West Point Care Center Inc

607 6TH STREET, WEST POINT, IA 52656 (319) 837-6117
For profit - Limited Liability company 46 Beds CAPSTONE MANAGEMENT Data: November 2025 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation
Trust Grade
56/100
#163 of 392 in IA
Last Inspection: May 2025

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

Overview

West Point Care Center Inc has a Trust Grade of C, indicating it is average and falls in the middle of the pack among nursing homes. It ranks #163 out of 392 facilities in Iowa, placing it in the top half, but is #5 out of 6 in Lee County, meaning there is only one local option that is better. The facility is showing improvement, reducing its issues from 11 in 2024 to just 3 in 2025. Staffing is rated at 4 out of 5 stars, which is a strength, although the turnover rate is 54%, slightly higher than the state average. However, there have been concerning incidents, including a critical finding where a resident with cognitive impairments suffered burns from hot liquid, and a serious issue involving verbal abuse from a staff member towards residents, indicating that while there are positive aspects, there are also significant areas that need attention.

Trust Score
C
56/100
In Iowa
#163/392
Top 41%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
11 → 3 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
54% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
⚠ Watch
$13,627 in fines. Higher than 83% of Iowa facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 39 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Iowa. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★★☆
4.0
Overall Rating
★★★★☆
4.0
Staff Levels
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 11 issues
2025: 3 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
  • 4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record

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

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 54%

Near Iowa avg (46%)

Higher turnover may affect care consistency

Federal Fines: $13,627

Below median ($33,413)

Minor penalties assessed

Chain: CAPSTONE MANAGEMENT

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 15 deficiencies on record

1 life-threatening 1 actual harm
May 2025 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, the facility failed to update the Care Plan for 2 of 12 resid...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, the facility failed to update the Care Plan for 2 of 12 residents for risk of elopement (Resident #18) and use of an antibiotic (Resident #26). The facility reported a census of 27 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #18 scored 7 out of 15 on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated severely impaired cognition. Per this assessment, the resident did not exhibit wandering. Review of Resident #18's Care Plan did not address wandering/elopement risk. Review of Resident #18's Elopement Evaluation dated 5/21/25 revealed the resident scored 0.0 on the assessment, indicated a score of 1 or higher indicated risk for elopement. The assessment revealed, in part, the following questions had been answered with response of no: Has the Resident verbally expressed the desire to go home, packed belongings to go home or stayed near an exit door? Does the resident wander? Review of Resident #18's Progress Notes revealed the following: a. 1/5/25 at 9:25 PM: Resident has been refusing cares. Continues to say he is leaving and going home. Staff ensure him he is not leaving tonight as he doesn't have anyone here to pick him up. b. 2/15/2025 at 7:31 AM: Resident was confused at 1130pm. He was watching movies in the dining area. He got turned around looking for room and stated he didn't have a room here. He needed to lock up and go home. Wanted to give this nurse and aide a ride home so he could lock up and leave. Explained we were here all night to help and attempted to get resident into bathroom. He went into bathroom but would not stand to go to toilet. Stated he wasn't doing that, he just needed to go home. Told aide we would wait a little bit, answer the lights and then try again. When this writer came back a couple minutes later from another room resident was no longer in dining room. Went down hallway to find him. He was in whirlpool room attempting to stand at whirlpool with hand in back of his pants digging at soiled pants. Assisted resident back into chair and with cleaning his hands. Then brought him down to his room where aide met us to assist with getting him into bed and changed. Resident allowed us to change him and laid down in bed. He was awake the rest of night laying in bed watching tv. c. 2/19/2025 at 3:54 AM: Resident not allowing staff to get him up and changed at first rounds. Was given some time and went back and resident was swinging at staff, stating we weren't going to help him, he didn't need it and he was going home. Would not stand for staff but did allow up to put on sling for standing lift. We were able to get him changed and cleaned before laying down in bed. d. 4/1/25 at 9:37 PM: When staff was assisting resident into bed, resident kept stating that he wanted to go home. Swapped out staff members and was able to redirect resident easily. Resident does not want to go to sleep though at this time and is laying in bed watching TV. e. 4/25/25 at 11:58 PM: Pleasantly confused, states he was going to get his car and go home before supper, able to redirect to dining table and a tv show and no further asking to go home. Did refuse to go to bed but states he is comfortable in his recliner. f. 5/2/25 at 8:53 PM: States he wants to go home, that he hasn't seen his mom in 3 weeks. Redirection and reassurance given and effective. g. 5/22/25 at 10:07 PM: After resident finished his supper, attempted to open door in dining room. Stated that he was going home. Attempts to reorientate resident were not effective. Resident would continue to say that he was going home. After resident was assisted into bed, he would pull curtain to talk to staff, ask for help getting his socks and shoes on to go home, and would turn sideways in bed so his legs were hanging outside of the bed. Turned movie on TV for resident to watch but this was not effective to redirect and preoccupy. Resident fell asleep after about an hour. h. 5/24/25 at 7:43 PM: After supper, attempted to exit through front door once. Resident stated that he was going to get in his car and leave. Attempts to orientate resident not effective. Attempted to redirect by turning movie on in dining room. Resident stated that he did not want to watch a movie and wanted to go home. He is currently sitting in the dining room in wheelchair watching movie. When 3 separate staff members attempted to toilet resident, he was resistive, not standing, repeatedly saying, no, I'm not going to, and that he was going home. Resident refused snack when offered. i. 5/25/25 at 10:04 AM: Resident pleasantly confused this shift. Sitting in dining room in wheelchair. Staff asked resident to return to room so they can provide cares. Resident refused to go to room, stating I'm getting ready to go home. I have to wait here. Able to redirect resident. j. 5/25/25 at 8:15 PM: Resident pleasantly confused this shift. States several times that he is going home. Has not attempted to exit building. Currently refusing cares and is in dining room watching TV. On 5/28/25 at 11:37 AM, Staff C, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) queried if Resident #18 every tried to leave, responded sometimes the resident got confused, wandered, would go down other halls, and never tried to leave the facility. When queried if the resident went to the doors, Staff C responded she had never seen [Resident #18] try to open the door and leave, anything like that. When queried if the resident ever discussed anything like that, Staff C responded, Not to me, no. On 5/28/25 at 2:33 PM, Staff E, CNA queried if Resident #18 wandered, and responded sometimes in wheelchair, and further explained sometimes the resident would get confused and he would forget what hall supposed to be in. On 5/29/25 at 12:30 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) explained Resident #18 was getting more confused in the evenings, and acknowledged she had heard the resident say he had to go home, then he didn't want to go home. The ADON explained she hadn't heard that the resident tried to get out the doors. Per the ADON, that would be a trigger, and resident needed a [wandering alert device] on. When queried if wandering/elopement should be part of the resident's Care Plan, the ADON responded if resident was to successfully get out, yes. The ADON acknowledged if a [wandering alert device] in place, that would be care planned. 2. Review of the MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #26 scored 15 out of 15 on a BIMS exam, which indicated intact cognition. Per this assessment, Resident #26 took an antibiotic. Review of Resident #26's Care Plan did not not address antibiotic use. The Nurses note dated 3/18/25 at 1:57 PM revealed, in part, New orders received from provider. Start azithromycin 500 mg (milligram) x 3 days, then maintenance dose of 250 mg on MWF (Monday, Wednesday, Friday) every week. Review of the Physician Order dated 3/24/25 revealed, Azithromycin Oral Tablet 250 MG (Azithromycin) Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day every Mon, Wed, Fri related to CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE PULMONARY DISEASE, UNSPECIFIED. On 5/29/25 at 12:39 PM, the facility's Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) queried if prophylactic antibiotics should be included on the Care Plan, and was unaware. Review of the Facility Policy titled Care Planning-Interdisciplinary Team, last revised 7/2018, revealed the following: Our facility's Care Planning/Interdisciplinary Team is responsible for the development of an individualized comprehensive care plan for each resident.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, clinical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to instruct a resident to swish and spit ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, clinical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to instruct a resident to swish and spit after receiving a puff of a steroid inhaler for 1 of 1 residents observed for inhalation medication administration (Resident #16). The facility reported a census of 27 residents. Findings include: Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #16 scored a 14 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated cognition intact. The MDS revealed diagnosis for asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or chronic lung disease. Review of the clinical record revealed an Physician Orders for Advair Diskus Inhalation Aerosol Powder Breath Activated 250-50 mcg/act (micrograms per actuation) (fluticasone-salmeterol)- 1 puff inhale orally two times a day related to emphysema, unspecified During an observation on 5/29/25 at 7:33 AM, Staff D, Certified Medication Aide (CMA) took Resident #16 Advair Diskus 250 mcg/50 mcg inhaler to the dining room table and Resident #16 inhaled one puff and did not swish or spit after inhalation. Staff D did not bring another cup over for Resident #16 to spit in or cue Resident #16 to swish and spit. Resident #16 then proceeded to take her oral medications. During an interview on 5/29/25 at 9:16 AM, Staff D queried if she had special instructions with any inhalers and she stated no, she didn't think so. Staff D stated Resident #16 was the only resident Staff D gave an inhaler and Resident #16 did it herself. Staff D asked if residents needed to swish and spit after inhaler use and Staff D stated she didn't know. During an interview on 5/29/25 at 12:48 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), confirmed residents needed to swish and spit after administration of the Advair inhaler. The facility policy, titled Administering Medication Policy revised December 2012 did not address use of inhaled medications. Review of a undated document titled Instructions for using Fluticasone Propionate and Salmeterol Inhaler, provided by the revealed instructions, which included rinse your mouth with water after breathing in the medicine. Spit out the water. Do not swallow it.
CONCERN (D)

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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were consist...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were consistently implemented for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #18). The facility reported a census of 27 residents. Findings include: Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident scored 7 out of 15 on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated severely impaired cognition. Further review of the assessment revealed the resident had fallen since admit, entry, reentry, or prior assessment, and had one fall with no injury. Review of the Care Plan dated 12/17/24 revealed, I need assist with ADL's (activities of daily living) R/T (related to) history of rhabdomyolysis, requiring significant cues to stay on task and use proper form, and poor attention which places me at risk for falls/injury. The Intervention dated 5/26/25 revealed, Fall intervention 5/26/25: alarm at all times. The Physician Order dated 5/26/25 at 10:00 PM revealed, Alarm at all times every shift. On 5/28/25 at 8:01 AM, 8:10 AM, and 8:18 AM, Resident #18 observed in their wheelchair in the dining room, and an alarm box not observed to the back of the resident's wheelchair. On 5/28/25 at 8:20 AM, Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) queried if Resident #18 had any alarms, and responded yes, they were a recent addition. When queried when the resident was to have it on, Staff A responded at all times. Staff A queried if able to check about resident's alarm, and Staff A observed to alert Staff B, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). Staff B observed to go to Resident #18's room, and alarm observed present in the resident's room on the resident's bed. Staff B queried about alarm for the resident while Staff B present in Resident #18's room. Staff B explained the resident just got it a few days ago from slipping out of bed. Staff B acknowledged the resident was to have it in the wheelchair, chair, and bed. When queried Staff B got the resident ready today, Staff B acknowledged she did, and acknowledged she forgot the alarm. Staff B brought the alarm out of the resident's room. On 5/28/25 at 8:23 AM, Staff B went over to Resident #18 while Staff B held the alarm, carried the alarm back down to the resident's room, then returned with the alarm and a walker. On 5/28/25 at 9:32 AM, Staff A queried about the alarms for resident, explained the resident had one on the bed, confirmed the resident did not have the alarm in the dining room and should have. Staff A further explained it was new, and explained resident had a recent fall. On 5/29/25 at 12:29 PM, the facility's Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) explained, in part, the alarm was on the Care Plan and was not on the ADL sheet. Per the ADON, it was on the resident's sheet now, and the ADON had talked to the CNA and let her know if had been a very recent change. When queried if the alarm should have been on the wheelchair when the resident was in the dining room, the ADON responded yes. Review of the Facility Policy titled Falls-Clinical Protocol, last revised 3/13/23, revealed the following: The staff and physician will monitor and document the individual's response to interventions intended to reduce falling or the consequences of falling.
Mar 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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interviews, and the facility policy reviewed, the facility failed to provide showers daily per physician...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interviews, and the facility policy reviewed, the facility failed to provide showers daily per physician orders for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for showers (Resident #5). The facility reported a census of 29 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #5 scored a 5 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), which indicated cognition severely impaired. The MDS revealed the resident required a substantial/maximal assistance with shower or bathe self and dependent with tub or shower transfers. The Care Plan revealed a focus area revised on 2/26/24 for assistance with ADL's (Activities of Daily Living) related to CVA (cerebral vascular accident) with right-sided weakness, and poor vision which placed the resident at risk for falls and injuries. The interventions revised on 11/8/23 revealed assistance the resident with bathing with 1 staff. The resident scheduled daily baths per family request and he refused to take them on some days. The Physician Orders revealed the following order: a. To have daily showers- every day shift- ordered 11/24/21 The POC (Plan of Care) Response History Report for February 2024 revealed the following dates Resident #35 didn't receive a shower: a. 2/3/24- marked with 97 (which indicated- not applicable) b. 2/4/24- marked with 98- (which indicated - resident refused) c. 2/8/24- marked with 98 d. 2/10/24- marked with 98 e. 2/11/24- marked with 98 f. 2/13/24- marked with 98 The facility lacked documentation the nurse notified of the refusals for the showers. The Disciplinary Warning dated 2/16/24 revealed Staff B, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) received a warning for carelessness and poor follow through with inconsistency with cares and completing showers as scheduled. Staff B had frequent refusals with no follow up and misinformation passed on to others not to do showers on Wednesdays and weekends. The Disciplinary Warning included, part of the position included educating others and reporting refusals, and due to this carelessness, you will no longer be the shower aide. During an interview on 3/12/24 at 4:02 PM, Staff A, CNA queried on what the protocol is when a resident refused showers and she stated she needed to tell the nurse and the shower aide of the resident's refusal. During an interview on 3/12/24 at 4:13 PM, Staff B, CNA queried on who performed the showers and she stated the facility scheduled a shower aid on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday and on Wednesday and the weekends the CNAs on the floor performed the showers. Staff B asked if residents refused and she stated yes they did and when they refused, the CNA supposed to go to the nurse and they would tell us to ask the resident again and if the resident refused a second time, the nurse talked to the resident and documented the refusal. Staff B stated she put in a note in the resident's record documenting the resident's refusal and why they refused. Staff B asked what not applicable meant in the charting for showers and she stated it meant not part of their job but showers were a part of the CNA job and they shouldn't chart not applicable. Staff B asked if Resident #5 ever refused showers and she stated yes and everytime he refused the shower, she reported it to the nurse. Staff B stated the importance of showers for the residents and they needed to report when the residents refused to the nurse. During an interview on 3/13/24 at 8:50 AM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) queried on who completed showers and she stated they scheduled a bath aide during the week except for Wednesdays and the CNAs on the floor gave showers on Wednesdays and they schedule for a CNA to come in on the weekends to give a bath to Resident #5. The ADON stated Resident #5 refused showers but his cognition failing and sometimes you just told him, he needed to take a shower. The ADON stated they looked back on Resident #5 shower log and saw his showers didn't get completed and they pulled the bath aide from showers because she documented he refused. The ADON stated the CNA knew if they got a refusal they needed to tell the nurse and the nurse supposed to go down and talk to the resident and if the resident still refused, it needed documented in the chart. The ADON asked if the refusals charted and she stated no, and the protocol been in place for awhile. The ADON stated they noticed the issue and been working to fix it. During an interview on 3/13/24 at 11:18 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) queried on how often resident received showers and she stated twice a week unless the resident asked for it more frequently or the physician ordered the showers more frequently. The DON asked if any of the residents received showers daily and stated Resident #5. The DON asked if Resident #5 typically refused showers and she stated he typically refused showers once or twice weekly. Discussed with the DON the multiple days the chart documented resident refused his shower and she stated he typically refused once or twice and they removed the CNA who was scheduled for the bath aide and now another CNA scheduled to do them. The DON stated she felt they had a better process now and at the end of the day received a list of the residents who refused the showers. The DON asked expected to be done with this issue and she stated she would of liked them to of performed bed baths with the resident and the documentation of the refusals. The DON asked for the policy for showers and she stated the policy stated to inform the nurse but didn't address the refusal needed documented, but the nurses knew they needed to document it. The Facility Shower/Tub Bath Policy and Procedure (no date identified) revealed the following information: a. Documenting Procedure: The following information shower be recorded in the POC record. 1. Any refusal of shower or bath. b. Reporting to Supervisor 1. Notified the nurse and DON if resident refused the shower or bath.
Jan 2024 10 deficiencies 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, Incident Report review, observations, and staff interviews the facility failed to ensure a resi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, Incident Report review, observations, and staff interviews the facility failed to ensure a resident with severely impaired cognition remained free from burns from hot liquid when the resident was found with a cup on their lap during shift change to night shift, resulting in blisters to the left abdomen and thigh and documented pain for one of four residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #7). This resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) to the health and safety of a resident who resided at the facility. The facility reported a census of 30 residents. The State Agency informed the facility of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 1/11/24 at 2:15 PM. The IJ began on 1/1/24. Facility staff removed the Immediate Jeopardy on 1/16/24 at 9:57 AM by completing the following: a. All residents were assessed via the Hot Liquids Safety Evaluation form for safety, when handling hot liquids. b. Any resident found to be at risk for inability to handle hot liquids safely will be placed on a Hot Liquids Safety list. The list will be kept in the Dietary Department and Nursing Department where all staff can visualize. This list will be updated by the Nursing Office. c. All facility staff were educated regarding the Hot Liquid Assessments, the list and where it is kept. d. Audits to be completed to assure staff compliance with the Hot Liquids Safety List will be done at every meal x 7 days, daily x 7 days, weekly x 2 months and then monthly times 2 months. e. Results of all Audits will be reviewed by the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) Meeting monthly for any observations and recommendations. The scope lowered from J to D at the time of the survey. Findings Include: 1. The Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] for Resident #7 revealed the resident was rarely to never understood and required supervision or touching assistance for eating. The Care Plan dated 10/14/22, revision date 12/27/23, for Resident #7 revealed, in part, the following: a. The resident needed assist with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) related to (R/T) a cerebrovascular accident (CVA- stroke) with right sided lower extremity (LE) weakness, right sided upper extremity flaccidness which places the resident at risk for falls/injury. b. The resident not able to eat in the dining room at this time due to there being too much stimulus, causing the resident to yell out and be disruptive to others. c. The resident does eat better in own room or during the week can go into the Activity Room and eat with [Name Redacted] or [Name Redacted] there. Resident likes it in this room, and eats better and stops yelling. d. The Intervention dated 3/4/22 documented to assist the resident with eating by supervising and making sure able to eat the food on own. Sometimes need physical assistance due to having to use left hand. e. The Intervention dated 1/2/24 documented, Intervention for burn/blister: Resident will not be given any hot liquids without supervision and all trays/hot liquids will be removed from room when staff leaves room or family leaves room. Resident is to be up to dining room if possible for all meals. The Diet Order 3/14/22 documented, Mechanical soft diet, Ground meat texture. Review of the resident's Nutrition Quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed the following per the ability to feed self-section: feeds self with supervision and cueing, and the current mental status section revealed, severe impairment. The Incident Report dated 1/1/24 at 10:30 PM for Resident #7 documented the following Incident Description Nursing Description: Third shift Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) alerted Staffing Nurse about areas on left abdomen and thigh. Appears to be blistered areas with redness around blisters. Cup removed from lap before transferring to bed, with what appeared to be coffee in it cold at this time. The Resident Description documented, Unable to state what happened. The Immediate Action Taken Section documented, Resident cleaned per CNA and made comfortable in bed. CNA notified this nurse also by text of issues. CNA stated nurse came down measured areas and applied cool wash cloth. The Injuries Observed at Time of Incident Section documented abdomen and left thigh. The Mental Status Section documented Resident #7 alert to person. Predisposing Physiological Factors marked included the following for the resident: Confused, drowsy, incontinent, impaired memory, recent change in cognition, and weakness/fainted. The Other Info Section of the Incident Report documented, Resident was left with supper tray in room in reach and coffee was on tray which was spilled into lap. Due to dementia and issues with coordination resident is to be supervised with meals. The Nurses Note dated 1/1/24 at 10:44 PM documented, resident was found to have blisters on lower left abdomen and left upper thigh area. two blisters present on abdomen. one blister present on upper thigh area. no complaints of (C/O) of pain at this time. Blisters maybe caused by hot food spilling on the resident. The Progress Note authored by the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) dated 1/2/2024 10:18 AM documented, was reported to this nurse through text on 1/1/2023 that resident was found sitting in recliner with food tray and cup on her lap. When assisted to bed CNA noted that resident had redness and blisters to left thigh and abdomen. Called nurse to room who placed cool cloth on areas and measured areas. Daughter was notified this AM along with [Name Redacted] Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioner (ARNP) and Hospice. Review of the Visit Note Report from Hospice dated 1/2/24 documented the following Chief Complaint/Problem: Patient (Pt) has burns/blister from spilling coffee on her last night. The Assessment Section documented, Pt has fluid filled vesicles on the left upper thigh and left lower abdominal quadrant. The Assessment documented, Speech is unclear. Pt can occasionally get something simple like Yes No or Out spoken, and also documented, Cognitive decline interferes with Pt's ability to express pain, rate pain, characterize pain. The Visit Note Report dated 1/2/24 documented the following wound descriptions: a. Wound #1: The resident had a left proximal thigh burn, onset date 1/1/24, documented as 5 centimeters (cm) length by 2 cm depth by 0 cm depth. The Wound Care Provided Section documented, Large blister intact with clear/yellow colored fluid. There is an area of redness surrounding. Unable to determine of area is painful or if Pt just refusing care as she is refusing all assessment. b. Wound #2: Burn to the abdominal left lower quadrant, onset date 1/1/24, documented as 5 cm by 8 cm by 0 cm. The Wound Care Provided Section documented, there are 3 separate blistered areas. Pt resistive to assessment and only able to get a rough measurement of the cluster of blisters versus each individual blister. There is redness surrounding the wound. Pt would not allow measurement of the redness. Unable to determine if the area is painful as Pt was resistive and uncooperative with assessment in general. The Narrative for the Visit Note Report dated 1/2/24, documented, in part, as needed (PRN) visit completed due to (D/T) Pt spilling coffee on herself last night causing redness and blistered areas on the left lower abdomen and left upper thigh. There is one fluid filled/intact blister on the left thigh and 3 fluid filled/intact blisters on the left lower abdomen. There are areas of redness surrounding these areas. Review of a Quality Monitoring/Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) dated 1/2/24 documented, Resident received burn from coffee. The Corrective Action Section of the form documented corrective action was needed, and revealed, in part, the following: a. A CNA from [Agency Name]-lied to [Facility Name] staff when they asked her how Resident #7 ate. She stated she ate good. In fact, it appears she did not check on her. CNA no longer able to come to facility. b. Nurse from [Agency Name]-Appears she did not check on Resident #7 in person as Resident #7 not gotten ready for bed appropriately. This nurse no longer will be allowed to work at [Facility Name]. The Physician Order dated 1/2/24 at 11:00 AM documented: cleanse left abdomen and left thigh gently with soap and water. Pat dry apply Xeroform Vaseline gauze to areas. Change daily and PRN. Check every shift to make sure dressing is in place to burn/blister. One time a day for wound healing discontinue (DC) when healed and as needed for wound healing and every shift for wound healing. Check to make sure Xeroform is in place. Review of the resident's Treatment Administration Record (TAR) dated January 2024 revealed treatment initiated 1/2/24. The Nurses Note dated 1/2/24 at 6:48 AM documented: Skin sheet done on resident for blisters on upper left thigh and lower left abdomen. Multiple blisters noted on abdomen. Blisters are fluid filled with redness noted around the blister. Skin was warm to the touch and it was noted that the blisters were uncomfortable/painful for resident. ADON/skin nurse notified. Hospice called and notified of burns to skin. The Notes Section of the Incident Report dated 1/2/24 documented the following: a. Resident will not be given any hot liquids without supervision and all trays/hot liquids will be removed from room when staff leaves room or family leaves room. Resident is to be up to dining room if possible for all meals. b. Have spoken to CNA'S and Nurses personally and had them sign regarding not leaving before they do a physical round (eye balling) each resident even the ones that they are not directly responsible for to see if anything needs done. c. [Staff G, CNA] the CNA from staffing will not be allowed back into the facility due to her lying to a staff CNA about resident eating fine and no issues. (resident was not fed by CNA and tray was left in room) d. It was reported that Resident #7 spilled her ice water on her that was in a sippy cup. Her gown was completely wet and the linens all had to be changed. Staff is being educated to of course not give hot or warm fluids at all and visually check on Resident #7 every two hours at minimum. e. Dietary Aide stated coffee was served to Resident's room tray in a lidded cup. [NAME] states at approximately 7:10 pm while passing evening (HS) Snacks she did not witness any coffee cup on Resident's lap but that she wasn't looking for it. Food tray was not on her lap at that time, nor did resident show any signs of discomfort or pain, Dietary staff have been instructed not to serve Resident any hot beverages and that Resident will no longer be a room tray but will be seated in the dining room with assistance with eating. The Nurses Note dated 1/4/24 at 5:24 AM documented, in part, dressing completed to left lower abdomen and left upper thigh. 2 large clear fluid filled blisters present to abdomen wound. Areas cleansed, dried, applied Xeroform gauze et covered per orders. Facial grimacing noted during dressing change, resident continued to push this nurse's hands away while applying the dressings. The Note dated 1/9/24 on the Incident Report documented, Summary: Staff did not know how Resident #7 even got coffee on her super tray until all staff input made it clear Resident #7 nods her head yes to most everything. The CNA that took her supper ticket to the kitchen did not know this information. This is why no temporary staff will be on any halls by themselves until oriented a minimum of 8 hours. All residents have had an evaluation for hot liquids done, the list of residents that should not get hot liquids in their rooms or without 1:1 supervision will be kept in the kitchen and the Care Plans updated. Resident #7 will no longer receive hot liquids even with 1:1 due to pouring ice water on her head even while her daughter was sitting next to her. The Alert Note dated 1/9/24 at 10:39 AM documented, Skin Note: Blister to left thigh is scabbed as this is where she has peeled the skin off of. Area is 6 cm across by 4.5 cm. Area was cleansed and new dressing applied no signs/symptoms (S/S) of pain with this. Left abdomen has one boomerang shaped area measures 6 cm by 5 cm and 5 cm by 3 cm with epithelial tissue present as she did not peel skin off of this, no S/S of infection. Smaller 2 cm by 1 cm area to inner left abdomen. No S/S of infection to any areas. No complaints of (C/O) pain with cleansing or treatment change. On 1/10/24 at 1:14 PM, Staff F, Registered Nurse (RN) explained eating assistance required for Resident #7 depended on the day, and some days the resident was fine and able to do herself. Staff F explained the resident often refused help. Per Staff F, they offered more than one person to assist, the resident ate in the dining room, and ate in her room if her daughters at the facility. Staff F explained she did not let the resident stay in her room because Staff F liked to watch her. The Nurses Note dated 1/10/24 at 2:25 PM documented, Resident remains on Hospice [Company Name Redacted] cares. No noted behaviors this shift. See Nursing Note about eating. Blisters are open and draining. Blister on thigh is red with slough. On 1/10/24 at 3:15 PM, interview with Staff D, CNA revealed the following: Per Staff D, Resident #7 usually ate on her own really, did not use utensils, and used her fingers. Staff D explained if the resident ate in her room someone always supposed to be in to help and the resident no longer got coffee unless someone assisted. Staff D explained need to cue the resident if the resident falling asleep, and further explained the resident ate with her fingers pretty good. Per Staff D, if Resident #7 was too weak sometimes, then the resident did not want to get up. Per Staff D if the resident did not have energy, they would go in and feed Resident #7. Staff D explained for the most part the resident did really good. The Nurses Note dated 1/10/24 at 8:49 PM documented, no noted behaviors, blisters on wound on thigh is red around the boarder with white slough on the center of the wounds. Wound on stomach is red around the board no noted slough. Ate supper with assistance from staff. On 1/11/24 at 8:45 AM, the ADON explained the Night Shift Nurse had been a staffing nurse, and the ADON received a call from the Night Shift Aide on behalf of Staff I, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Staffing Nurse. The ADON explained they (ADON) filled out the incident report. Per the ADON, Staff G, staffing CNA worked with Resident #7 that night. The ADON explained she received a call from a facility CNA (3rd shift), Staff J, CNA. On 1/11/24 at 8:50 AM, observation revealed Resident #7 in their room in their recliner chair. Observation of wound care to the resident's thigh conducted with Staff H, Hospice Registered Nurse (RN). An area observed to the left thigh with yellow wound bed and redness around wound bed. Staff H explained the following about the area to the resident's left thigh: The last time Staff H saw the area, skin was covering, and now it was yellow with red around. Per Staff H, the area was much worse than when she last saw it. Per Staff H, the resident picked at the blister. Staff H explained she would call the doctor about an antibiotic cream. Staff H explained the area had to hurt, and acknowledged it came from coffee. Review of the Visit Note Report from dated 1/11/24 revealed the following wound description for Wound #1: The resident's left proximal thigh wound: The measurement section documented 6 cm by 4.5 cm by 0.2 cm, depth description noted full thick, with scant purulent drainage. The Narrative Section of the Visit Note Report documented, in part, Performed her wound dressing change on her thigh. It does appear infected, reached out to [Name Redacted] Nurse Practitioner (NP) for orders, awaiting her return call with new orders. Wounds on abdomen do not appear infected at this time. On 1/11/24 at 11:57 AM, interview conducted with Staff J, CNA, who explained the following about the incident: Staff J explained she worked nights, did not remember the incident date, and came in on nights at approximately 9:45 PM with another staff member (Staff K, CNA). Staff J explained the nurse for her shift was a Staffing Nurse, and explained on second shift a Staffing Nurse and Staffing Aide present when she came in. Per Staff J, the Staffing Aide (on the shift prior) had never worked at the building before, and had been in charge of South Hall where Resident #7 resided. Staff J explained the other two staff who worked with the Staffing Aide were facility staff. Staff J explained the Staffing Aide floated and helped. Staff J explained in getting report from the Staffing CNA, the Staffing CNA said she had never been in the facility before and was not able to tell Staff J much. Staff J explained when Staff J got to the facility a couple people were up in the dining room, and Staff K went ahead and started walking the halls. Staff J further explained Staff K said there were a lot of people up, and Staff J explained at that point it was easier to let the Staffing CNA go. Staff J and Staff K started a round, and offered to see if anybody wanted to go to bed. Staff J explained since the Staffing CNA had been on the South hall, they went ahead and started the round on South hall right after 10:00 PM. Staff J explained Resident #7 was the first person they addressed on the South hall. Per Staff J, she and Staff K went in and Resident #7 was still in the recliner, which Staff J explained had never happened as the resident was always in bed when she got to the facility. Staff J explained Resident #7's blanket was peeled back, underneath the resident wore blue snap pants, and there was a puddle around the resident's pants, dark, brown, and dried. Staff J explained it was like the second shift aides had not touched the resident since first shift put the resident in the recliner before they left. Per Staff J, the resident was so soaked her brief had seeped through. Staff J explained the resident's tray was on top of her on her lap. Per Staff J, the resident was known for that to pull things down on her. Staff J explained the resident was Care Planned to have a soda on the side of the bed and would pick it up and dump on herself. Per Staff J, the resident was not safe to have hot liquids in her room. When queried how this information was communicated prior to the incident, Staff J responded common sense, and if spilling soda pop on her, then wouldn't put coffee. Per Staff J, if Staffing (Agency) staff were not shown, then they did not know, and the facility had more Staffing (Agency Staff) in the facility than regular people. Staff J explained the resident had regular dishes, the tray itself was still on the nightstand, the only thing on the tray was the tray and plate, and everything else was in her lap (cups/bowl). Staff J explained maybe the brown ring in her lap could have been coffee, and she and the other staff member thought urine because the resident was soaked through the back. Per Staff J, she and Staff K took everything off the resident's lap and set it on the nightstand, used the Hoyer (mechanical lift) to get the resident to the bed, cleaned the resident up, took the resident's pants down, and realized the resident had started to blister on the left bottom part of the resident's abdomen and one spot on her top part of her thigh. Staff J explained it was all red all around and yellow/bubbly. Staff J explained when she and Staff K started rounding she told the Staffing Nurse to keep an eye on the hall as they were going to be busy for a while. Staff K explained the Staffing Nurse was down taking care of another resident, she waited for the nurse for a few minutes, the nurse looked at Resident #7, and said yeah it has to be a burn for sure. Staff J explained the resident was given a bed bath, cleaned up, the nurse came in and did measurements, and hourly checks were done after that. On 1/11/24 at 3:27 PM interview conducted with Staff I, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), who explained they worked the day after the incident, came in at 10 PM (on 1/2/24) to 6 AM (on 1/3/24). Per Staff I, she came in on her shift, received report, and was told there were blisters on the Resident #7's left leg and left side of her lower abdomen. Staff I explained she knew they were from a hot liquid. When queried about symptoms of pain for the resident, Staff I said yes, and explained just applying the dressing around the area the resident flinched and was very cautious. Staff I explained she could tell it was painful. Per Staff I, prior to the incident that resident had to have the special cups with sippy type device to hold onto it, and explained the resident did sit at the assisted table on a regular basis. Staff I explained sometimes the resident wanted your help and also very independent wanted to do herself. Staff I explained assistance was more supervisory. The Physician Order for Resident #7 dated 1/12/24 documented, Cefadroxil Oral Suspension Reconstituted 250 MG/5 ML (milligram/milliliter) with instruction to give 5 ml by mouth every 12 hours for infection for 7 Days. On 1/16/23 at 912 AM, Staff F, Registered Nurse (RN) explained Resident #7 started on antibiotic for the thigh area, as worried about infection as the resident liked to pick at it. On 1/16/24 at 1:28 PM, Staff N, LPN acknowledged she did work 1/1/24 (date of incident). Staff N explained she got to the facility at 8 PM to 6 AM, explained she had worked for the facility as a CNA, and came in at 8 PM for training. Staff N explained when the overnight staff came in at 10:00 PM or 10:30 PM, the aides came in and said it looked like spilt food all over the resident. Staff N explained getting the resident laid down, and had blisters to the lower left abdomen and left upper thigh. Per Staff N, a cool washcloth applied, and she call the ADON to let her know. Staff N further explained Resident #7 sat in the recliner, and staff called her in to see food spilt all over. Per Staff N, the blisters were noticed once got the resident into the bed. Staff N was unable to recall the names of the aides. When queried if the resident spoke, Staff N explained the resident did not really talk to her. Staff N explained she asked the resident if in pain, and the resident shook her head no. On 1/16/24 at 1:33 PM when queried if she worked the night of the incident, Staff O, Medication Aide/CNA explained she thought so, and later clarified she did. Per Staff O, she did not normally go down that hall (where Resident #7 resided) and did meds on two other halls. Staff O explained she knew there was a Staffing CNA that night who had passed the trays on the hall where Resident #7 resided. Per Staff O, she saw the CNA take the cart, and didn't see the staff member actually pass the trays. Staff O explained she knew the resident had been getting room trays or eating down with family in her room and before the incident she was not aware of the resident spilling drinks on herself. On 1/16/24 at 2:48 PM, Staff P, CNA explained she worked 4 PM to 8 PM on the date of incident (1/1/24). Per Staff P, an agency staff was working the hallway and it was the agency staff's first time at the facility. Staff P explained the agency staff passed trays, and had Resident #7 and another resident eating in their rooms. Per Staff P, after dinner she had seen the staff member coming towards the kitchen with a tray, which made Staff P think of Resident #7 as the resident did not always eat in her room and if Resident #7 was not hungry she would not eat it. Staff P explained it made Staff P ask the Agency Staff, and the Agency Staff reported Resident #7 ate everything. Staff P explained she was very busy before 8:00 PM, had four residents up, and passed on that she had not helped the Agency Staff member with Resident #7 or another resident yet, and explained those residents required assistance of Hoyer transfer. Staff P explained she did not come back down to check herself, and took the Agency Staff member's word for it when the staff said the resident ate everything. When queried if Resident #7 could eat in their room by themselves prior to the incident, Staff P responded yes, and further explained sometimes with medication the resident got sleepy, and when she ate in her room Staff P would wake her up and let her know food was there. Per Staff P, prior to the incident, the resident drank a lot of coffee, at least for dinner, and for the most part ate in the dining room. On 1/22/24 at 12:53 PM, when queried if the facility had a way to assess residents for hot liquids prior to the incident, the Interim Director of Nursing (DON) explained not that she was aware of. When queried if the resident was known to dump fluids on herself prior to the incident, the Interim DON responded no, and as long as the Interim DON had been at the facility the resident would drink cans of soda in her room, and would not dump that on herself. When queried where the resident ate, the Interim DON explained since she started at the facility the resident almost always ate in the dining room. Per the Interim DON the resident used to feed herself, and over the last six months the resident slowly started to not want to eat, and the resident needed cueing. Per the Interim DON, sometimes the resident would let you scoop food on her spoon for her, and wanted you to leave it. When queried how often CNA's and nurses rounded on the resident, the Interim DON explained normally the resident should be ok for every 2 hours. Per the Interim DON, they had not seen the resident drink hot liquids, and usually at night the resident drank water or soda, and when she would work days saw her drink orange juice or water in the morning. On 1/22/24 at 4:25 PM, the Interim DON provided an undated form titled Hot Liquids Safety Evaluation, and explained to be included with the plan of correction. The form documented, Directions to be completed at time of admission, readmission or change in condition: (1) Evaluate for the presence of risk factors for spills and burns from hot liquids. (2) Place a check mark for each risk factor in space provided for that evaluation date. (3) Initial and sign the evaluation. (4) Review evaluation during care team meeting to determine appropriate interventions to prevent spills and burns. (5) Record date intervention was initiated, notes and date it was discontinued (if applicable).
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** During an interview on 1/18/24 at 3:05 PM, the ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) queried on Staff B, CNA behavior towards sta...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** During an interview on 1/18/24 at 3:05 PM, the ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) queried on Staff B, CNA behavior towards staff and she stated she knew Staff B for a long time and from other facilities. She stated she didn't know about any allegations until the Administrator told her and she thought Staff B was stressed and joked with the residents. She stated she didn't know what was said but if Staff B was joking around she needed to know her audience before doing it. Based on Facility Reported Incident (FRI) review, observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from mental abuse and verbal abuse by a staff member for three of six residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #30, #84, and #134), resulting in a resident report of the employee being mean to them, resident display of negative reactions including being irate and displaying increased behaviors around the employee, and staff report of the employee taunting a resident. The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings Include: Review of a Self-Report Reporting Information for an Incident which occurred 10/9/23 at 10:00 AM, documented the following per the Incident Summary: A staff member wrote a statement stating Staff B, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) on 2nd sift talks badly to the residents. She stated that residents have told her to get out of their room. The statement reports Resident #4 was told she could take herself to the bathroom and she is not helpless. Resident #4 has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 out of 15. Staff B told Resident #30 she wasn't going to help her if she was going to keep acting crazy. Resident #30 has a BIMS of 6 out of 15 and is very confused. The statement reports that Resident # 13 was told he was lazy and could do more for himself. Resident #13 was then reported to say Staff B didn't like him at another facility and she still didn't like him now. Resident #13's BIMS is 14 out of 15. At this time, we do not know when any of these things were said. We assume it was in their rooms. Review of the Summary of Investigation of Incident section dated 10/11/23 documented, in part, the following: At this time [Facility Name Redacted] has completed its investigation of the allegation of verbal abuse/personal degradation. While the residents that have a BIMS of 10 or above, report there is no problem with Staff B, CNA, staff report Staff B has said things to our confused/dementia residents that could be considered shameful, degrading, and possibly causing humiliation or harm to their personal dignity. Review of a Situation, Background, Assessment, Request (SBAR) form to the Nurse Practitioner (NP) dated 10/13/23 documented, Allegation of verbal abuse was reported to us + (and) reported to State-CNA made faces + comments to some residents about you could do more for yourself, you are lazy, if you fall, then one less person I have to care for. The SBAR included four resident names, Resident #1, Resident #4, Resident #13, and Resident #30, with notation the first three residents denied anything and the fourth had dementia. Review of the clinical records for Resident #1, Resident #4, Resident #13, Resident #30, and Resident #134 revealed the following residents had intact cognition per their BIMS scores present on the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, as indicated below: 1. The MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 scored 15 out of 15 on a BIMS exam, which indicated intact cognition. 2. The MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #4 scored 14 out of 15 on a BIMS exam, which indicated intact cognition. 3. The MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #13 scored 14 out of 15 on a BIMS exam, which indicated intact cognition. The following residents had severely impaired cognition per their BIMS scores present on the MDS assessment, as indicated below: 4. The MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #30 scored 6 out of 15 on a BIMS exam, which indicated severely impaired cognition. 5. The MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #134 scored 3 out of 15 on a BIMS exam, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. On 1/17/24 at 2:24 PM, Resident #134 observed in their room in a recliner chair. Review of Medical Diagnoses for Resident #134 revealed a diagnosis of anxiety disorder. When queried, Resident #134 unable to state the name of where they currently were. Interview with staff at time of survey revealed Resident #84's described reaction to Staff B. Resident #84 was not included in FRI documentation. The BIMS information for Resident #84 included the following: 6. The MDS Assessment for Resident #84 dated 10/6/23 revealed the resident scored 00 out of 15 on a BIMS exam, which indicated severely impaired cognition. Review of medical diagnoses for Resident #84 revealed the resident had a diagnosis of dementia without behavioral disturbance. Review of a statement by Staff C, CNA, dated 10/9/23 at 10:45 AM, documented, I [Staff C] seen [First Name matching that of Staff B, CNA talk badly to the residents, she goes in their rooms with poor ethic she will refuse to help those she doesn't like, I've seen and heard residents say she's mean she's evil, I heard residents tell her to get out of their room. Staff B told Resident #4 she's not helpless she could take herself to bathroom. Staff B told Resident #30 she wasn't going to help her if she was going to keep acting crazy. Staff B would refuse to help Resident #1 more than once I would have to go answer Resident #1's call light cause she wouldn't [Staff B] and would talk bad to Resident #13 saying he was lazy and he could do more for himself I heard Resident #13 say to Staff B, you didn't like me at [another facility name redacted] and you still don't like me here. Review of a statement by Staff D, CNA, dated 10/11/23 documented, I, [Staff D], have witnessed Staff B verbally abusive + Taunt residents at [Facility Name]. It's mostly with residents with memory issues. Their demeanor changes when she enters the room + they start to have behaviors. Another CNA + I had to go into Resident #30's room to get her up because she would not for Staff B. Resident #30 said Staff B was hateful + mean to her + we calmed her. Staff D noticed Staff B peaking though the curtain taunting her with faces. I have heard the same resident who was experiencing pain say she was going to throw herself out of her chair + kill herself + Staff B told her to go ahead and do it then, less work for us, etc. Resident #134 said how mean Staff B is to her. Staff D had been in the room when Staff B said things back mocking their pain + confusion. Staff B walks into rooms with sour faces, a bad attitude, + is just mean to some residents. Especially the residents who react to her negative energy. Staff D cannot remember every word said but, Staff B should not take care of the elderly who have memory loss, who are confused or scared she mocks them, she is not supportive + she is mean to them. Review of a statement by Staff E, Registered Nurse (RN), documented, had noted Staff B making negative sarcastic comments to residents over the past week. Staff E had also overheard a couple residents making a comment along the lines of you just don't like me. Staff B had made negative statements about residents to me and within earshot of me that certain residents get on her nerves and she does not like caring for them. On Friday night 10/6/23, several CNA's were sitting discussing similar situations they have encountered with Staff B in the recent past 1-2 weeks. On 1/10/24 at 3:04 PM Staff D, CNA queried about her statement and Staff B. Staff D explained she really enjoyed working with Staff B, then started noticing Staff B was kind of talking with the residents with memory disabilities kind of mean. Per Staff D, she heard the employee had been turned in. Staff D explained she provided a statement about Staff B's treating a few of the residents, clarified as two residents, and Staff D explained she needed to go and take care of residents because they did not want Staff B near them. Staff D provided the first names of the two residents, Resident #30 and Resident #134. Staff D explained she looked back and Staff B was poking through the curtain mocking a resident (Resident #30), and didn't care for that, and Staff B's negative energy rubbed off on residents and something had to be said. Staff D explained she needed to go in and do cares because Resident #30 did not want Staff B, would not listen to her and be around her. Per Staff D, with Resident #134, right when the resident was having a really hard time and said something like, Oh, I'm just going to fall or something, Staff B said just go ahead. Per Staff D, she knew Staff B would never let someone actually fall, and didn't know if Staff B said it loud enough for resident to hear, but think the employee did so (loud enough to hear). When queried about reporting, Staff D explained she just wasn't sure, thought this was not Staff B, and explained she had worked with Staff B prior. Staff D explained when they were approached by a staff, Staff D realized it was an actual problem, and explained now when it happened they would not think the staff was just going through something rough and would notify right away. Staff D explained she was approached by the Director of Nursing (DON). Staff D explained this occurred with just people with memory problems and nobody who was actually alert. When queried about the residents' reaction, Staff D explained when Staff B was in the room they would get immediately irritated, and further explained it probably did not just happen when Staff D was at the facility, and probably happened often. On 1/11/24 at 12:11 PM, during an interview with Staff J, CNA, about concerns with staff treatment to residents, Staff J explained there was one lady who was let go. Staff J explained she wouldn't want her taking care of people. Staff J provided a first name of that matching Staff B, and last name starting with the same letter as Staff B's name. Per Staff J, she believed the employee was accused of abuse, and explained she believed it was valid. Per Staff J, the employee was very vulgar, straight to the point, very blunt, and was like children talking to her. Staff J explained she was the one that took report from the employee the night the allegation was made. Staff J explained there was a resident down [redacted] hall, Resident #21, who had a [Brand Name camera device with monitoring display screen] in their room. Per Staff J, the [Camera Device] can hear (described as like a baby monitor). Staff J explained if right outside the room giving report you could hear, and there was a resident across the hall from Resident #21, later identified by first name of Resident #30, who was louder, and Staff B said, quit that fake crying. Per Staff J, she heard it directly, Staff B left, and the nurse working with Staff J asked if Staff B was like that a lot. Staff J explained the other part of the camera was at the Nurse's Station so when giving report the staff member probably heard Staff B telling resident she was faking. Staff J explained Staff B was trying to finish report, Resident #30 was hollering and crying, and Staff B made the comment. When queried if she thought residents could hear the comment, Staff J responded they were all in bed. Per Staff J, she had worked with Staff B in the past and that seemed to be her normal. Per Staff J the above described happened, Staff J was off for a few days, Staff J came back, and heard the staff member had been reported. On 1/16/24 at 12:21 PM, a display screen with an image was observed at the Nursing Station. When queried whose device it was, Staff L, Restorative Aide explained for Resident #21. Observation of Resident #21's resident room revealed a camera device on the wall. On 1/16/24 at 12:45 PM, Staff M, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) explained she worked night shift, 10:00 PM to 6:00 AM. When queried about concerning statements by staff to resident, Staff M denied knowing of any. When queried if a resident had a camera device, Staff M explained Resident #21. When queried if the device had audio, Staff M responded yes, and it had the option to turn audio off. When queried if she ever heard anything concerning though the camera device, Staff M denied hearing anything. On 1/17/24 at 9:53 AM, interview conducted with Staff Q, CNA. When queried about staff to resident treatment concerns, Staff Q explained not for staff at the facility now. Per Staff Q there was one lady, matching first name of Staff B, that she worked with one day. Staff Q explained she did not like how Staff B spoke to residents, and Staff Q thought Staff B was too burnt out and got frustrated with the residents. Per Staff Q, Staff B wasn't yelling at residents, and Staff Q explained she did not say anything to anyone else, and didn't think it was a form of abuse. Per Staff Q, Staff B was very stern speaking, and described the employee as fed up and over it. Staff Q was not able to remember anything said to the residents. When queried if the facility had spoken to her about staff to resident concerns, Staff Q explained they had for a different situation (involving a different allegation type). When queried if directed towards certain residents or more widespread, Staff Q responded with everybody. Staff Q explained mainly what she remembered the residents met Staff B's energy and gave it right back. When queried how Staff B responded, Staff Q explained she knew Staff B argued with a couple of residents and they would argue right back with her. When queried as to specific residents, Staff Q responded she did not think at the facility any more. On 1/17/23 at 2:55 PM, when queried about treatment from staff to residents, Staff E, former employee, explained a staff would make offhand comments towards resident in the hall or their tone of voice was a little rough. Staff E explained she noticed the employee's tone of voice, and figured it was kind of her personality as the employee would be that way to other staff. Staff E explained they never heard anything she needed to report. Staff E explained when they heard discussion by CNAs, then it needed to be reported. Staff E explained it boiled down to one CNA. Staff E queried if this would be the same situation described in her statement, included with FRI documentation, and acknowledged yes. Per Staff E, the employee would not give a simple response when a resident would ask for something. Staff E further explained with a regular exchange for the resident, the employee would throw in something extra and put an edge on it. When queried about resident response, Staff E explained some of them seemed to not be really comfortable around her. Per Staff E, none of the residents refused to let the employee care for them that Staff E could recall. Staff E explained it was on a midnight shift when she overheard conversation from CNAs, and she felt like someone needed to report it as it was openly talked about in front of Staff E. Staff E further explained the discussion was around how a CNA from second shift spoke to residents when doing walking rounds per her recollection. Per Staff E, the discussion surrounded on how they did not think how the employee was talking was right. On 1/17/24 at 4:14 PM, during an interview with Staff R, CNA explained Staff B used to agitate the [h*ll] out of every single resident she would go into. Per Staff R, she would follow Staff B and would take report from Staff B, and multiple residents were agitated to high heavens and she needed to calm them down almost every day. Staff R explained there was one resident who was at the facility for four days, Resident #84, who would be irate, throwing things at Staff B. Per Staff R, Resident #84 had dementia, and she would assist in getting the resident settled down and then the resident was fine for the rest of the night. Staff R explained Staff B had a very short temper, very short attention span, and if did not do what she wanted, she was going to yell at them. Staff R further explained the following about Resident #30: Per Staff R, Resident #21 had a [brand name device like baby monitor], and the volume of the monitor would be kept up at night in case the resident started talking. Staff R explained the volume of the monitor was turned up when she got to the facility. Per Staff R, she turned it up and heard Staff B in the hallway mocking Resident #30 because Resident #30 used to have behaviors and scream. Staff R explained they heard Staff B yelling back at the resident in the hallway, heard through Resident #21's monitor. Staff R explained the following example: Resident #30 would yell she wanted out of there and wanted to go home, and Staff B in a mocking tone did it back, not to the resident's face, but in the hallway. Staff R explained she could hear it on Resident #21's monitor. When queried if she thought Resident #30 could hear Staff B, Staff R responded no as the resident was pretty hard of hearing, but she still didn't like it and was not appropriate. Staff R explained she knew Resident #4 had said the staff member was short with her, and Resident #4 said Staff B had a real short attention span, got short with her, and made her hurry. Per Staff R, it was irritating when the same few people were always upset. On 1/18/24 at 4:21 PM when queried about findings, the facility Administrator explained their intuition was that something was not right. The Administrator explained she thought Staff B thought she was joking, but it came off harsh. The Administrator explained she had not seen Staff B treat a resident wrong, and she could not remember which CNA told her of Staff B and the curtain peeking incident, and she did not know why Staff B did that. The Facility Policy titled Nursing Facility Abuse Prevention, Identification, Investigation and Reporting Policy dated October 2022 revealed, in part, 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. This includes prohibiting nursing facility staff from taking part in acts that result in person degradation.
CONCERN (D)

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

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to notify the Physician after ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to notify the Physician after the resident expressed thoughts of self harm for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for change of condition (Resident #21). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings Include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #21 scored a 3 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated cognition severely impaired. The MDS documented the resident had medical diagnoses including Non-Alzheimer's dementia, and depression. The MDS revealed the resident took antipsychotic, antidepressant, and antianxiety medications. The Care Plan documented a Focus Area dated 3/1/23 for a mood problem related to cognitive decline, and inability to safely return to her home. The interventions dated 3/1/23 directed the staff as follows: a. Assist the resident, family, and caregivers to identify strengths and positive coping skills and reinforce them. b. Monitor/record/report mood patterns with signs and symptoms of depression, anxiety, sad mood as needed to the Medical Doctor (MD) as per the facility behavior monitoring protocols. The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed the following diagnoses: a. Major depressive disorder, single episode, unspecified. b. Unspecified depression. c. Unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, with other behavioral disturbance. The Physician Orders revealed the following orders: a. Ordered on 10/10/23 and discontinued on 10/17/23- Clonazepam oral tablet disintegrating 0.25 milligram (mg) - give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day every other day for anxiety for 7 days. b. Ordered on 8/21/23 and discontinued on 12/21/23- Sertraline HCl (hydrochloride) oral tablet 25 mg- give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day. c. Ordered on 2/17/23 and discontinued on 11/13/23 Risperidone oral tablet 0.25 mg- give 0.5 mg by mouth one time a day. The Progress Note dated 8/23/23 at 8:55 PM, revealed after resident in bed staff heard her crying. Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) stated when she talked with the resident, the resident stated, I just want my children here and for us all to die together so I can be with them. 1:1 placed with resident and resident calmed down and checked by nurse and resident asleep. The facility lacked documentation the family or the doctor notified of the residents thoughts/behaviors. The Progress Note dated 10/14/23 at 3:16 PM, revealed the resident stated to another resident that if I had a gun, I'd shoot myself. This nurse went and talked with resident. The resident stated that she really didn't want to kill herself, she just felt useless. Resident kept requesting to go to see her mother, who was ill. This nurse put 1 on 1 supervision with the resident, then went and got the basket of clothing protectors and asked for resident's help folding them. This nurse called family to let them know and see if one of them could visit with the resident. Resident folded the clothing protectors in the basket and then smiled at this nurse and stated that made her, feel happier. Another resident joined her in folding some of the clothing protectors. This nurse went back to laundry and pulled a load out of the dryer and gave them to both residents. Both sat there and folded them chatting with each other. The facility lacked documentation of notification to the doctor of the residents thoughts of harm. During an interview on 1/17/24 at 11:26 AM, Staff F, Registered Nurse (RN) queried on the situation when the resident made comments about wanting to shoot herself and Staff F stated she believed they spoke to the Physician. Staff F asked if the Physician notified, would it be documented and she stated yes. During an interview on 1/17/23 at 3:46 PM, Staff T, RN queried what she done when residents expressed thoughts of harm and she stated she asked a few more questions such as did they have a plan and why did they think that way and then she would talk to the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) and let the Physician know. During an interview on 1/18/24 at 1:15 PM, the ADON queried on Resident #21's behaviors and she stated she knew about a time when the resident said something about a gun and she stated they called the family. The ADON asked if the Physician needed notified and she stated yes they should. The ADON queried about another time the resident spoke of wanting her family with her so they could all die together and the ADON confirmed the Physician should of been notified. During an interview on 1/22/24 at 12:44 PM, the Interim Director of Nursing (DON) queried on her expectations when a resident made comments of self harm and she stated it would depend on the resident and if they were capable of following through and look at the situation and she would look at urinary symptoms, look to see if resident started new medication or had family visits and let the doctor know of the situation. The Facility Resident Change of Condition Physician Notifications Policy dated 1/22/18 revealed the following information: a. The attending Physician or Physician On-Call notified with changes in a resident's condition or health status. 1. Significant change in mental or psychosocial status. 2. Other conditions as deemed necessary. b. Document time of call, Physician or Nurse Practitioner or other person spoke to, reason for call and results or orders received.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to update a Car...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to update a Care Plan when a resident started a diuretic medication for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #19). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings Include: The MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #19 scored a 5 of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated cognition severely impaired. The MDS revealed the resident received a diuretic. The Care Plan lacked documentation for a Focus Area and interventions for Resident #19's diuretic medication. The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed the following medical diagnoses: a. Heart failure, unspecified. b. Unspecified systolic (congestive) heart failure. c. Chronic kidney disease, Stage 3 unspecified. d. Hypertensive chronic kidney disease with Stage 1 through Stage 4 chronic kidney disease, or unspecified chronic kidney disease. The Physician Orders documented the following medication orders: a. Ordered 11/10/23- Bumetanide oral tablet 1 milligram (mg)- Give 1.5 mg by mouth one time a day. During an observation on 1/8/24 at 1:44 PM, Resident #19 sat in her Geri chair in high semi-Fowlers position and the Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) escorted her from the dining room. Alarm in place on the arm of her Geri chair. During an interview on 1/18/24 at 1:28 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated they all worked on the Care Plans. The ADON queried if Resident #30 on a diuretic, and if the diuretic needed documented on the Care Plan and she stated the facility usually didn't put diuretics on the Care Plan. She stated they Care Planned blood thinners, antipsychotics, and antidepressants. During an interview on 1/22/24 at 12:35 PM, the Interim Director of Nursing (DON) queried on the expectation of a diuretic addressed on the Care Plan and she stated she didn't think they Care Planned the diuretic. She stated they Care Planned antipsychotics, anticoagulants, and antianxiety medications but didn't think they Care Planned the diuretics. The undated Facility MDS/Care Plan Review Policy didn't address the need for medications to be addressed on the Care Plan. The undated Facility MDS/Care Plan Review Policy revealed the focus areas, goals, or interventions on the Care Plan were good to review for assistance with what to document on.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to recheck a blood pressure, ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to recheck a blood pressure, notify the doctor, and document a follow up Progress Note after a elevated blood pressure reading of 190/88 with a stomachache and back pain for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for closed records (Resident #30). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings Include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #30 scored a 4 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated cognition severely impaired. The MDS revealed diagnoses of hypertension and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed a diagnosis of hypertension. The Physician Orders documented the following medication: a. Ordered 10/31/23- metoprolol tartrate oral tablet 25 milligrams (mg) - give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day The Skilled Evaluation Progress Note dated 11/26/23 at 8:07 PM, revealed the following vitals: a. Temperature 97.7. b. Blood Pressure (BP) 123/64. c. Pulse 74 beats per minute (bpm). d. Respirations 16 breaths per minute. e. Pulse Oximetry (O2) 96%. The Progress Note dated 11/26/23 at 9:09 PM, documented Resident #30 complained of stomachache and back pain. As needed (PRN) Tylenol administered and gave warm blankets wrapped around stomach and back. Temperature 97.4, pulse 74 bpm and regular, respirations 20 breaths per minute, BP 190/88 laying position, left arm. While resident laid down stated I'm going to be sick and gagged with only spit coming out. Also passed a large amount of gas at that same time. The resident got up into recliner so that she sat in upright position if she vomited. After a few minutes she stated she wanted to get into bed again. Encouraged her to sit up but replied I'm not that sick. Assisted back to bed into comfortable position on her side, with wastebasket at bedside and fresh warm blanket. The facility lacked documentation for a recheck of the elevated blood pressure, notification to the doctor of blood pressure and symptoms, and a follow up Progress Note for resident's symptoms or if the Tylenol effective for pain relief. During an interview on 1/17/24 at 11:23 AM, Staff F, Registered Nurse (RN) queried what she'd do when a resident had a high blood pressure reading and she stated she waited a little bit and then rechecked the blood pressure and if the reading still showed the blood pressure elevated she contacted the provider. She stated she'd let the oncoming nurse know of the elevated blood pressure. Staff F confirmed when she took a blood pressure reading, she documented the reading in the chart. She stated the system now had alerts to inform the nurses if they needed to chart on a resident and the interventions that completed. During an interview on 1/17/24 at 3:46 PM, Staff T, RN queried if she remembered the last time she cared for Resident #30 and she stated yes. She stated Resident #30 had a stomach ache and had a huge bowel movement and went to sleep and then she checked on her throughout the shift. Staff T asked about the elevated blood pressure she documented and she stated she didn't remember the blood pressure and if the resident had an elevated blood pressure reading she rechecked it manually. Staff T stated sometimes Resident #30 hard to get vitals assessed. Staff T stated she normally documented when she rechecked the blood pressure. She stated if the blood pressure elevated she would probably call the on-call. Staff T stated she might of called the on-call but didn't know and it would be documented. During an interview on 1/18/24 at 1:38 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) queried on Resident #30 elevated blood pressure and she stated she would have called the family and rechecked the blood pressure. During an interview on 1/22/24 at 12:39 PM, the Interim Director of Nursing (DON) queried on Resident #30's elevated blood pressure and the expectation of nurses evaluating elevated blood pressure and the DON explained the nurse should re-take the blood pressure and document another Progress Note and if the blood pressure continued to be high notify the Physician. She stated if a wrist blood pressure cuff used, the nurse would recheck the blood pressure manually. She stated she took care of the resident that evening and the resident commented about a stomach ache and then had a bowel movement and the Interim DON stated she checked on her during and at the end of her shift. The undated Facility Resident Vital Parameters Policy revealed the following information: a. Upon admission admitting nurse requested parameters for vital sings. b. Nurse put parameters into weights and vitals tab on EMR. c. When vitals taken, they needed documented in weights and vitals tab which prompted the nurse of vital signs out of parameter. d. Nurse needed to recheck vital signs that were out of parameters and notify the Physician. e. Documentation of the time of the call, what Physician the nurse spoke with, and what vitals were out of parameter and any new orders received. The Facility Resident Change of Condition Physician Notifications Policy dated 1/22/18 revealed the following information: a. The attending Physician or Physician On-Call notified with changes in a resident's condition or health status: 1. Change in vital signs. 2. Pain (new or unmanaged). b. Document time of call, Physician or Nurse Practitioner or other person spoken to, reason for call and results or orders received.
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 observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a medication cart remained lo...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a medication cart remained locked when staff not present for one of two medication carts. The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings Include: On 1/8/24 at 10:45 AM, observation of a medication cart present outside of room [ROOM NUMBER] of the facility revealed the cart unlocked, drawer of cart able to be opened without a key, and medication cards inside the cart. Staff were not observed to be present with the medication cart at time of observation. On 1/8/24 at 11:14 AM, observation of a medication cart in the same location of the facility revealed although the main lock for the medication cart depressed, the second drawer on the right side of the cart unlocked with the drawer slightly opened. Medication card visible inside of the drawer. On 1/8/24 at 11:18 AM, when queried if the drawer was the narcotic drawer, Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) confirmed. Staff A questioned how the main lock of the cart locked while the drawer was unlocked. On 1/22/24 at 12:50 PM when queried when medication carts should be locked, the Interim Director of Nursing (DON) responded any time the Nursing Staff are not standing there taking something out. The Interim DON also explained the Pharmacy was contacted who provided the carts, and it was explained the main lock could be locked with the narcotic drawer unlocked. The Facility Policy titled Storage of Medication revised 4/07 documented at point #7: a. Compartments (including, but not limited to, drawers, cabinets, rooms, refrigerators, carts, and boxes.) containing drugs and biologicals shall be locked when not in use, and trays or carts used to transport such items shall not be left unattended if open or otherwise potentially available to others.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on Facility Reported Incident (FRI) review, staff interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure allegations of mental abuse and verbal abuse from a staff member to residen...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on Facility Reported Incident (FRI) review, staff interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure allegations of mental abuse and verbal abuse from a staff member to residents was reported to the State Agency within required regulatory timeframe for five of six residents reviewed for abuse included as part of a Facility Reported Incident and/or included in staff statements as part of the FRI (Resident #1, #4, #13, #30, and #134). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings Include: Review of a Self-Report Reporting Information for an Incident which occurred 10/9/23 at 10:00 AM, documented the following per the Incident Summary: A staff member wrote a statement stating Staff B, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) on 2nd sift talks badly to the residents. She stated that residents have told her to get out of their room. The statement reports Resident #4 was told she could take herself to the bathroom and she is not helpless. Resident #4 has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 out of 15. Staff B told Resident #30 she wasn't going to help her if she was going to keep acting crazy. Resident #30 has a BIMS of 6 out of 15 and is very confused. The statement reports that Resident #13 was told he was lazy and could do more for himself. Resident #13 was then reported to say Staff B didn't like him at another facility and she still didn't like him now. Resident #13's BIMS is 14 out of 15. At this time, we do not know when any of these things were said. We assume it was in their rooms. Review of a statement by Staff E, Registered Nurse (RN), documented, had noted Staff B making negative sarcastic comments to residents over the past week. Staff E had also overheard a couple residents making a comment along the lines of you just don't like me. Staff B had made negative statements about residents to me and within earshot of me that certain residents get on her nerves and she does not like caring for them. On Friday night 10/6/23, several CNA's were sitting discussing similar situations they have encountered with Staff B in the recent past 1-2 weeks. Review of the Summary of Investigation of Incident section dated 10/11/23 documented, in part, the following: At this time [Facility Name Redacted] has completed its investigation of the allegation of verbal abuse/personal degradation. While the residents that have a BIMS of 10 or above, report there is no problem with Staff B, (CNA), staff report Staff B has said things to our confused/dementia residents that could be considered shameful, degrading, and possibly causing humiliation or harm to their personal dignity .Also, at this time staff is being educated starting today regarding the need to report verbal abuse immediately to the Director of Nursing (DON) and or the Administration instead of waiting a day or two to do so. When asking the staff members why they did not report sooner. They stated they were fairly new here and thought maybe it was just her way. It was not until they got together and started talking that they knew they needed to report this. On 1/17/23 at 2:55 PM, when queried about treatment from staff to residents, Staff E, Registered Nurse (RN), explained a staff would make offhand comments towards resident in the hall or their tone of voice was a little rough. Staff E explained she noticed the employee's tone of voice, and figured it was kind of her personality as the employee would be that way to other staff. Staff E explained they never heard anything they needed to report. Staff E explained when they heard discussion by CNAs, then it needed to be reported. Staff E explained it boiled down to one CNA. Staff E queried if this would be the same situation described in her statement as part of the facility reported incident, and acknowledged yes. Per Staff E, the employee would not give a simple response when a resident would ask for something, and with a regular exchange for the resident, the employee would throw in something extra and put an edge on it. When queried about resident response, Staff E explained some residents seemed to not be real comfortable around her. Per Staff E, none of the residents refused to let the employee care for them that Staff E could recall. Staff E further explained it was on a midnight shift when she overheard conversation from CNAs, and she felt like someone needed to report it as it was openly talked about in front of her. Per Staff E, the discussion was around how a CNA from second shift spoke to residents when doing walking rounds is what she remembered them talking about. Per Staff E, they were all discussing how they did not think how the employee was talking was right. On 1/18/24 at 4:16 PM when queried how the incident was reported to her, the Administrator explained an anonymous note was left on her desk. The Administrator acknowledged coordination with the DON to start asking questions, and that is when statements started coming in on 10/9 (2023). When queried who had left the note, the Administrator responded she heard it was a CNA and heard it was a nurse, she did not know. The Administrator responded it should have been reported to her and the State Agency. When queried about expectations for staff, the Administrator explained she would expect for them to call her as soon as saw something or heard something, explained she always told staff 2 hours she knew with injury, and minimum of 24 hours. When queried if this occurred in this instance, the Administrator responded, no, it did not. Per the Administrator, when she asked staff, the response was they were new, did not want to make any trouble, and wanted to talk about it. The Administrator further explained from what she understood, they had talked about it for more than one day. The Facility Policy titled Nursing Facility Abuse Prevention, Identification, Investigation and Reporting Policy dated October 2022 revealed the following per the Reporting section: All allegations of Resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment, injuries of unknown origin and misappropriation should be reported immediately to the charge nurse. The Charge Nurse is responsible for immediately reporting the allegations of abuse to the Administrator, or designated representative. All allegations of Resident Abuse shall be reported to the Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals not later than two (2) hours after the allegation is made.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on Facility Reported Incident (FRI) review, clinical record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the faci...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on Facility Reported Incident (FRI) review, clinical record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation following allegations of mistreatment, mental abuse, and verbal abuse from a staff member to residents for six of six residents reviewed for abuse, four of which were named in a Facility Reported Incident (FRI) (Resident #1, #4, #13, and #30), one additional resident referenced in a staff statement included in the FRI documentation (Resident #134), and for one additional resident identified by staff upon interview (Resident #84). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings Include: Review of a Self-Report Reporting Information for an Incident which occurred 10/9/23 at 10:00 AM, documented the following per the Incident Summary: A staff member wrote a statement stating Staff B, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) on 2nd sift talks badly to the residents. She stated that residents have told her to get out of their room. The statement reports Resident #4 was told she could take herself to the bathroom and she is not helpless. Resident #4 has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 out of 15. Staff B told Resident #30 she wasn't going to help her if she was going to keep acting crazy. Resident #30 has a BIMS of 6 out of 15 and is very confused. The statement reports that Resident # 13 was told he was lazy and could do more for himself. Resident #13 was then reported to say Staff B didn't like him at another facility and she still didn't like him now. Resident #13's BIMS is 14 out of 15. At this time, we do not know when any of these things were said. We assume it was in their rooms. Per the Resident Section of the Self-Report, the names of Resident #1, Resident #4, Resident #13, and Resident #30 were listed. The residents listed in this section of the report had the following Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) scores: 1. Per the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #1 scored 15 out of 15 on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated intact cognition. 2. Per the MDS dated [DATE], Resident #4 scored 14 out of 15 on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated intact cognition. 3. Per the MDS dated [DATE], Resident #13 scored 14 out of 15 on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated intact cognition. 4. Per the MDS dated [DATE], Resident #30 scored 6 out of 15 on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated severely impaired cognition. Review of a Situation, Background, Assessment, Request (SBAR) form to the Nurse Practitioner (NP) dated 10/13/23 documented, Allegation of verbal abuse was reported to us + (and) reported to State-CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) made faces + comments to some residents about you could do more for yourself, you are lazy, if you fall one less person I have to care for. The SBAR included four resident names, Resident #4, Resident #1, Resident #13, and Resident #30, with notation the first three residents denied anything and the fourth had dementia. Review of a staff statement included as part of the FRI included information for Resident #134. Resident #134 was not included in the list of resident names included in the Resident Section of the Self-Report form. The BIMS for Resident #134 included the following: 5. Per the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #134 scored 3 out of fifteen on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Interview with staff at time of survey revealed Resident #84's described reaction to Staff B. Resident #84 was not included in the FRI, and was not referenced in witness statements by staff provided with the FRI. The BIMS information for Resident #84 included the following: 6. The MDS assessment for Resident #84 dated 10/6/23 revealed the resident scored 00 out of 15 on a BIMS exam, which indicated severely impaired cognition. Review of medical diagnoses for Resident #84 revealed the resident had a diagnosis of dementia without behavioral disturbance. Interviews conducted during the time of survey with Staff J, CNA, Staff Q, CNA, and Staff R, CNA revealed the following additional information including specific alleged incidents with residents, staff, and Staff B: On 1/11/24 at 12:11 PM during an interview with Staff J, CNA, about concerns with staff treatment to residents, Staff J explained there was one lady who was let go. Staff J explained she wouldn't want her taking care of people. Staff J provided a first name of that matching Staff B, and last name starting with the same letter as Staff B's name. Per Staff J, she believed the employee was accused of abuse, and explained she believed it was valid. Per Staff J, the employee was very vulgar, straight to the point, very blunt, and was like children talking to her. Staff J explained she was the one that took report from the employee the night the allegation was made. Staff J explained there was a resident down [redacted] hall, Resident #21, who had a [Brand Name camera device with monitoring display screen] in their room. Per Staff J, the [Camera Device] can hear (described as like a baby monitor). Staff J explained if right outside the room giving report you could hear, and there was a resident across the hall from Resident #21, later identified by first name of Resident #30, who was louder, and Staff B said, quit that fake crying. Per Staff J, she (Staff J) heard it directly, and when she came up, Staff B left, the nurse working with her asked if Staff B was like that a lot. Staff J explained the other part of the camera was at the Nurse's Station so when giving report the staff member probably heard Staff B telling resident she was faking. Staff J explained Staff B was trying to finish report, Resident #30 was hollering and crying, and Staff B made the comment. When queried if she thought residents could hear the comment, Staff J responded they were all in bed. Per Staff J, she had worked with Staff B in the past and that seemed to be Staff B's normal. Staff J explained that happened, then Staff J was off for a few days, came back, and heard the staff member had been reported. On 1/16/24 at 12:21 PM, a display screen with image was observed at the nursing station. When queried whose device it was, Staff L, Restorative Aide explained for Resident #21. Observation of Resident #21's resident room revealed a camera device on the wall. On 1/17/24 at 9:53 AM, interview conducted with Staff Q, CNA. When queried about staff to resident treatment concerns, Staff Q explained not for staff at the facility now. Staff Q explained there was one lady, matching first name of Staff B, that she worked with one day. Staff Q explained she did not like how Staff B spoke to residents, and Staff Q thought Staff B was too burnt out and got frustrated with the residents. Per Staff Q, Staff B wasn't yelling at residents, and Staff Q explained she did not say anything to anyone else and didn't think it was a form of abuse. Per Staff Q, Staff B was very stern speaking, and described the employee as fed up and over it. Staff Q was not able to remember anything said to the residents. When queried if the facility had spoken to her about staff to resident concerns, Staff Q explained they had for a different situation (different allegation type than this incident). When queried if the behavior was directed towards certain residents or more widespread, Staff Q responded with everybody. Staff Q explained mainly what she remembered the residents met Staff B's energy and gave it right back. When queried how Staff B responded, Staff Q explained she knew Staff B argued with a couple of residents and they would argue right back with her. When queried as to specific residents, Staff Q responded she did not think at the facility any more. On 1/17/24 at 4:14 PM during an interview with Staff R, CNA explained Staff B used to agitate the [h*ll] out of every single resident she would go into. Per Staff R, she would follow Staff B and would take report from Staff B, and multiple residents were agitated to high heavens and she needed to calm them down almost every day. Staff R explained there was one resident who was at the facility for four days, Resident #84, who would be irate, throwing things at Staff B. Per Staff R, Resident #84 had dementia, and she would assist in getting the resident settled down and the resident was fine for the resident of the night. Staff R explained Staff B had a very short temper, very short attention span, and if did not do what she wanted, she was going to yell at them. The Facility Reported Incident (FRI) did not include Resident #84. Staff R further explained there was a resident, Resident #30. Staff R explained Resident #21 had a [brand name device like a baby monitor], and the volume of the monitor would be kept up at night in case the resident started talking. Staff R explained the volume of the monitor was turned up when she got to the facility. Per Staff R, she turned the volume up and heard Staff B in the hallway mocking Resident #30 because Resident #30 used to have behaviors and scream. Staff R explained they heard Staff B yelling back at the resident in the hallway, heard through Resident #21's monitor and mocking. Staff R explained the following example: Resident #30 would yell she wanted out of there and wanted to go home, and Staff B in a mocking tone did it back, not to the resident's face, but in the hallway. Staff R explained she could hear it on Resident #21's monitor. When queried if she thought Resident #30 could hear Staff B, Staff R responded no as the resident was pretty hard of hearing, but she still didn't like it and was not appropriate. Staff R explained she knew Resident #4 had said the staff member was short with her, and Resident #4 said Staff B had a real short attention span, got short with her, and made her hurry. Staff R explained she always told the nurse of the situations which occurred, most of the time she let them know hey, this just happened and I got the resident calmed down. Staff R explained the specific phrasing she believed she used to communicate about Staff B. Per Staff R, it was irritating when the same few people were always upset, and she knew she told. Staff R explained she knew Staff M, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) had been present when she said something. Staff R explained she would report to a nurse. When queried if she was asked by the facility about the situation similar to current interview, Staff R said no. On interview, two staff referenced the monitor in Resident #21's room, one who reported what they heard on the monitor by Staff B, and another who alleged she was asked about Staff B by a nurse who heard via the monitor. The Facility Reported Incident did not reference Resident #21 or the monitor. On 1/18/24 at 4:16 PM when queried how the incident was reported to her, the Administrator explained an anonymous note was left on her desk. The Administrator acknowledged coordination with the Director of Nursing (DON) to start asking questions, and that is when statements started coming in on 10/9 (2023). When queried who had left the note, the Administrator responded she heard it was a CNA and heard it was a nurse, she did not know. On 1/18/24 at 4:27 PM, the Administrator explained residents with confusion would not be able to vocalize being treated wrongly unless there were outbursts, increased fighting back, or resisting cares, and explained she had not heard that anything had been extraordinarily off with the residents who had dementia. The Facility Policy titled Nursing Facility Abuse Prevention, Identification, Investigation and Reporting Policy dated October 2022 revealed the following: The Administrator or designee will complete documentation of the allegation of Resident abuse and collect any supporting documents relative to the alleged incident.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0865 (Tag F0865)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on review of the Centers For Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)-2567 reports for the Surveys conducted at the facility, staff interviews, and facility Quality Assurance and Performance Improveme...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on review of the Centers For Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)-2567 reports for the Surveys conducted at the facility, staff interviews, and facility Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Plan, the facility failed to ensure an effective QAPI process to address previously identified quality deficiencies, resulting in multiple repeat deficiencies identified on the facility's current Recertification and Complaint Survey previously identified during Surveys completed in the last seventeen months. The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings Include: Review of the facility's CMS-2567 form from a Complaint Survey which occurred 8/8/22 to 8/12/22 revealed the facility received a no actual harm level citation for freedom of abuse, reporting of alleged violations of abuse, and investigating/preventing/and correcting alleged violation of abuse. The facility also received a no actual harm level for labeling and storing of medications. The facility's current Recertification Survey, entrance date 1/8/23, resulted in repeat citations for freedom from abuse, timely reporting for alleged abuse, investigating/preventing/and correcting alleged abuse, and proper storage of medications. During an interview on 1/22/24 at 3:55 PM, the Administrator queried on the expectation of not repeating the same citations and she stated she would meet with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Department Heads and talk with their employees and see what their fears are with reporting and find out what we need to do to get reports done in a timely manner. The Administrator stated she would get more involved in the investigations and she stated the expectation for the medication carts was to keep them locked at all times and they would conduct audits on the carts staying locked as an example The Facility Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Program reviewed on January 2023 revealed the following information: a. Develop, implement and maintain an effective, comprehensive, data-driven QAPI program for services provided at the facility, focusing on indicators of outcomes of care and quality of life. b. provide a working framework for excellence in quality monitoring processes, identification of opportunities for improvement, implementing action steps to correct and/or improve measures, evaluates outcomes and demonstrates sustained compliance/outcomes.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0944 (Tag F0944)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on personnel record review,Facility Assessment review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to conduct annual training on Quality Assurance and Performance Improveme...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on personnel record review,Facility Assessment review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to conduct annual training on Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI)) for all staff reviewed for QAPI training. The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings Include: The training competencies for 2023 reviewed for staff showed the training competencies lacked documentation for the facility staff completing QAPI training for the year of 2023. During an interview on 1/18/24 at 11:26 AM, the Administrator queried to supply the training competencies documentation for QAPI training and she reviewed her files and then stated they didn't schedule it. She then stated it should of been completed in December of last year. She stated her goal was to include everyone in QAPI and she spoke to all the new hires about QAPI when they were hired. During an interview on 1/22/24 at 4:10 PM, the Administrator stated she looked and found the last QAPI training conducted in the fall of 2022. The Facility Assessment Tool for 2024 revealed the following information for Staff Training/Education and Competencies: a. Describe the staff training/education and competencies necessary to provide the level and types of support and care needed for your resident population. 1. QAPI fundamentals, and the needed team involvement using Performance Improvement teams. 2024 goal would be open meeting to more staff and residents The Facility Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Program (QAPI) Policy last reviewed on 1/23/23 documented the following information: a. Identified and scheduled mandatory education and/or skills training needed included elements and goals of the facility's QAPI program. b. Establish a staff competencies and annual education/competency calendar.
May 2023 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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on clinical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a residents medical needs were provided in accordance with professional standards of care for 1 of 4 residents revie...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on clinical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a residents medical needs were provided in accordance with professional standards of care for 1 of 4 residents reviewed. (Resident #5) The facility reported census is 34. Findings include: According to a Minimum Data Set (MDS) with a reference date of 8/3/22, Resident #5 had a Brief Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 which indicated a moderately impaired cognitive status. Resident #5 required extensive assistance with transfers, mobility, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene needs. Resident #5's diagnosis included congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease and seizure disorder. The admission Record documented that Resident#5 had diagnoses including kidney stones, and cancerous tumor of the prostate. The admission Record revealed that the resident had been admitted from a hospital on 7/28/23. A Progress Note dated 8/19/23 at 3:07 p.m. documented that the resident had amber colored urine, and the resident refused a lot of his meals. In an interview on 5/4/23 at 1:00 p.m. Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), stated when residents have an appointment outside of the facility, they coordinate with family to ensure transportation for the resident. The ADON stated if family is not able to transport the resident, they would contact their transportation provider, which is wheelchair accessible. The ADON was questioned regarding progress notes she wrote on 8/26/22 at 8:59 p.m. in which she indicated Resident #5's condition was worsening, 8/27/22 at 9:58 p.m. in which Resident #5 continued to decline and on 8/28/22 at 12:06 a.m. Resident #5 had a blood pressure of 104/52 and a temperature of 96.5 and whether the physician was notified of Resident #5's decline. The ADON stated the physician and nurse practitioner were both aware. (no indication in the progress notes of an assessment or physician notification) In an interview on 5/4/23 at 1:07 p.m. Staff E, MDS coordinator, stated when residents need transportation to get to appointments, she or other nurses will help facilitate the transportation. Staff E stated they only have one provider which is wheelchair accessible. Staff E questioned regarding a progress note dated 8/11/22 at 2:31 p.m. in which Resident #5 had a pre-op appointment in Iowa City on 8/12/22 and planned stent removal on 8/16/22. Staff E stated Resident #5 was unable to sit or stand for long periods of time and their transportation provider would not be suitable for a long trip. The progress note indicated Staff E contacted the urology department and they were to call back in the morning. Staff E stated there was no follow up the next day and Resident #5 missed his pre-op appointment. A progress note dated 8/16/22 at 3:34 p.m. indicated Staff E spoke with the urology department at a closer facility about removing Resident #5's stent there. Staff E stated she was planning on making arrangements but Resident #5's family was talking about leaving against medical advice (AMA). Resident #5 did not leave. Staff E indicated she did not follow up with making arrangements including transportation to have Resident #5's stent removed. Staff E reviewed the progress note dated 8/26/22 at 1:16 p.m. Staff E stated on that date she had made an appointment to have the Resident #5's stent removed on 9/8/22 and the spouse was to contact Care Transport to transport Resident #5 by stretcher to the hospital. Staff E stated on 8/30/22 the spouse called and stated she was not able to get transportation set up. The spouse reportedly contacted the urology department who instructed her to have the resident sent by ambulance to the hospital. Resident #5 was sent by ambulance to the hospital. In an interview on 5/4/23 at 1:15 p.m. Staff H, Registered Nurse, was questioned about a progress note dated 8/25/22 at 1:16 p.m. in which Resident #5's spouse indicated Resident #5's hematuria was not normal for him. Staff H wrote she educated the spouse about hematuria and it being normal with stents. Staff H was asked if she saw the hematuria the spouse was referring to. Staff H stated she had. There was no note describing the observation or assessment of the resident's reported abnormal hematuria. Staff H was questioned about a progress note dated 8/31/22 at 6:44 a.m. Staff H stated that morning she had spoken to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) nurse. The nurse stated Resident #5 was admitted related to sepsis and that the issues could have been avoided had the facility followed up with his urology appointments regarding his stents. Staff H stated it was the families responsibility to coordinate appointments and transportation. The ICU nurse stated Resident #5 had a catheter put in, blood pressure medications to address his hypotension, intravenous fluids and antibiotics.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s), Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 15 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $13,627 in fines. Above average for Iowa. Some compliance problems on record.
  • • Grade C (56/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Mixed indicators with Trust Score of 56/100. Visit in person and ask pointed questions.

About This Facility

What is West Point Care Center Inc's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns West Point Care Center Inc an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Iowa, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.

How is West Point Care Center Inc Staffed?

CMS rates West Point Care Center Inc's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 54%, compared to the Iowa average of 46%.

What Have Inspectors Found at West Point Care Center Inc?

State health inspectors documented 15 deficiencies at West Point Care Center Inc during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, and 13 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates West Point Care Center Inc?

West Point Care Center Inc is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by CAPSTONE MANAGEMENT, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 46 certified beds and approximately 29 residents (about 63% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in WEST POINT, Iowa.

How Does West Point Care Center Inc Compare to Other Iowa Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Iowa, West Point Care Center Inc's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (54%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting West Point Care Center Inc?

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

Is West Point Care Center Inc Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, West Point Care Center Inc has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Iowa. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at West Point Care Center Inc Stick Around?

West Point Care Center Inc has a staff turnover rate of 54%, which is 8 percentage points above the Iowa average of 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 West Point Care Center Inc Ever Fined?

West Point Care Center Inc has been fined $13,627 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Iowa average of $33,215. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.

Is West Point Care Center Inc on Any Federal Watch List?

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