COLBY OPERATOR, LLC

105 EAST COLLEGE DRIVE, COLBY, KS 67701 (785) 462-6721
For profit - Partnership 40 Beds MISSION HEALTH COMMUNITIES Data: November 2025 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation
Trust Grade
28/100
#118 of 295 in KS
Last Inspection: June 2025

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

Overview

Colby Operator, LLC in Colby, Kansas has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. Ranking #118 out of 295 facilities in Kansas places them in the top half for the state, but they are last in Thomas County with only one other facility to compare against. Unfortunately, the facility is worsening, with issues increasing from 1 in 2024 to 5 in 2025. Staffing is a concern, with a turnover rate of 76%, which exceeds the state average of 48%, although they maintain average RN coverage. Fines totaling $48,571 are troubling, as this amount is higher than 89% of other Kansas facilities. Specific incidents include a resident developing pressure ulcers due to inadequate care and a fall resulting from a wheelchair not being properly equipped, leading to injury. Overall, while some aspects like RN coverage are acceptable, the numerous deficiencies and high turnover raise significant red flags for families considering this facility.

Trust Score
F
28/100
In Kansas
#118/295
Top 40%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Worse
1 → 5 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
76% turnover. Very high, 28 points above average. Constant new faces learning your loved one's needs.
Penalties
✓ Good
$48,571 in fines. Lower than most Kansas facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 40 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Kansas. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
28 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★☆☆
3.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★★★☆☆
3.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 1 issues
2025: 5 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in fire safety.

The Bad

3-Star Overall Rating

Near Kansas average (2.9)

Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities

Staff Turnover: 76%

30pts above Kansas avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Federal Fines: $48,571

Above median ($33,413)

Moderate penalties - review what triggered them

Chain: MISSION HEALTH COMMUNITIES

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

Staff turnover is very high (76%)

28 points above Kansas average of 48%

The Ugly 28 deficiencies on record

1 life-threatening 1 actual harm
Jun 2025 5 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with one reviewed for dignity and respect. Based on...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with one reviewed for dignity and respect. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to promote dignity for one resident, Resident (R) 3, who was left uncovered in bed with only an incontinence brief on. This placed R3 at risk for impaired dignity. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R3 documented diagnoses of retention of urine (lack of ability to urinate and empty the bladder), diabetes mellitus (DM - when the body cannot use glucose, no enough insulin is made, or the body cannot respond to the insulin), hypertension (high blood pressure), anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), benign prostatic hyperpiesia (BPH - non-cancerous enlargement of the prostate which can lead to interference with urine flow, urinary frequency, and urinary tract infections), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD - slow and progressive circulation disorder causing narrowing, blockage, or spasms in a blood vessel). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R3 had severely impaired cognition. R3 was dependent upon staff for toileting hygiene, showers, dressing, personal hygiene, mobility, and transfers. R3 was always incontinent of bowel and had a catheter (a flexible tube inserted through a narrow opening into a body cavity, particularly the bladder, for removing fluid). R3's Care Plan, dated 05/28/25, initiated on 02/09/21, documented R3 required two staff for bed mobility, and one staff for personal hygiene. The update, dated 03/24/23, documented R3 had a catheter and directed staff to check tubing for kinks often throughout every shift, monitor and document intake and output as per facility policy. On 06/10/25 at 08:15 AM, observation revealed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) N removed R3's blanket off the bed and revealed R3 only had on an incontinence brief. CNA M wiped R3's face with a wet washcloth and swabbed his mouth. CNA M untaped R3's brief and noticed there were no wipes for her to perform catheter care. CNA M asked CNA N to go and get her some wipes so that she could do R3's catheter care. CNA M did not cover R3, and he laid in bed naked while CNA N left the room to get the wipes. R3 stated, You guys gonna cover me up? I'm freezing! CNA M did not cover up R3; she stood by his bed and waited for CNA N to bring more wipes. After CNA N brought in the wipes, CNA M performed catheter and other personal care. After they provided personal care, a clean attend was placed under him, and he asked that it not be fastened but left open. R3 was repositioned on his left side, and then he was covered up with a clean blanket. On 06/11/25 at 08:30 AM, CNA M stated she should have covered him up while waiting for the wipes. On 06/10/25 at 02:53 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated that R3 should not have been left uncovered while there were no cares being provided, and she would reeducate staff on dignity and respect for the resident. The facility's Resident Rights policy, dated 12/24, documented that the facility would make every effort to assist each resident in exercising his/her rights to ensure that the resident was always treated with kindness, respect, and dignity.
CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview,...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan with resident-centered interventions for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) for one resident, resident (R) 25. This placed the resident at risk for unmet care needs. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R25 documented diagnoses of dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion), bipolar disorder (a major mental illness that causes people to have episodes of severe high and low moods), schizoaffective disorder (a mental disorder characterized by gross distortion of reality, disturbances of language and communication, and fragmentation of thought), and major depressive disorder (a major mood disorder that causes persistent feelings of sadness). R25's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R25 had moderately impaired cognition. R25 required set-up assistance with oral hygiene, dressing, and personal hygiene. R25 was independent with mobility, transfers, and ambulation. R25 had no behaviors or rejection of care and felt it was very important to choose a bath, shower, or bed bath. The ADL Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 09/02/24, documented R25 had a risk for potential alterations in his ADL function related to his diagnoses. The CAA further documented that staff would put interventions into place for his ADL status. R25's Quarterly MDS, dated 03/21/25, documented R25 had severely impaired cognition. R25 required supervision with showers, and independent with dressing, oral hygiene, mobility, transfers, and ambulation. R25 had no behaviors or rejection of care. R25's Care Plan, dated 03/12/25, lacked a care area with interventions for ADLs. The April 2025 Shower Sheets documented R25 had not received a shower during the following days: 04/01/25 - 04/12/25 (12 days) The April Shower Sheets documented R25 refused a shower on 04/09/25. The May and June 2025 Shower Sheets, documented R25 had not received a shower during the following days: 05/09/25 - 05/25/25 (17 days) 05/27/25 - 06/04/25 (9 days) The May Shower Sheets documented R25 refused a shower on 05/12/25. On 06/09/25 at 08:00 AM, the hair on the back of his head was disheveled, and he was unshaven. On 06/10/25 at 07:45 AM, R25 had his coat on and was unshaven. On 06/11/25 at 10:30 AM, R25 had on his coat, and he was unshaven. On 06/10/25 at 12:15 PM, Administrative Nurse F verified there was not a care plan with R25's ADLs and stated she would get it done right away. On 06/11/25 at 10:15 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated that all residents should have an ADL care plan. The facility's Comprehensive Care Plan policy, dated -3/25, documented that an individualized, comprehensive person-centered care plan was developed for each resident. The care plan would include measurable objectives and time frames that met the resident's medical, nursing, mental, cultural, and psychological needs. The care plan team was responsible for periodic review and updating the care plans.
CONCERN (D)

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with one reviewed for activities of daily living (A...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with one reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL). Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide consistent bathing and grooming for one resident, Resident (R) 25. This placed the resident at risk for complications related to poor hygiene and impaired dignity. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R25 documented diagnoses of dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion), bipolar disorder (a major mental illness that causes people to have episodes of severe high and low moods), schizoaffective disorder (a mental disorder characterized by gross distortion of reality, disturbances of language and communication, and fragmentation of thought), and major depressive disorder (a major mood disorder that causes persistent feelings of sadness). R25's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R25 had moderately impaired cognition. R25 required set-up assistance with oral hygiene, dressing, and personal hygiene. R25 was independent with mobility, transfers, and ambulation. R25 had no behaviors or rejection of care and felt it was very important to choose a bath, shower, or bed bath. The ADL Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 09/02/24, documented R25 had a risk for potential alterations in his ADL function related to his diagnoses. The CAA further documented staff would put interventions into place for his ADL status. R25's Quarterly MDS, dated 03/21/25, documented R25 had severely impaired cognition. R25 required supervision with showers, and independent with dressing, oral hygiene, mobility, transfers, and ambulation. R25 had no behaviors or rejection of care. R25's Care Plan, dated 03/12/25, lacked a care area with interventions for ADLs or rejection of care. The April 2025 Shower Sheets documented R25 had not received a shower during the following days: 04/01/25 - 04/12/25 (12 days) The April Shower Sheets documented R25 refused a shower on 04/09/25. The May and June 2025 Shower Sheets documented R25 had not received a shower during the following days: 05/09/25 - 05/25/25 (17 days) 05/27/25 - 06/04/25 (9 days) The May Shower Sheets documented R25 refused a shower on 05/12/25. On 06/09/25 at 08:00 AM, the hair on the back of R25's head was disheveled, and he was unshaven. On 06/10/25 at 07:45 AM, R25 had his coat on and was unshaven. On 06/11/25 at 10:30 AM, R25 had his coat on and was unshaven. On 06/10/25 at 12:54 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G stated he refused his shower a lot of the time. Staff were to inform the nurse when that happened, and other staff members reapproach him at a later time. LN G stated that after seven days without a shower, then she tried harder to get him to take a shower by calling the family. On 06/11/25 at 10:15 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated staff reattempted, offered different alternatives than the shower, and should document in the EMR that the resident did not want a shower. On 06/11/25 at 10:30 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) N stated he refused his shower, and that they would try to reapproach later. CNA N further stated his family requested that staff shave him even if he refused his showers. On 06/11/25 at 10:45 AM, Certified Medication Aide (CMA) R stated he rarely took a shower, and staff just had to keep asking. The facility's Quality of Life-Activities of Daily Living policy, dated 04/25, documented that the community environment and staff behaviors were directed toward assisting the resident in maintaining and/or achieving independent functioning, dignity, and well-being. Residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living receive the necessary care and services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene. If a resident refuses care and treatment that may contribute to a decline, they are to inform and/or educate the resident of the benefits and risks of not accepting such interventions. Staff are to document such in the record, including the interventions identified in the care plan and in place to minimize the functional loss that was refused. The policy further documents staff are to document substitute interventions that were tried with consent or refused.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0757 (Tag F0757)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with five reviewed for unnecessary medications. Bas...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with five reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to hold insulin (medication that lowers the level of glucose [a type of sugar] in the blood) when the medication was out of the physician's ordered parameters for one resident, Resident (R) 3. This placed the resident at risk for adverse effects related to medication. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R3 documented diagnoses of retention of urine (lack of ability to urinate and empty the bladder), diabetes mellitus (DM - when the body cannot use glucose, no enough insulin is made, or the body cannot respond to the insulin), hypertension (high blood pressure), anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), benign prostatic hyperpiesia (BPH - non-cancerous enlargement of the prostate which can lead to interference with urine flow, urinary frequency, and urinary tract infections), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD - slow and progressive circulation disorder causing narrowing, blockage, or spasms in a blood vessel). The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R3 had intact cognition. R3 was dependent upon the staff for showers, toileting, transfers, and dressing. R3 received insulin (a hormone that lowers the level of glucose in the blood), antidepressant (a class of medications used to treat mood disorders), and diuretic (medication used to promote the formation and excretion of urine) medications during the look-back period. The Quarterly MDS, dated 05/28/25, documented R3 had severely impaired cognition. R3 was dependent upon staff for toileting hygiene, showers, dressing, personal hygiene, mobility, and transfers. R3 received insulin, antidepressant, and diuretic medication during the look-back period. R3's Care Plan, dated 05/28/25, initiated on 03/02/20, directed staff to monitor blood glucose as ordered, administer diabetes medication as ordered by the doctor, and monitor for side effects and effectiveness. The update, dated 02/11/21, directed staff to obtain a fasting serum blood sugar (measures the level of glucose [sugar] in the blood after you've fasted [not eaten or drunk] for at least eight hours) as ordered by the physician. The update, dated 03/24/23, directed staff to monitor for compliance with diet and document any problems. The update, dated 03/27/23, directed staff to administer insulin as directed/ordered. The Physician's Order, dated 06/28/24, directed staff to administer insulin glargine (long-acting insulin), 17 Units (U), twice a day, for DM. Hold if glucose < (less than) 120 mg (milligrams) per deciliter (dl). R3's Medication Administration Record (MAR), dated April 2025, documented the following days R3 received his insulin when his blood sugar was out of the physician's ordered parameters: 04/06/25 at 06:00 PM - 102 mg/dl 04/14/25 at 09:00 AM - 112 mg/dl 04/20/25 at 09:00 AM - 108 mg/dl 04/21/25 at 09:00 AM - 103 mg/dl 04/21/25 at 06:00 PM - 112 mg/dl 04/22/25 at 09:00 AM - 112 mg/dl 04/22/25 at 06:00 PM - 114 mg/dl 04/23/25 at 09:00 AM - 104 mg/dl 04/28/25 at 09:00 AM - 101 mg/dl 04/28/25 at 06:00 PM - 114 mg/dl 04/29/25 at 06:00 PM - 114 mg/dl R3's MAR, dated May 2025, documented the following days R3 received his insulin when his blood sugar was out of the physician's ordered parameters: 05/14/25 at 09:00 AM - 96 mg/dl 05/24/25 at 09:00 AM - 82 mg/dl 05/25/25 at 09:00 AM - 100 mg/dl On 06/10/25 at 09:00 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G, gowned and gloved, rubbed an alcohol swab over R3's left pointer finger, and obtained his blood sugar. LN G stated his blood sugar was out of parameters and would not be administering R3's insulin. On 06/10/25 at 12:45 PM, LN G verified there were several days that R3 received his insulin when the out-of-physician ordered parameters. On 06/10/25 at 02:53 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated, staff were to follow the physician's orders. The facility's Obtaining a Fingerstick Glucose Level policy, dated 10/24, directed staff to verify that there was an order for the procedure. Staff were to document the results and follow facility policies and procedures for appropriate nursing interventions regards the blood sugar results.
CONCERN (F) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0729 (Tag F0729)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents, of which five were reviewed for sufficient and comp...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents, of which five were reviewed for sufficient and competent nurse staffing. Based on the record review and interview, the facility failed to verify one of the five Certified Nurse Aides (CNA) had a current license prior to employing her and allowing her to work the floor providing resident care. Findings included: - Review of the CNA Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services (KDADS) nurse aide registry confirmation notice revealed CNA P's nurse aide license had expired on [DATE]. Review of the facility's date of hire information revealed CNA P was hired on [DATE]. On [DATE] at 02:37 PM, Consultant Staff GG verified CNA P license was inactive on [DATE], and the verification was conducted today. Consultant Staff GG stated Administrative Staff B was responsible for verifying CNAs' licenses were current before hiring them. Consultant Staff GG verified CNA P was scheduled to work the evening shift today, and she would not be working. On [DATE] at 03:12 PM, Administrative Staff A verified the facility had hired CNA P on [DATE] with an expired license. Administrative Staff A stated the director of nursing (DON) and the business office manager were responsible for verifying nurse aids have a current license. Administrative Staff A verified CNA P had worked the floor providing care for residents for seven days with an expired license. On [DATE] 03:52 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated from what she understood both the DON and the Administrative Staff B thought the other one had conducted the license verification check, prior to CNA P being hired and thought CNA P had a current active license. The facility's Credentialing of Nursing Service Personnel Policy, revised 10/2024, documented nursing personnel requiring a license/certification would not be permitted to perform direct resident care services unless authorized by the Medical Director until all licensing/background checks had been completed. Nursing personnel who require a license or certification to perform resident care or treatment without direction or supervision must present verification of such license/certification to the DON before or upon employment.
Aug 2024 1 deficiency 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

The facility identified a census of 34 residents with three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility failed to identify and provide appropriate interventions consistent with the standards ...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility identified a census of 34 residents with three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility failed to identify and provide appropriate interventions consistent with the standards of care to prevent pressure ulcers from developing and worsening for Resident (R) 1. On 03/11/24, R1 developed two facility-acquired Stage 2 (partial-thickness skin loss into but no deeper than the dermis including intact or ruptured blisters) pressure ulcers (localized injury to the skin and/or underlying tissue usually over a bony prominence, as a result of pressure, or pressure in combination with shear and/or friction) to her bilateral buttocks. On 05/16/24 the wound specialists identified diffuse pressure and redness to the entire intergluteal cleft (a deep groove that separates the buttocks and runs from the third or fourth sacral spine to the anus) area. The facility did not implement further preventative measures to address offloading or positioning until 07/11/2024. The facility further failed to assess R1's pressure wounds weekly to determine the effectiveness of treatments. On 08/07/24, R1 was transferred to an acute care hospital where they identified she arrived with an unstageable pressure ulcer (depth of the wound is unknown due to the wound bed being covered by a thick layer of other tissue and pus) to her coccyx (area at the base of the spine) with necrosis (localized tissue death that occurred in a group of cells in response to disease or injury) and slough (dead tissue, usually cream or yellow) in the wound bed, a Stage 3 pressure ulcer (full thickness pressure injury extending through the skin into the tissue below) to her left buttock, a Stage 3 pressure ulcer to her right buttock, a deep tissue injury (DTI - purple or maroon localized area of discolored intact skin or blood?filled blister due to damage of underlying soft tissue from pressure and/or shear) to the right heel a DTI to the left trochanter (bony prominence on the upper part of the thigh bone) that serves as a site for muscle attachment. The facility's failure to identify and implement interventions consistent with standards of care to prevent the development of further pressure injuries and to promote healing of existing facility-acquired pressure ulcers placed R1 in immediate jeopardy. Findings included: - R1's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented R1 had diagnoses of pressure ulcer of unspecified stage to unspecified buttock, fibromyalgia (condition of musculoskeletal pain, spasms, stiffness, fatigue, and severe sleep disturbance), morbid obesity, diabetes mellitus (DM-when the body cannot use glucose, not enough insulin made or the body cannot respond to the insulin), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD- progressive and irreversible condition characterized by diminished lung capacity and difficulty or discomfort in breathing). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated 04/13/24, documented R1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15, which indicated intact cognition. The MDS documented R1 had no impairment of her upper or lower extremities. The MDS documented R1 was completely dependent on staff for assistance with toileting, dressing, personal hygiene, bed mobility, and transfer. The MDS documented R1 had no pressure ulcers, was at risk for pressure ulcer development, had a pressure-reducing device for her chair, had a pressure-reducing device for her bed, and was on a turning/repositioning program. The MDS documented R1 received nutrition interventions to manage skin problems, received pressure ulcer care, and application of dressings and ointments/medications. The Quarterly MDS, dated 07/14/24, documented R1 had a BIMS score of 15 which indicated intact cognition. The MDS documented R1 had impairment of her bilateral lower extremities. The MDS documented R1 was completely dependent on staff for assistance with toileting, dressing, personal hygiene, bed mobility, and transfer. The MDS documented R1 had two Stage 2 pressure ulcers that were not healed. The MDS recorded R1 was at risk for pressure ulcer development, had a pressure-reducing device for her chair, and was on a turning/repositioning program. R1 received nutrition interventions to manage skin problems and had application of ointments/medications. The Functional Abilities Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 12/21/23, documented R1 was at risk for potential alterations in her activity of daily living (ADL) function, had several medical conditions that affected her ADL functions, and required supervision to dependent assistance from staff with her ADLs. The Pressure Ulcer Injury CAA, dated 12/21/23, documented R1 was at risk for pressure-related injuries/ulcers. R1's skin was intact and was being treated for moisture-associated skin damage (MASD). The CAA documented weekly skin assessments were performed and R1 had interventions in place to prevent skin breakdown. R1's Care Plan documented R1 was unable to ambulate and required a sit-to-stand lift for all transfers by two staff members. R1 required total assistance of two staff members for toileting, was dependent on two staff members to turn and reposition in bed and was totally dependent on two staff members for bathing, personal hygiene, and dressing. The care plan documented R1 had the potential for altered skin integrity related to DM, pain, anxiety, and immobility. The care plan directed staff to follow the facility policies and protocols for preventative/treatment of skin breakdown. The care plan documented R1 was to lay down in bed for sixty minutes every day, but R1 refused to comply and would sit in her recliner most of the time. The care plan documented R1 required a pressure relieving/reducing cushion to her wheelchair (03/22/24). The care plan documented R1 was being seen by the wound care clinic and staff were to follow their treatment plan. The Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Injury Scale, dated 05/08/24, documented a score of 16, low risk for pressure ulcer development. The Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Injury Scale, dated 08/06/24, documented a score of 10, high risk for pressure ulcer development. The Progress Note, dated 03/11/24, documented R1 had a bleeding wound on her buttocks bilaterally that was cleaned and had to be bandaged twice during the shift. A large amount of blood was noted during bathroom use and the first bandage was soaked through and replaced. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 03/11/24, documented R1 had MASD on her right and left buttock. No measurements of the wounds were documented. The note documented a large amount of exudate (drainage). The surrounding skin had discoloration. The area pained R1. The comments documented R1 agreed to lie in bed for one hour daily as R1 typically stayed in her recliner and slept in her recliner. No specialty interventions were documented. The Progress Note, dated 03/13/24, documented R1 with a wound to her buttocks. R1 stated it hurt. Staff encouraged R1 to lie in bed and get off of her buttocks to aid in healing and decrease the pain. R1 stated she was not lying in bed and wanted the doctor called to get a stronger pain pill. The Progress Note, dated 03/14/24, documented R1 had multiple wounds on her buttocks, but it was likely due to the amount of time R1 spent up in her recliner. The note recorded staff attempted to ask R1 to lay in bed to relieve pressure off her sores and R1 denied this. Staff applied honey barrier cream liberally to R1's buttocks while she was up on the commode. R1 stated she could not tell if it was helping. The Progress Note, dated 03/15/24, documented staff encouraged R1 to lie in bed and get off of her bottom. R1 stated she could not lay in the bed as it kills her to lay in that bed. The Progress Note, dated 03/17/24, documented that the dressing on R1's buttocks was saturated that morning. The areas to the left and right buttocks remained open. Staff cleansed the wound, patted the area dry, and applied a new sacral foam dressing. R1 reported discomfort to the area. The Progress Note, dated 03/18/24, documented that a Certified Nurse's Aide (CNA) requested the nurse come to R1's room. R1 had a bowel movement, and the CNA was unsure if the dressing should be changed due to mild soiling. The old dressing was removed. The area to R1's buttocks remained open and small amounts of bloody drainage were noted. Staff cleansed the area with wound cleanser, patted the area dry, and applied a new dressing. R1 reported discomfort on her buttocks. R1 was repositioned in the recliner. The Secure Conversations Note, dated 03/18/24, documented the nurse asked R1's provider if R1 could have a wound consult with wound care so the facility could apply the right dressing. Administrative Nurse D responded the facility now had a wound care consultant in-house and the doctor could see R1 through telehealth and asked for orders for R1 to be seen. R1's provider responded he agreed with a wound consult and directed to keep him posted. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 03/18/24, documented R1 had pressure wounds on her right and left buttocks. No measurements of the wounds were documented. The report indicated there was no exudate noted, and the surrounding skin was reddened. No specialty interventions were documented. The Progress Note, dated 03/19/24, documented R1 refused to see wound care via telehealth and wanted to be seen in person. An appointment was made at the wound clinic for 03/21/24 at 09:00 AM. The Secure Conversation Note, dated 03/20/24, documented the nurse requested and order from R1's provider to start R1 on Arginaid (protein drink to aid in healing) twice a day and a multivitamin and vitamin C daily. R1's provider responded yes to start them. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 03/26/24, documented R1 had pressure wounds on her right and left buttocks. No measurements of the wounds were documented. The report indicated there was no exudate noted, and the surrounding skin was reddened. No specialty interventions were documented. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 04/02/24, documented R1 had pressure wounds on her right and left buttocks. No measurements of the wounds were documented. No exudate was noted. The surrounding skin was normal. No specialty interventions were documented. Nutritional interventions were documented as vitamin therapy. The Wound Care Progress Note, dated 04/04/24, documented R1 presented to the wound care clinic for initial evaluation of pressure wounds to bilateral buttocks. R1 stated the wounds were painful. The wounds have been ongoing for at least one month. R1 stated they bled a lot. R1 stated she sat in a recliner most of the time as she felt her bed was not comfortable at all. R1 did not have a cushion for her recliner or her wheelchair. R1 stated she laid on her back in her bed only to sleep at night. The left buttock wound measured 6 cm by 8 cm by 0.1 cm and had copious amounts (a lot) of sanguineous (bloody drainage) drainage. The right buttock wound measured 6 cm by 8 cm by 0.1 cm and had copious amounts of sanguineous drainage also. There was a treatment ordered for staff to apply Triad paste (zinc-oxide based hydrophilic paste for light to moderate levels of wound exudates and helps to maintain an optimal wound healing environment to facilitate autolytic debridement), Maxsorb sheet (an alginate dressing that locks fluid away as a gel providing beneficial, moist wound environment), and bordered foam dressing. Change every two to three days and as needed if saturated. R1 needed a good cushion (preferably Roho [pressure relief cushion that is made of soft, flexible air cells]) in her recliner and wheelchair. The resident was to change position every two hours. Follow up with wound care in two weeks or sooner if needed. The Progress Note, dated 04/05/24, documented R1 had a wound care appointment the previous day on 04/04/24 and the facility received the following new orders: 1. Apply Triad paste, then Maxsorb sheet, then bordered foam dressing. Change every 2-3 days and as needed if saturated, soiled, or falling off. 2. Get a good cushion for R1's recliner and wheelchair preferably a Roho cushion. 3. Please be sure R1 is changing positions and shifting weight often as these wounds are due to constant pressure in this area. 4. Follow up in wound care in two weeks, sooner if needed. The Nutrition Note, dated 04/08/24, documented R1 had open wounds to her left and right buttocks. R1 refused her Juven/Argenaid for wound healing. The registered dietitian recommended discontinuing the Juven/Arginaid and giving R1 1 to 2 ounces of extra protein with all meals. R1 agreed with the recommendation. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 04/09/24, documented R1 had pressure wounds on her right and left buttocks. No measurements of the wounds were documented. A moderate amount of serosanguinous (semi-thick blood-tinged drainage) exudate was noted. The wound bed had dark pink/red tissue. The surrounding skin was reddened. No specialty interventions were documented. The nutritional intervention was vitamin therapy. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 04/16/24, documented R1 had pressure wounds on her right and left buttocks. No measurements of the wounds were documented. No exudate was noted. The surrounding skin was normal for skin. No specialty interventions were documented. The Wound Care Progress Note, dated 04/18/24, documented wound care follow-up with R1 due to pressure wounds to the buttocks. R1 stated the pain was much improved. R1 stated she had a cushion in her recliner and her wheelchair. R1 stated the staff at the facility changed the dressing every other day. The left buttock wound measured 7.4 cm by 4 cm by 0.1 cm with a moderate amount of drainage. The right buttock wound measured 7.4 cm by 4 cm by 0.1 cm with a moderate amount of drainage. The resident received a treatment of Adaptic (a non-adhering wound contact layer made of knitted cellulose) folded in fourths on the right buttock and covered with bordered foam dressing and bordered foam dressing to the left buttock. No debridement. Wounds were much improved, with a small open area to the right buttock noted with bleeding upon initial evaluation. Follow up in one month or sooner if needed. The Nutrition Note, dated 04/18/24, documented R1 remained on treatment for pressure areas to her left and right buttocks. The wounds were reported to be improving. R1 was eating well, on 1-2 ounces of protein powder with meals for wound healing. The Progress Note, dated 04/19/24, documented new orders received from wound care on the dressing to R1's bottom. The note documented to continue with Triad paste and cover with a foam dressing and documented staff needed to try and get R1 off her bottom as much as possible. The dressing was to be changed every three days and as needed if soiled or falling off. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 04/25/24, documented no skin issues. No measurements of the wounds were documented. No exudate was noted. The surrounding skin was normal for skin. A wheelchair/chair cushion was documented as a specialty intervention. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 05/09/24, documented R1 had pressure wounds on her right and left buttocks. No measurements of the wounds were documented. No exudate was noted. The surrounding skin was normal for skin. No specialty interventions were documented. The Wound Care Clinic Progress Note, dated 05/16/24, documented wound care follow-up. R1 presented with pressure wounds to the bilateral buttocks. R1 stated her right buttock was painful when she was sitting. R1 stated she never laid in her bed as it was very uncomfortable. R1 had one bordered foam dressing to each buttock. The right buttock wound measured 4.5 cm by 3 cm by 0.1 cm and the left buttock wound measured 1.4 cm by 0.7 cm by 0.1 cm. No active bleeding was noted on the exam. R1 did have open wounds bilaterally and her entire buttocks/intergluteal cleft area was ecchymotic (bruised), evidence of pressure injury diffusely. R1 stated she refused to lay in bed as it was uncomfortable, and she had arthritis. The wound care provider would talk to R1's primary care provider to see if it was an option for the nursing home to get a Sizewise (specialty bariatric hospital-type bed with a larger surface area) bed. Discussed with R1 that unless she attempted to offload this area her wounds would not heal and would worsen. The Nutrition Note, dated 05/16/24, documented R1 continued to have open areas to her left and right buttocks with treatment in place. Continue current interventions for wound healing. Weight fluctuations were noted. The registered dietitian would continue to monitor monthly until R1's wounds were healed. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 05/17/24, documented R1 had MASD on her right and left buttock. No measurements of the wounds were documented. No exudate was noted. The area pained R1. The wound bed was documented as pale pink tissue. The surrounding skin was reddened. No specialty interventions were documented. The nutritional intervention was vitamin therapy. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 05/25/24, documented R1 had no type of wound documented to her right and left buttocks. No measurements of the wounds were documented. No exudate was noted. The wound bed had pink, pale tissue. The surrounding skin was normal for skin. No specialty interventions were documented. The Weekly Skin Evaluation Note, dated 05/29/24, documented R1's skin was intact. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 06/01/24, documented R1 had no type of wound documented to her right and left buttocks. No measurements of the wounds were documented. No exudate was noted. The wound bed was normal for skin. The surrounding skin was normal for skin. No specialty interventions were documented. The Weekly Skin Evaluation Note, dated 06/08/24, documented R1's skin was intact. The Nutrition Note, dated 06/12/24, documented R1 had been eating well. R1 had an open area to her coccyx (tail bone) and redness to her right and left iliac crest (the curved, bony ridge that forms the upper border of the ilium the largest of the three bones that make up the hip bone). Recommended to continue current interventions for wound healing. The Wound Care Clinic Progress Note, dated 06/13/24, documented wound care follow-up for pressure wounds to the bilateral buttocks. R1 complained of increased bleeding to wounds. R1 stated she slept in her recliner every night and refused her bed as it was very uncomfortable. R1 also refused to shift her weight from side to side and stated she sat right in the center of her buttocks. No measurements were noted. Triad paste to bilateral buttocks. No active bleeding was noted. R1 had superficial open areas to her right buttock but nothing of depth. The note recorded the wound would not heal if R1 continued to sit directly on her buttocks all day and all night. The note recorded someone would see about ordering a Roho cushion for R1, however R1 stated it would not work in her recliner. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 06/20/24, documented R1 had no type of wound documented to her right and left buttocks. No measurements of the wounds were documented. No exudate was noted. The wound bed was normal for skin. The surrounding skin was normal for skin. No specialty interventions were documented. The Progress Note, dated 06/21/24, documented a message was sent to R1's provider requesting an as-needed administration for Triad paste due to R1 not having any on that morning after toileting and the wound was bleeding. The Progress Note, dated 06/21/24, documented starting Triad past every other day. R1 tolerated well. The Progress Note, dated 06/23/24, documented a new order to receive Triad hydrophilic wound dress external paste to bilateral buttocks every other day remained in place. The Weekly Skin Evaluation Note, dated 06/25/24, documented a Stage 2 ulcer to R1's coccyx. The Secure Conversation Note, dated 06/26/24, documented the facility was having difficulty maintaining the Triad paste barrier with every other day application. Request for as-needed order to reapply when needed especially when the order date did not line up with R1's bath day. R1's provider said yes to the request. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 06/27/24, documented R1 had pressure wounds on her right and left buttocks. No measurements of the wounds were documented. No other description of the wounds was documented. The area pained R1. No specialty interventions were documented. The nutritional intervention was documented as vitamin therapy. The report documented R1 was being seen at the wound care clinic and to see notes. The Weekly Skin Evaluation Note, 07/01/24, documented R1's skin was intact. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 07/04/24, documented R1 had a Stage 2 pressure wound on her right buttock. No measurements of the wounds were documented; serous (thin, clear) exudate was noted. The wound bed had pink/pale tissue. The surrounding skin was reddened and macerated. The area pained R1. A wheelchair/chair cushion was noted as the specialty intervention. The nutritional intervention was vitamin therapy. The report documented R1 was being seen at the wound care clinic, see notes. The note documented the area had deteriorated. The Secure Conversation Note, dated 07/09/24, documented the facility thought it would be beneficial for R1 to have an order for a catheter (a tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine). The wound to R1's bottom was not improving. Triad past was being used on R1's wound. R1's provider asked if R1 was willing to consider the placement of a Foley catheter and if so, he would be willing to order it. The facility responded R1 was willing to try it. R1's provider responded to place a Foley catheter to dependent drainage and once the wound was healed, remove the catheter. The Wound Care Clinic Progress Note, dated 07/11/24, documented a wound care follow-up for pressure wounds to the bilateral buttocks. R1 had no concerns during the visit. The nursing home continued to use Triad paste to the buttocks. No measurements were noted for the right buttock wound. The left buttock wound measured 3 cm by 0.5 cm by 0.1 cm. The Rental Review Receipt, dated 07/11/24, documented the facility acquired a bariatric frame and a bariatric therapeutic support mattress for R1. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 07/12/24, documented R1 had a Stage 2 pressure wound on her right and left buttock. No measurements of the wounds were documented. Serosanguinous exudate was noted. The wound bed had pink/pale tissue. The surrounding skin was normal for skin. The area pained R1. The nutritional intervention was vitamin therapy. No specialty interventions were documented. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 07/18/24, documented R1 had a coccyx pressure wound. No measurements of the wound were documented. Serous exudate was noted. The wound bed had pink/pale tissue. The surrounding skin was reddened. A specialty bed was noted as the specialty intervention. The nutritional intervention was vitamin therapy. The Secure Conversation Note, dated 07/30/24, documented that Administrative Nurse D requested advice regarding R1. The note stated R1 utilized the bed but now R1 would not get up from the bed. R1 refused weights even though the full body lift with scale would be used. R1 refused to let staff reposition and refused staff to change incontinent products. R1 stated it hurt too much to move and complained of increased pain. The facility wanted to do what was best for R1. R1's wound to her buttocks showed no improvement. R1's provider responded he would see R1 the next day. The Physician Progress Note, dated 07/31/24, documented R1 complained of sacral (the region at the bottom of the spine between the fifth segment of the lumbar spine and the coccyx) pain secondary to a wound. R1 was started on an antibiotic for a urinary tract infection. R1 continued to see wound care for a sacral ulcer. The Infection Note, dated 08/01/24, documented R1 was alert and able to make needs known. Antibiotic therapy was in progress for a urinary tract infection. R1 had Bactrim-DS (antibiotic) for ten days. R1 had no complaints of discomfort post-void and was afebrile. Fluids were encouraged and accepted. Respirations were even and unlabored. No signs and symptoms of acute distress. The Weekly Skin Condition Report, dated 08/01/24, documented R1 had a coccyx pressure wound. No measurements of the wound were documented. No exudate was noted. The wound bed had pink/pale tissue. The surrounding skin was normal for skin. A specialty bed was noted as the specialty intervention. The nutritional intervention was identified as vitamin therapy. The Progress Note, dated 08/01/24, documented the facility received a phone call from R1's provider and he ordered a repeat urine sample and sensitivity as R1 had two bacteria in her urine. R1's provider at first ordered ceftriaxone one gram intramuscularly (IM-administered directly into the muscle) but then realized R1 was allergic to it, so ordered R1 to continue with the Bactrim-DS. The Infection Note, dated 08/03/24, documented R1 was in bed with her eyes opened, respirations even and unlabored, skin warm and dry to the touch; R1 was able to make her needs known, and confusion was noted. R1 continued antibiotic therapy. Fluids were encouraged and incontinent care was provided. Treatment of R1's coccyx was ongoing. The Progress Note, dated 08/04/24, documented R1 was alert and awake, respirations were even and unlabored, no acute distress was noted, and skin warm and dry to the touch. R1 transferred to the recliner per full lift. The Progress Note, dated 08/06/24, documented the nurse went to assess R1 after a phone call from R1's daughter. R1 was alert and oriented, lung sounds were clear, and R1 had times of confusion. The note documented R1's hands shook a lot more than they used to. The Communication with Physician Note, dated 08/06/24, documented the nurse called R1's provider to discuss R1's change of status. The nurse talked to R1's provider about R1's confusion, shaking hands, elevated blood pressure, and coccyx wound. R1's provider ordered lab work, vitals twice a day, and one-time blood sugar. R1's provider would round on R1 tomorrow. The Skin and Wound Evaluation, dated 08/06/24, documented a pressure wound to R1's coccyx which measured 4.64 cm by 1.42 cm, a pressure wound to R1's left buttock which measured 2.01cm by 1.66 cm, and a pressure wound to R1's right buttock which measured 9.3 cm by 2.09 cm. The evaluation documented that on 08/12/24 Administrative Nurse D changed the coccyx wound and the left buttock wound description to Kennedy terminal ulcers (KTU- a pressure-based injury that can develop quickly and is often a sign of terminal illness or impending death) in the wound description tab. The Progress Note, dated 08/07/24, documented the facility received a call from the lab reporting R1 had a critical value for a potassium level of 6.2 milliequivalents per liter. R1's provider was notified of the critical lab value, and he ordered R1 to be transferred to the hospital via ambulance. R1's responsible party was notified. R1 was diagnosed with acute kidney failure (a condition in which the kidneys suddenly cannot filter waste from the blood). R1 would be transferred to a higher level of care but it was unknown where R1 would be sent. The ER Progress Notes, dated 08/07/24, documented R1 had a right heel pressure ulcer that was erythematous (redness) and eccymotic with an intact blister and seemed to be painful for R1. It also noted a pressure area to R1's coccyx. The notes did not include measurements or descriptions. The hospital's Wound Service Consult Note, dated 08/08/24, documented R1 presented to the higher level of care hospital with an unstageable pressure injury to her coccyx, a Stage 3 pressure injury with evolving DTI to her left buttock, a Stage 3 pressure injury with evolving DTI to her right buttock, a DTI to her right heel, and a DTI to her left trochanter (hip bone). The exam noted an unstageable pressure injury to R1's coccyx that was active with necrotic (pertaining to the death of tissue in response to disease or injury) tissue with the ability to probe through the fascia (band of thin, fibrous connective tissue)to the bone to the center point of injury which measured 4 cm by 2 cm by 2 cm. Adhered slough with necrosis to the wound edges with malodor. Bilateral buttocks pressure injuries were full-thickness tissue injuries at Stage 3 with superimposed DTI features. The wound edges were irregular indicative of continual friction and shearing forces adversely impacting condition epidermal stripping forces more prominent to the left buttock. The left buttock wound measured 4 cm by 2 cm by 0.2 cm and the right buttock injury measured 8 cm by 6 cm by 0.3 cm. The left trochanter DTI had an intact bulla with darkened purple discoloration to the wound bed and measured 7 cm by 3 cm. Generalized DTI formations were noted to the gluteal cleft and gluteal tissue. The right heel DTI with intact bulla with darkened purple discoloration to the wound bed and measured 4 cm by 4 cm. Evidence of neglect. Consider magnetic resonance imaging (MRI-medical imaging used to view soft tissue) for coccygeal pressure injury. The coccyx and bilateral buttock pressure injuries were cleansed with saline-moistened gauze, Medihoney (medical grade honey used to aid wound healing) gel applied to the wound beds, covered with Allevyn (brand of dressing) pink bordered heel dressing, ensure all three injuries are covered. Change every two days or as needed. To the right heel DTI and left trochanter DTI, maintain heel Allevyn to the right heel and a 6 X 6 Allevyn to the left trochanter. Change every 48 hours or when soiled, saturated, or dislodged. If the blisters pop, take a picture and send it to wound care. On 08/12/24 at 10:30 AM, observation revealed a wheelchair in the corner of R1's room that had a pressure relieving cushion (not a Roho cushion) in it. R1's recliner was in the center of the room covered with chucks. Observation of the bed revealed a regular mattress on a twin bed frame. On 08/12/24 at 11:00 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M stated she did not ever remember R1 having a pressure-relieving cushion in her recliner. CNA M stated R1 sat in her recliner twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week because it was too painful for R1 to get into bed. On 08/12/24 at 11:15 AM, CNA N stated she took care of R1 all the time and there was never a pressure relieving cushion in R1's recliner. CNA M stated there were always chucks and maybe a turn sheet in R1's recliner but never a pressure relieving cushion. CNA N stated R1 would refuse to reposition at times because she was comfortable where she was and did not want the pain to start. CNA N stated aides were able to reposition R1 in her recliner using three aides, but it was difficult. CNA N stated aides would also change R1's briefs in the recliner. CNA N stated once R1 had an air mattress she was able to get into bed and not have pain. On 08/12/24 at 11:30 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G stated she never saw a pressure relieving cushion in R1's recliner. LN G stated when R1 got an air mattress, she finally got into bed. LN G said that pr[TRUNCATED]
Sept 2023 14 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents, with two reviewed for abuse and neglect. Based on o...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents, with two reviewed for abuse and neglect. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 14 remained free from neglect when the facility failed to provide the necessary care and service as directed by the resident's plan of care, on more than one occasion, despite being aware of what care the resident required. This placed the resident at risk for congoing neglect and related complications. Findings included: - R14's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented diagnoses of hemiparesis/hemiplegia (weakness and paralysis on one side of the body) following other cerebrovascular accident (CVA-stroke- sudden death of brain cells due to lack of oxygen caused by impaired blood flow to the brain by blockage or rupture of an artery to the brain) affecting left dominant side, muscle weakness, abnormalities of gait and mobility, and lack of coordination. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R14 had intact cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting. R14 did not ambulate. The assessment further documented R14 had unsteady gait, upper and lower functional impairment on one side, and had no falls. The Fall Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 02/27/23, documented R14 had unsteady, impaired gait and balance, and was at risk for falls. R14 used a wheelchair and was at risk for injuries from falls. The Quarterly MDS, dated 06/27/23, documented R14 had intact cognition and required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, transfers, ambulation, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. The MDS further documented R14 had unsteady gait, upper and lower functional impairment on both sides, and had two or more falls since prior assessment. The Fall Assessment, dated 02/22/23 documented R14 was a low risk for falls. The Fall Assessment, dated 05/26/23, 08/15/23, and 08/26/23 documented R14 was a high risk for falls. R14's Care Plan, dated 07/24/23, initiated on 03/21/23, directed staff to anticipate and meet his needs, be sure R14's call light was within reach and encourage him to use it for assistance as needed as R14 required prompt response to all requests for assistance. Encourage R14 to participate in activities that promote exercise, physical activity for strengthening and improved mobility. Ensure R14 wore appropriate footwear and ensure he had a safe environment. Provide activities that minimized the potential for falls while providing a diversion and use a sit to stand lift for transfers with two staff. R14's Care Plan updated 09/08/23 documented R14 continued to self-transfer himself without assistance and directed staff to educate and reeducate him on using his call light to request assistance as needed. The update, dated 09/26/23, directed staff to use a full body lift for transfers. The Fall Investigation, dated 08/15/23, at 01:31 PM, documented a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) attempted to transfer R14 off the toilet to his wheelchair. R14's left foot was unable to move as the CNA tried to pivot turn the resident, and the CNA had to assist R14 to the ground. The investigation further documented R14 did not sustain any injury. On 09/25/23 at 12:50 PM, observation revealed R14 sat in his wheelchair. CNA N and CNA O put the sit to stand sling around R14's waist, placed his feet upon the foot plate of the lift, and told R14 to hold onto the handles of the lift. R14 held onto the lift handle with his right hand but CNA O had to put R14's left hand onto the handle and hold onto it for him. CNA N used the lift controller to lift R14 and told him to stand up. As the lift rose, R14 started to lean to the left and his left foot fell off of the foot plate. R14 could not stand and continued to lean heavily to his left, tipping the wheelchair. CNA N kept telling R14 to stand up, and R14 told both CNA he could not. CNA N lowered the lift and tried to reposition and straighten R14. The CNA tried to get R14's left foot back onto the foot plate. CNA O put her left knee against R14's left leg to try to hold it into place as both CNA attempted to stand R14 once again. R14 continued to lean heavily to the left and R14 again stated that he could not stand as the CNA continued to attempt to stand R14 using the lift. As the lift was raised, R14 continued to lean left, and the wheelchair started to tip. R14 stated No wonder my left side hurts sometimes and CNA N stated she did not feel comfortable using the sit to stand lift with R14 and had CNA O go tell the nurse to come to the resident's room. Licensed Nurse (LN) G went to R14's room and directed staff to use the full body mechanical lift to transfer R14 to the toilet. LN G then left to try to find a toileting sling to use on the resident. Further observation revealed R14 already had a full lift sling in his room that he stated had been used on him by one of the night shift CNA. CNA N and CNA O placed the sling under R14 while he was in his wheelchair. Staff lifted R14 into the air and placed R14 in his bed. Observation revealed the sling was not the right size for the resident and the straps were tight and cut into R14's inner thighs and made his head lean forward. The staff removed R14's pants and brief then lifted R14 again using the lift. R14's genitals were smashed in between the leg straps of the sling and R14 stated he was uncomfortable. CNA O was unable to position the lift in order to get R14 seated comfortably onto the toilet and Administrative Nurse D was asked to assist the two CNA with the resident. Administrative Nurse D stated the sling was not the right size for R14 and said that she would request a physical therapy evaluation to determine the best option to transfer R14. On 09/26/23 at 04:09 PM, observation revealed R14 sat in the shower chair with a gait belt around his waist. CNA M was on R14's right side and CNA O on the left. R14 used his right hand to guide his left hand to the end of the whirlpool tub so that he could hold on while both CNA transferred him to his wheelchair. CNA N stated, Are you sure we can transfer him, ok? and CNA N answered, Yes. CNA started to stand R14. R14 started to bend at the waist and his head was over the whirlpool. R14 said If I fall in, you are going to have a hard time getting me out of the whirlpool. Both CNAs had difficulty holding R14 up and they had to sit him down in the shower chair because he could not stand long enough to complete the transfer. R14's left foot did not move and seemed to be stuck on the floor. Continued observation revealed the CNAs attempted to stand R14 again and were able to transfer him into his wheelchair. On 09/26/23 at 04:30 PM, CNA M stated R14 was stronger before his shower, CMA M said she transferred R14 from his wheelchair to the shower chair without any assistance. On 09/28/23 at 09:30 AM, LN H stated R14 had severe left side weakness and therapy had evaluated him. LN H said therapy would work with R14 to try to get him stronger and see which lift would be appropriate for him. LN H stated when a resident had a fall, she filled out fall paperwork but did not implement interventions for falls. LN H said she did not document interventions on the care plan. On 09/28/23 at 01:52 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated if staff felt unsafe or unsure of how to transfer the resident, staff needed to stop and ask questions. Administrative Nurse D further stated staff should provide whatever assistance was directed by the resident's' care plans. The facility's Abuse Prevention Program, Recognizing Signs and Symptoms of Abuse/Neglect (Identification) policy, dated 08/22, documented neglect occurs when the facility were aware of, or should have been aware of good ad services that a resident required but the facility failed to provide them to the resident resulting in, or may result in, physical harm, pain, mental anguish, or emotional distress. The facility failed to ensure R14 remained free from neglect when the facility failed to provide the necessary care and service as directed by the resident's plan of care, on more than one occasion, despite being aware of what care the resident required. This placed the resident at risk for congoing neglect and related complications.
CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview,...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for Resident (R)16 and R18 for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD- mental disorder characterized by an acute emotional response to a traumatic event or situation involving severe environmental stress). This placed R16 and R18 at risk for unmet care needs. Findings included: - R16's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) recorded diagnoses of generalized anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty and irrational fear) disorder, diabetes mellitus (DM-when the body cannot use glucose, not enough insulin made or the body cannot respond to the insulin), major depressive disorder (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), muscle weakness, mood {affective} disorder (category of mental health problems, feelings of sadness, helplessness, guilt, wanting to die were more intense and persistent than what may normally be felt from time to time), multiple sclerosis (MS- progressive disease of the nerve fibers of the brain and spinal cord , and problems related to care provider dependency. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R16 had intact cognition, required supervision and one person assist with activities of daily living, had primary diagnoses of non-traumatic brain dysfunction, and other diagnoses of anxiety disorder, depression, but not PTSD. The MDS further documented R16 took an antianxiety (class of medications that calm and relax people) , antidepressant (class of medications used to treat mood disorders), diuretic (medication to promote the formation and excretion of urine), and opioid (medication used for pain relief) daily. The Care Plan initiated 04/10/23, documented R16 had mood problems and directed staff to administer medications as ordered and monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness. The care plan further documented R16 needed encouragement, assistance, and support to maintain as much independence and control as possible. The plan directed staff to assist R16 to identify strengths, positive coping skills and reinforce these. The care plan lacked did not identify R16 had PTSD and interventions to prevent traumatization triggers. The Mental Health Consultation Progress Note dated 08/16/23 documented R16 reported nightmares that disturbed her and caused her to be upset; asome were about people that worked at the facility. The note recorded the mental health consultant ordered medication at bedtime for PTSD and nightmares. The Progress Note dated 09/14/23 at 02:58 PM, documented R16 was screaming and crying after being informed of the rules for pets in the facility. R16 appeared safe at that time, and was given time to calm down. R16 wrote a letter and gave it to the nurse to pass on to the mental health provider. On 09/26/23 at 08:25 AM, observation revealed R16 ambulated in the hallway with her walker. R16 reported she had better days than that particular time and day. On 09/28/23 at 09:24 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA ) P stated she was not aware of R16's diagnosis of PTSD, nor the triggers associated with this. On 09/28/23 at 10:40 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated she was aware of R16's PTSD. LN H stated she was not aware of R16's triggers associated with the diagnosis. LN H stated that information would be helpful for the care of the resident. On 09/28/23 at 09:08 AM, Consultant HH verified R16 had PTSD on admission and the Social Service admission Assessment, dated 09/21/21, documented R16 had PTSD and a triggers of people who downplay the trigger and those who snuck up on her. On 09/28/23 at 01:50 PM Administrative Nurse D verified R16's care plan lacked the identified concern or problem of PTSD. The facility's Comprehensive Care Plans policy, dated 09/2023, documented an individualized comprehensive person-centered care plan that includes measurable objective time frames to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental, cultural and psychosocial need is developed for each resident. The comprehensive care plan is based on a thorough assessment that includes, but is not limited to, the MDS and physician orders. Assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the resident and the resident's condition change. The care plan should describe the resident's nursing, medical, physical, mental and psychosocial preferences. Each resident's comprehensive care plan is designed to incorporate identified problem areas, risk factors associated with identified concerns, aid in preventing or reducing declines in the resident's functional status ad or functional levels and enhance the optimal functioning of the resident. The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan to include R16's PTSD which placed the resident at risk for unmet care needs. - R18's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) recorded diagnoses of major depressive disorder (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), generalized anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty and irrational fear) disorder, chronic pain, acute and chronic respiratory failure, rheumatoid arthritis (chronic inflammatory disease that affected joints and other organ systems) , dependence on supplemental oxygen, panic disorder, starvation, severe protein-calorie malnutrition, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD- mental disorder characterized by an acute emotional response to a traumatic event or situation involving severe environmental stress), need for assistance with personal care, and problems related to care provider dependency. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R18 had intact cognition, and required limited assistance of one person for activities of daily living. R18 was not steady, was only able to stabilize with staff assistance, and used a walker and wheelchair. R18 had occasional incontinence of urine and used oxygen. The MDS further documented R18 had diagnoses of anxiety disorder, PTSD, and regularly took an antianxiety (class of medications that calm and relax people), antidepressant (class of medications used to treat mood disorders), diuretic (medication to promote the formation and excretion of urine), and opioid (medication used for pain relief). The Care Plan initiated on 05/03/23 documented R18 was at risk for a potential psychosocial well-being problem related to anxiety, pain, recent admission, repeated falls, shortness of air, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD- progressive and irreversible condition characterized by diminished lung capacity and difficulty or discomfort in breathing), asthma (disorder of narrowed airways that caused wheezing and shortness of breath), and depression. The care plan directed staff to allow R18 time to answer questions and verbalize feelings, perceptions, and fears as needed. The plan directed to assist, encourage, and support R18 to set realistic goals and to consult with pastoral care, social services, and psychiatric services. The care plan further directed staff to assist, supervise, and support R18 to identify causative and contributing factors. The care plan lacked direction regarding R18's PTSD diagnosis and interventions to prevent traumatization triggers. The Social Service admission Note dated 04/18/23 at 03:49 PM documented R18 came to the facility due to failure to thrive living at home with family. R19 was on an antipsychotic, antidepressant, and antianxiety medications, and exhibited signs of depression and anxiety. The note further documented R18 did not have a history of trauma and/or PTSD. The Mental Health Consultation Progress Note, dated 04/19/23, documented R18's thought process associations were logical, attention span was normal throughout the interview, and concentration intact. R18 had not realized how depressed he was and what a terrible state he was in. R18 was not currently taking psychiatric medications, but had diagnoses of depression, anxiety and PTSD. The note further documented R18 needed therapy from a trauma informed perspective and intensive talk therapy to help in working through his grief and loss. The plan/recommendation to start and antianxiety medication for anxiety and panic attacks, and antidepressant for depression, and talk therapy for PTSD and trauma. On 09/26/23 at 12:30 PM, observation revealed R18 sat in an electric wheelchair in the dining room and had lunch at a table of male residents. On 09/28/23 at 09:24 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA ) P stated she was not aware of R18's diagnosis of PTSD, nor the triggers associated with this. On 09/28/23 at 10:40 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H, stated she was not aware of R18's PTSD. LN H stated she was not aware of R18 triggers associated with the diagnosis. LN H stated this information would be helpful for the care of the resident. On 09/28/23 at 01:50 PM Administrative Nurse D verified R18's care plan lacked the identified concern or problem of PTSD. The facility's Comprehensive Care Plans policy, dated 09/2023, documented an individualized comprehensive person-centered care plan that includes measurable objective time frames to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental, cultural and psychosocial need is developed for each resident. The comprehensive care plan is based on a thorough assessment that includes, but is not limited to, the MDS and physician orders. Assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the resident and the resident's condition change. The care plan should describe the resident's nursing, medical, physical, mental and psychosocial preferences. Each resident's comprehensive care plan is designed to incorporate identified problem areas, risk factors associated with identified concerns, aid in preventing or reducing declines in the resident's functional status ad or functional levels and enhance the optimal functioning of the resident. The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan to include R18's PTSD which placed the resident risk for unmet care needs.
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** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents, with six reviewed for falls. Based on observation, ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents, with six reviewed for falls. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to revise Resident (R) 28's plan of care to reflect his current needs and use of a mechanical lift for transfers. This placed the residents at risk for preventable accidents and injury due to uncommunicated care needs. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R28 documented diagnoses of hemiparesis/hemiplegia (weakness and paralysis on one side of the body), unsteadiness on feet, and abnormalities of gait and mobility. The Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R28 had intact cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, personal hygiene, and R28 did not ambulate. The assessment further documented R28 had unsteady balance, upper and lower functional impairment on one side, and had no falls. The Quarterly MDS, dated 07/26/23, documented R28 had intact cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and did not ambulate. The assessment further documented R28 had unsteady balance, had upper functional impairment on one side and lower functional impairment on both sides, and had one non-injury fall. The Fall Assessments, dated 01/12/23, 05/31/23, 07/06/23, documented R28 was a high risk for falls. The Care Plan, dated 09/08/23, initiated on 02/16/23, directed staff to anticipate and meet R28's needs, be sure he has his call light within reach, encourage him to use it for assistance as needed as R28 needed prompt response to all requests for assistance. The plan directed staff to follow facility fall protocol. R28 needed a safe environment, and physical therapy was to evaluate and treat as ordered or as needed. R28 required extensive assistance of two staff for all transfers. The Fall Investigation, dated 07/16/23 at 10:44 AM, documented a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) notified the nurse that R28 was lowered to the ground and was kneeling on both knees in front of the bed and beside the wheelchair. The investigation further documented R28 became weak, could no longer stand, started to fall, and the CNA had to lower him to his knees. On 09/26/23 at 11:50 AM, observation revealed CNA N and CNA O placed to full body mechanical lift sling under R28, attached the straps to the lift, raised R28 up, then sat him down in his wheelchair. CNA N removed the sling from behind the resident, attached R28's foot pedals to the wheelchair, placed R28's feet on the pedals and took him to the dining room for lunch. On 09/26/23 at 11:50 AM, CNA stated physical therapy worked with R28 and staff used the full lift because R28 had a stroke. 09/28/23 at 09:30 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated R28 was a full lift for transfers and said she did not know of any falls R28 had. On 09/28/23 at 01:00 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated the nurse was responsible for implementing new interventions after falls and should document the new intervention on the care plan. Administrative Nurse D further stated, she will sometimes run the care plans, but not all the time as other staff members run the care plans also. Care plans are completed outside of the facility with the assistance of a corporate nurse who corresponds with her through phone calls and emails and stated that any assessment completed by staff was sent to her to build the care plan. Administrative Nurse D stated she did not know where to find any care plan conference documentation and hoped to hire someone soon to do the care plans. The facility's Comprehensive Care Plans policy, dated 08/22, documented an individualized person-centered care plan that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental, cultural and psychological needs was developed for each resident and the team would review and update the care plans. The facility failed to revise R28's care plan to reflect his need for a mechanical lift for transfers. This placed the resident at risk for accident or injury related to uncommunciated care needs.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0661 (Tag F0661)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on record review, and interview, the facility...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on record review, and interview, the facility failed to complete a discharge summary, a reconciliation (summary) of pre and post discharge medications, and post-discharge plan of care for Resident (R) 30, who discharged from the facility. This placed the resident at risk for unmet care needs. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented R30 had diagnoses of fracture of neck of right femur (thigh bone), right artificial hip joint, major depressive disorder (major mood disorder which causes persistent feelings of sadness) , chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD- progressive and irreversible condition characterized by diminished lung capacity and difficulty or discomfort in breathing), dementia (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty and irrational fear), fluid overload, severe protein malnutrition, weakness, and need for assistance with personal care. The EMR documented R30's admission date of 05/04/23 and discharge date of 07/05/23. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R30 had severe cognitive impairment, required limited assistance with activities of daily living, was not steady, and only able to stabilize with staff assistance. R30 used a walker and wheelchair. The MDS documented R30 had occasional incontinence of urine and bowel. The MDS further documented R30 had a surgical wound and received an antipsychotic (class of medications used to treat major mental conditions which cause a break from reality) and antidepressant (class of medications used to treat mood disorders) daily. The Care Plan dated 05/17/23 documented R30 and her family wished for her to return home upon discharge. The care plan directed staff to encourage R30 to discuss feelings and concerns with impending discharge, to monitor for and address episodes of anxiety, fear and distrust. The care plan further directed staff to establish a pre-discharge plan with resident and family, plan with required community resources to support independence post-discharge, and R30 needed written instructions and visual aids, as required, to ensure care continuity post-discharge. R30's EMR lacked a physician order for discharge. The Progress Note dated 07/05/23 at 03:43 PM documented R30 was discharging to another facility closer to family. R30's EMR lacked further evidence of a summary or recapitulation of R30's stay, reconciliation of medications, the post-discharge plans and needs, and any services required. On 09/28/23 at 09:03 AM, Consultant HH verified there was no physician order for discharge to another facility, or a discharge summary to include a recapitulation and reconciliation of medications. The facility's Discharge Summary and Plan policy, dated 09/2023, documented when a resident's discharge is anticipated, a discharge summary and post-discharge plan will be developed to assist the resident to adjust to his/her new living environment. The discharge summary will include a recapitulation of the resident's stay at this facility and a final summary of the resident's status at the time of discharge in accordance with established regulations governing release of resident information and as permitted by the resident. The recapitulation will include, but not limited to: diagnoses, course of illness, treatment or therapy, pertinent lab, radiology and consultation results, reconciliation of all pre-discharge medications with the resident's post-discharge medications for prescribed and over the counter, and a final summary paragraph that may be released to any provider with the consent of the resident or representative. The facility failed to complete a discharge summary, a reconciliation of pre and post discharge medications, and post-discharge plan of care for R30. This placed the resident at risk for unmet care needs.
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** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents, with six reviewed for falls. Based on observation, ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents, with six reviewed for falls. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide an environment free from preventable accidents and falls for Resident (R)9, R14, and R20. This placed the residents at risk for further falls and injury. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R9 documented diagnoses of Parkinson's disease (slowly progressive neurologic disorder characterized by resting tremor, rolling of the fingers, masklike faces, shuffling gait, muscle rigidity and weakness), repeated falls, anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty and irrational fear), muscle weakness, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD- progressive and irreversible condition characterized by diminished lung capacity and difficulty or discomfort in breathing), and spinal stenosis (degenerative condition of the spine that could cause weakness and loss of use of extremities). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set, (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R9 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, dressing, toileting, personal hygiene, transfers, and extensive assistance of one staff for ambulation. The MDS further documented R9 had unsteady balance, lower functional impairment on one side, and had no falls. The Quarterly MDS, dated 09/13/23, documented R9 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, personal hygiene, and did not ambulate. The MDS further documented R9 had unsteady balance, no functional impairment, and had one non injury and one injury fall since prior admission. The Fall Assessments, dated 08/21/22, 11/21/22, 02/21/23, 03/27/23, 06/27/23, documented R9 was a high risk for falls. R9's Care Plan, dated 09/07/2023, initiated on 06/27/17, directed staff to lower R9's bed. The update, dated 05/13/20, directed staff to monitor for safety on nurse rounds every two hours. The update, dated 03/26/21, directed staff to monitor for R9 sleeping on the side of her bed and assist her to the middle of the bed if noted. R9 Care Plan recorded an update, dated 02/20/23, which directed staff to make sure R9's call light was within reach and encourage her to use it for assistance as needed, educate R9 and family about safety reminders and what to do if a fall occurs, encourage R9 to participate in activities, ensure R9 wore appropriate footwear when ambulating or mobilizing in her wheelchair, have a safe environment for R9, and provide activities that minimize the potential for falls that would provide distraction or diversion. R9 Care Plan recorded an update, dated, dated 06/10/23, which directed staff to make sure a pillow was placed under her right side no matter of position, ensure R9 was closer to the wall when in bed and ensure her bed was in the lowest position, ensure her fall mat was next to her bed when she was in bed, and ensure R9 was positioned closer to the wall due to her air mattress. The update, dated 08/14/23, directed staff to ensure bolsters were on the outer edge, right side of bed, when R9 was in bed. The Fall Investigation, dated 01/21/23 at 03:15 AM, documented R9 was observed on the floor on the right side, parallel to the bed, with her head slightly under the bed. Her legs were outstretched, and her right arm was beneath her. The investigation further documented staff lifted R9 off the floor with the use of a Hoyer (total body mechanical lift), and R9 did not have pain. The investigation documented R9 could not tell staff what happened, and staff felt R9 rolled out of bed while repositioning herself on her new air mattress. R9's record lacked evidence an intervention addressing the air mattress related fall was implemented at that time. The Fall Investigation, dated 01/31/23 at 05:00 AM, documented R9 was on the floor beside her bed and sustained a hematoma (collection of blood trapped in the tissues of the skin or in an organ, resulting from trauma). R9 stated she was looking for her children. The investigation further documented R9 had impaired memory, hallucinations (sensing things while awake that appear to be real, but the mind created) and staff lifted her off the ground and placed her back into her bed. R9's record lacked evidence of interventions related to this fall at that time. The Fall Investigation, dated 04/16/23 at 06:15 PM, documented R9 laid on her right side on the floor, and did not sustain any injuries. The investigation further documented staff assisted R9 off the floor, placed her back into bed, positioned her with pillows, and set up her supper tray. R9's record lacked evidence of interventions related to this fall at that time. The Fall Investigation, dated 06/10/23 at 05:15 PM, documented R9 was lying on the floor next to her bed and stated she scooted a little bit then whop. The investigation further documented R9 sustained a hematoma to the right side of her forehead and her bed was not in the lowest position. R9 was assisted back onto her bed by three staff with a gait belt, then transferred to her wheelchair and taken down to supper. The Fall Investigation, dated 08/09/23 at 11:30 AM, documented staff found R9 on the floor parallel with her bed. There was a fall mat beside the bed. R9 had a moderate amount of blood beneath her head, and staff applied gentle direct pressure to a laceration (wound to the skin) at her temple. On 09/28/23 at 08:21 AM, observation revealed R9 laid in bed. There was a fall mat beside the bed, and a bolster under the mattress cover, but not visible. There were no pillows on R9's right side. On 09/26/23 at 02:30 PM, CNA N stated she was not aware R9 had any falls. CNA N said R9 worked with physical therapy, and staff used a sit to stand lift to transfer R9. On 09/28/23 at 09:30 AM, Licensed Nurse H stated R9 had a fall matt beside her bed, required frequent checks, and was a two-person transfer. Licensed Nurse H stated when a resident had a fall, she filled out fall paperwork but did not implement interventions for falls. Licensed Nurse H stated she did document interventions on the care plan. On 09/28/23 at 01:00 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated the nurse was responsible for implementing new interventions after falls and should document the new intervention on the care plan. The facility's Falls and Fall Risk, Managing policy, dated 10/22, documented based on previous evaluations and current data, staff would identify interventions related to the resident's specific risks and causes to try to prevent the resident from falling and to try to minimize complications from falls. The policy further documented, the team would attempt to identify appropriate interventions to reduce the risk of falls, If a systematic evaluation of a resident's fall risk identified several possible interventions, the staff may choose to prioritize interventions. the staff would monitor and document each resident's response to interventions intended to reduce falling or the risks of falling. If interventions have been successful in preventing falls, staff would continue the interventions or reconsider whether these measures are still needed if a problem that required the intervention has resolved. The facility failed to identify relevant interventions after falls to prevent further falls for cognitively impaired R9. The facility further failed to ensure staff implemented the plan of care related to fall prevention when staff failed to place pillows as directed by R9's plan of care. This placed the resident at risk for further falls and injury. - R14's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented diagnoses of hemiparesis/hemiplegia (weakness and paralysis on one side of the body) following other cerebrovascular accident (CVA-stroke- sudden death of brain cells due to lack of oxygen caused by impaired blood flow to the brain by blockage or rupture of an artery to the brain) affecting left dominant side, muscle weakness, abnormalities of gait and mobility, and lack of coordination. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R14 had intact cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting. R14 did not ambulate. The assessment further documented R14 had unsteady gait, upper and lower functional impairment on one side, and had no falls. The Fall Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 02/27/23, documented R14 had unsteady, impaired gait and balance, and was at risk for falls. R14 used a wheelchair and was at risk for injuries from falls. The Quarterly MDS, dated 06/27/23, documented R14 had intact cognition and required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, transfers, ambulation, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. The MDS further documented R14 had unsteady gait, upper and lower functional impairment on both sides, and had two or more falls since prior assessment. The Fall Assessment, dated 02/22/23 documented R14 was a low risk for falls. The Fall Assessment, dated 05/26/23, 08/15/23, and 08/26/23 documented R14 was a high risk for falls. R14's Care Plan, dated 07/24/23, initiated on 03/21/23, directed staff to anticipate and meet his needs, be sure R14's call light was within reach and encourage him to use it for assistance as needed as R14 required prompt response to all requests for assistance. Encourage R14 to participate in activities that promote exercise, physical activity for strengthening and improved mobility. Ensure R14 wore appropriate footwear and ensure he had a safe environment. Provide activities that minimized the potential for falls while providing a diversion and use a sit to stand lift for transfers with two staff. R14's Care Plan updated 09/08/23 documented R14 continued to self-transfer himself without assistance and directed staff to educate and reeducate him on using his call light to request assistance as needed. The update, dated 09/26/23, directed staff to use a full body lift for transfers. The Fall Investigation, dated 08/15/23, at 01:31 PM, documented a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) attempted to transfer R14 off the toilet to his wheelchair. R14's left foot was unable to move as the CNA tried to pivot turn the resident, and the CNA had to assist R14 to the ground. The investigation further documented R14 did not sustain any injury. On 09/25/23 at 12:50 PM, observation revealed R14 sat in his wheelchair. CNA N and CNA O put the sit to stand sling around R14's waist, placed his feet upon the foot plate of the lift, and told R14 to hold onto the handles of the lift. R14 held onto the lift handle with his right hand but CNA O had to put R14's left hand onto the handle and hold onto it for him. CNA N used the lift controller to lift R14 and told him to stand up. As the lift rose, R14 started to lean to the left and his left foot fell off of the foot plate. R14 could not stand and continued to lean heavily to his left, tipping the wheelchair. CNA N kept telling R14 to stand up, and R14 told both CNA he could not. CNA N lowered the lift and tried to reposition and straighten R14. The CNA tried to get R14's left foot back onto the foot plate. CNA O put her left knee against R14's left leg to try to hold it into place as both CNA attempted to stand R14 once again. R14 continued to lean heavily to the left and R14 again stated that he could not stand as the CNA continued to attempt to stand R14 using the lift. As the lift was raised, R14 continued to lean left, and the wheelchair started to tip. R14 stated No wonder my left side hurts sometimes and CNA N stated she did not feel comfortable using the sit to stand lift with R14 and had CNA O go tell the nurse to come to the resident's room. Licensed Nurse (LN) G went to R14's room and directed staff to use the full body mechanical lift to transfer R14 to the toilet. LN G then left to try to find a toileting sling to use on the resident. Further observation revealed R14 already had a full lift sling in his room that he stated had been used on him by one of the night shift CNA. CNA N and CNA O placed the sling under R14 while he was in his wheelchair. Staff lifted R14 into the air and placed R14 in his bed. Observation revealed the sling was not the right size for the resident and the straps were tight and cut into R14's inner thighs and made his head lean forward. The staff removed R14's pants and brief then lifted R14 again using the lift. R14's genitals were smashed in between the leg straps of the sling and R14 stated he was uncomfortable. CNA O was unable to position the lift in order to get R14 seated comfortably onto the toilet and Administrative Nurse D was asked to assist the two CNA with the resident. Administrative Nurse D stated the sling was not the right size for R14 and said that she would request a physical therapy evaluation to determine the best option to transfer R14. On 09/26/23 at 04:09 PM, observation revealed R14 sat in the shower chair with a gait belt around his waist. CNA M was on R14's right side and CNA O on the left. R14 used his right hand to guide his left hand to the end of the whirlpool tub so that he could hold on while both CNA transferred him to his wheelchair. CNA N stated, Are you sure we can transfer him, ok? and CNA N answered, Yes. CNA started to stand R14. R14 started to bend at the waist and his head was over the whirlpool. R14 said If I fall in, you are going to have a hard time getting me out of the whirlpool. Both CNAs had difficulty holding R14 up and they had to sit him down in the shower chair because he could not stand long enough to complete the transfer. R14's left foot did not move and seemed to be stuck on the floor. Continued observation revealed the CNAs attempted to stand R14 again and were able to transfer him into his wheelchair. On 09/25/23 at 01:00 PM, CNA N stated R14 was impulsive and did not like to wait for help. On 09/26/23 at 04:30 PM, CNA M stated R14 was stronger before his shower. CMA M said she transferred R14 from his wheelchair to the shower chair without any assistance. On 09/28/23 at 09:30 AM, LN H stated R14 had severe left side weakness and therapy had evaluated him. LN H said therapy would work with R14 to try to get him stronger and see which lift would be appropriate for him. LN H stated when a resident had a fall, she filled out fall paperwork but did not implement interventions for falls. LN H said she did not document interventions on the care plan. On 09/28/23 at 11:30 AM, Consultant II stated he worked with R14 in the past and R14's cognition did not allow him to retain any safety awareness. Consultant II said he would be working with R14 again but felt R14 would continue to fall because the resident wanted to be independent and did not remember that he cannot transfer alone. On 09/28/23 at 01:52 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated if staff felt unsafe or unsure of how to transfer the resident, staff need to stop and ask questions. Administrative Nurse D further stated the nurse was responsible for implementing new interventions after falls and should document the new intervention on the care plan. The facility's Falls and Fall Risk, Managing policy, dated 10/22, documented based on previous evaluations and current data, staff would identify interventions related to the resident's specific risks and causes to try to prevent the resident from falling and to try to minimize complications from falls. The policy further documented, the team would attempt to identify appropriate interventions to reduce the risk of falls, If a systematic evaluation of a resident's fall risk identified several possible interventions, the staff may choose to prioritize interventions. the staff would monitor and document each resident's response to interventions intended to reduce falling or the risks of falling. If interventions have been successful in preventing falls, staff would continue the interventions or reconsider whether these measures are still needed if a problem that required the intervention has resolved. The facility failed to ensure an environment free from preventable accidents and hazards when staff performed unsafe transfers with R14 which resulted in an assisted fall. This placed R14 at increased risk for preventable falls and related injuries. - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R20 documented diagnoses of lack of coordination, repeated falls, dementia with other behavior disturbance (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), and difficulty walking. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R20 had intact cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and extensive assistance of one staff for ambulation, mobility, and personal hygiene. The assessment further documented R20 had unsteady balance, no functional impairment, and had one fall with injury. The Annual MDS, dated 09/04/23, documented R20 had intact cognition and required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting and personal hygiene. The assessment further documented R20 had unsteady balance, no functional impairment, and had one fall with injury. The Fall Assessments, dated 08/09/22, 08/19/22, 11/19/22, 02/19/23, 05/19/23, 08/21/23 recorded R20 was a high-risk for falls. R20's Care Plan, dated 09/07/23, initiated on 01/02/22, directed staff to have her call light within reach. keep frequently used items within reach, keep room door open when up in recliner, keep her walker near the resident, proper footwear and no slip socks. The update, dated 03/28/22, directed staff to refer to therapy post fall for screen. The update dated 07/07/22 documented R20 was a two person assist for ambulation and transfers. The Fall Investigation, dated 11/16/22 at 11:50 AM, documented one staff member assisted R20 to her recliner when R20 decided to sit down and missed the chair. The investigation further documented she sat down, her feet slipped, and she fell onto the floor. The investigation documented R20 did not sustain any injuries. On 09//26/23 at 02:00 PM, observation revealed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) N placed a gait belt around R20's waist, stood her up. and ambulated R20 to her recliner. On 09/26/23 at 02:00 PM, CNA N stated R20 was assisted with ambulation by two staff if there were two staff available to help her. CNA N stated R20 had falls because she would often forget her walker. On 09/28/23 at 09:30 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated R10 required assistance of two staff with transfers and said she was unaware that R20 had any falls but she had only worked at the facility for a month. LN H stated when a resident had a fall, she filled out fall paperwork but did not implement interventions for falls. LN H said she did not document interventions on the care plan. On 09/28/23 at 01:52 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated, if staff felt unsafe or unsure of how to transfer the resident, staff need to stop and ask questions. Administrative Nurse D further stated the nurse was responsible for implementing new interventions after falls and should document the new intervention on the care plan. The facility's Falls and Fall Risk, Managing policy, dated 10/22, documented based on previous evaluations and current data, staff would identify interventions related to the resident's specific risks and causes to try to prevent the resident from falling and to try to minimize complications from falls. The policy further documented, the team would attempt to identify appropriate interventions to reduce the risk of falls, If a systematic evaluation of a resident's fall risk identified several possible interventions, the staff may choose to prioritize interventions. the staff would monitor and document each resident's response to interventions intended to reduce falling or the risks of falling. If interventions have been successful in preventing falls, staff would continue the interventions or reconsider whether these measures are still needed if a problem that required the intervention has resolved. The facility failed to provide the appropriate amount of assistance to prevent accidents and falls for R20. This placed the resident at risk for further falls and injury.
CONCERN (D)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents, with four reviewed for respiratory care. Based on o...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents, with four reviewed for respiratory care. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 27, who required continuous supplemental oxygen, received adequate respiratory care and services. This placed the resident at risk for physical decline. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R27 documented diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD- progressive and irreversible condition characterized by diminished lung capacity and difficulty or discomfort in breathing), and muscle weakness. The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R27 had moderately impaired cognition and required supervision and one person assistance for toileting, personal hygiene, and supervision and set up assistance for all other activities of daily living. The MDS further documented R27 had shortness of breath with exertion, sitting, lying flat, and received oxygen. The Care Plan, dated 09/07/23, directed staff to monitor for signs and symptoms of respiratory distress, and provide oxygen therapy as ordered. The plan directed to keep the head of the bed elevated for optimal breathing, and maintain a clear airway by encouraging resident to clear own secretions with effective coughing. The plan directed R27 frequently takes off his oxygen, and forgot to put it back on; staff to remind and assist the resident as needed. The Physician's Order, dated 11/10/22, directed staff to ensure R27 received 4 liters (L) of oxygen continuous via nasal cannula. On 09/26/23 at 07:55 AM, observation revealed R27 sat in the dining room. His oxygen tubing and cannula laid on the dining room floor. On 09/26/23 at 08:58 AM, observation revealed R27 self propelled his wheelchair into the television area, his oxygen tubing and cannula was wound around the right wheel of his wheelchair. Further observation revealed Administrative Staff B asked Administrative Nurse E to get R27 a new set of tubing sine R27's touched the ground. Administrative Nurse E replaced the old tubing and assisted R27 with the new tubing. Continued observation revealed, the oxygen tank R27 was using was empty and Adminsitrative Nurse E brought R27 a new tank. Administrative Nurse E obtained R27's oxygen saturation (percentage of oxygen in the blood) which was in the 70 percentile (normal is 90-100 %). After Administrative Nurse E had R27 take deep breaths, he was able to get his saturations up into the 90 percentiles. Administrative Nurse E stated it was everyone's responsibility to make sure R27 had a full oxygen tank and to make sure he was wearing the nasal cannula correctly and it was not dragging on the floor. On 09/26/23 at 12:25 PM, observation revealed R27 fiddled with his oxygen tubing and oxygen tank. Closer observation revealed R27's oxygen tank was empty and he was having difficulty catching his breath. Administrative Nurse E was notified and retreived a new tank for R27. Adminsitrative Nurse E again checked R27's oxygen saturations again, which read in the 90 percentiles. Administrative Nurse E stated staff must not be turning off the tank when they switched R27 from the portable tank to his concentrator in his room. On 09/26/23 at 1:00 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated R27 often took his oxygen off and it would be found on the floor, or he would put it in his mouth. Administrative Nurse D further stated staff should make sure the oxygen tanks were full and assist R27 with his tubing. On 09/28/23 at 09:30 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated, R27 had an oxygen concentrator in the dining room instead of using the portable tanks due to staff not turning them off when they switched from the tank to the concentrator. On 09/28/23 at 10:40 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) P stated the staff were supposed to check R27's oxygen tank to make sure it has oxygen in it when the change him from the concentrator to the portable tank. CNA P stated R27's oxygen tank was empty again that morning and R27 now had a concentrator in the dining room. The facility's Oxygen Administration policy, dated 06/21, directed staff to check the tubing connected to the oxygen cylinder to assure that it is free of kinks, turn on the oxygen, place appropriate oxygen device on the resident, and adjust the oxygen delivery devices so that it is comfortable for the resident and the proper flow of oxygen was being administered. Check the mask, tank, to be sure they are in good working order and are securely fastened, and observe the resident upon setup and periodically thereafter to be sure oxygen was being tolerated, The facility failed to ensure R27, who required continuous supplemental oxygen, received proper respiratory care and services. This placed the resident at risk for physical decline.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0699 (Tag F0699)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview,...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 16 and R18 received trauma informed care to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may care re-traumatization which placed the residents at risk for unmet behavioral health care needs and impaired psychosocial well-being. Findings included: - R16's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) recorded diagnoses of generalized anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty and irrational fear) disorder, diabetes mellitus (DM-when the body cannot use glucose, not enough insulin made or the body cannot respond to the insulin), major depressive disorder (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), muscle weakness, mood {affective} disorder (category of mental health problems, feelings of sadness, helplessness, guilt, wanting to die were more intense and persistent than what may normally be felt from time to time), multiple sclerosis (MS- progressive disease of the nerve fibers of the brain and spinal cord , and problems related to care provider dependency. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R16 had intact cognition, required supervision and one person assist with activities of daily living, had primary diagnoses of non-traumatic brain dysfunction, and other diagnoses of anxiety disorder, depression, but not PTSD. The MDS further documented R16 took an antianxiety (class of medications that calm and relax people) , antidepressant (class of medications used to treat mood disorders), diuretic (medication to promote the formation and excretion of urine), and opioid (medication used for pain relief) daily. The Care Plan initiated 04/10/23, documented R16 had mood problems and directed staff to administer medications as ordered and monitor/document for side effects and effectiveness. The care plan further documented R16 needed encouragement, assistance, and support to maintain as much independence and control as possible. The plan directed staff to assist R16 to identify strengths, positive coping skills and reinforce these. The care plan lacked did not identify R16 had PTSD and interventions to prevent traumatization triggers. The Mental Health Consultation Progress Note dated 08/16/23 documented R16 reported nightmares that disturbed her and caused her to be upset; and some were about people that worked at the facility. The note recorded the mental health consultant ordered medication at bedtime for PTSD and nightmares. The Progress Note dated 09/14/23 at 02:58 PM, documented R16 was screaming and crying after being informed of the rules for pets in the facility. R16 appeared safe at that time and was given time to calm down. R16 wrote a letter and gave it to the nurse to pass on to the mental health provider. On 09/26/23 at 08:25 AM, observation revealed R16 ambulated in the hallway with her walker. R16 reported she had better days than that particular time and day. On 09/28/23 at 09:24 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA ) P stated she was not aware of R16's diagnosis of PTSD, nor the triggers associated with this. On 09/28/23 at 10:40 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated she was aware of R16's PTSD. LN H stated she was not aware of R16's triggers associated with the diagnosis. LN H stated that information would be helpful for the care of the resident. On 09/28/23 at 09:08 AM, Consultant HH verified R16 had PTSD on admission and the Social Service admission Assessment, dated 09/21/21, documented R16 had PTSD and a triggers of people who downplay the trigger and those who snuck up on her. On 09/28/23 at 01:50 PM Administrative Nurse D verified R16's care plan lacked the identified concern or problem of PTSD. The facility's Trauma Informed Care policy, dated 09/2023, documented residents who are known trauma survivors, will receive culturally competent, trauma informed care in accordance with professional standards of practice and accounting for resident's experiences and preferences in order to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization. A trauma informed approach to care delivery recognizes the widespread impact and signs and symptoms of trauma in residents, and incorporates knowledge about trauma into care plans, policies, procedures and practices to avoid re-traumatization's. The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) will quarterly and as needed, monitor the care and services delivered to the resident with identified trauma. The facility failed to ensure R16 receive trauma informed care to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident which placed the resident at risk for unmet emotional and psychosocial needs. - R18's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) recorded diagnoses of major depressive disorder (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), generalized anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty and irrational fear) disorder, chronic pain, acute and chronic respiratory failure, rheumatoid arthritis (chronic inflammatory disease that affected joints and other organ systems) , dependence on supplemental oxygen, panic disorder, starvation, severe protein-calorie malnutrition, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD- mental disorder characterized by an acute emotional response to a traumatic event or situation involving severe environmental stress), need for assistance with personal care, and problems related to care provider dependency. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R18 had intact cognition, and required limited assistance of one person for activities of daily living. R18 was not steady, was only able to stabilize with staff assistance, and used a walker and wheelchair. R18 had occasional incontinence of urine and used oxygen. The MDS further documented R18 had diagnoses of anxiety disorder, PTSD, and regularly took an antianxiety (class of medications that calm and relax people), antidepressant (class of medications used to treat mood disorders), diuretic (medication to promote the formation and excretion of urine), and opioid (medication used for pain relief). The Care Plan initiated on 05/03/23 documented R18 was at risk for a potential psychosocial well-being problem related to anxiety, pain, recent admission, repeated falls, shortness of air, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD- progressive and irreversible condition characterized by diminished lung capacity and difficulty or discomfort in breathing), asthma (disorder of narrowed airways that caused wheezing and shortness of breath), and depression. The care plan directed staff to allow R18 time to answer questions and verbalize feelings, perceptions, and fears as needed. The plan directed to assist, encourage, and support R18 to set realistic goals and to consult with pastoral care, social services, and psychiatric services. The care plan further directed staff to assist, supervise, and support R18 to identify causative and contributing factors. The care plan lacked direction regarding R18's PTSD diagnosis and interventions to prevent traumatization triggers. The Social Service admission Note dated 04/18/23 at 03:49 PM documented R18 came to the facility due to failure to thrive living at home with family. R19 was on an antipsychotic, antidepressant, and antianxiety medications, and exhibited signs of depression and anxiety. The note further documented R18 did not have a history of trauma and/or PTSD. The Mental Health Consultation Progress Note, dated 04/19/23, documented R18's thought process associations were logical, attention span was normal throughout the interview, and concentration intact. R18 had not realized how depressed he was and what a terrible state he was in. R18 was not currently taking psychiatric medications, but had diagnoses of depression, anxiety and PTSD. The note further documented R18 needed therapy from a trauma informed perspective and intensive talk therapy to help in working through his grief and loss. The plan/recommendation to start and antianxiety medication for anxiety and panic attacks, and antidepressant for depression, and talk therapy for PTSD and trauma. On 09/26/23 at 12:30 PM, observation revealed R18 sat in an electric wheelchair in the dining room and had lunch at a table of male residents. On 09/28/23 at 09:24 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA ) P stated she was not aware of R18's diagnosis of PTSD, nor the triggers associated with this. On 09/28/23 at 10:40 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H, stated she was not aware of R18's PTSD. LN H stated she was not aware of R18 triggers associated with the diagnosis. LN H stated this information would be helpful for the care of the resident. On 09/28/23 at 01:50 PM Administrative Nurse D verified R18's care plan lacked the identified concern or problem of PTSD. The facility's Trauma Informed Care policy, dated 09/2023, documented residents who are known trauma survivors, will receive culturally competent, trauma informed care in accordance with professional standards of practice and accounting for resident's experiences and preferences in order to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization. A trauma informed approach to care delivery recognizes the widespread impact and signs and symptoms of trauma in residents, and incorporates knowledge about trauma into care plans, policies, procedures and practices to avoid re-traumatization's. The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) will quarterly and as needed, monitor the care and services delivered to the resident with identified trauma. The facility failed to ensure R18 receive trauma informed care to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident which placed the resident at risk for unmet emotional and psychosocial needs.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0760 (Tag F0760)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview,...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents remained free from significant medication errors when medication was not administered per physician orders for Resident (R) 81. This placed the resident at risk for decreased physical and mental well-being. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R81 documented diagnoses of delusion (untrue persistent belief or perception held by a person although evidence shows it was untrue) disorder, anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty and irrational fear), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD- mental disorder characterized by an acute emotional response to a traumatic event or situation involving severe environmental stress), and mood disorder (category of mental health problems, feelings of sadness, helplessness, guilt, wanting to die were more intense and persistent than what may normally be felt from time to time). The Medicare 5 Day Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R81 had intact cognition and was dependent upon two staff for toileting, personal hygiene. R81 required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, and dressing. The MDS recroded R81 felt depressed, had thoughts about being better off dead never or one day, and had no behaviors. The MDS further documented R81 received antipsychotic (class of medications used to treat major mental conditions which cause a break from reality), antianxiety (class of medications that calm and relax people), and antidepressant (class of medications used to treat mood disorders) medications. R81's Care Plan, dated 09/12/23, initiated on 03/28/23 documented R81 received antipsychotic medications and directed staff to administer medications as ordered, and monitor for side effects from medications. The Physician Encounter Note, dated 08/16/23, directed staff to add Abilify (antipsychotic medication) to R81's medications to help with his increased paranoia. The Physician's Order, dated 08/16/23, directed staff to administer Abilify, 2 milligrams (mg), one tablet, at bedtime. The August 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) lacked evidence R81 received the physician ordered Ability. The September 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) lacked evidence R81 received the physician ordered Ability. On 09/26/23 at 11:10 AM, observation revealed R81 laid in bed with his eyes closed. On 09/27/23 at 12:01 PM, Administrative Nurse D verified R81's Ability was missed and not given. The facility's Identifying and Managing Medication Errors and Adverse Consequences policy, dated 04/07, documented the staff and practioner should try to prevent medication errors and adverse medication consequences and should strive to identify and manage them appropriately when they occur. The facility failed to ensure residents remained free from significant medication errors when medication was not administered per physician orders for R81. This placed the resident at risk for decreased physical and mental well-being.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to adequately label and store insulin (hormone that...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to adequately label and store insulin (hormone that lowers the level of glucose in the blood) for five residents in the facility's medication room. This placed the affected residents at risk for ineffective medication regimens. Findings included: - On 09/25/23 at 01:59 PM, observation of the medication room refrigerator had the follwoing insulin pens which were open, and in use which lacked a date when opened and/or discard date: Residents (R)1's Levemir (long acting insulin) and lispro (short acting insulin) was not labeled with opened or discard dates. R2's Levemir was not labeled with opened or discard date. R14's insulin glargine (long acting) was dated 07/23/23 but not specified if that was an open or discard date. R24's Levemir was dated 09/17/23 but notspecified if that was an open or discard date. R11's basaglar (long acting insulin) was not labeled with opened or discard date. On 09/25/23 at 02:05 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G stated she did not know what the insulin pen dating policy was for the facility's insulin use. On 09/26/23 at 08:02 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated the insulin pens should be dated to when it was opened and when it should be discarded. The facility's Identifying and Managing Medication Errors and Adverse Consequences policy, dated 09/2023, documented the staff and practitioner shall strive to prevent medication errors and adverse medication consequences, and shall strive to identify and manage them appropriately when they occur. The policy further the staff to follow relevant clinical guidelines and manufacturers' specifications for use. The facility failed to label and store insulin pen with opened and expiration dates for R1, R2, R14, R24, and R11, which placed the affected residents at risk for ineffective medication regimens.
CONCERN (F)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food under sanitary co...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food under sanitary conditions for 33 residents who resided in the facility and received meals from the facility kitchen, placing the residents at risk for food borne illness. Findings included: - On 09/26/23 at 11:55 AM observation revealed the ceiling light fixtures above the stove, grill top, steam table, and three-compartment sink all had dead insect in them. The dining room ceiling light cover also contained dead insects. Further observation revealed the front sheath and blades of the fan attached to the wall and venting ducts over the area where clean dishes were stored had brown, fuzzy material hanging from them. Throughout multiple observations of the kitchen and dining room, a large number of flies were also noted landing on the food preparation tables in the kitchen, the dining room tables, and food on the plates which the residents had to wave away during the meal. On 09/26/23 at 02:09 PM Dietary Staff (DS) BB stated the ceiling lights in the kitchen and dining room and the fan and venting ducts were to be cleaned when she had returned to the facility after time off. DS BB verified numerous flies throughout the kitchen and dining room and said the pest control company came monthly and as needed. The facility Sanitation policy, dated 10/2022, documented all kitchens, kitchen areas and dining areas shall be kept clean, free from litter and rubbish and protected from rodents, roaches, flies and other insects. Kitchen and dining room surfaces not in contact with food shall be cleaned on a regular schedule and frequently enough to prevent the accumulation of grime. The facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food under sanitary conditions for residents that resided in the facility and received meals from the kitchen, placing the residents at risk for food borne illness.
CONCERN (F)

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

Staffing Data (Tag F0851)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

The facility had a census of 33 residents. Based on interview, and record review the facility failed to submit complete and accurate staffing information to the federal regulatory agency through Payro...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 33 residents. Based on interview, and record review the facility failed to submit complete and accurate staffing information to the federal regulatory agency through Payroll Based Journaling (PBJ) when the facility failed to submit the information for Licensed Nurses (LN) 24 hour/day staffing as required. This placed the residents at risk for unidentified and ongoing inadequate staffing. Findings included: - The PBJ report provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for Fiscal year (FY) 2022 Quarter 4 and FY 2023 Quarters 1 through 3 indicated the facility did not have licensed nurse coverage 24 hours a day, seven days a week on over 75 dates. Review of the faciliyt provided staffign information revealed the facility had a licensed nurse 24 hours a day, seven days a week. On 09/28/23 at 08:30 AM, Administrative Staff B stated she started in October and was given a crash course on the PBJ reporting. She said she has since learned how to input it correctly, and felt that it was the agency nursing staff that had not been input correctly which caused the LN 24hours a day to trigegr. The facility's Payroll Based Journal policy, dated 11/17, documented the facility would submit payroll data in a uniform format to CMS, including staffing information for the community, agency, and contract staff. The facility would distinguish employees from agency and contract staff when reporting information about staffing. The facility failed to submit accurate information to CMS PBJ. This placed the residents at risk for unidentified and ongoing inadequate staffing.
CONCERN (F)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain acceptable infection control practices ...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain acceptable infection control practices during Resident (R)15's feeding assistance, R24's bathing on enhanced precautions (infection control interventions designed to reduce transmission of resistant organisms which employs targeted gown and glove use during high contact cares), R131's wound dressing change, and care of R27's oxygen tubing. The facility further implement the water management program to prevent Legionella (Legionella is a bacterium which can cause pneumonia in vulnerable populations). These practices placed the residents at risk for transmission of infectious disease. Findings included: -On 09/26/23 at 12:18 PM, observation revealed R15 was assisted by Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M with eating a sandwich in the dining room. CNA M handled the sandwich without the use of gloves while giving bites to the resident. On 09/26/23 at 01:48 PM, Dietary Staff (DS) BB verified sandwiches should not be handled without gloves while assisting the resident to eat. The facility's Paid Feeding Assistants policy dated 10/2022 documented the use of basic infection control practices related to food and feeding. The facility failed to provide standard infection control practice for R15 who was fed by staff with ungloved hands, which placed R15 at increased risk of illness and infection. - On 09/27/23 at 07:47 AM, observation revealed R24, who was on enhanced barrier precautions for infectious disease, in the bathing room. Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M provided bathing activities without the use of gloves or gown. The signage outside R24's room instructed providers and staff to put on gloves and a gown. On 09/27/23 at 08:58 AM, Administrative Nurse D verified CNA M should have worn gloves and a gown during bathing activity for R24 who had enhanced barrier precautions. The facility's Initiating Transmission-Based Precautions (TBA), (Isolation), (Contact, Enhanced, Airborne, Droplet) policy, dated 05/2023, documented Transmission Based Precautions will be initiated when there is reason to believe that a resident has a communicable infectious disease. When TBP are implemented, the following is recommended: protective equipment (i.e., gloves, gowns, masks, etc.) is maintained near the resident's room so that everyone entering the room can access what they need. Post the appropriate notice on the room entrance door and on the front of the resident's chart so that all personnel will be aware of precautions or be ware that they must first see a nurse to obtain additional information about the situation before entering the room. Put on gown, do not use cloth gowns more than once, and linens are to be placed in black trash can with clear sack labeled trash. The facility failed to ensure staff followed the enhanced barrier precautions while giving direct care to R24, which increased the risk of transmission of infectious disease. - On 09/27/23 at 10:45 AM observation revealed Administrative Nurse E remove a soiled dressing from R131's buttock wound. Administrative Nurse E used the same gloves to remove the soiled dressing, cleanse the wound with wound cleanser, and to apply a clean dressing to the wound. On 09/28/23 at 01:02 PM, Administrative Nurse E verified she should have changed gloves after cleansing the buttock wound and before placing a clean dressing to the site. The facility's Pressure Injury Treatment Guidelines policy, dated 03/2023, documented steps in treatment procedure to wash hands before treatment, apply disposable gloves, remove soiled dressing and gloves and place in open plastic bag, wash hands, apply disposable gloves, clean area and pat dry, apply dressing/treatment remove and discard soiled gloves. The facility failed to follow acceptable infection control measures during wound care for R131 by not changing soiled gloves before applying a clean dressing, which placed R131 at risk for wound infection. - On 09/26/23 at 07:55 AM, observation revealed R27 in the dining room. His oxygen tubing and cannula laid on the dining room floor. On 09/26/23 at 08:58 AM, observation revealed R27 self propelled his wheelchair into the television area, his oxygen tubing and cannula was wound around the right wheel of his wheelchair. Further observation revealed Administrative Staff B asked Administrative Nurse E to get R27 a new set of tubing sine R27's touched the ground. Administrative Nurse E replaced the old tubing and assisted R27 with the new tubing. Continued observation revealed, the oxygen tank R27 was using was empty and Adminsitrative Nurse E brought R27 a new tank. Administrative Nurse E obtained R27's oxygen saturation (percentage of oxygen in the blood) which was in the 70 percentile (normal is 90-100 %). After Administrative Nurse E had R27 take deep breaths, he was able to get his saturations up into the 90 percentiles. Administrative Nurse E stated it was everyone's responsibility to make sure R27 had a full oxygen tank and to make sure he was wearing the nasal cannula correctly and it was not dragging on the floor. Upon request a policy for oxygen tubing storage was not provided. The facility failed provide infection control practices for F27, when his oxygen tubing and cannula dragged on the floor and not bagged. This placed the resident at risk for infection. - On 09/27/23 at 08:14 AM, Maintenance Staff U stated he had the testing material for the water management process but had not started yet. The facility's Water Management, Legionella Testing policy dated 10/22, documented the facility handled and maintained its water supply in accordance with recommendations of the CDC, the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee and the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) to minimize their risk of Legionella disease (Legionella is a bacterium which can cause pneumonia in vulnerable populations) and other opportunistic pathogens in the building water system through a documented water management. The facility failed to implement a water management program to test and manage waterborne pathogens placing the residents who resided in the facility at risk of contracting Legionella pneumonia.
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0925 (Tag F0925)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

The facility had a census of 33 residents. Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program for the 33 resident's residing in the facility. This pl...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 33 residents. Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program for the 33 resident's residing in the facility. This placed the resident's at risk for illness and an uncomfortable environment. Findings included: - On 09/25/23 at 11:21 AM, observation revealed during the noon meal, R132 had flies land on her food. On 09/25/23 at 11:30 AM meal, R2 complained about all the flies that landed on his food and onto the table. On 09/25/23 at 12:50 PM, observation in R14's room revealed multiple flies landing on and around the resident as he was transferred by staff. On 09/26/23 at 10:00 AM, R2 stated the flies were terrible in his room. As he spoke, a fly landed on his nose. On 09/26/23 at 12:00 PM, observation revealed R2, in the television area, with a fly swatter in his hand as he tried to kill flies. On 09/27/23 at 02:00 PM, observation revealed several flies landed on R9 while she sat in her recliner. On 09/27/23 at 05:00 PM, observation revealed flies on R9 as she sat in the television area. On 09/27/23 at 08:30 AM, Maintenance U stated he was unsure what to do about all the flies and stated he would contact his pest control provider. The facility's Pest Control policy, dated 02/20, documented the community shall maintain an effective pest control program to ensure that the building was kept free of insects and rodents and maintenance services assist, when appropriate and necessary in providing pest control services. The facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program for the 33 residents related to flies in the building. This placed the resident's at increased risk for illness and an uncomfortable environment.
MINOR (C)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Staffing Information (Tag F0732)

Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents

The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to display current daily nursing staffing hours as required. Findin...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 33 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to display current daily nursing staffing hours as required. Findings included: -During the survey on 09/25/23 and 09/26/23, observation revealed the nursing hours posted with a date of 09/05/23. On 09/28/23 at 04:00 PM, Consultant Staff HH verified the nursing hours posted were incorrect and she had corrected the posting. Upon request the facility did not provide a staff posting policy. The facility failed to display current daily nursing hours as required.
Mar 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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

The facility identified a census of 34 resident with three reviewed for accidents. Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision for Resident ...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility identified a census of 34 resident with three reviewed for accidents. Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision for Resident (R)1 allowing R1 to leave the facility unsupervised. This deficient practice placed R1 at risk for falls and injury. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented R1 had diagnoses of dementia (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), major depressive disorder (major mood disorder), and Parkinson's disease (slowly progressive neurologic disorder characterized by resting tremor, rolling of the fingers, masklike faces, shuffling gait, muscle rigidity and weakness). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated 03/12/23, documented R1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of eight which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS documented R1 required limited assistance of one staff for bathing, dressing, and toileting. R1 required supervision of one staff for ambulation, bed mobility, eating, personal hygiene, and locomotion. The MDS documented R1 had wandered four to six days in the look back period and R1's wandering and placed him at risk for getting to a potentially dangerous place. The Cognitive Loss/Dementia Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 03/12/23, documented R1 had wandering behaviors and did start to exit seek. A Wander Guard (electronic bracelet that alerts staff when a resident is close to the doors) was placed on R1 to ensure his safety. The Wandering Care Plan, dated 03/03/23, directed staff to increase supervision of R1 for increased exit seeking and unsafe wandering and a Wander Guard would be placed on R1 and staff were to check placement each shift and functionality each day. The Wandering/Elopement Evaluation, dated 03/09/23, documented R1 was a moderate risk for wandering with a score of seventeen. The evaluation documented R1 had a history of wandering and exit seeking, stayed close to exit doors, wandered after dark, and lacked safety awareness. The Facility Incident Report, dated 03/23/23, documented on 03/22/23 at 07:35 PM, R1 exited the front doors of the facility per facility video footage. Nursing staff were providing cares to other residents in those residents' rooms. The charge nurse heard the alarms and initiated the resident search process at 07:35 PM. The two Certified Nurse Aides (CNA) on duty did not hear the alarms in the resident's room they were in. R1 walked from the front entrance around the south end of the building to the back of the building. The south end of the building was next to a street, next to the hospital. Dietary staff was on break in the smoke shed at the back of the building and saw R1 walking; staff brought R1 back into the back of the building through the break room door and took him to Licensed Nurse (LN) G at 07:39 PM. The charge nurse did a head to toe assessment and determined R1 had no injuries. R1's representative was notified as well as the on call physician. All residents in the facility were accounted for. It was still day light at the time, temperature was 50 degrees with a light breeze. R1 was dressed in a sweat shirt, sweat pants, and tennis shoes with his Wander Guard was in place. On 11/29/23 at 11:00 AM, R1 wandered to another residents room, sat down in his recliner and fell asleep in the other resident's recliner. R1 had a Wander Guard in place. On 11/29/23 at 11:15 AM, CNA M stated R1 wandered a lot throughout the facility and had a Wander Guard in place. When R1 got close to the doors, the alarm sounded and staff went to find where he is at. On 11/29/23 at 11:30 AM, CMA R stated R1 has found a new friend with a gentleman down another hall and spent a lot of time in his room watching TV and talking and that seemed to have cut down on R1's wandering. On 11/29/23 at 12:30 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated the root of the problem was the Wander Guard alarms not being loud enough to be heard down the hall ways with staff in the rooms with the doors shut. She stated maintenance had contacted the Wander Guard manufacturer and have turned up the alarms as high as they will go and now the alarms are easily heard throughout the facility. The DON felt that the staff followed the elopement policy. The facility's Accidents-Elopement Policy, dated October 2022, documented upon admission and quarterly, each resident will be evaluated for elopement and wandering risk. Based on the evaluation the resident will be deemed: No Risk, Low Risk, Moderate Risk, or High Risk. Evidence for such will be documented and intervention will be initiated, reviewed or modified based upon the risk. For residents requiring increased monitoring of wandering, the LN will initiate Elopement/Wandering supervision for a specific period of time. New wandering behavior or attempted Elopement will be noted on the 24 hours report, discussed in daily clinical meeting and documented in the nurses notes as to effect of interventions. Update Care plan. Staff shall promptly report any resident who tries to leave the premises or is suspected of being missing to the charge nurse or DON. The facility failed to provide adequate supervision for R1 which allowed R1 to exit out the front doors unsupervised placing him at risk for falls and injury.
Dec 2022 1 deficiency 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

The facility identified a census of 28 residents, with three reviewed for falls. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 1 had foot pedals on his...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility identified a census of 28 residents, with three reviewed for falls. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 1 had foot pedals on his wheelchair when Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M attempted to push R1 in his wheelchair to the nurse's station. As a result, R1 put his foot down on the ground and the wheelchair abruptly stopped, flipping R1 out of the wheelchair and forward onto his face, which resulted in a laceration to his right eyebrow. R1 had to be transported to the emergency room for sutures to be placed to his laceration. Findings included: - R1's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented R1 had the following diagnoses: Parkinson's disease (slowly progressive neurologic disorder characterized by resting tremor, rolling of the fingers, masklike faces, shuffling gait, muscle rigidity and weakness), major depressive disorder (major mood disorder), and psychosis (any major mental disorder characterized by a gross impairment in reality testing). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated 09/23/22 documented R1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of zero, which indicated R1 was severely cognitively impaired. The MDS further documented R1required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, transfer, toilet use, and bathing. The MDS documented R1 required limited assistance of one staff for ambulation, locomotion in wheelchair, and dressing. The Cognitive Loss/Dementia Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 06/19/22 documented R1 had diagnoses of Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease (progressive mental deterioration characterized by confusion and memory failure) and had cognitive deficit with behaviors. The CAA directed staff to monitor R1 for increased cognitive issues. The Activities of Daily Living (ADL) CAA, dated 06/19/22, documented R1 required supervision and cueing for ADL. R1 had behaviors that could interfere with his ability to perform his ADL. The CAA continued to document R1 had difficulty making safe decisions for his care and was at risk for falls and injuries. The Elopement Care Plan, dated 04/23/21, documented R1 would self-propel in his wheelchair up and down the halls and to the nurse's station frequently. The Fall Care Plan, dated 09/26/22, directed staff R1 had poor safety awareness, needed increased monitoring while awake, ensure R1 wore appropriate footwear, ensure R1 had a safe environment, and to follow the facility fall protocol. The Nurse's Note, dated 11/20/22 at 08:10 PM, documented R1 fell. Staff rolled R1 over and noted R1 had a laceration to his right eyebrow that needed sutures. The facility notified the provider of the fall and she said she would let the emergency department know R1 would be arriving to be seen. The Emergency Department Paperwork, dated 11/20/22 at 09:45 PM documented R1 was at the emergency department with a laceration to his right eyebrow from a fall and noted six sutures were placed to R1's right eyebrow. R1 was discharged back to the facility with new orders to keep the sutures clean and dry. The facility could wash the sutures once daily with soap and water. In five days, the sutures needed to be removed. The Nurse's Note, dated 11/20/22 at 10:11 PM, documented R1 arrived back at the facility from the emergency department. R1's vital signs were stable and R1 sat in the nurse's station and slept for two hours. The Nurse's Note, dated 11/21/22 at 04:35 AM, documented R1's laceration was cleansed, and lubricant applied. The Facility Incident Report, dated 11/23/22, documented R1 sat in the dining room when CNA M attempted to move R1 closer to the nurse's station. There were no foot pedals on R1's wheelchair and R1's foot hit the floor and R1 fell forward out of the wheelchair face first, which caused a laceration above R1's right eye. R1 was sent to the emergency room and R1 received four sutures and then returned to the facility. R1 was care planned to self-propel in his wheelchair. The investigation documented the standard of practice was to have foot pedals on the wheelchair when staff propelled R1. All nursing staff were re-educated on the use of foot pedals and daily monitoring by management staff would be completed for correct use of foot pedals on wheelchairs. On 12/12/22 at 12:30 PM, CMA R stated the facility had provided wheelchair safety education several days prior to the day the incident with R1 had occurred. On 12/12/22 at 01:30 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated she expected all of the facility staff to follow safe wheelchair practices to prevent any injury from occurring to the residents. On 12/12/22 at 02:30 PM, Administrative Staff A stated the facility trained staff regarding wheelchair safety five days prior to the incident. Administrative Staff A stated he expected all staff to follow safe wheelchair practices. The facility's Residence of Gramercy Ambulation Assistance Policy, revised October 2021, documented to assist a resident using a wheelchair be sure the resident is properly and securely seated in his/her wheelchair and if it is necessary to push a resident in a wheelchair staff need to walk at a normal pace and not rush and ensure that the foot pedals are down and the resident's feet are properly placed on the foot rests to avoid getting their feet caught underneath the wheelchair as the resident is propelled. The facility failed to ensure R1 had foot pedals on his wheelchair when R1 was being propelled by CNA M which resulted in an avoidable accident where R1 sustained a laceration that required emergent treatment and sutures. On 11/23/22 the facility completed the following corrective actions: The facility reported the incident to the State Agency. All staff received education to ensure staff placed foot pedals on the wheelchairs of all residents prior to any event when staff propelled residents in the wheelchairs. Facility management staff reviewed and audited daily to ensure staff followed the policy and training regarding the use of foot pedals. The deficient practice was cited at past-noncompliance.
May 2022 6 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** The facility had a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents of which one was reviewed for respiratory care. Base...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents of which one was reviewed for respiratory care. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to revise the care plan with interventions for respiratory assessment and care of respiratory equipment for Resident (R) 24, who required oxygen and nebulizer treatments (device which changes liquid medication into a mist easily inhaled into the lungs). This placed R24 at risk for miscommunication related to respiratory cares. Findings included: - R24's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented he had diagnoses of shortness of breath and emphysema (a condition in which the air sacs of the lungs are damaged and enlarged, causing breathlessness). R24's Annual Minimal Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented the resident had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated intact cognition. The MDS documented the resident required total staff assistance with locomotion on the unit, extensive staff assistance with bed mobility, and transfers and received oxygen continuously. R24's Respiratory Care Plan, dated 04/05/22, informed the staff the resident received oxygen at 2.5 liters continuously. The care plan directed staff R24's lung sounds to be auscultated (listening to breath sounds by use of a stethoscope) every shift. R24's Physician Order, dated 01/11/22, instructed staff to administer one vial of ipratropium/albuterol solution (a sterile inhalation solution), 0.5-2.5 (3) milligram (mg) /3 milliliter (ml), nebulizer (device which changes liquid medication into a mist easily inhaled into the lungs) treatment four times a day. On 05/09/22 at 11:01 AM, observation revealed R24's oxygen tubing wrapped around the bathroom doorknob, with the nasal cannula (tubing to deliver oxygen through the nose) on the floor. Further observation revealed the nebulizer machine and uncovered nebulizer mask on the floor under the resident's bed. On 05/09/22 at 03:30 PM, observation revealed the nebulizer machine laid on the foot of the bed, with the resident's left foot on top of the uncovered nebulizer mask. On 05/10/22 at 02:00 PM, observation revealed the nebulizer machine laid on the floor under the bed with the uncovered nebulizer mask. On 05/10/22 at 03:50 PM, observation revealed Licensed Nurse (LN) H picked up the nebulizer machine and uncovered mask from the floor and sat it on the bed. Further observation revealed LN H filled the nebulizer with a liquid, placed the nebulizer mask on the resident and turned on the nebulizer machine and then left the room. LN H did not auscultate R24's lung sounds or perform any respiratory assessment before administration of the medication. On 05/11/22 at 09:30 AM, observation revealed Certified Medication Aide (CMA) R placed the uncovered nebulizer mask on the resident and filled the nebulizer with a liquid and then turned on the nebulizer machine and left the room. On 05/11/22 at 09:35 AM, CMA R stated, I just put the medicine in the machine and turn it on. I do not think there is anything special I need to do before I turn it on. On 05/11/22 at 09:45 AM, LN G stated R24 has been on breathing treatments for a while, and I think he is fine. On 05/11/22 at 01:30 PM, Administrative Nurse D verified the resident received routine nebulizer treatments. Administrative Nurse D also verified the staff were to assess R24's respiratory status before starting the nebulizer treatment, and oxygen tubing and the nebulizer mask was to be bagged when not in use. The facility's Administering Medication Through a Small Volume Nebulizer, policy dated 05/21, instructed the staff to obtain a baseline, pulse, respiratory rate and lung sounds before administration of the nebulizer treatment. The mask or handheld nebulizer device is to be bagged and dated when not in use. The nebulizer equipment is to washed weekly in warm soapy water and soak for five minutes, then rinse all equipment pieces in warm water and allow to air dry on a paper towel. The nebulizer equipment is to be stored in a plastic bag with the date on it. Equipment is to be changed every seven days. The facility's Oxygen use, policy dated 05/21, instructed the staff to keep oxygen tubing when not in use in a bag and attach to oxygen concentrator. Nasal cannula or oxygen mask are not to be placed on the floor. Oxygen tubing is to be changed every seven days The facility failed to revise R24's care plan with interventions to assess respiratory status before and after nebulizer treatments and care of nebulizer equipment and oxygen tubing which placed the resident at risk for miscommunication regarding respiratory cares.
CONCERN (D)

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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with one reviewed for urinary catheter. Based on ob...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with one reviewed for urinary catheter. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain appropriate handling of urinary catheter tubing to ensure safe positioning and avoid contact with the floor for one sampled resident, Resident (R) 17. This placed the resident at risk for the catheter tube kinking, dislodging, and urinary tract infections (UTIs). Findings included: - The Physician Order Sheet, dated 05/01/22, recorded R17 had diagnoses of dementia (persistent mental disorder marked by memory loss and impair reasoning), traumatic brain injury (an injury that affects normal brain function), end-stage renal disease (condition in which kidneys lose normal function) and urinary retention (condition in which the bladder is unable to empty). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], recorded R17 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of eleven (moderate cognitive impairment) with inattention and verbal behaviors. The MDS recorded R17 required extensive staff assistance with transfers, dressing, personal hygiene, had a urinary catheter, and used a wheelchair for mobility. The Urinary Catheter Care Plan, dated 03/28/22, recorded R17 had a urinary catheter for the diagnoses of urinary retention and pressure ulcers. The Urinary Catheter Care Plan directed staff to provide sanitary catheter cares every shift and ensure the catheter tubing and catheter bag were positioned for appropriate drainage and infection control. On 05/10/22 at 10:24 AM, observation revealed R17 sat in his wheelchair in the common area near the nurse station with several other residents. Continued observation revealed R17's catheter tubing wrapped around his left ankle and contacting the floor under the resident's left shoe. Continued observation revealed three staff in the immediate area, and no staff repositioned R17's catheter tubing. On 05/11/22 at 02:12 PM, observation revealed R17 sat in his wheelchair in the common area with nine other residents and participated in a group exercise activity (badminton). Continued observation revealed R17's catheter tubing wrapped around his ankle outside his pant leg, and staff made no attempts to reposition the catheter tubing. On 05/11/22 at 01:41 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G verified R17's urinary catheter tubing contacted the floor under the resident's wheelchair, and this was an infection control problem. LN G stated staff should ensure R17's catheter tubing was appropriately positioned to avoid kinking, dislodging and contact with the floor. On 05/12/22 at 08:31 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated staff should provide catheter cares to ensure R17's catheter tubing was positioned to avoid kinking, dislodging and infection risks. The Indwelling Urinary Catheter, policy, dated November 2017, directed staff maintain safe handling of urinary catheter tubing to prevent kinking, entanglements, dislodging and infection risks of the resident's urinary catheter. The facility failed to maintain appropriate handling of R17's urinary catheter tubing to ensure safe positioning and avoid contact with the floor. This placed the resident at risk for the catheter tube kinking, dislodging, and UTI.
CONCERN (D)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents with one reviewed for respiratory care. Based on obs...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents with one reviewed for respiratory care. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate respiratory care and services for Resident (R) 24 who required oxygen and nebulizer treatments. This placed R24 at risk for infection and respiratory complications. Findings included: - R24's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented he had diagnoses of shortness of breath and emphysema (a condition in which the air sacs of the lungs are damaged and enlarged, causing breathlessness). R24's Annual Minimal Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented the resident had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated intact cognition. The MDS documented the resident required total staff assistance with locomotion on the unit, extensive staff assistance with bed mobility, and transfers and received oxygen continuously. R24's Respiratory Care Plan, dated 04/05/22, informed the staff the resident received oxygen at 2.5 liters continuously. The care plan directed staff R24's lung sounds to be auscultated (listening to breath sounds by use of a stethoscope) every shift. R24's Physician Order, dated 01/11/22, instructed staff to administer one vial of ipratropium/albuterol solution (a sterile inhalation solution), 0.5-2.5 (3) milligram (mg) /3 milliliter (ml), nebulizer (device which changes liquid medication into a mist easily inhaled into the lungs) treatment four times a day. On 05/09/22 at 11:01 AM, observation revealed R24's oxygen tubing wrapped around the bathroom doorknob, with the nasal cannula (tubing to deliver oxygen through the nose) on the floor. Further observation revealed the nebulizer machine and uncovered nebulizer mask on the floor under the resident's bed. On 05/09/22 at 03:30 PM, observation revealed the nebulizer machine laid on the foot of the bed, with the resident's left foot on top of the uncovered nebulizer mask. On 05/10/22 at 02:00 PM, observation revealed the nebulizer machine laid on the floor under the bed with the uncovered nebulizer mask. On 05/10/22 at 03:50PM, observation revealed Licensed Nurse (LN) H picked up the nebulizer machine and uncovered mask from the floor and sat it on the bed. Further observation revealed LN H filled the nebulizer with a liquid, placed the nebulizer mask on the resident and turned on the nebulizer machine and then left the room. LN H did not auscultate R24's lung sounds or perform any respiratory assessment before administration of the medication. On 05/11/22 at 09:30AM, observation revealed Certified Medication Aide (CMA) R placed the uncovered nebulizer mask on the resident and filled the nebulizer with a liquid and then turned on the nebulizer machine and left the room. On 05/11/22 at 09:35AM, CMA R stated, I just put the medicine in the machine and turn it on. I do not think there is anything special I need to do before I turn it on. On 05/11/22 at 09:45AM, LN G stated R24 has been on breathing treatments for a while, and I think he is fine. On 05/11/22 at 01:30PM, Administrative Nurse D verified the resident received routine nebulizer treatments. Administrative Nurse D also verified the staff were to assess R24's respiratory status before starting the nebulizer treatment, and oxygen tubing and the nebulizer mask was to be bagged when not in use. The facility's Administering Medication Through a Small Volume Nebulizer, policy dated 05/21, instructed the staff to obtain a baseline, pulse, respiratory rate and lung sounds before administration of the nebulizer treatment. The mask or handheld nebulizer device is to be bagged and dated when not in use. The nebulizer equipment is to washed weekly in warm soapy water and soak for five minutes, then rinse all equipment pieces in warm water and allow to air dry on a paper towel. The nebulizer equipment is to be stored in a plastic bag with the date on it. Equipment is to be changed every seven days. The facility's Oxygen use, policy dated 05/21, instructed the staff to keep oxygen tubing when not in use in a bag and attach to oxygen concentrator. Nasal cannula or oxygen mask are not to be placed on the floor. Oxygen tubing is to be changed every seven days. The facility failed to assess the respiratory status of R24 before and after the nebulizer treatment, and properly to store the nebulizer equipment and oxygen tubing placing the resident at risk for respiratory distress or an infection.
CONCERN (D)

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

The facility had a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents and two closed record residents. Based on record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure the availability of phy...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents and two closed record residents. Based on record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure the availability of physician ordered pain medication for one of 14 sampled residents, Resident (R) 30. This placed R30 at risk for untreated pain. Findings included: - The Physician Order Sheet, dated 02/14/22, recorded R30 had diagnoses of lower end right femur (thigh bone) fracture, right leg non weight bearing status, and chronic pain. R30's Electronic Medical Record (EMR), documented the facility admitted R30 on 02/14/22 and had not completed the resident's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) or admission care plan. The admission Note, dated 02/14/22, recorded R30 was non weight bearing on her right leg, always wore a hinged knee immobilizer on her right leg and required extensive staff assistance with repositioning and transfers. The admission Note recorded R30 was alert and oriented, able to accurately report her pain, directed staff to provide pain medication as ordered by the physician and monitor the effectiveness of the pain medication. The Physician's Orders, dated 02/14/22, (hospital faxed to the facility at 10:54 AM) directed staff to administer Tramadol (narcotic medication used to treat moderate to severe pain) 50 milligrams (mg) one or two tablets every six hours as needed (PRN) for moderate pain. The Progress Note, dated 02/14/22 at 02:46 PM, recorded R30 reported moderate pain and requested Tramadol pain medication. The Progress Note, dated 02/14/22 at 05:11 PM, recorded the facility requested a prescription for Tramadol 50 mg one or two tablets every six hours PRN (six hours after the facility received the physician's order for the Tramadol and almost three hours after R30 was admitted ). The Progress Note, dated 02/14/22 at 08:00 PM, recorded the nursing staff offered R30 Tylenol 1000 mg (pain medication for minor pain) for the resident's leg pain. R30 and her family refused the Tylenol and continued to request Tramadol. The note recorded staff would contact the physician about the Tramadol order (nine hours after the facility received the physician's order for the Tramadol and almost six hours after R30 was admitted ). The Progress Note, dated 02/14/22 at 09:35 PM, recorded R30 refused to sign the facility's Against Medical Advice (AMA) paperwork, and left the facility accompanied by her family (seven hours after admission to facility). On 05/11/22 at 10:16 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated staff should be aware of the facility's procedures to obtain physician ordered medications and notify the physician and pharmacy promptly to ensure medications were available to treat R30's pain. The facility's admission Orders policy, dated November 2017, directed staff to ensure new orders for medications were delivered timely to the facility to prevent unnecessary delays in the resident's medication administration. The facility failed to ensure the availability of physician ordered pain medications for R30, placing the resident at risk for increased or worsened pain.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

The facility had a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to label Resident (R) 21's, R22 and R25's insulin (...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to label Resident (R) 21's, R22 and R25's insulin (hormone which allows cells throughout the body to uptake glucose) pens with the date opened, on one of two medication carts. This placed these residents at risk for ineffective medications. Findings included: - On 05/09/22 at 10:50AM, observation of the 200-300 hallway medication cart revealed the following: R21's Humalog (fast acting insulin) kwik pen lacked a date when opened and a date of expiration. R22's Levimer (long acting insulin) flex pen lacked a date when opened and a date of expiration. R25's Levimer flex pen lacked a date when opened and a date of expiration. On 05/09/22 at 11:00AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H, verified the undated insulin and stated the insulin is to be dated when opened. On 05/12/22 at 11:15AM, Administrative Nurse D, verified the insulin in the medication cart should be dated when opened for use. The facility's Storage of Medications, dated 05/2021, documented the facility shall store all drugs and biological's in a safe secure and orderly manner. Storage of insulin all vials and pens are to be dated when opened. The facility failed to label and date R21, R22 and R25's insulin pens, placing the residents at risk for ineffective medications.
CONCERN (F)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

The facility had a census of 27 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to provide a backflow device (unwanted flow of water in the reverse direction) or a tw...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 27 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to provide a backflow device (unwanted flow of water in the reverse direction) or a two-inch air gap for the drainage system of the kitchen ice machine, used by the 27 residents who resided in the facility. This placed the affected residents at risk to receive contaminated ice. Findings Included: - On 05/11/22 at 11:26 AM, observation revealed a two-inch plastic drainpipe extended from the back of the ice machine approximately 10 feet and inserted into a floor drain under a cabinet. Continued observation revealed the ice machine drainage system had no backflow device or two-inch air gap at the floor drain. On 05/11/22 at 11:28 AM, Dietary Staff Manager BB verified the ice machine drainage system did not have a backflow device, or two-inch air gap to prevent possible backflow contamination into the ice supply. The facility's Ice Machine, policy, dated August 2011, directed staff to ensure the ice machine had an appropriate drainage system to prevent contamination of the ice supply. The facility failed to provide a backflow device or two-inch air gap for the drainage system of the kitchen ice machine, placing the 27 residents who resided in the facility at risk for contaminated ice.
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?"
  • "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s), $48,571 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 28 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $48,571 in fines. Higher than 94% of Kansas facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
  • • Grade F (28/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 28/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Colby Operator, Llc's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns COLBY OPERATOR, LLC an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Kansas, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.

How is Colby Operator, Llc Staffed?

CMS rates COLBY OPERATOR, LLC's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 76%, which is 30 percentage points above the Kansas average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 100%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Colby Operator, Llc?

State health inspectors documented 28 deficiencies at COLBY OPERATOR, LLC during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, 25 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Colby Operator, Llc?

COLBY OPERATOR, LLC 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 MISSION HEALTH COMMUNITIES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 40 certified beds and approximately 32 residents (about 80% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in COLBY, Kansas.

How Does Colby Operator, Llc Compare to Other Kansas Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Kansas, COLBY OPERATOR, LLC's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.9, staff turnover (76%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Colby Operator, Llc?

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?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the facility's high staff turnover rate.

Is Colby Operator, Llc Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, COLBY OPERATOR, LLC 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 3-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Kansas. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Colby Operator, Llc Stick Around?

Staff turnover at COLBY OPERATOR, LLC is high. At 76%, the facility is 30 percentage points above the Kansas average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 100%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?

Was Colby Operator, Llc Ever Fined?

COLBY OPERATOR, LLC has been fined $48,571 across 2 penalty actions. The Kansas average is $33,565. 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 Colby Operator, Llc on Any Federal Watch List?

COLBY OPERATOR, LLC 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.