to care and would urinate anywhere. He did not use an assistive device. His gait was unsteady and needed assistance of one to keep him balanced. He had gotten sick from flu going through the building. He did not use a call light for assistance. They did frequent checks on him and left his door open, but he was a mover, he felt independent and would get up on his own. The facility talked about falls daily, in the morning meetings, they would talk about what they had tried to do and what they could do and put interventions in place to work. Interventions normally started with the nurses. Immediate interventions were typically 15 minute checks to make sure the resident's needs were being met. During an interview with CNA 8, on 1/27/23 at 1:27 p.m., she indicated Resident D had not been stable on his feet for the past couple months. He should had been in a wheelchair 24/7. They would try to put him in a wheelchair or in bed and he would just get up. The last time he fell was after breakfast and he had been changed and cleaned. She was in the next room with another resident and Resident D was seen scooching across the floor and he had busted his head. Review of a current facility policy, with the effective date of 6/26/19 titled Fall Policy & Procedure, and provided by the DON on 1/27/23 at 11:13 a.m. indicated the following: .5. The resident care plan should be updated to reflect any new or change in interventions 3.1-35(b)(1)
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 F0919 (Tag F0919)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure there were interventions in place when the call light system w...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure there were interventions in place when the call light system was not functioning properly for all resident rooms in the facility. Findings include: During an interview with Resident G, on 1/27/23 at 9:08 a.m., he indicated that he had fallen out of bed the night before and pushed his call light and it didn't work. He did not get hurt but struggled to get back into bed by himself. On 1/27/23 at 9:11 a.m., CNA 15 was observed testing the call lights on Resident G's hall. The call lights did not work. During an interview with the Maintenance Director and Social Service Director, on 1/27/22 at 9:13 a.m., the Maintenance Director indicated the fire and security company had been at the facility to work on the fire alarm the day prior, but didn't have time to fix the call lights and would be in sometime later in the week to fix them. The Social Service Director indicated their sister facility had their bells (for resident use) and they would have to get them back. The call lights had worked yesterday because she had answered two calls. During an observation of testing the resident's call lights, on 1/27/23 at 10:26 a.m., room [ROOM NUMBER]-D did not have a call light present and his roommates call light did not work. Resident K indicated his call light had not worked in the last three to four days. The call lights in all residents' rooms were not functioning. During an interview with Resident H, on 1/27/23 at 10:30 a.m., she indicated her call light had not worked in three to four days. During an interview with CNA 5, on 1/27/23 at 10:43 a.m., she indicated the call lights had not worked since the day before when the company was in the building to work on the fire alarm. During an interview with the Maintenance Director, on 1/27/23 at 11:03 a.m., he indicated one of the CNAs came to him a week ago and indicated a couple of the resident's call lights were not working. He changed the bulbs, but they still didn't work and the Administrator was aware. During an observation of the Maintenance/Requisition/Work orders for the two rooms, each dated 1/23/23, one indicated the call light was burnt out and the other was broken. During an interview with the Administrator, on 1/27/23 at 11:11 a.m., he indicated he was not aware of the call lights not working at all. He knew the bulbs had been replaced. During an interview with Resident J, on 1/27/23 at 11:28 a.m., she indicated her call light had not worked for at least a week. A review of the fire and security company's service tickets, provided by the Administrator, on 1/27/23 at 11:57 a.m., indicated the following: On 12/6/23, the company was at the facility to service the nurse call system. The annunciator to the nurse call system was not making any sound when station was active. The connections were tightened and was able to get the annunciator to make a buzz for the nurses to hear. Onsite staff was happy with the notification it was making and the system was functioning at the time of their departure. On 1/10/23, the company was at the facility to service the fire alarm. On 1/25/23, the company was at the facility to service the fire alarm. During an interview with the ADON, on 1/27/23 at 12:52 p.m., the Administrator indicated to her the reason for the call light system not working was a blown fuse. Review of a current facility policy, revised 12/31/22 titled Call Lights: Policy and Procedure, and provided by the Administrator, on 1/27/23 at 11:57 a.m., indicated the following: Procedure: 1. Each Resident will be provided with a call light at his or her bedside .7. In the event the call light system malfunctions the facility will distribute hand bells to all resident and staff will check in with each Resident twice an hour. Additionally, a staff member will be assigned to monitor each Resident hallway and respond to bells 3.1-19(u)
Nov 2022 4 deficiencies 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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to prevent physical and emotional abuse for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse prevention (Resident F). Using the reasonable pe...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to prevent physical and emotional abuse for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse prevention (Resident F). Using the reasonable person concept, it is likely this deficient practice would lead to chronic anxiety, or fear. Findings include: The clinical record for Resident F was reviewed on 11/14/2022 at 10:31 a.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, Huntington's Disease, major depressive disorder and cognitive communication deficit. Review of a current quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 9/15/2022, indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. Review of Resident F's current care plans indicated the following: Resident has behaviors not directed towards others of crawling on the floor and into hall. Date Initiated: 02/23/2021 Revision on: 02/23/2021. Goal: Resident will have no injury related to crawling on the floor and in the halls through next review. Date Initiated: 02/23/2021 Revision on: 09/05/2022. Interventions: Assess for pain and toileting needs. Date Initiated: 02/23/2021. Offer snack or drink. Date Initiated: 02/2021. Psych consult as needed. Date Initiated: 02/23/2021. Resident has episodes of disrobing as evidenced by: will take off all of her clothes and come out of room Date Initiated: 02/20/2021 Revision on: 02/20/2021. Goal: Resident will remain adequately clothed, maintain dignity, and will stop disrobing through next review. Date Initiated: 02/20/2021 Revision on: 09/05/2022. Interventions: Asses for pain, toileting need, etc. Date Initiated: 03/03/2021. Instruct resident to not disrobe and reorient to surroundings as needed. Date Initiated: 02/20/2021. Observe resident frequently for intact clothing. Assist with putting clothes back on as needed. Date Initiated: 02/20/2021. Offer food, snack. Date Initiated: 03/03/2021. Question resident to ascertain any possible needs (toileting, etc.) Date Initiated: 02/20/2021. Refer to activities for diversion, if appropriate. Date Initiated: 02/20/2021. A security video, dated 10/30/2022 from 9:04 a.m. to 9:37 a.m., was reviewed on 11/14/2022 at 12:17 p.m. with the acting Administrator. During the review the following was observed: At 9:04 a.m., the resident was observed on the floor, crawling into the hallway, naked. The Laundry Supervisor and the Housekeeping Supervisor were observed in the area. These employees did not approach the resident. At 9:31 a.m., CNA 1 approached the resident. Audio was not clear and no verbal exchange could be heard. The CNA did not cover the resident, nor appear to attempt to assist or direct her back into her room. At 9:36 a.m., CNA 1 was observed dragging the resident into her room. Due to the angle and quality of the video, it was not clear if the CNA dragged the resident by the arm or leg. At 9:37 a.m., CNA 1 observed leaving the resident's room. During the video review, from 9:04 a.m. to 9:37 a.m., the resident could be seen rolling around on the floor and attempting to sit up and fall back onto the floor (for a 33 minute period). During these 33 minutes, several staff members were observed walking past the resident with no attempts to cover the resident or take her back to her room. Several resident's (male and female) were observed walking past or attempting to maneuver around Resident F in wheelchairs. Staff members did not assist or provide interventions. The resident remained on the hallway floor, naked, for thirty-three minutes. At 10:02 a.m., the resident was observed on the floor crawling into the hallway. The resident was again naked. The Laundry Supervisor and the Housekeeping Supervisor were observed walking past the resident. Male and female residents were observed walking or maneuvering wheelchairs around Resident F. At 10:04 a.m., CNA 2 was observed walking around the resident without intervention. At 10:15 a.m., CNA 2 was observed attempting to cover the resident with a gown. CNA 1 and CNA 2 were observed picking the resident up off the floor and taking her into her room. Resident F remained on the floor, naked and without intervention for an additional thirteen minutes. During an interview, at the time of the video viewing, the acting Administrator and the ADON each indicated the staff had not met the resident's needs. The acting Administrator indicated the resident should never have been left on the floor naked in a common area. Staff should have attempted to take the resident back to her room and dressed her or put a gown or covering on her while she was in the hallway. The resident should not have been dragged on the floor. The acting Administrator indicated CNA 1's employment had been terminated. During an interview, on 11/14/2022 at 1:47 p.m., Laundry Aide 7 indicated he had worked on October 30, 2022. The Laundry Aide indicated he saw Resident F on the floor naked. The resident is known for this behavior and does it daily. During an interview, on 11/14/2022 at 1:47 p.m., QMA (Qualified Medication Assistant) 6 indicated on October 30, 2022, she had seen Resident F naked on the floor in hallway several times. The QMA indicated she did not provide covering or any intervention for the resident. We had a lot of behaviors that day. It is not an excuse, to indicate the resident should not been left uncovered. During an interview, on 11/14/2022 at 2:26 p.m., CNA 5 indicated Resident F was known for disrobing in common areas and crawling on the floor. The CNA indicated staff were to attempt to get her back to her room and put clothes on her or cover her while she was in the common area. The CNA indicated it would not have been appropriate to leave the resident naked on the floor. During an interview, on 11/15/2022 at 10:18 a.m., the Assistant Director of Nursing indicated staff did not act appropriately. Resident F should have been redirected to her room and clothed. If the staff could not redirect the resident back to her room, they should have placed a gown on her or covered her while in the hallway. The ADON indicated the resident should not have been dragged across the floor to her room by staff. Review of a current undated policy titled Abuse Prohibition indicated the following: .Procedure . 2. Should an occurrence of abusive behavior be reported or witness, the Administrator shall be notified immediately . 4. The staff who witness or was made aware of the abusive incident will take immediate steps to protect The involved resident from further abuse, including verbal/mental/physical/neglect/involuntary seclusion and/or exploitation. Such steps could include, but are not limited to: a. Physically removing the resident(s) from the abusive environment. b. Physically removing the perpetrator of the abuse from the environment This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00393778. 3.1-27(a)(1)
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

Abuse Prevention Policies (Tag F0607)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, facility staff (Housekeeping Supervisor and Laundry Supervisor), failed to timely report suspicions of emotional abuse by another staff member (CNA 1) immediately...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, facility staff (Housekeeping Supervisor and Laundry Supervisor), failed to timely report suspicions of emotional abuse by another staff member (CNA 1) immediately to the facility Administrator per the facility policy for 1 resident (Resident F). Findings include: The clinical record for Resident F was reviewed on 11/14/2022 at 10:31 a.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, Huntington's Disease, major depressive disorder and cognitive communication deficit. Review of a current quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 9/15/2022, indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. Review of a facility self reportable, dated 11/1/2022, indicated an incident involving an allegation of abuse occurred on 10/30/2022 at 9:01 a.m. The reportable indicated CNA 1 had treated Resident F disrespectfully. During an interview, on 11/14/2022 at 12:17 p.m., the acting Administrator indicated the facility did not notify him of the incident until October 31, 2022. During the facility investigation, staff had informed the acting Administrator they did not have his phone number to communicate the incident. The acting Administrator indicated the facility could have called the ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) or the sister facility to get his contact information. This failure to report the incident also resulted in the delay of the facility investigation. The incident occurred on 10/30/2022 at 9:04 a.m. and the acting Administrator was not informed of the incident until 10/31/2022 between 1:30 p.m. and 2:00 p.m., approximately 28 hours after the incident occurred. During an interview, on 11/14/2022 at 2:40 p.m., the SSD (Social Service Director) indicated the Laundry Supervisor informed her of the incident between 1:30 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. on 10/31/2022. The SSD immediately informed the acting Administrator of the allegation. During an interview, on 11/15/2022 at 10:18 a.m., the ADON indicated the facility called her frequently with concerns while she was out of the building. However, the facility had not called her about this incident. She indicated the facility should have called her if they were unable to reach the Administrator or the acting Administrator. She was not made aware of the incident until Tuesday 9/1/2022. During an interview, on 11/14/2022 at 12:05 p.m., the Housekeeping Supervisor indicated she observed CNA 1 mistreating Resident F. She attempted to call the Administrator but was unable to make contact. She called the acting Administrator to report the incident. She had made no effort to intervene. During an interview, on 11/14/2022 at 1:00 p.m., the Laundry supervisor indicated the Housekeeping Supervisor reported to her an allegation of abuse. She told the Charge Nurse. During the survey, the Charge Nurse was unable to be contacted for interview. Review of the time clock punches for CNA 1 indicated she worked from 6:03 a.m. to 2:34 p.m. on 10/30/2022. The CNA had not been sent home after she had been observed dragging the resident. Review of a current undated policy titled Abuse Prohibition indicated the following: .Procedure . 2. Should an occurrence of abusive behavior be reported or witness, the Administrator shall be notified immediately. 4. The staff who witness or was made aware of the abusive incident will take immediate steps to protect The involved resident from further abuse, including verbal/mental/physical/neglect/involuntary seclusion and/or exploitation. Such steps could include, but are not limited to: a. Physically removing the resident(s) from the abusive environment. b. Physically removing the perpetrator of the abuse from the environment Review of a current policy, dated 12/1/2021, titled Reporting Abuse to State Agencies and Other Entities/Individuals indicated the following: .POLICY: All suspected violations and all substantiated incidents of abuse will be immediately reported to appropriate state agencies and other entities or individuals as may be required by law. Interpretation and Implementation: . 2. Verbal/written notices to agencies will be made within two (2) hours of occurrence if event involved abuse or results in serious injury, or within twenty-four (24) hours if the allegation does not include abuse and does not result in bodily injury This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00393778. 3.1-28(c)
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

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure allegations of abuse were reported to the appropriate State agency in a timely manner for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse (Resid...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure allegations of abuse were reported to the appropriate State agency in a timely manner for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident F). Findings include: Review of a facility self reportable, dated 11/1/2022, indicated an incident involving an allegation of abuse occurred on 10/30/2022 at 9:01 a.m During an interview, on 11/14/2022 at 12:17 p.m., the acting Administrator indicated the facility did not notify him of the incident until October 31, 2022. During the facility investigation, staff had informed the acting Administrator they did not have his phone number to communicate the incident. The acting Administrator indicated the facility could have called the ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) or the sister facility to get his contact information. This failure to report the incident also resulted in the delay of the facility investigation. The incident occurred on 10/30/2022 at 9:04 a.m. and the acting Administrator was not informed of the incident until 10/31/2022 between 1:30 p.m. and 2:00 p.m., approximately 28 hours after the incident occurred. During an interview, on 11/14/2022 at 2:40 p.m., the SSD (Social Service Director) indicated the Laundry Supervisor informed her of the incident between 1:30 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. on 10/31/2022. The SSD immediately informed the acting Administrator of the allegation. During an interview, on 11/15/2022 at 10:18 a.m., the ADON indicated the facility called her frequently with concerns while she was out of the building. However, the facility had not called her about this incident. She indicated the facility should have called her if they were unable to reach the Administrator or the acting Administrator. She was not made aware of the incident until Tuesday 9/1/2022. During an interview, on 11/14/2022 at 12:05 p.m., the Housekeeping Supervisor indicated she observed CNA 1 mistreating Resident F. She attempted to call the Administrator but was unable to make contact. She called the acting Administrator to report the incident. She had made no effort to intervene. During an interview, on 11/14/2022 at 1:00 p.m., the Laundry supervisor indicated the Housekeeping Supervisor reported to her an allegation of abuse. She told the Charge Nurse. During the survey, the Charge Nurse was unable to be contacted for interview. Review of a current undated policy titled Abuse Prohibition, indicated the following: .Procedure . 2. Should an occurrence of abusive behavior be reported or witness, the Administrator shall be notified immediately. 4. The staff who witness or was made aware of the abusive incident will take immediate steps to protect the involved resident from further abuse, including verbal/mental/physical/neglect/involuntary seclusion and/or exploitation. Such steps could include, but are not limited to: a. Physically removing the resident(s) from the abusive environment. b. Physically removing the perpetrator of the abuse from the environment Review of a current policy, dated 12/1/2021, titled Reporting Abuse to State Agencies an Other Entities/Individuals, indicated the following: .POLICY: All suspected violations and all substantiated incidents of abuse will be immediately reported to appropriate state agencies and other entities or individuals as may be required by law. Interpretation and Implementation: . 2. Verbal/written notices to agencies will be made within two (2) hours of occurrence if event involved abuse or results in serious injury, or within twenty-four (24) hours if the allegation does not include abuse and does not result in bodily injury This Federal tag relates to complaint IN00393778. 3.1-28(c)
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

QAPI Program (Tag F0867)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure issues identified in which quality assessment and assurance activities were necessary as evidenced by the severity and deficiencies ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure issues identified in which quality assessment and assurance activities were necessary as evidenced by the severity and deficiencies cited and to ensure quality assurance procedures were followed and plans of action implemented to prevent deficiencies from re-occurring. Cross reference F600. Cross reference F607. Cross reference F609. During an interview, on 1/3/23 at 1:35 p.m., the interim Administrator indicated he reviewed the 24-hour reports each morning to see if any type of change of condition or signs and symptoms of abuse were present. He had not completed an audit tool to document his findings. The quality assurance and performance improvement (QAPI) team had not had a meeting since the incident (in October 2022). 3.1-52(b)(2)
Sept 2022 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to properly store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Findings include: 1. During the initial...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to properly store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Findings include: 1. During the initial kitchen observation on 9/19/22 at 9:49 a.m. with the Dietary Manager, the following was observed: a. A pitcher of lemonade on top shelf in the refrigerator without date made or use by date. b. Several trays of prepared beverages in glasses without date prepared. c. A box of hot dog buns on floor in dry storage. d. A box of quick oats on floor in dry storage. 2. During a follow-up tour on 9/23/22 at 2:47 p.m. with the Dietary Manager, the box of hot dog buns and box of quick oaks remained on the bare floor in the dry goods area. Several trays of prepared beverages in glasses were in the refrigerator and lacked a date. During an interview on 9/23/22 at 2:50 p.m., the Dietary Manager indicated the boxes of food items in dry storage should not be stored on the floor and began to move them onto shelving. He indicated these should have been moved following the initial tour on 9/19/22. Food and beverages should be labeled with a use by date. A current facility policy, revised October 2017, titled, Food Receiving and Storage, provided by the Business Office Manager on 9/23/22 at 2:40 p.m., included, but was not limited to the following: Policy Statement Foods shall be received and stored in a manner that complies with safe food handling practices. Policy Interpretation and Implementation .6. Food in designated dry storage areas shall be kept off the floor (at least 18 inches) .8. All foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer will be covered, labeled and dated (use by date). 3.1-21(i)(3)
CONCERN (E)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to administer insulin as ordered for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medication review. (Residents 9 and 20) Findings include: 1. ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to administer insulin as ordered for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medication review. (Residents 9 and 20) Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident 9 was reviewed on 9/22/22 at 9:17 a.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, diabetes mellitus and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the resident's electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) indicated the following current, signed physician's orders and lack of blood sugars for the resident: a. Novolog (insulin to treat diabetes) solution, inject four units before meals related to diabetes mellitus. The order was dated 4/9/22. The eMAR was blank for administration or blood sugar value for the 11:30 a.m. doses on 8/16/22, 8/20/22, 8/30/22, 8/31/22, and 9/10/22; and for the 5:00 p.m. dose on 9/18/22. b. Novolog solution, inject per sliding scale for blood sugar results before meals: If 150-200 = 2 units; 201-250 = 4 units; 251-300 = 6 units; 301-350 = 8 units; 351-400 = 10 units. Call MD with blood sugar greater than 401. The order was dated 4/9/22. The eMAR was blank for administration or blood sugar value for the 11:30 a.m. doses on 8/16/22, 8/30/22, 8/31/22 and 9/10/22; and for the 5:00 p.m. dose on 9/18/22. c. Levemir solution (insulin to treat diabetes), inject 55 units at bedtime related to diabetes mellitus. The order was dated 9/5/22. The eMAR was blank for administration of ordered dose on 8/18/22. 2. The clinical record for Resident 20 was reviewed on 9/21/22 at 9:43 a.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, type 1 diabetes mellitus and unspecified intellectual disabilities. Review of the resident's eMAR indicated the following current, signed physician's orders and lack of blood sugars for the resident: a. Novolog solution, inject 5 units with meals related to type 1 diabetes mellitus. The order was dated 8/21/22. The eMAR was blank for administration for the 11:30 a.m. dose on 8/31/22 and 9/10/22; and for the 5:00 p.m. dose on 9/18/22. b. Novolog solution, inject per sliding scale for blood sugar results before meals: If 181-220 = 1 units; 221-260 = 2 units; 261-300 = 3 units; 301-340 = 4 units; 341-380 = 5 units; 381-420 = 6 units; 421-550 = 7 units. The order was dated 8/21/22. The eMAR was blank for administration or blood sugar value for the 11:30 a.m. doses on 8/31/22 and 9/10/22; and the 5:00 p.m. dose on 9/18/22. c. Lantus SoloStar solution (insulin to treat diabetes), inject 6 units at bedtime related to type 1 diabetes mellitus. The order was dated 8/16/22. The eMAR was blank for administration on 9/18/22. During an interview on 9/23/22 at 3:37 p.m., the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) indicated the administration of medications, including insulin, should be recorded in the eMAR when administered. If the administration was not entered on the eMAR, the administration of that medication would not be confirmed. A current facility policy, dated 12/1/21, titled, Insulin Injections, provided by RN 13 on 9/23/22 at 2:32 p.m., included, but was not limited to, the following: Policy: Daily insulin injections are give {SIC} with a physician's order Procedure: .14. Record type, amount, time and site of injection on the MAR. 3.1-37(a)
CONCERN (E)

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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to investigate resident falls and assess for additional ...

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 investigate resident falls and assess for additional fall interventions to prevent falls for 3 of 5 residents reviewed for accidents. (Residents 1, 34 and 9) Findings include: 1. During an observation on 9/19/22 at 11:50 a.m., the resident used her hands to propel her high back wheelchair from the nurse's station down the hallway to her room. She was not assisted by a staff member. A discolored bruise was noted to her right posterior hand. During an observation on 9/20/22 at 11:45 a.m., Resident 1 was not in her room. Her room lacked non-skid strips in front of the closet or on the floor at either side of the resident's bed. Resident 1's clinical record was reviewed on 9/20/22 at 2:07 p.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to the following: Parkinson's disease, epilepsy, unspecified, essential hypertension, dementia in other diseases classified elsewhere with behavioral disturbance, generalized anxiety disorder, polyneuropathy and polyosteoarthritis. Current physician orders for the resident included, but were not limited to the following: a. Give carbidopa-levodopa (Parkinson's medication)25-100 milligram (mg) 0.5 tablet by mouth two times daily. The order originated on 6/7/21. b. Give amlodipine besylate (blood pressure medication) 10 mg tablet by mouth daily in the morning. The order originated on 6/10/22. c. Give lacosamide (seizure medication) 100 mg tablet by mouth two times daily. The order originated on 6/1/22. d. Give buspirone HCl (anxiety medication) 15 mg tablet by mouth four times daily. The order originated on 3/1/22. e. Give Morphine Sulfate Solution (pain medication on hospice) 20 mg/milliliters (ml) - 0.25 ml by mouth every 3 hours as needed for pain. The order originated on 6/3/22. Review of a post fall Morse Fall Assessment, dated 7/4/22, indicated the resident was at high risk for falls. A Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 6/16/22, indicated the resident's cognitive status was moderately impaired. Rejection of care behavior was not exhibited. The resident required extensive assistance of 2 staff members for bed mobility, transfers, and toileting. She required supervision and assistance of 1 staff member for locomotion on the unit. The resident was always incontinent of bowel and bladder and had a fall in the last month. A current Care Plan, dated 7/5/22, indicated the resident had impaired safety awareness related to dementia. Interventions included, but were not limited to, redirect as/if needed. A current Care Plan for risk for falls, last revised on 8/24/22, indicated the resident had a history of falls and a recent fall. Interventions included, but were not limited to, non-skid strips in front of closet door, non-skid strips at bedside and seating and positioning evaluation. A Nurse's Note, dated 7/29/22 at 3:40 p.m., indicated the resident was found on the floor face down in the corner of her closet with her wheelchair on top of her. A moon shaped skin tear was noted to the left upper shin area and measured 3.8 centimeters (cm). A Nurse's Note, dated 8/20/22 at 1:26 p.m. indicated the resident was found crying uncontrollably with her head near the bottom edge of the dresser opposite of the wheelchair in her room. She had 2 lacerations on her upper right forehead. An Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) Note, dated 8/22/22 at 9:25 a.m., indicated the IDT met to review the resident's falls on 8/18/22 and 8/20/22. Care plans were reviewed and updated. The clinical record lacked the seating and positioning evaluation intervention noted on the care plan. A Nurse's Note, dated 8/24/22 at 2:22 p.m., indicated the resident was found on the floor, laying on back with head faced toward the bathroom and feet towards the bed in her room. Resident was attempting to transfer self. Was told would be a few minutes, staff were weighing another resident. Resident overheard ' I will just do it myself.' The clinical record lacked documentation of management notification or IDT meeting documentation for the resident's fall dated 8/24/22. During an observation on 9/21/22 at 11:30 a.m., the resident was not in her room. Non-skid strips were not on the floor by the resident's bed nor on the floor in front of the resident's closet. During an interview on 9/21/22 at 3:58 p.m., Temporary Nurse's Aide (TNA) 9 indicated she referenced the Resident Roster for what assistance each resident required and for any specific needs. Review of the Resident Roster on 9/21/11 at 4:00 p.m., lacked any indication of Resident 1's risk for falls. During an interview at the time of observation on 9/21/22 at 4:02 p.m., TNA 9 indicated the resident's closet and floor beside the bed did not have any non-skid strips. TNA 9 identified which closet belonged to the resident in her room. During an interview on 9/21/22 at 4:09 p.m., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 6 indicated she was familiar with all of the residents in the facility. Resident 1 was a high fall risk and had several recent falls. Staff were required to notify the provider, POA (power of attorney/resident representative), DON, ADON, and Administrator of the resident's falls along with the details of the fall. Since the facility did not have a DON, they were required to report it to the Administrator and ADON for IDT review and care plan updates. Fall prevention interventions should have been implemented and put into place immediately if the current interventions were not effective to prevent falls. She indicated current fall interventions included 2 person assistance, ensure the resident is clean an dry, frequent checks, ask for assistance from staff to get items from her closet, and non-skid strips in her room because the resident preferred to get things from her closet. During an interview at the time of observation on 9/21/22 at 4:27 p.m., LPN 6 indicated the resident's room did not have any non-skid strips in front of the resident's closet nor at the resident's bedside. She indicated the resident had been moved from another room and the non-skid strips had not been placed on the floor in her current room. Immediate review of the resident's previous room, along with LPN 6, lacked non-skid strips in front of the closet or at beside in the resident's previous room. During an interview on 9/21/22 at 4:29 p.m., LPN 6 indicated a nurse should have notified the Administrator and ADON when fall prevention interventions were not implemented to prevent falls. During an interview on 9/21/22 at 4:40 p.m., the ADON indicated Resident 1 was a high fall risk and had several recent falls and some resulted in injuries of bruising, skin tear, and abrasions. Current interventions in place included a high back wheel chair and non-skid strips at the closet and bedside. She indicated fall interventions on the care plan should have been implemented immediately. Failure to implement the fall prevention interventions placed the residents at risk for further falls. Fall interventions in place during a room change should have followed the resident and remained in place. During an observation at the time of interview on 9/21/22 at 5:00 p.m., the ADON indicated the resident's current room and the last 2 rooms the resident resided in lacked non-skid strips. She was unsure why the non-skid strips were not in place. 2. Resident 34's clinical record was reviewed on 9/20/22 at 3:07 p.m. She admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to the following: schizoaffective disorder, anxiety disorder, unspecified, restless legs syndrome, essential hypertension, atrial fibrillation, primary osteoarthritis, unspecified ankle and foot, insomnia, abnormal posture, and unsteadiness on feet. Current physician orders for the resident included, but were not limited to the following: a. Give digoxin (heart rhythm medication) 125 micrograms (mcg) by mouth each morning. The order originated on 5/30/22. b. Give melatonin (insomnia medication) 6 mg tablet by mouth daily at bedtime. The order originated on 3/16/22. c. Give ropinirole hcl (restless leg medication) 0.5 mg tablet by mouth daily at bedtime. The order originated on 3/28/22. A Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 6/10/22, indicated the resident's cognitive status was moderately impaired. Rejection of care behavior was exhibited 4-6 days. The resident required extensive assistance of 2 staff members for bed mobility, transfers, personal hygiene and toileting. She required assistance of 1 staff member for locomotion on the unit. The resident was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder, had a fall on admission in the last month and a fracture related to a fall in the 6 months prior to admission. A current Care Plan, dated 7/5/22, indicated the resident had impaired safety awareness related to schizoaffective disorder. Interventions included, but were not limited to, redirect as/if needed. A current Care Plan for risk for falls, last revised on 3/19/22, indicated the resident was at risk for falls related to confusion, gait/balance problems, and psychoactive drug use. Interventions included, but were not limited to, anticipate and meet the resident's needs, assist with toileting, assist with transfers, and encourage the resident to wear non-skid footwear. The care plan lacked any revisions related to the fall dated 5/26/22. Review of the admission Morse Fall Assessment, dated 3/17/22, indicated the resident was at moderate risk for falls. Review of a post fall Morse Fall Assessment, dated 5/26/22, indicated the resident was at moderate risk for falls. A Nurse's Note, dated 5/26/22 at 12:29 p.m. indicated the resident had a witnessed fall secondary to an attempted unassisted transfer from her wheelchair to the toilet before the Certified Nurse's Aide could get to her. The resident loudly screamed, My leg is broken; and I know it. A Nurse's Note, dated 5/26/22 at 6:03 p.m., indicated the hospital called and the resident was admitted for a right hip fracture. The clinical record lacked and IDT note of the resident's fall and lacked any updated fall interventions/reviews or revisions. During an observation on 9/22/22 at 3:25 p.m., the resident was observed sitting up in bed with a movie on her television. She was talking to someone in words that did not make sense, but no one was there. During an interview on 9/23/22 at 1:43 p.m., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 8 indicated the resident had a fall and fractured her right hip on 5/26/22. The clinical record did not contain an IDT progress note nor implemented care plan interventions related to the resident's fall on the above mentioned date. The residents care plan should have been revised when the resident had a fall with a fracture. During an interview on 9/23/22 at 2:05 p.m., Registered Nurse (RN) 3 indicated Resident 34's fall on 5/26/22 lacked an Interdisciplinary Team Note because no one was assigned to review falls at that time. The care plan should have been revised when the resident returned from her hospitalization but the fall risk care plan was not updated. A request was made for a copy of the IDT note related to the resident's fall on 5/26/22. Further information was not provided. 3. The clinical record for Resident 9 was reviewed on 9/22/22 at 9:17 a.m. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, traumatic brain injury, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, epilepsy, unspecified convulsions and repeated falls. Fall reports were obtained on 9/22/22 at 1:36 p.m. from the Administrator and included, but were not limited to, the following: On 7/6/22, Resident 9 had an unwitnessed fall. She was found on her floor in her room, laying on her back with her feet towards the head of the bed. The resident indicated she was scooting herself back in her wheelchair seat and had forgotten to lock the wheelchair. The resident was assessed to have no injuries. The resident's health care plan intervention, added on 7/7/22, was for occupational therapy to evaluate for positioning and to provide the resident with a reacher to assist with picking items up from the floor. The electronic health record (EHR) lacked indication of the interdisciplinary team (IDT) investigation of incident. On 7/26/22, the resident had a witnessed fall. She was sitting on her walker moving around without it being locked. She fell over onto the floor. She was assessed to have no injuries. No immediate intervention was indicated on the fall report. The EHR indicated the IDT reviewed the resident's fall on 7/27/22 and indicated the health care plan for falls had been updated. Review of the resident's fall health care plan lacked an updated intervention for the fall occurring 7/26/22. On 8/18/22, the resident was trying to assist another resident and fell backwards onto the floor. The resident was assessed to have no injuries. The IDT met to review the fall on 8/22/22 and indicated the health care plan for falls had been updated. Review of the resident's fall health care plan lacked an updated intervention for the fall occurring 8/18/22. During an interview on 9/23/22 at 3:37 p.m., the ADON indicated the IDT should meet after each resident fall to investigate cause and update the care plan accordingly. She does not know why the care plans had not been updated or why IDT did not investigate some recent falls. A current facility policy, dated 6/2/19, titled, Fall Policy and Procedure, provided by the Administrator on 9/22/22 at 1:55 p.m., included, but was not limited to, the following: PROCEDURE: .5. The resident care plan should be updated to reflect any new or change in interventions. 3.1-45(a)(2)
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0727 (Tag F0727)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to employ a full time Director of Nursing for clinical oversight of the facility. This had the potential to affect all 36 residents residing in ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to employ a full time Director of Nursing for clinical oversight of the facility. This had the potential to affect all 36 residents residing in the facility. Finding includes: During an interview on 9/19/22 at 9:32 a.m., the Social Services Director (SSD) indicated the facility did not have a Director of Nursing (DON) but the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) and Administrator were on their way to the facility for entrance conference. During an interview at entrance conference on 9/19/22 at 9:52 a.m., the ADON indicated she was not the interim DON. The facility did not have an interim DON and they contacted the Corporate Nurse Consultant for any questions or concerns. The facility did not have any nursing waivers in place. A DON was not present during the entrance conference. During an interview on 9/19/22 at 9:59 a.m., the ADON indicated they had not employed a DON since approximately March of 2022. A request was made for the date the facility last had a full time DON at the facility. During an interview on 9/21/22 at 3:09 p.m., the Administrator indicated the facility lacked a full time DON. She indicated the facility consulted with the Corporate Nurse Consultant, but she only worked part time. During an interview on 9/21/22 at 4:09 p.m., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 6 indicated they were required to report accidents to the Administrator, DON, and ADON. Since the facility did not have a DON, the Administrator and ADON were notified of any accidents. During an interview on 9/22/22 at 10:33 a.m. , the Administrator indicated the last day worked for the facility's last employed full time DON was 1/17/22. During an interview on 9/23/22 at 2:05 p.m., Registered Nurse (RN) 3 indicated Resident 34's fall on 5/26/22 lacked an Interdisciplinary Team review note because no one was assigned to review falls at that time. During exit conference on 9/23/22 at 4:23 p.m., a DON was not present. A current undated policy, titled Departmental Supervision, provided by the Administrator on 9/22/20 at 2:48 p.m., indicated the following: The Nursing Services department shall be under the direct supervision of a Registered or Licensed Practical/Vocational Nurse at all times. Policy Interpretation and Implementation .2. A Registered Nurse (RN) is employed as the Director of Nursing Services (DNS). The DNS is on duty during the day shift Monday through Friday 3.1-17(b)(4)
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?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Indiana facilities.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 2 life-threatening violation(s), Special Focus Facility, 5 harm violation(s), Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 59 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • 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 Brookside Care Strategies's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns BROOKSIDE CARE STRATEGIES an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within Indiana, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.

How is Brookside Care Strategies Staffed?

CMS rates BROOKSIDE CARE STRATEGIES's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 45%, compared to the Indiana average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care. RN turnover specifically is 80%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Brookside Care Strategies?

State health inspectors documented 59 deficiencies at BROOKSIDE CARE STRATEGIES during 2022 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 5 that caused actual resident harm, 51 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Brookside Care Strategies?

BROOKSIDE CARE STRATEGIES is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 42 certified beds and approximately 39 residents (about 93% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in MUNCIE, Indiana.

How Does Brookside Care Strategies Compare to Other Indiana Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Indiana, BROOKSIDE CARE STRATEGIES's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (45%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Brookside Care Strategies?

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?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "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 below-average staffing rating.

Is Brookside Care Strategies Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, BROOKSIDE CARE STRATEGIES 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 2 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 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Indiana. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Brookside Care Strategies Stick Around?

BROOKSIDE CARE STRATEGIES has a staff turnover rate of 45%, 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 Brookside Care Strategies Ever Fined?

BROOKSIDE CARE STRATEGIES 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 Brookside Care Strategies on Any Federal Watch List?

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