APOSTOLIC CHRISTIAN HOME

511 PARAMOUNT STREET, SABETHA, KS 66534 (785) 284-3471
Non profit - Church related 76 Beds Independent Data: November 2025 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation
Trust Grade
38/100
#108 of 295 in KS
Last Inspection: December 2024

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

Overview

Apostolic Christian Home in Sabetha, Kansas has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. Ranking #108 out of 295 facilities in Kansas places the home in the top half, but the poor grade suggests that families should proceed with caution. The facility is improving, with the number of reported issues decreasing from 14 in 2023 to 12 in 2024. Staffing is a strength here, boasting a 5/5 star rating and a turnover rate of only 38%, which is better than the state average. However, the home has been fined $43,403, which is concerning as it exceeds the fines of 78% of Kansas facilities. Notable incidents include a critical failure where a resident was injured after sliding out of their wheelchair in a transportation van due to a lack of a seatbelt, resulting in serious fractures. Additionally, the home failed to provide a full-time certified dietary manager, risking inadequate nutrition for residents. While staffing levels and experience are strong, these incidents raise significant red flags for families considering this facility for their loved ones.

Trust Score
F
38/100
In Kansas
#108/295
Top 36%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
14 → 12 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
38% turnover. Near Kansas's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
$43,403 in fines. Lower than most Kansas facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 53 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Kansas. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
Violations
⚠ Watch
30 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★☆☆
3.0
Overall Rating
★★★★★
5.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2023: 14 issues
2024: 12 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (38%)

    10 points below Kansas average of 48%

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.

The Bad

3-Star Overall Rating

Near Kansas average (2.9)

Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities

Staff Turnover: 38%

Near Kansas avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Federal Fines: $43,403

Above median ($33,413)

Moderate penalties - review what triggered them

The Ugly 30 deficiencies on record

1 life-threatening 1 actual harm
Dec 2024 11 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0583 (Tag F0583)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

The facility had a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to keep Resident (R) 112's protected health informa...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to keep Resident (R) 112's protected health information (PHI) private on a medication cart parked in the main dining room. This placed R112 at risk for impaired privacy. Findings included: - On 12/17/24 at 07:37 AM, an observation revealed a medication cart parked in the main dining room with a laptop computer sitting on the top, Licensed Nurse (LN) G walked away from the medication cart and into the dining room. LN G left the computer screen unlocked and open and R112's PHI was on the screen, visible to all who passed by the medication cart. The information visualized included R112's medications, date of birth , allergy information, and code status. On 12/18/24 at 11:55 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated the medication cart should be double locked, the computer screen should be closed, or the PHI should be hidden from view. On 12/18/24 at 12:20 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated she expected the nursing staff to close the computer screen before walking away from the medication cart. Administrative Nurse D stated the resident's PHI should never be left on the computer screen for unintended viewing. The facility's Confidentiality of Information and Personal Privacy policy last reviewed 08/2024 documented that the facility would protect and safeguard resident confidentiality and personal privacy. The facility failed to keep and maintain R112's privacy regarding PHI. This placed the resident at risk for impaired privacy.
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 Diagnosis tab of R32's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented diagnoses of anemia (an inadequate number of healthy red...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - The Diagnosis tab of R32's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented diagnoses of anemia (an inadequate number of healthy red blood cells to carry adequate oxygen to body tissues), dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion), protein-calorie malnutrition, bipolar disorder (a major mental illness that causes people to have episodes of severe high and low moods), delusions (untrue persistent belief or perception held by a person although evidence shows it was untrue), chronic pain, hypertension (high blood pressure), major depressive disorder (major mood disorder that causes persistent feelings of sadness), insomnia (inability to sleep), chronic pain, anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), and dysuria (painful urination). The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of three which documented severely impaired cognition. The MDS documented R32 required substantial to maximum assistance for eating, bathing, and dressing; R32 was dependent on staff for oral hygiene. The Cognitive Loss/Dementia Care Assessment Area (CAA) dated 12/09/24 triggered secondary to R32's BIMs score. Contributing factors included dementia. Risk factors included self-care deficits, falls and injuries, incontinence, decreased socialization, skin breakdown, and weight loss. The care plan would be reviewed to maintain cognitive status, activities of daily living (ADLs) status, continence status, mobility, encourage activity participation, maintain communication, decrease fall, pressure ulcer risk, and maintain weight. R32's Care Plan revised 12/13/24 documented she had a psychosocial well-being problem related to lack of motivation. R32 would verbalize feelings related to emotional state. Staff was to allow R32 time to answer questions and to verbalize feelings perceptions and fears as needed. Staff were to encourage participation from the resident, who depended on others to make own decisions. Nursing staff were to monitor R32's feelings relative to unhappiness, anxiousness, and crying, and provide opportunities for the resident and family to participate in care. Staff were to remove the resident to a calm safe environment and allow R32 to vent and share feelings. R32's Care Plan lacked preferences or indications for sleeping and napping on the couches in areas other than R32's room and when R32 yelled out for help. On 12/16/24 at 07:15 AM, R32 lay on the couch in the Northeast hallway. R32 had a blanket and pillow. R32 was yelling out help me. On 12/16/24 at 01:12 PM, R32 lay on the couch in the Northeast hallway. R32 had a blanket and was reaching out her hand and asking for help. On 12/16/24 at 11:33 AM, R32 lay on the couch in the hallway next to the dining room. R32 had her eyes shut and was covered with a blanket. On 12/18/24 at 11:37 AM, Certified Nurses Aid (CNA) M stated she did not have access to the [NAME] (a nursing tool that gives a brief overview of the care needs of each resident). CNA M stated the nurse in charge keeps all the CNAs updated on any changes with each resident. CNA M stated all the nursing staff know R32 likes to sleep on the couches, and at times yells for help. CNA M said staff could check on R32 to ensure she did not need help. CNA M stated she was unsure if R32's preferences were on her care plan. On 12/18/24 at 11:55 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated all nursing staff have access to the care plan and said the care plan identifies resident-specific information. LN H stated that R32 liked to take naps on couches and would occasionally yell out. She stated she did not believe R32's preferences were part of her care plan. On 12/18/24 at 12:18 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated the care plans were updated by the MDS coordinator; she stated the core group of administrative staff discussed what should be placed on the care plans. She stated she saw R32 sleeping on the couch at times and yelling for help. Administrative Nurse D stated she did not believe R32's preference of sleeping on the couch or yelling was care planned. The facility's Comprehensive Care Plan policy revised March 2024 documented a comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial, and functional needs was developed and implemented for each resident. The interdisciplinary team (IDT) in conjunction with the resident and his/her family or legal representative, develops and implements a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident. The comprehensive, person-centered care plan is developed within seven (7) days of the completion of the required MDS assessment (Admission, Annual or Significant Change in Status), and no more than 21 days after admission. The care plan interventions are derived from a thorough analysis of the information gathered as part of the comprehensive assessment. The facility failed to revise R32's Care Plan with preferred preferences for napping on the couches in common areas or for the behavior of yelling out for help. This deficient practice placed R32 at risk for impaired care due to uncommunicated care needs. The facility reported a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents with 15 reviewed for care plan revisions. Based on interviews, observations, and record reviews, the facility failed to revise Resident (R) 33's Care Plan to reflect his increased behavioral episodes. The facility additionally failed to revise R32's Care Plan to reflect her sleeping preferences. This deficient practice placed both residents at risk for impaired care due to uncommunicated care needs. Findings Included: - The Diagnosis section within R33's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) included diagnoses of epilepsy (brain disorder characterized by repeated seizures), seizures (violent involuntary series of contractions of a group of muscles), spinal stenosis (degenerative condition of the spine that could cause weakness and loss of use of extremities), insomnia (difficulty sleeping), aphasia (difficulty speaking), major depressive disorder (major mood disorder), and cerebral infarction (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). R33's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS documented episodes of wandering behaviors one to three days during observation. The MDS documented upper and lower extremity impairments on one side of his body. The MDS documented he was dependent on staff assistance for oral hygiene, toileting, transfers, bed mobility, dressing, and bathing. R33's Cognitive Loss Area Assessment (CAA) completed 03/07/24 documented he had poor memory and recall. The CAA documented poor decision-making thought processes. The CAA documented he had impaired hearing requiring the use of sign language and electronic adaptive equipment. R33 was not triggered for behavioral CAA. R33's Care Plan initiated on 11/04/24 documented he was at risk for falls, cognitive decline, and activities of daily living (ADLs) deficit. The plan documented he required moderate to maximal assistance for his bed mobility, toileting, dressing, eating, personal hygiene, and bathing. The plan documented he required a sit-to-stand mechanical lift and staff assistance with transfers. The plan documented he was unable to ambulate in his Broda chair (specialized wheelchair with the ability to tilt and recline) without staff assistance. The plan documented he had a history of wandering but had no exit-seeking behaviors. The plan instructed staff to keep his routine consistent to prevent confusion. R33's EMR under Progress Notes revealed a note on 11/22/24. The note documented that R33 became physically aggressive while staff attempted to transfer him from his Broda chair to the shower chair. The note documented he was resistant to care and hitting staff. R33's EMR under Progress Notes revealed a note on 11/27/24. The note documented that R33 was resistive towards care. The note documented he began to hit, slap, and kick staff. The note documented that staff made several attempts to perform care with no success. The note documented that R33's representative was notified and requested to be called each time he refused care or became aggressive. R33's EMR under Progress Notes revealed a note on 12/07/24. The note documented staff attempted to get R33 up for the day and he became physically aggressive. The note documented that R33 began to hit, kick, and twist staff members' arms. The note documented that R33's representative was notified. R33's representative requested his neurologist be notified of his behaviors. R33's EMR under Progress Notes revealed a note on 12/08/24. The note documented that R33 was hitting, punching, and grabbing staff when they attempted to get him up for the morning. The note documented staff gave him more time and he eventually allowed them to assist him. On 12/17/24 at 08:20 AM, R33 sat in his Broda chair in the dining room. R33 was assisted by staff during his breakfast. On 12/18/24 at 11:37 AM, Certified Nurse's Aide (CNA) M stated R33 could get aggressive during care and transfers. She stated he could be resistant to care and had decreased awareness due to his cognitive impairment and inability to hear. She stated staff should explain what was going to happen to him before treatment or care and allow him to express his opinions. She stated that usually, his refusal is in the morning time. She stated staff contacted his representative to assist during behaviors. On 12/18/24 at 11:54 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated R33 sometimes had behaviors. She stated staff were to communicate clearly with him at eye level. She stated that staff should give him time to process and explain what would happen to him, before attempting to move him. She stated he could be aggressive, and staff should give R33 time and reapproach him at a later time if he was agitated. She stated that staff should offer him choices and listen to his frustrations. She stated he has been known to be physically aggressive and the care plan should reflect interventions and triggers related to his behaviors. On 12/18/24 at 12:23 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated R33 behaviors were not frequent and more sporadic. She stated he occasionally had behaviors, but staff were usually able to calm him down and get the care completed. She stated the care plan should reflect behavioral interventions and possible triggers to assist with behaviors. The facility's Care Plans policy revised 03/2024 documented a comprehensive assessment would be completed to identify treatment goals and interventions based on the assessment findings. The policy documented that each resident's care plan would reflect the resident's current conditions and changes toward their care goals. The facility failed to revise R33's Care Plan to reflect increased behavioral concerns and interventions. This deficient practice placed R33 at risk for impaired care due to uncommunicated care needs.
CONCERN (D)

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility identified a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents with two residents reviewed for pressure ulce...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility identified a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents with two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (localized injury to the skin and/or underlying tissue usually over a bony prominence, because of pressure, or pressure in combination with shear and/or friction). Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure pressure-reducing heel protectors or boots were in place for Resident (R) 34 who had a pressure-related injury on her left heel. These deficient practices placed R34 at risk for complications related to further skin breakdown and worsening of pressure ulcers. Findings included: - R34's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) from the Diagnosis tab documented diagnoses of a pressure ulcer of the left heel, dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion), major depressive disorder (major mood disorder that causes persistent feelings of sadness), and anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear). The Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of three which indicated severely impaired cognition. The MDS documented R34 was at risk of developing pressure ulcers and currently had an unhealed pressure ulcer. The MDS documented R34 had a pressure-reducing device on her bed, nutritional or hydration interventions in place to manage skin problems, and pressure ulcer care in place. R34's Pressure Ulcer Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 11/08/24 documented R34 had developed a new pressure ulcer related to mobility impairment. R34's Care Plan dated 11/04/24 documented staff would apply bilateral heel protectors to R34's feet when she was out of bed. The plan of care also documented staff would apply bilateral Thera-boots when she was in bed. R34's EMR under the Orders tab revealed the following physician orders: Ensure R34 was wearing bilateral heel protectors during the day and bilateral Thera-boots at night, dated 11/08/24. On 12/17/24 at 11:00 AM, R34 sat upright in her Broda chair (specialized wheelchair with the ability to tilt and recline) in the hallway outside the TV room with socks on her feet and no heel protectors in place. Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) N pushed her in the Broda chair with her feet sliding on the floor to the dining room. On 12/17/24 at 04:07 PM, R34 lay awake on her bed. She was not wearing Thera-boots and her heels laid directly on the bed. A pressure-reducing boot laid on the floor of her open closet. On 12/18/24 at 11:37 AM, CNA M stated she would know which residents were to have pressure-reducing measures in place by the [NAME] (a nursing tool that gives a brief overview of the care needs of each resident), the charge nurse information, and if the heel protectors were in the room. On 12/18/24 at 11:55 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated the pressure-reducing devices were listed on the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) and staff would sign off every shift that the items were in place. LN H said usually the CNAs would apply the heel protectors or boots. On 12/18/24 at 12:20 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated she expected R34's heel protectors and boots to be in place. Administrative Nurse D stated she expected the nurse to ensure the pressure-reducing devices were in place as ordered. The facility's Support Surface Guidelines policy last revised September 2024 documented that the purpose of this procedure was to provide guidelines for the assessment of appropriate pressure-reducing and relieving devices for residents at risk of skin breakdown. The facility failed to ensure pressure-reducing heel protectors and boots were in place for R34 who had a pressure injury on her left heel. This deficient practice placed R34 at risk for complications related to skin breakdown and worsening pressure ulcers.
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 reported a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents with five reviewed for accidents. Based on inte...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility reported a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents with five reviewed for accidents. Based on interviews, observations, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a safe care environment related to the use of Resident (R)35's fall prevention interventions for his wheelchair. This deficient practice placed R35 at risk for preventable falls and injuries. Findings included: - The Diagnosis tab within R35's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) included diagnoses of dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion) restlessness, agitation, major depressive disorder (major mood disorder), muscle spasms, muscle weakness, and repeated falls. R35's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS documented he required partial to moderate assistance with dressing, transfers, bed mobility, bathing, personal hygiene, and personal hygiene. The MDS documented he could independently use his wheelchair. The MDs documented two or more non-injury falls since his last assessment. R35's Falls Care Area Assessment (CAA) completed 05/01/24 documented he had a significant history of falls and required assistance. The CAA documented he did not always comply with asking for assistance. The CAA documented he had difficulty maintaining a standing position, even with a mobility aid or personal assistance. The CAA documented a care plan will be implemented to address his fall risks and provide interventions. R35's Care Plan initiated 07/23/24 documented he was at risk for a decline in his activities of daily living (ADLs) and falls related to his medical diagnoses. The plan documented he required touch assistance and supervision when transferring between surfaces. The plan documented he could not safely transfer himself without staff assistance, and chair alarms were put into place. The plan documented he used a wheelchair for mobility. The plan instructed staff to ensure a Dycem (non-slip mat used for stabilization and gripping to prevent slipping) was placed in his recliner and wheelchair to prevent slips and falls. On 12/17/24 at 10:20 AM, R35 sat in his room in the recliner. His fall alarm was in place in the chair and was functioning. His recliner had a Dycem mat directly underneath him. An inspection of his wheelchair revealed a pressure relieving mat but lacked a Dycem mat. On 12/17/24 at 01:25 PM, R35 sat in his wheelchair in the small dining area next to the main dining room eating his meal. R35's wheelchair had his pressure mat but lacked a Dycem mat. On 12/18/24 at 12:03 PM, R35 sat in his room in his wheelchair. R35 removed the blanket and Dycem mat from his recliner. He stated he was going to lunch. R35 folded the Dycem mat and placed it on his bed. An inspection of his wheelchair revealed no Dycem mat in place under him. On 12/18/24 at 11:37 AM, Certified Nurse's Aide (CNA) N stated R35 was impulsive and would often transfer himself without staff knowing. She stated he was a fall risk due to his cognitive impairment and limited mobility. She stated he could wheel himself but needed assistance with transfers. She stated he should have a Dycem mat in his recliner but was not sure about his wheelchair. She was not sure if he had one for each or if it was moved every time he transferred. On 12/18/24 at 12:23 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated she was not sure if R35 had two Dycem mats but stated staff were expected to ensure the Dycem mats were in place every time he transferred or moved. The facility's Assessing Falls policy revised August 2024 documented the facility would assess each resident's functional abilities and identify pertinent interventions to prevent subsequent falls. The policy documented the facility would provide ongoing monitoring and assessment of individuals at risk for falls. The facility failed to ensure R35's care-planned fall inventions were in place, related to his wheelchair's Dycem mat. This deficient practice placed R35 at risk for preventable falls and injuries.
CONCERN (D)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

The facility identified a census of 58 residents. The facility identified one resident on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP - infection control interventions designed to reduce transmission of resista...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility identified a census of 58 residents. The facility identified one resident on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP - infection control interventions designed to reduce transmission of resistant organisms which employ targeted gown and glove use during high contact care). Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the blood pressure cuff, pulse monitor, and oxygen saturation equipment were sanitized after each resident's use. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for infectious diseases. Findings included: - On 12/16/24 at 07:47 AM, License Nurse (LN) I obtained a resident's blood pressure and pulse in the main dining room. LN I did not sanitize the pulse monitor or blood pressure cuff before or after resident use. On 12/17/24 at 07:18 AM, LN G obtained a resident's blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and pulse in the main dining room. LN G did not sanitize the blood pressure cuff, oxygen saturation monitor, or pulse monitor before or after resident use. On 12/18/24 at 07:42 AM, LN G obtained the resident's blood pressure and pulse monitoring in the main dining room. LN G did not sanitize the blood pressure cuff or the pulse monitor before and after resident use. On 12/18/24 at 11:55 AM, LN H stated all shared equipment was to be sanitized between resident use. LN H stated the facility had a sanitizer spray all staff could use. On 12/18/24 at 12:18 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated it was the facility's expectation was all nursing staff sanitize shared equipment after each resident's use. The facility's Sanitizing Shared Equipment dated September 2024 documented Resident-care equipment, including reusable items and durable medical equipment will be cleaned and disinfected according to current CDC. Critical items consist of items that carry a high risk of infection if contaminated with any microorganism. Semi-critical items consist of items that may encounter mucous membranes or non-intact. Non-critical items are those that encounter intact skin but not mucous membranes. Non-critical items require cleaning followed by either low- or intermediate-level disinfection following manufacturers' instructions. The facility failed to ensure the blood pressure cuff, pulse monitor, and oxygen saturation equipment was sanitized after each resident's use. These deficient practices placed the residents at risk for infectious diseases.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0883 (Tag F0883)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

The facility identified a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents, with five reviewed for immunization status. Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to offer and...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility identified a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents, with five reviewed for immunization status. Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to offer and administer or obtain informed declinations for the Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV20 - vaccination for bacterial pneumonia infections) vaccination for Resident (R) 32 and R52. This placed the residents at increased risk for complications related to pneumonia. Findings included: - Review of R32's clinical record revealed the PCV13 was administered on 11/30/17, and the PSV23 was administered on 08/30/13. R31's clinical record lacked documentation the PCV20 was offered or declined and lacked documentation of a historical administration or a physician-documented contraindication. Review of R53's clinical record revealed the PCV13 was administered on 09/27/18, and the PSV23 was administered on 09/02/19. R53's clinical record lacked documentation the PCV20 was offered or declined and lacked documentation of a historical administration or a physician-documented contraindication. On 12/18/24 at 12:18 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated the facility relied on WEB IZ (database-driven immunization registry system) to prompt the facility when an immunization needed to be given. She stated the facility did not offer the PCV20 if a resident had the PCV13 and PCV23. Administrative Nurse D stated R32 and R53 were not offered the PCV20. The facility did not provide an immunization policy. The facility failed to offer the PCV20 or obtain informed declinations for R32 and R53. This placed the residents at increased risk for complications related to pneumonia.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0558 (Tag F0558)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

The facility had a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents with five reviewed for accommodation of needs. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to en...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents with five reviewed for accommodation of needs. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the residents were provided foot pedals during wheelchair transports for Resident (R) 23, R36, R46, R34, R40, and R33. This placed the residents at risk for preventable accidents and injuries due to unmet care needs. Findings Included: - On 12/16/24 at 08:16 AM, R23, a severely cognitively impaired resident, sat upright in his Broda chair (specialized wheelchair with the ability to tilt and recline). R23 had socks on both feet. Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) O pushed R23 in his Broda chair and R23's feet slid along the floor before he lifted his legs. On 12/17/24 at 07:18 AM, Staff pushed R36 in her wheelchair with no foot pedals. Staff repeatedly told R36 to keep her feet up. On 12/17/24 at 07:20 AM, Staff pushed R46, a cognitively impaired resident, in her wheelchair with no foot pedals. Staff repeatedly asked R46 to keep her feet up. On 12/17/24 at 09:47 AM, R23 sat upright in his Broda chair as Licensed Nurse (LN) J pushed his chair. R23's feet bumped up and down. R23 picked his feet up and held them out after LN J asked him to pick them up as she pushed him to the dining room. On 12/17/24 at 11:00 AM, R34, a severely cognitively impaired resident, sat upright in her Broda chair in the hallway outside the TV room with socks on her feet and no heel protectors in place. Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) N pushed R34 in the Broda chair to the dining room with R34's feet sliding on the floor. On 12/17/24 at 11:13 AM, R23 sat upright in his Broda chair as CNA O pushed him from the dining room down the hallway. R23's feet slid along the floor. R23 wore only socks on his feet. On 12/18/24 at 08:08 AM, R40, a severely cognitively impaired resident, was wheeled to the main dining room by Licensed Nurse (LN) G without any foot pedals. R40 had socks on as her feet slid on the floor as she was pushed to the back dining room table. On 12/18/24 at 08:14 AM, R33, a severely cognitively impaired resident with lower extremity limitation, sat in his Broda chair at the dining room table next to the piano. LN H wheeled R33 from his dining room table to the front window. R33's right foot was not on a foot pedal and slid on the ground as he was pushed to the window. On 12/18/24 at 11:37 AM, CNA M stated that all the residents had foot pedals for their wheelchairs, but staff would only apply them for residents who could not lift their legs up. She stated that the resident's legs should never slide or touch the ground while being pushed. She stated that staff would ask the residents if they could hold their legs up and apply them if needed. She stated that foot pedals would only be applied if they were needed. On 12/18/24 at 11:45 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated staff know which residents can hold their feet up. She stated the foot pedals were left off the wheelchairs to promote independence. She stated staff should never allow the resident's feet to slide on the floor as they push them. On 12/18/24 at 12:34 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated staff should always apply wheelchair foot pedals for high fall risk residents. She stated staff were expected to apply the pedals when pushing the residents long distances. The facility's Assistive Devices and Equipment policy revised 01/2024 indicated the facility will supervise the use of assistive devices including grab bars, walkers, canes, and foot pedals. The policy indicated staff will ensure the safe use of all assistive devices. The facility failed to utilize and ensure foot pedals were provided and used during wheelchair transports for R23, R36, R46, R34, R40, and R33. This placed the residents at risk for preventable accidents and injuries due to unmet care needs.
CONCERN (E)

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

Drug Regimen Review (Tag F0756)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - The Diagnosis tab of R52's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented diagnoses of cerebral infarction (stroke - sudden death ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - The Diagnosis tab of R52's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented diagnoses of cerebral infarction (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), aphasia (condition with disordered or absent language function), hemiparesis/hemiplegia (weakness and paralysis on one side of the body) affecting right dominant side, anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), dysphagia (swallowing difficulty), hypertension (high blood pressure), vascular dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion caused by a decreased blood flow to the brain), and major depressive disorder (major mood disorder that causes persistent feelings of sadness). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of four which indicated severely impaired cognition. The MDS documented R52 had an impairment on one side of her body. The MDS documented R52 needed partial to moderated assistance with dressing, toileting, and setting up for eating. The MDS documented R52 received an antidepressant (a class of medications used to treat mood disorders) and antipsychotic (a class of medications used to treat major mental conditions that cause a break from reality) during the observation period. R52's Psychotropic Drug Use Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 05/16/24 documented R52 admitted to the facility with a psychotropic medication and the physician would monitor R52's medication routinely. The MDS documented staff would monitor the side effects of medication for R52. R52's Care Plan dated 08/05/2024 documented R52 had impaired cognitive function, dementia, or impaired thought processes related to dementia. R52 would be able to communicate basic needs daily. R52's plan of care documented staff would administer medications as ordered and monitor and document for side effects and effectiveness. Staff were to keep the R52's routine consistent and try to provide consistent caregivers as much as possible to decrease confusion. R52's EMR under the Orders tab documented the following physician's order: Quetiapine fumarate (antipsychotic) 25 milligrams (mg) oral tablet give 0.5 tablet by mouth one time a day for behavioral disorders associated with dementia dated 07/17/24. R52's EMR revealed no physician-documented rationale for the continued use of quetiapine fumarate for dementia-related behaviors. A review of the CP's Monthly Medication Reviews (MMR) from 08/2024 to 12/2024 revealed no recommendations noting the inappropriate indication of use related to R52's quetiapine fumarate medication. On 12/16/24 at 07:32 AM R52 sat at the dining room table eating her breakfast. On 12/18/24 at 12:23 PM Administrative Nurse D stated the pharmacist did not recognize or report issues related to medication indications, but she stated she would meet with them to ensure they did in the future. The facility's Medication Regimen Reviews policy last revised May 2024 documented the Consultant Pharmacist reviewed the medication regimen of each resident at least monthly. Medication regimen reviews (MRR) are done upon admission (or as close to admission as possible) and at least monthly thereafter, or more frequently if indicated. The policy documented the Consulting Pharmacist would identify and report medication irregularities found during the monthly review. The facility failed to ensure the CP identified and made recommendations related to R52's inappropriate indication for her quetiapine fumarate medication. This placed R52 at risk for unnecessary psychotropic medications and related complications. - The Diagnosis tab of R32's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented diagnoses of anemia (an inadequate number of healthy red blood cells to carry adequate oxygen to body tissues), dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion), protein-calorie malnutrition, bipolar disorder (a major mental illness that causes people to have episodes of severe high and low moods), delusions (untrue persistent belief or perception held by a person although evidence shows it was untrue), chronic pain, hypertension (high blood pressure), major depressive disorder (major mood disorder that causes persistent feelings of sadness), insomnia (inability to sleep), chronic pain, anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), and dysuria (painful urination), The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of three which indicated severely impaired cognition. The MDS documented R32 required substantial to maximum assistance for eating, bathing, and dressing, and was dependent on staff for oral hygiene. The MDS documented R32 received antipsychotics during the observation period. R32's Psychotropic Drug Use Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 12/09/24 documented R32 triggered secondary to the use of psychotropic medication to manage psychiatric illness and conditions. A licensed nurse monitored for side effects every shift, and the physician was to be notified of any abnormal findings. A pharmacist consultant would review medications monthly, and the physician would review medications with each visit. Contributing factors included current history of depression, anxiety, and bipolar disease. Risk factors included increased falls, impaired balance, and a potential for adverse effects of medication. The care plan would be reviewed to monitor the effectiveness of psychotropic medication and any adverse effects of medication. R32's Care Plan revised 12/13/24 documented R32 received psychotropic medications related to bipolar disorder (a major mental illness that causes people to have episodes of severe high and low moods), depression, and anxiety. R32 would be free of psychotropic drug-related complications including movement disorder, discomfort, hypotension, gait disturbance, constipation, or cognitive and behavioral impairment. Nursing staff were to administer psychotropic medications as ordered by the physician and monitor for side effects and effectiveness every shift. Nurses were to consult with the pharmacy and physician to consider dosage reduction when clinically appropriate at least quarterly. Nursing staff were to monitor and record the occurrence of target behavior symptoms every shift. R32's EMR under the Orders tab documented the following physician's order: Risperidone (antipsychotic) oral tablet 0.5 milligrams (mg) give one tablet by mouth two times a day for delusions dated 07/24/24. R32's EMR revealed no physician-documented rationale for the continued use of risperidone for delusions. A review of the CP's Monthly Medication Reviews (MMR) from 08/2024 to 12/2024 revealed no recommendations noting the inappropriate indication of use related to R32's risperidone medication. On 12/16/24 at 07:15 AM, R32 lay on the couch in the Northeast hallway. R32 had a blanket and pillow. On 12/18/24 at 12:23 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated the pharmacist did not recognize or report issues related to medication indications, but she stated she would meet with them to ensure they did in the future. The facility's Medication Regimen Reviews policy last revised 05/2024 documented the consultant pharmacist reviews the medication regimen of each resident at least monthly. Medication regimen reviews (MRR) are done upon admission (or as close to admission as possible) and at least monthly thereafter, or more frequently if indicated. The policy documented the Consulting Pharmacist would identify and report medication irregularities found during the monthly review. The facility failed to ensure the CP identified and made recommendations related to R32's inappropriate indication for her risperidone medication. This placed R32 at risk for unnecessary psychotropic medications and related complications. The facility reported a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 with five residents reviewed for drug regimen review. Based on interviews, observations, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Consulting Pharmacist (CP) identified and made recommendations related to Residents (R) 55, R8, R52, and R32's indications for their antipsychotic medications (a class of medications used to treat major mental conditions that cause a break from reality). This placed the residents at risk for unnecessary psychotropic (alters mood or thoughts) medications and related complications. Findings Included: - The Diagnosis tab within R55's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) included diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease (progressive mental deterioration characterized by confusion and memory failure), fatigue, and pain. R55's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of eleven indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS documented she was independent with meals, oral hygiene, toileting, bathing, dressing, transfers, and bed mobility. The MDS documented no behaviors were exhibited during the observed period. The MDS documented she took antipsychotic medication. The MDS documented a gradual dose reduction (GDR) was not completed and documented as clinically contraindicated on 09/06/24. R55's Psychotropic Drug Use Area Assessment (CAA) completed 08/05/24 documented she took antipsychotics and was at risk for adverse effects related to her Seroquel medication (an antipsychotic medication). R55's Care Plan initiated on 09/11/24 documented she was at risk for a cognitive decline due to her medical diagnosis. The plan documented she was independent when completing her activities of daily living (ADLs). The plan documented she was at risk for adverse reactions related to her medications; and took medications with Black Box Warnings (BBW- the highest safety-related warning that medications can be assigned by the Food and Drug Administration). The plan instructed staff to monitor for changes and notify her medical provider. R55's plan lacked documentation showing she had behaviors and non-pharmacological interventions to address those behaviors. The plan lacked documentation related to her antipsychotic medication. R55's EMR under the Orders tab indicated an order for staff to administer 50 milligrams (mg) of Seroquel three times a day for behavioral disturbances and paranoia related to dementia. The EMR revealed she had the medication upon her admission on [DATE]. A review of R25's EMR revealed no documented rationale for the indicated use of Seroquel for dementia-related behaviors. A review of the facility's Monthly Medication Reviews (MMR) from 08/2024 to 12/2024 revealed no recommendations noting the inappropriate indication of use related to R55's Seroquel medication. On 12/18/24 at 07:30 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G administered R55's morning medications. R55 received her morning dose of Seroquel without behaviors or refusals. R55 reported she felt fine and had no concerns. On 12/18/24 at 12:23 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated the pharmacist did not recognize or report issues related to medication indications. Administrative Nurse D stated she would meet with them to ensure they did in the future. The facility's Medication Regimen Reviews policy last revised May 2024 documented the Consultant Pharmacist reviewed the medication regimen of each resident at least monthly. Medication regimen reviews (MRR) are done upon admission (or as close to admission as possible) and at least monthly thereafter, or more frequently if indicated. The policy documented that the Consulting Pharmacist would identify, and report medication irregularities found during the monthly review. The facility failed to ensure the CP identified and made recommendations related to R55's inappropriate indication for her Seroquel medication. This placed R55 at risk for unnecessary psychotropic medications and related complications.a - R8's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) from the Diagnosis tab documented diagnoses of diabetes mellitus (DM - when the body cannot use glucose, not enough insulin is made, or the body cannot respond to the insulin), depressive disorder (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), and anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear). The Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated intact cognition. The MDS documented R8 received antipsychotic (a class of medications used to treat major mental conditions that cause a break from reality) medication, antidepressant (a class of medications used to treat mood disorders) medication, diuretic (a medication to promote the formation and excretion of urine) medication, and opioid (a class of controlled drugs used to treat pain) medication during the observation period. The Quarterly MDS dated 12/09/24 documented a BIMS score of 14 which indicated intact cognition. The MDS documented that R8 had received antianxiety (a class of medications that calm and relax people) medication, antipsychotic medication, opioid medication, and antidepressant medication during the observation period. R8's Psychotropic Drug Use Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 07/05/24 documented she had received multiple psychotropic and opioid medications. The nursing staff continued to monitor for effectiveness and side effects every shift. R8's Care Plan dated 08/25/24 documented the nursing staff would monitor R8 for possible signs and symptoms of side effects of her medications. The plan lacked documentation related to her antipsychotic medication. R8's EMR under the Orders tab revealed the following physician orders: Quetiapine fumarate (antipsychotic) oral tablet extended release 24 hour (Seroquel) 150 milligram (mg) give one tablet by mouth at bedtime related to major depressive disorder dated 07/12/24. Review of R8's EMR lacked documentation of non-pharmaceutical interventions tried and failed prior to the antipsychotic medication. The EMR lacked evidence of documentation related to informed consent for the use of antipsychotic medication. R8's Monthly Medication Review (MMR) reviewed from May 2024 through December 2024 lacked evidence the CP identified and reported R8's antipsychotic medication did not have a physician-documented rationale or risk versus benefit for continued use of an antipsychotic without a CMS-approved indication. On 12/17/24 at 07:17 AM, R8 lay asleep on her bed. R8's oxygen cannula was in her nostrils; she was covered with a blanket and the head of her bed was elevated. On 12/18/24 at 12:23 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated the pharmacist did not recognize or report issues related to medication indications. Administrative Nurse D stated she would meet with them to ensure they did in the future. The Medication Regimen Reviews policy last revised May 2024 documented the Consultant Pharmacist reviewed the medication regimen of each resident at least monthly. Medication regimen reviews (MRR) are done upon admission (or as close to admission as possible) and at least monthly thereafter, or more frequently if indicated. The goal of the MRR was to promote positive outcomes while minimizing adverse consequences and potential risks associated with medication. An irregularity refers to the use of medication that was inconsistent with accepted pharmaceutical services standards of practice; was not supported by medical evidence; and/or impedes or interferes with achieving the intended outcomes of pharmaceutical services. It may also include the use of medication without indication, without adequate monitoring, in excessive doses, and or in the presence of adverse consequences. If the identified irregularity represents a risk to a person's life, health, or safety; the consultant pharmacist contacts the physician immediately (within one hour) to report the information to the physician verbally and document the notification. The facility failed to ensure the CP had identified and reported irregularities with R8's antipsychotic medication. This deficient practice placed R8 at risk for unnecessary medication administration, ineffective benefits of the medication, and possible adverse side effects.
CONCERN (E)

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

Medication Errors (Tag F0758)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - The Diagnosis tab of R32's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented diagnoses of anemia (an inadequate number of healthy red...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - The Diagnosis tab of R32's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented diagnoses of anemia (an inadequate number of healthy red blood cells to carry adequate oxygen to body tissues), dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion), protein-calorie malnutrition, bipolar disorder (a major mental illness that causes people to have episodes of severe high and low moods), delusions (untrue persistent belief or perception held by a person although evidence shows it was untrue), chronic pain, hypertension (high blood pressure), major depressive disorder (major mood disorder that causes persistent feelings of sadness), insomnia (inability to sleep), chronic pain, anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), and dysuria (painful urination), The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of three which documented severely impaired cognition. The MDS documented R32 required substantial to maximum assistance for eating, bathing, and dressing, and was dependent on staff for oral hygiene. The MDS documented R32 received antipsychotics during the observation period. R32's Psychotropic Drug Use Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 12/09/24 documented R32 triggered secondary to the use of psychotropic medication to manage psychiatric illness and conditions. A licensed nurse monitored for side effects every shift, and the physician was to be notified of any abnormal findings. A pharmacist consultant would review medications monthly, and the physician would review medications with each visit. Contributing factors included current history of depression, anxiety, and bipolar disease. Risk factors included increased falls, impaired balance, and a potential for adverse effects of medication. The care plan would be reviewed to monitor the effectiveness of psychotropic medication and any adverse effects of medication. R32's Care Plan revised 12/13/24 documented R32 received psychotropic medications related to bipolar disorder (a major mental illness that causes people to have episodes of severe high and low moods), depression, and anxiety. R32 would be free of psychotropic drug-related complications including movement disorder, discomfort, hypotension, gait disturbance, constipation, or cognitive and behavioral impairment. Nursing staff were to administer psychotropic medications as ordered by the physician and monitor for side effects and effectiveness every shift. Nurses were to consult with the pharmacy and physician to consider dosage reduction when clinically appropriate at least quarterly, Nursing staff were to monitor and record the occurrence of target behavior symptoms every shift. R32's EMR under the Orders tab documented the following physician's order: Risperidone (antipsychotic) oral tablet 0.5 milligrams (mg) give one tablet by mouth two times a day for delusions dated 07/24/24. A review of R32's EMR revealed no physician-documented rationale for the continued use of risperidone for delusions. On 12/16/24 at 07:15 AM, R32 lay on the couch in the Northeast hallway. R32 had a blanket and pillow. On 12/18/24 at 11:54 AM, LN H stated the appropriate indication for antipsychotic medication did not include dementia-related indications unless the resident had schizophrenia (a mental disorder characterized by gross distortion of reality, disturbances of language and communication, and fragmentation of thought), Huntington's disease (a rare abnormal hereditary condition characterized by progressive mental deterioration, a disabling central nervous system movement disorder), or Tourette's syndrome (condition of the nervous syndrome causing uncontrollable repetitive movements or unwanted sounds). On 12/18/24 at 12:23 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated only CMS-approved indications should be used for antipsychotic medications. She stated delusions were not an appropriate indication for risperidone. The facility's Psychotropic Drug Use policy revised July 2024 documented residents would not receive medications that were not clinically documented to treat a specific condition Residents, families, and/or the representative were involved in the medication management process. Residents who had not used psychotropic medications were not prescribed or given those medications unless the medication was determined to be necessary to treat a specific condition that was diagnosed and documented in the medical record. Medications not classified as anti-psychotic, anti-depressant, anti-anxiety, and hypnotic medication were not prescribed or administered as a substitution for another psychotropic medication unless there was a documented clinical indication consistent with clinical standard of practice. Consideration of the use of any psychotropic medication was based on a comprehensive review of the resident. This included evaluation of the resident's signs and symptoms to identify underlying causes. The facility failed to ensure an appropriate indication or a documented physician rationale for R32's risperidone fumarate medication. This placed R32 at risk for unnecessary psychotropic medications and related complications. - The Diagnosis tab of R52's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented diagnoses of cerebral infarction (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), aphasia (condition with disordered or absent language function), hemiparesis/hemiplegia (weakness and paralysis on one side of the body) affecting right dominant side, anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), dysphagia (swallowing difficulty), hypertension (high blood pressure), vascular dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion caused by a decreased blood flow to the brain), and major depressive disorder (major mood disorder that causes persistent feelings of sadness). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of four which documented severely impaired cognition. The MDS documented R52 had an impairment on one side of her body. The MDS documented R52 needed partial to moderated assistance with dressing, toileting, and set up for eating. The MDS documented R52 received an antidepressant (a class of medications used to treat mood disorders) and antipsychotic (a class of medications used to treat major mental conditions that cause a break from reality) during the observation period. R52's Psychotropic Drug Use Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 05/16/24 documented R52 was admitted to the facility with a psychotropic medication and the physician would monitor R52's medication routinely. The MDS documented staff would monitor side effects of the medication for R52. R52's Care Plan dated 08/05/2024 documented R52 had impaired cognitive function, dementia, or impaired thought processes related to dementia. R52 would be able to communicate basic needs daily. R52's plan of care documented staff would administer medications as ordered and monitor and document for side effects and effectiveness. Staff were to keep the R52's routine consistent and tried to provide consistent caregivers as much as possible to decrease confusion. R52's EMR under the Orders tab documented the following physician's order: Quetiapine fumarate (antipsychotic) 25 milligrams (mg) oral tablet give 0.5 tablet by mouth one time a day for behavioral disorders associated with dementia dated 07/17/24. A review of R52's EMR revealed no physician-documented rationale for the continued use of quetiapine fumarate for behavior disorders with dementia. On 12/16/24 at 07:32 AM, R52 sat at the dining room table eating her breakfast. On 12/18/24 at 11:54 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated the appropriate indication for antipsychotic medication did not include dementia-related indications unless the resident had schizophrenia (a mental disorder characterized by gross distortion of reality, disturbances of language and communication, and fragmentation of thought), Huntington's disease (a rare abnormal hereditary condition characterized by progressive mental deterioration, a disabling central nervous system movement disorder), or Tourette's syndrome (condition of the nervous syndrome causing uncontrollable repetitive movements or unwanted sounds). On 12/18/24 at 12:23 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated only CMS-approved indications should be used for antipsychotic medications. She stated that dementia was not an appropriate indication for quetiapine. The facility's Psychotropic Drug Use policy revised July 2024 documented residents would not receive medications that were not clinically documented to treat a specific condition Residents, families, and/or the representative were involved in the medication management process. Residents who had not used psychotropic medications were not prescribed or given those medications unless the medication was determined to be necessary to treat a specific condition that was diagnosed and documented in the medical record. Medications not classified as anti-psychotic, anti-depressant, anti-anxiety, and/or hypnotic medication were not prescribed or administered as a substitution for another psychotropic medication unless there was a documented clinical indication consistent with the clinical standard of practice. Consideration of the use of any psychotropic medication was based on a comprehensive review of the resident. This included evaluation of the resident's signs and symptoms to identify underlying causes. The facility failed to ensure an appropriate indication or a documented physician rationale for R52's quetiapine fumarate medication. This placed R52 at risk for unnecessary psychotropic medications and related complications. The facility reported a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 with five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on interviews, observations, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an appropriate indication or documented physician rationale for Resident (R) 55, R8, R32, and R52s' antipsychotic medications (a class of medications used to treat major mental conditions that cause a break from reality). This placed the residents at risk for unnecessary psychotropic (alters mood or thoughts) medications and related complications. Findings Included: - The Diagnosis tab within R55's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) included diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease (progressive mental deterioration characterized by confusion and memory failure), fatigue, and pain. R55's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of eleven indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS documented she was independent with meals, oral hygiene, toileting, bathing, dressing, transfers, and bed mobility. The MDS documented no behaviors were exhibited during the observed period. The MDS documented she took antipsychotic medication. The MDS documented a gradual dose reduction (GDR) was not completed and documented as clinically contraindicated on 09/06/24. R55's Psychotropic Drug Use Area Assessment (CAA) completed 08/05/24 documented she took antipsychotics and was at risk for adverse effects related to her Seroquel (antipsychotic medication). R55's Care Plan initiated on 09/11/24 documented she was at risk for a cognitive decline due to her medical diagnosis. The plan documented she was independent with her activities of daily living (ADLs). The plan documented she was at risk for adverse reactions related to her medications and took medications with Black Box Warnings (BBW- the highest safety-related warning that medications can be assigned by the Food and Drug Administration). The plan instructed staff to monitor for changes and notify her medical provider. R55's plan lacked documentation showing she had behaviors and non-pharmacological interventions to address those behaviors. The plan lacked documentation related to her antipsychotic medication. R55's EMR under the Orders tab documented an order for staff to administer 50 milligrams (mg) of Seroquel three times a day for behavioral disturbances and paranoia related to dementia. The EMR revealed she had the medication upon her admission on [DATE]. A review of R25's EMR revealed no documented rationale for the documented use of Seroquel for dementia-related behaviors. On 12/18/24 at 07:30 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G administered R55's morning medications. R55 received her morning dose of Seroquel without behaviors or refusals. R55 stated she felt fine and had no concerns. On 12/18/24 at 11:54 AM, LN H stated the appropriate indication for antipsychotic medication did not include dementia-related indications unless the resident had schizophrenia (a mental disorder characterized by gross distortion of reality, disturbances of language and communication, and fragmentation of thought), Huntington's disease (a rare abnormal hereditary condition characterized by progressive mental deterioration, a disabling central nervous system movement disorder), or Tourette's syndrome (condition of the nervous syndrome causing uncontrollable repetitive movements or unwanted sounds). On 12/18/24 at 12:23 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated only CMS-approved indications should be used for antipsychotic medications. She stated that dementia was not an appropriate indication for Seroquel. The facility's Psychotropic Drug Use policy revised July 2024 documented residents would not receive medications that were not clinically documented to treat specific conditions. The policy documented monthly medication reviews would be completed to show psychotropic monitoring to ensure appropriate indication, effectiveness, and the need for a gradual dose reduction. The facility failed to ensure an appropriate indication or a documented physician rationale for R55's Seroquel medication. This placed R55 at risk for unnecessary psychotropic medications and related complications. - R8's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) from the Diagnosis tab documented diagnoses of diabetes mellitus (DM - when the body cannot use glucose, not enough insulin is made, or the body cannot respond to the insulin), depressive disorder (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), and anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear). The Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which documented intact cognition. The MDS documented R8 received antipsychotic (a class of medications used to treat major mental conditions that cause a break from reality) medication, antidepressant (a class of medications used to treat mood disorders) medication, diuretic (a medication to promote the formation and excretion of urine) medication, and opioid (a class of controlled drugs used to treat pain) medication during the observation period. The Quarterly MDS dated 12/09/24 documented a BIMS score of 14 which documented intact cognition. The MDS documented that R8 had received antianxiety (a class of medications that calm and relax people) medication, antipsychotic medication, opioid medication, and antidepressant medication during the observation period. R8s Psychotropic Drug Use Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 07/05/24 documented she had received multiple psychotropic and opioid medications. The nursing staff continued to monitor for effectiveness and side effects every shift. R8's Care Plan dated 08/25/24 documented nursing staff would monitor R8 for possible signs and symptoms of side effects of her medications. The plan lacked documentation related to her antipsychotic medication. R8's EMR under the Orders tab revealed the following physician orders: Quetiapine fumarate (antipsychotic) oral tablet extended release 24 hour (Seroquel) 150 milligram (mg) give one tablet by mouth at bedtime related to major depressive disorder dated 07/12/24. Review of R8's EMR lacked documentation of non-pharmaceutical interventions tried and failed prior to the administration of antipsychotic medication. The EMR lacked evidence of documentation related to informed consent for the use of antipsychotic medication. On 12/17/24 at 07:17 AM, R8 lay asleep on her bed. R8's oxygen cannula was in her nostrils; she was covered with a blanket and the head of her bed was elevated. On 12/18/24 at 11:54 AM, LN H stated the appropriate indication for antipsychotic medication did not include dementia-related indications unless the resident had schizophrenia (a mental disorder characterized by gross distortion of reality, disturbances of language and communication, and fragmentation of thought), Huntington's disease (a rare abnormal hereditary condition characterized by progressive mental deterioration, a disabling central nervous system movement disorder), or Tourette's syndrome (condition of the nervous syndrome causing uncontrollable repetitive movements or unwanted sounds). On 12/18/24 at 12:23 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated only CMS-approved indications should be used for antipsychotic medications. She stated that dementia was not an appropriate indication for Seroquel. The facility's Psychotropic Drug Use policy revised July 2024 documented residents would not receive medications that were not clinically documented to treat a specific condition Residents, families, and/or the representative were involved in the medication management process. Residents who had not used psychotropic medications were not prescribed or given those medications unless the medication was determined to be necessary to treat a specific condition that was diagnosed and documented in the medical record. Medications not classified as anti-psychotic, anti-depressant, anti-anxiety, and hypnotic medication were not prescribed or administered as a substitution for another psychotropic medication unless there was a documented clinical indication consistent with clinical standard of practice. Consideration of the use of any psychotropic medication was based on a comprehensive review of the resident. That included an evaluation of the resident's signs and symptoms to identify underlying causes. The facility failed to ensure an appropriate indication or a documented physician rationale for R8's Seroquel medication. This placed R8 at risk for unnecessary psychotropic medications and related complications.
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0801 (Tag F0801)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

The facility identified a census of 58 residents and one kitchen. Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide the services of a full-time certified dietary manager for the 58...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility identified a census of 58 residents and one kitchen. Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide the services of a full-time certified dietary manager for the 58 residents who resided in the facility and received their meals from the kitchen. This placed the residents at risk for inadequate nutrition. Findings included: - On 12/16/24 at 07:26 AM, during the initial tour of the kitchen, Dietary Staff BB stated she had started the certified dietary manager course three years ago. Dietary Staff BB stated she had completed three months of the course before staffing shortages at the facility required her to return full-time in dietary. Dietary Staff BB stated the Registered Dietician (RD) came to the facility monthly. On 12/18/24 at 01:10 PM, Administrative Staff A stated he was aware Dietary Staff BB was not certified. Administrative Staff A stated that was something that he would investigate. The Facility's Dietitian policy revised November 2024 documented that a qualified, competent, and skilled dietitian would help oversee the food and nutrition services in the facility. The facility failed to employ a full-time certified dietary manager to evaluate residents' nutritional concerns and oversee the ordering, preparing, and storage of food for the 58 residents in the facility, placing the residents at risk for inadequate nutrition.
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0838 (Tag F0838)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

The facility identified a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to conduct a thorough facility-wide asses...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility identified a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to conduct a thorough facility-wide assessment to determine the resources necessary to care for residents competently during day-to-day operations and emergencies. This failure affected all 58 residents residing in the facility. Findings Included: - On 12/18/24 an inspection of the Facility Assessment was completed. The assessment was revised on 06/28/2024. A review of the evaluation revealed the following: The assessment identified the average daily staffing required for the facility but failed to identify the specific staffing levels needed and the number of Registered Nurses (RN), Licensed Nurses (LPN/LVN), Certified Medication Aides (CMA), and Certified Nurse's Aides (CNA) needed for each unit, shift, and per census. The assessment lacked staffing levels required for each shift, including evenings and weekends. On 12/18/24 at 12:45 AM, Administrative Staff A stated the facility assessment was just revised. He stated he worked with Administrative Nurse A to complete the assessment based on the resident population, acuity, census, and needs of each resident to provide staffing. He stated the assessment was completed yearly based on the required guidelines. The facility's Facility Assessment policy revised October 2024 indicated the facility would complete an annual assessment to determine and update the capacity to meet the needs and competency of each resident. The facility failed to conduct a thorough, updated facility-wide assessment to determine what resources were necessary to care for residents competently during day-to-day operations and emergencies. This failure affected all 88 residents residing in the facility.
Jun 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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility identified a census of 60 residents. The sample included three residents reviewed for accidents. Based on observati...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility identified a census of 60 residents. The sample included three residents reviewed for accidents. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide a safe environment, free from preventable accidents for Resident (R) 1. On 05/29/24 at 12:15 PM, Transportation FF strapped R1's wheelchair into the facility's transportation van but did not place the seatbelt around R1. When Transportation FF braked before making a turn, R1 slid out of her wheelchair onto the van floor. R1 was taken to the hospital for evaluation where she was found to have left tibia (bone in the lower leg) and fibula (bone in the lower leg) fractures as a result of the accident. This failure placed R1 in immediate jeopardy. Findings included: - R1's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented diagnoses of pain, fibromyalgia (condition of musculoskeletal pain, spasms, stiffness, fatigue, and severe sleep disturbance), and weakness. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated 04/17/24, documented R1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15. R1 had impairment on both sides in upper and lower extremities and she used a wheelchair. R1 did not have any falls since admission. The Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Functional/Rehabilitation Potential Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 04/22/24, documented R1 had chronic pain and needed assistance with most ADLs. The Falls CAA dated 04/22/24, documented R1 used a sit-to-stand (mechanical lift) lift for transfers as she was not strong enough to bear weight while transferring with staff. R1's Care Plan dated 04/10/24 and discontinued 05/29/24, documented R1 could not complete her care on her own because she had physical challenges and required two helpers providing more than half the effort to transfer with the stand-up lift. R1's Care Plan dated 05/30/24, documented R1 had the potential to fall down and hurt herself and directed an Occupational Therapy (OT) evaluation was ordered for a Broda (specialized wheelchair with the ability to tilt and recline) chair for all transports outside of the facility as of 05/29/24. R1's Care Plan dated 06/03/24, documented R1 could not complete care on her own because of physical challenges; she transferred with two helpers providing more than half the effort with a full body lift. The facility's investigative report, dated 06/04/24, documented on 05/29/24 at 01:10 PM, Administrative Nurse E, and Administrative Nurse F notified Administrative Nurse D that there had been an accident with a possible injury in the facility's van involving R1. Transportation FF was driving the facility's van when he pushed the van brake to turn into a parking lot. Upon pushing on the brake, R1 slid out of her wheelchair. Transportation FF pulled over to assist R1 and R1's friend called 911. The ambulance arrived and transported R1 to the emergency room (ER) for evaluation. At 02:45 PM, Administrative Nurse E received a call from R1's representative stating that R1 had tibia and fibula fractures. In a notarized Witness Statement on 05/29/24, Transportation FF stated he took R1 to the hospital on [DATE]. He tied the front and rear straps to R1's wheelchair which he always did. He stated he was asked to stop at a fast-food restaurant and when they approached the business, he had to stop quickly. Transportation FF stated the next thing he knew, R1 was sliding out of the wheelchair onto the floor. He stated he stopped and assisted R1 but R1's friend was sure there were broken bones. He stated the ambulance came and took R1 out of the van and to the hospital. In a notarized Witness Statement on 05/29/24, Transportation EE stated on 05/29/24 at 12:15 PM, Administrative Nurse E went to her office and asked if she had heard from Transportation FF. She stated that R1's representative had called the facility regarding an accident. Transportation EE stated she called Transportation FF, but he did not answer so she called R1's friend. She stated that R1's friend reported that R1 slipped out of her wheelchair when Transportation FF put on the brakes and the ambulance was called. The Computed Tomography (CT- scan- test that used x-ray technology to make multiple cross-sectional views of organs, bone, soft tissue, and blood vessels) Ankle Left without Intravenous (into a vein) Contrast report, dated 05/29/24, documented R1 had comminuted (fracture that occurs in at least two places) fractures in the distal (away from the farthest point of origin or attachment) fibula, comminuted fractures in the posterior (back) distal tibia, comminuted fractures in the anterior (front) distal tibia, and comminuted fractures in the central and superior (toward the head end of the body) medial malleolus (bony projection that extends downward from the medial surface of the lower end of the tibia). On 06/10/24 at 01:17 PM, R1 lay in her bed and watched television. She stated on 05/29/24, her wheelchair was strapped to the floor, but a strap was not placed across her lap or body. R1 stated the driver hit the brakes of the van fast and she slid clear out of her wheelchair and her left ankle was twisted underneath her. She stated it was very painful and she could feel something was wrong immediately. On 06/10/24 at 12:38 PM, Transportation FF stated on 05/29/24, he took R1 and her friend to an appointment and afterward, they asked to go through a drive-through for food. He stated he had to stop quickly and the next thing he knew, R1 was out of her wheelchair and onto the floor. Transportation FF stated he stopped the van and was going to lift her up but could not lift her then her friend called for an ambulance. He stated that day, he had strapped R1's wheelchair down on the front and the back and locked the wheelchair brakes but he did not use a seatbelt because she was large, and he did not know if he could get the seatbelt around her. Transportation FF stated they were not going very far so he did not think too much about a seatbelt. He stated there should be a seatbelt on if in a wheelchair or in a van seat. On 06/10/24 at 12:51 PM, Transportation EE stated on 05/29/24, she called R1's friend who told her the facility van was turning into the fast-food restaurant when R1 was suddenly on the floor. She stated the four hooks under the wheelchair were fastened and the resident should have been buckled in. She stated residents were expected to be buckled in if they were not in a wheelchair. Transportation EE stated she had not received training that it was necessary to buckle the resident in if they were in a wheelchair before the incident but said she had received this training since the incident. She stated residents in wheelchairs were buckled in with four straps on the wheelchair and a lap belt across the resident. On 06/10/24 at 01:00 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated on 05/29/24, she was informed the seatbelt was not on R1, but the wheelchair was buckled in. She stated when a resident in a wheelchair was loaded onto the facility's van, the wheelchair's wheels were locked and the wheelchair was locked into the van then a seatbelt went across the resident. Administrative Nurse D stated she expected the seatbelt to be buckled. On 06/10/24 at 01:44 PM, Administrative Staff A stated he expected laws and regulations to be followed and seatbelts to be worn and properly secured. He further stated he expected the wheelchairs to be properly secured and the seat belt used. The facility's Transportation Van or Bus Policy, dated April 2024, directed the facility to complete transportation van/bus competency training for all employees or volunteers who transport or secure the elder's mobility device in the facility van or bus. The policy directed the driver to obey all laws, rules, and regulations. On 06/10/24 at 02:49 PM Administrative Staff A received a copy of the Immediate Jeopardy Template and was informed the facility's failure to provide a safe environment, free from preventable accidents for R1 placed R1 in immediate jeopardy. The facility completed the following corrective actions by 05/30/24: An OT evaluation for R1 was ordered on 05/29/24. All facility transportation was suspended on 05/29/24 until training and competencies were completed by transportation staff. R1's Care Plan was updated on 05/30/24. Transportation EE and Transportation FF completed transportation competencies on 05/30/24. Due to the corrective measures implemented and completed prior to the onsite survey, this deficient practice was cited as past noncompliance. The scope and severity remained at a J.
Jun 2023 14 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - The Medical Diagnosis section in R14's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) included diagnoses of dorsalgia (back pain), scoliosis ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - The Medical Diagnosis section in R14's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) included diagnoses of dorsalgia (back pain), scoliosis (curvature of the spine), major depressive disorder (abnormal emotional state characterized by exaggerated feelings of sadness, worthlessness, emptiness and hopelessness), osteoporosis (abnormal loss of bone density and deterioration of bone tissue with an increased fracture risk), anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty and irrational fear) disorder, fatigue, kyphosis (outward curvature of the spine), cervicalgia (neck pain), fracture of left clavicle (collarbone), shortness of breath, and panic disorder. The Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R14 had intact cognition, and required extensive assistance of one staff for activities of daily living (ADL). The MDS recorded R14 was not steady and was only able to stabilize with human assistance. R14had occasional incontinence of urine, received scheduled and as needed pain medication, and was short of breath with exertion. The MDS further documented R14 had one fall with no injury and one fall with injury. The Activity of Daily Living Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 01/16/23, documented R14's family chose comfort care due to R14's decline. R14 needed extensive assistance with most of her ADL, and was failing to thrive. R14 had falls on 08/15/22 and 10/14/22. The CAA further documented R14 took two antidepressants (class of medications used to treat mood disorders), a Fentanyl (narcotic pain medication) patch, and had as needed pain and antianxiety (class of medications that calm and relax people) medications The Quarterly MDS, dated 04/03/23, documented R14 had moderately impaired cognition. The Quarterly MDS, dated 06/13/23, documented R14 had severe cognitive impairment, had other behavioral symptoms not directed toward others, and required extensive assistance of one staff for ADL. R14, received scheduled, as needed, and non-medication interventions for pain, and had a fall with major injury. The Care Plan, dated 10/27/22, documented R14 had the potential to fall down and hurt herself because of fatigue. The nurses needed to request a therapy screen for R14 if needed, and the nurse aides were to keep R14's room well lit when she was up and to remind her to get up slowly. On 04/16/23 the care plan added intervention to stay with R14 during toileting. On 04/24/23 the care plan further documented R14 had not met her goal of avoiding major injury due to a clavicle fracture. The Fall Note on 08/15/22 at 02:11 AM, documented the nurse heard a noise and R14 calling out for help. The nurse went to investigate and found R14 lying on her back in the bathroom with her head resting against the door frame. R14 had a hematoma to the right side of her head the size of a golf ball. R14 complained of pain in her head and buttocks. R14 was unable to tell the nurse what caused the fall. The note recorded R14 was independent, and had appropriate lighting and footwear on; her floor was clean and dry, and an assistive device (walker) was with the resident. The fall note further documented no new interventions at that time. The Fall Note, on 10/14/22 at 08:21 PM, documented R14 was getting ready for bed,and getting clothes to her closet, when she became unsteady and fell. R14 was sitting on her bottom with her head resting against the bed and her hand on her chest. R14 was very short of breath. Staff provided teaching on the use of the call light if R14 felt unsteady. The note documented no new interventions at that time, and stated the care plan was followed. The Fall Note on 04/21/23 at 11:30 PM, documented the nurse heard R14 scream and went to investigate. The nurse found R14 lying on her left side with her left arm behind her. Her oxygen tubing was off, and there was candy scattered on the floor. R14 reported pain to her left arm and was unable to move her left arm without pain. R14 went to the emergency room. The note documented no interventions at that time. R14 returned from the hospital with a left clavicle fracture. On 06/26/23 at 09:18 AM, R14 sat in her room, in a recliner. She wore oxygen via nasal cannula. R14 reported she no longer had shoulder pain from the fractured clavicle. She stated it was healed On 06/26/23 at 12:14 PM observation revealed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) O assisted R14 to the bathroom. CNA O assisted R14 to a wheelchair and wheeled the resident into the bathroom. CNA O assisted R14 with toileting needs and then returned the resident to her recliner. CNA O reported R14 was usually continent, and used her call light, but recently had been calling out for assistance. On 06/27/23 at 09:40 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated the care plan had not been updated following the fall for R14 which resulted in a clavicle fracture. Administrative Nurse D and verified no new interventions were implemented to prevent further falls. Administrative Nurse D reported she had not reported the fall to the state agency because she thought if the care plan was followed, a report did not have to be made. The facility's undated Falls and Fall Risk, Managing policy documented based on previous evaluations and current data, the staff will identify interventions related to resident's specific risks and causes to try to prevent the resident from falling and to try to minimize complications from falling. The facility failed to identify and implement interventions to prevent R14 from falling resulting in a major injury and placed the resident at risk of further falls. - R57's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) recorded diagnoses of atrial fibrillation (rapid, irregular heartbeat), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD- progressive and irreversible condition characterized by diminished lung capacity and difficulty or discomfort in breathing), hypertension (elevated blood pressure), anemia (condition without enough healthy red blood cells to carry adequate oxygen to body tissues), Parkinson's disease (slowly progressive neurologic disorder characterized by resting tremor, rolling of the fingers, masklike faces, shuffling gait, muscle rigidity and weakness), pain, sleep disorder, and dystonia ( movement disorder that cause slow repetitive movements). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set, (MDS) dated [DATE], documented R57 had intact cognition, rejection of care behavior one to three days during the look back period, required extensive assistance with activities of daily living, was not steady and only able to stabilize with staff assistance, and used a walker. The MDS further documented R57 was frequently incontinent of urine, received an antidepressant (medication used to treat mood disorder) and hypnotic (medication used to induce sleep) on a routine basis. R57 used bed and chair alarms. The Fall Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 03/21/23, documented R57 had a history of multiple falls, impaired balance, impulsivity, anxiety disorder and depression (mood disorder). R57 had multiple falls from self-transferring and walking without assistance. R57 had a chair and bed alarm to alert staff when he was moving about and to stay with him during toileting. The Care Plan dated 12/22/22, documented R57 needed assistance because of having physical challenges, and frequent falls. R57 had trouble making decisions. The care plan directed staff to transfer R57 with a gait belt, walk using a four wheeled walker; R57 wore a Wanderguard device (personal alarm which alerts staff when close to alarmed exits) on his left ankle. The care plan further documented R57 had the potential to fall and hurt himself because of Parkinson's disease. The care plan further directed staff to keep an eye on his behaviors, make sure the call light was within reach, establish an activity of daily living program, to stay with R57 during toileting, make sure glasses are within reach, encourage R57 to use assistance, and to report pain and behaviors to nurse. R57's Care Plan documented an intervention dated 12/29/22which directed R57 used an alarm on his bed, chair and floor. On 01/20/23 the plan documented R57 was to use gripper socks at bedtime. On 02/16/23 the plan was updated to direct R57 had the potential to fall and hurt himself due to Parkinson's disease and dementia/Alzheimer's disease. An intervention dated 06/20/23 directed R57 used a self-locking wheelchair. The Fall Note, dated 01/20/23 at 01:48 AM, documented R57 had just been assisted by a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) with getting ready for bed, and he was sitting in his recliner watching television. The CNA then went to assist R57's roommate. The CNA reported hearing a thud and R57 was sitting on the floor in front of his recliner. The fall note documented no actions were needed and direct staff to continue to observe resident. The care plan was updated for R57 to wear slipper socks at bedtime and to give R57 frequent reminders to call for assistance when getting up. The Fall Note dated 01/20/23 at 10:34 PM documented staff checked on R57 because the room door was shut. R57 was sitting in his chair with blood on the floor and his left knee. R57's walker was folded and turned on its side. R57 informed staff he did fall. The pad alarm was on his table and unplugged enough not to alarm the pagers. R57 had previous skin issues to his left knee from a previous fall and had acquired new skin tears and abrasions to just below the left knee, left upper arm, left ankle and upper buttocks. The note documented R57 received education to use the call light and not to remove pad alarm from the chair. The Fall Note dated at 02/02/23 at 05:10 AM documented staff were notified by the alarm and found R57 sitting on the floor in his room. R57 had an abrasion to his left knee, which was cleansed, and a dressing applied. The note documented action taken was to observe, teach use of call light, and safe use of devices. The intervention listed to adjust toileting schedule and staff to frequently remind R57 to use his call light for assistance for his safety. The Fall Note dated 03/02/23 at 11:33 PM documented R57 was assisted to the bathroom with his walker and gait belt. R57 lost his balance and fell partially on the couch, landing on his left knee sustaining injury to left knee and first aid was immediately applied. The fall note documented no interventions at that time. The Fall Note dated 03/28/23 at 12:49 PM documented staff observed R57 starting to stand up from his recliner when he fell on his left knee. Staff were not able to get to the resident before the fall. The nurse found R57 sitting on his couch. R57 reported he wanted to see what laundry had put in his closet. The fall note further documented staff educated R57 on the importance of using the call light; R57had a bed alarm and chair alarm. He often attempted to ambulate in his room without calling for assistance and to give frequent reminders to use the call light to call and wait for assistance. No interventions at that time. The Fall Note dated 04/25/23 at 04:24 PM documented R57 was on his left knee in front of his bed. R57 reported he was trying to get into his wheelchair for supper and stated his call light was attached to his recliner and he should have used it. The chair alarm was working and answered promptly. The fall note further documented staff visited with R57 on the importance of using the call light to call staff for assistance and waiting for staff to get there to assist him. Resident verbalized understanding. No intervention was documented. On 06/26/23 at 03:38 PM observation revealed R57 sitting in his recliner watching television. R57 stated he had been admitted to the facility because of falling. He reported he was taking a sleeping pill and staff reported he had been walking around at night, but he does not remember this happening. R57 stated the facility wanted him to remain seated as the intervention to keep him from falling and when the alarms go off, they come running. He did report the staff remind him to use the call light and wait for assistance. R57 also reported he wanted to return home at the end of summer. On 06/27/23 at 09:45 AM Administrative Nurse D stated due to R57's intact cognition the facility had not implemented new interventions to prevent his falls. The facility's undated Falls and Fall Risk, Managing policy documented based on previous evaluations and current data, the staff will identify interventions related to resident's specific risks and causes to try to prevent the resident from falling and to try to minimize complications from falling. The facility failed to identify and implement interventions to prevent R57 from falling which placed the resident at risk of further falls and injuries. The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents, with 10 reviewed for falls. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff provided Resident (R)52 with his call light when he went to bed, resulting in a fall in which R52 obtained a right trimalleolar ankle fracture (a break in the lower leg section that form your ankle joint). The facility further failed to assess residents for safe lift chair use, after falls out of a lift recliner for R52 and R36. The facility failed to follow R36 and R46's plan of care which resulted in falls and failed to implement meaningful, resident centered interventions for R14 and R57. This placed the residents at risk for further falls and avoidable injuries. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R52 documented diagnoses of dementia without behavioral disturbance (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), neurocognitive disorder with Lewy bodies (a type of progressive dementia that leads to a decline in thinking, reasoning, and independent function), tremors (an involuntary quivering movement), and Parkinson's disease (a disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R52 had moderately impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, ambulation, wheelchair mobility, toileting, and personal hygiene. The MDS further documented R52 had unsteady balance, no functional impairments, and had no falls. The Annual MDS, dated 05/15/23, documented R52 had moderately impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, and toileting. The MDS further documented R52 had unsteady balance, no functional impairment, and had two or more non-injury falls. The Fall Care Area Assessment [CAA], dated 05/15/23, documented R52 wore non-skid shoes during the day and had a large landing mat in front of his recliner. The Fall Assessments, dated 07/14/22 and 05/15/23, document R52 at risk for falls. The Fall Care Plan, dated 05/19/23, initiated on 07/14/22, directed staff to remind him to ask for help, report changes in his abilities to the nurse, monitor his safety during activities. An update, dated 08/02/22, directed staff to ensure the skid strips were in place on the floor in front of R52's recliner. An update, dated 11/18/22, directed staff to ensure R52 wore non-skid shoes during the day. An update, dated 11/21/22, directed staff to ensure there was a landing mat in front of R52's recliner when he was in it. An update, dated 05/22/23, directed staff to monitor R52 every 30 minutes and make sure his bed was in low position. The Fall Investigation, dated 08/02/22 at 12:25 PM, documented R52 slid out of his recliner and was on the floor in front of the recliner, with his legs out in front of him. The investigation further documented the fall was unwitnessed and R52 slid onto the floor when he raised his lift recliner into an upright position. It directed staff to place skid strips in front of the recliner. Review of the EMR lacked documentation an assessment was completed to determine R52's safe use of a lift chair. The Fall Investigation, dated 09/03/22 at 04:42 PM, documented R52 slid out of his recliner and obtained a laceration (cut) to the bridge of his nose and his forehead. The investigation documented staff reviewed safety measures with R52 and instructed him to call for assistance and directed him not to elevate his chair. The investigation documented staff felt it was doubtful R52 would retain the information they provided. The EMR lacked documentation an assessment was completed to determine R52's safe use of a lift chair. The Fall Investigation, dated 11/19/22 at 10:43 PM, documented R52 slid out of his recliner and staff observed him lying on the floor on his back. The investigation further documented the lift chair remote was clearly marked with up and down arrows on it. The investigation documented staff encouraged R52 to call for assistance prior to raising the chair up, but with R52's moderate impaired cognition, he may not always remember to call for assistance. The investigation directed staff to place a landing pad in front of R52's lift chair. The Fall Investigation, dated 05/20/23 at 07:45 AM, documented R52 was found lying on his back on the left side of the bed with his head slightly up on a bedside table and his legs straight out in front of him. The investigation further documented R52 had an abrasion (scrape) to the outer right ankle which measured 4.0 centimeters (cm) by 2.0 cm, and an abrasion to the right side of his head with a small amount of bleeding present, which measured 9.0 cm by 4.0 cm. The investigation documented R52 complained of right ankle pain; there was swelling but no deformity noted. R52 stated he was getting up to get his call light, that was still in his recliner, to call for assistance and fell. The investigation documented R52's call light should always be in reach. The investigation further documented the facility sent R52 to the emergency room for evaluation and he returned at 12:00 PM with non-weight bearing orders, a splint, and orders to see an orthopedic doctor for surgical repair, as he had a right trimalleolar ankle fracture. The Witness Statement, dated 05/20/23 documented Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M reported R52 used his call light to tell staff he was ready to go to bed. CNA M documented she was training another CNA and together, they assisted R52 from the recliner to his bed. CMA M stated staff forgot to give R52 his call light. CNA M further documented he did not check on R52 after placing him in bed because it was almost at the end of the shift. The Physician's Order, dated 05/25/23, directed staff to ensure strict elevation of R52's right foot/ankle, non-weight bearing of his right lower extremity, keep splint in place, and plan for a surgical fixation on 05/31/23. On 06/21/23 at 03:00 PM, observation revealed R52 sat in his recliner with his feet elevated, and a call light at his side. There was a fall mat in front of the recliner. Further observation revealed R52 had a fracture boot on his right leg. R52's representative was in the room and stated R52 broke his leg because he did not have his call light, when he was in bed. On 06/26/23 at 12:30 PM, observation revealed CMA R and CNA N attached the sling underneath R52 to the full body lift. CNA M stood behind R52 to maneuver him to the recliner as CMA R used the lift controls to raise him up and take him to his recliner. Further observation revealed CMA R lowered R52 into his recliner, elevated his feet, gave him his call light, and put the fall mat in front of the recliner. On 06/26/23 at 12:30 PM, CNA M stated R52 broke his leg trying to get to his call light when he was in bed. CNA M stated staff check on R52 every 30 minutes since the fall. CNA M further stated R52 had other falls out of his recliner when he would elevate the chair, but not since he broke his leg. On 06/26/23 at 03:30 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G stated R52 had falls out of his recliner and staff tried to put a chair alarm in the recliner but as R52 elevated the recliner, the alarm pad would fall out, so staff took his alarm away. LN G further stated R52 had a fall with a fracture and the interventions after the fall were a low bed, 30-minute checks, and a fall mat in front of the recliner. LN G said staff made sure R52 had his call light and staff documented that, every shift, in the Medication Administration Record. On 06/27/23 at 09:45 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated staff did not follow R52's care plan and did not give R52 his call light, resulting in a fall where R52 broke his leg. Administrative Nurse D further stated staff tried different interventions to prevent falls for R52 when he was in his recliner. Administrative Nurse D verified the facility had not completed an assessment for the safe use of lift chairs. The facility's undated Falls and Fall Risk Assessment policy documented staff would document risk factors for falls in the resident's record and the physician would identify medical conditions affecting fall risks. The staff would evaluate, and document falls that occur while the individual was in the facility, identify them as witnessed or unwitnessed, and attempt to define possible causes of the fall. Based on the assessments, the staff and physician would identify pertinent interventions to try to prevent subsequent falls and to address risks of serious consequences of falling. If underlying causes could not be readily identified or corrected, staff would try various relevant interventions, based on assessment of the nature or category of falling, until falling reduces or stops or until a reason was identified for its continuation. The staff would monitor and document the individual's response to interventions intended to reduce falls or the consequences of falling. If interventions have been successful in preventing falling, the staff would continue with current approaches or reconsider whether these measures were still needed if the problem that required the interventions had resolved. If the resident continued to fall, the staff and physician would re-evaluate the situation and consider other possible reasons for the resident's falls and would reevaluate the continued relevance of current interventions. The facility failed to provide a safe environment for R52 when staff failed to place his call light within reach. As a result, R52 attempted to get his call light and subsequently fell and broke his leg. The facility further failed to assess R52's ability to safely use a lift chair after multiple lift chair related falls. - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R36 documented diagnoses of dementia without behavioral disturbance (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), cerebral infarction (a disruption of blood flow to the brain due to problems with the blood vessels that supply it), major depression (abnormal emotional state characterized by exaggerated feelings of sadness, worthlessness, emptiness and hopelessness), post-traumatic stress disorder (a disorder in which a person has difficulty recovering after experiencing or witnessing a terrifying event), and hypertension (high blood pressure). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R36 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, toileting, and extensive assistance of one staff for transfers, ambulation, dressing, and personal hygiene. The assessment further documented R36 had unsteady balance, upper and lower functional impairment on one side, and had two or more non-injury falls. The Quarterly MDS, dated 05/02/23, documented R36 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, toileting, and extensive assistance of one staff for transfers, ambulation, mobility in his wheelchair, dressing, and personal hygiene. The MDS further documented had unsteady balance, upper and lower functional impairment on one side, and one non-injury fall. The Fall Assessments, dated 11/25/22 and 05/02/23, documented R36 was at risk for falls. The Fall Care Plan, dated 05/02/23, initiated on 07/25/22, directed staff to request a therapy screen if needed, use a bed alarm, stay with the resident during toileting, make sure his important items were within reach, assist R36 with transfers or when he walked, remind R36 to ask for help, and place a mat on the floor beside the bed in case he rolled out. The update, dated 01/16/23, directed staff to visualize R36 in the mornings at shift change. The update, dated 01/26/23, directed staff to use an alarm on his chair. The Fall Investigation, dated 01/26/23 at 07:45 PM, documented staff heard someone yelling for help and was R36 was discovered on the floor holding on to the footrest of the recliner, which was slightly open. The note further documented Social Services X and a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) got R36 up and took him into the bathroom before a nurse could assess him for injuries. The investigation documented, due to R36's cognition, he did not always comprehend what was safe and had attempted to get up on his own without calling for assistance after his guest left. The Fall Investigation, dated 04/29/23 at 07:00 PM, documented R36 slid out of his recliner and education was provided to staff to make sure R36's chair alarm was under him when he is in his recliner. The investigation further documented R36 had severely impaired cognition and did not comprehend what was safe. The Fall Investigation, dated 05/28/23 at 09:30 PM, documented R36 was found on the floor in his room with the recliner controller in his hand; the chair was elevated in an up position. R36's drinks were spilled all over the floor, and he was still covered with a blanket he had on while in his recliner. The intervention directed to keep the remote for the recliner out of the resident's reach. The investigation further documented, R36 had severely impaired cognition and did not comprehend what was safe; it was felt by administration that keeping the recliner controller out of reach was not the appropriate intervention for this resident. R36's EMR lacked evidence the facility assessed for safe use of a lift chair. On 06/22/23 at 11:50 AM, observation revealed CNA O and CNA MM attached the sit to stand lift sling around the resident and hooked the sling to the lift. R36 HELD onto the handles and STAFF stood him up to transfer him to the toilet. On 06/22/23 at 11:55 AM, CNA O stated R36 used to sit in his room but since he had falls, staff kept him in the living room area unless his family was visiting. CNA O stated R36 had falls out of his recliner; he would elevate the recliner and slide out. On 06/26/23 at 12:22 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated R36's falls were out of his recliner, so now R36 stayed out in the living room area. On 06/27/23 at 09:45 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated R36 had falls from his recliner and the facility had looked into doing the lift chair/recliner assessments. She said staff keep R36 in the living room area unless his family was with him in his room. The facility's undated Falls and Fall Risk Assessment policy documented staff would document risk factors for falls in the resident's record and the physician would identify medical conditions affecting fall risks. The staff would evaluate, and document falls that occur while the individual was in the facility, identify them as witnessed or unwitnessed, and attempt to define possible causes of the fall. Based on the assessments, the staff and physician would identify pertinent interventions to try to prevent subsequent falls and to address risks of serious consequences of falling. If underlying causes could not be readily identified or corrected, staff would try various relevant interventions, based on assessment of the nature or category of falling, until falling reduces or stops or until a reason was identified for its continuation. The staff would monitor and document the individual's response to interventions intended to reduce falls or the consequences of falling. If interventions have been successful in preventing falling, the staff would continue with current approaches or reconsider whether these measures were still needed if the problem that required the interventions had resolved. If the resident continued to fall, the staff and physician would re-evaluate the situation and consider other possible reasons for the resident's falls and would reevaluate the continued relevance of current interventions. The facility failed to assess cognitively impaired R36 for safe lift chair use and failed to follow his plan of care which resulted in falls. This placed the resident at risk for further falls and injury. - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R46 documented diagnoses of dementia without behavioral disturbances (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), and seizures (violent involuntary series of contractions of a group of muscles). The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R46 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for transfers, dressing, toileting, and extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, ambulation, and personal hygiene. The assessment further documented R46 had unsteady balance, no functional impairment, had one fall with injury, and used a bed, chair, and wander alarm daily. The Quarterly MDS, dated 05/22/23, documented R46 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and extensive assistance of one staff for mobility in her wheelchair, dressing and personal hygiene. The assessment further documented R46 had unsteady balance, no functional impairment, two or more non injury falls, and used a bed alarm daily. The Fall Assessments, dated 10/13/22 and 05/22/23 documented R46 at risk for falls. The Care Plan, dated 05/23/23, initiated 07/27/22, directed staff to request a therapy screen if needed, monitor her toileting program, make sure important items are within reach, keep room well lit, use a bed and chair alarm, use a standard walker and use agait belt with one staff assistance. The update, dated 01/23/23, directed staff to not leave R46 unattended in the dining and activity room. The Fall Investigation, dated 10/08/22 at 04:45 PM, documented R46 was in the bathroom with staff and as the Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) pulled down R46's pants, R46 fell forward, landed on her knees, and sustained an abrasion (scrape) to her right knee. The investigation further documented R46's walker was in the southwest corner of the restroom away from the resident and when the nurse asked where the walker was positioned at the time of the fall, the CNA stated it was where it was located when the nurse entered the room. The nurse asked the CNA why it was not in front of the resident with the brakes locked, the CNA could not give an answer. The investigation documented the CNA was educated to have the resident's walker in front of her and the brakes locked when she was standing. The Fall Investigation, dated 06/01/23 at 06:05 PM, documented R46 was in the activity room in her wheelchair. Staff walked out of the room and when they returned, R46 scooted out of the wheelchair and was seated on the wheelchair pedals. The investigation documented R46 had severely impaired cognition and did not comprehend what was safe and staff were educated to follow R46's care plan. On 06/22/23
CONCERN (D)

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - The Medical Diagnosis section in R14's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) included diagnoses of dorsalgia (back pain), scoliosis ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - The Medical Diagnosis section in R14's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) included diagnoses of dorsalgia (back pain), scoliosis (curvature of the spine), major depressive disorder (abnormal emotional state characterized by exaggerated feelings of sadness, worthlessness, emptiness and hopelessness), osteoporosis (abnormal loss of bone density and deterioration of bone tissue with an increased fracture risk), anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty and irrational fear) disorder, fatigue, kyphosis (outward curvature of the spine), cervicalgia (neck pain), fracture of left clavicle (collarbone), shortness of breath, and panic disorder. The Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R14 had intact cognition, and required extensive assistance of one staff for activities of daily living (ADL). The MDS recorded R14 was not steady and was only able to stabilize with human assistance. R14had occasional incontinence of urine, received scheduled and as needed pain medication, and was short of breath with exertion. The MDS further documented R14 had one fall with no injury and one fall with injury. The Activity of Daily Living Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 01/16/23, documented R14's family chose comfort care due to R14's decline. R14 needed extensive assistance with most of her ADL and was failing to thrive. R14 had falls on 08/15/22 and 10/14/22. The CAA further documented R14 took two antidepressants (class of medications used to treat mood disorders), a Fentanyl (narcotic pain medication) patch, and had as needed pain and antianxiety (class of medications that calm and relax people) medications The Quarterly MDS, dated 04/03/23, documented R14 had moderately impaired cognition. The Quarterly MDS, dated 06/13/23, documented R14 had severe cognitive impairment, had other behavioral symptoms not directed toward others, and required extensive assistance of one staff for ADL. R14, received scheduled, as needed, and non-medication interventions for pain, and had a fall with major injury. The Care Plan, dated 10/27/22, documented R14 had the potential to fall down and hurt herself because of fatigue. The nurses needed to request a therapy screen for R14 if needed, and the nurse aides were to keep R14's room well-lit when she was up and to remind her to get up slowly. On 04/16/23 the care plan added intervention to stay with R14 during toileting. On 04/24/23 the care plan further documented R14 had not met her goal of avoiding major injury due to a clavicle fracture. The Fall Note on 08/15/22 at 02:11 AM, documented the nurse heard a noise and R14 calling out for help. The nurse went to investigate and found R14 lying on her back in the bathroom with her head resting against the door frame. R14 had a hematoma to the right side of her head the size of a golf ball. R14 complained of pain in her head and buttocks. R14 was unable to tell the nurse what caused the fall. The note recorded R14 was independent and had appropriate lighting and footwear on; her floor was clean and dry, and an assistive device (walker) was with the resident. The fall note further documented no new interventions at that time. The Fall Note, on 10/14/22 at 08:21 PM, documented R14 was getting ready for bed, and getting clothes to her closet, when she became unsteady and fell. R14 was sitting on her bottom with her head resting against the bed and her hand on her chest. R14 was very short of breath. Staff provided teaching on the use of the call light if R14 felt unsteady. The note documented no new interventions at that time and stated the care plan was followed. The Fall Note on 04/21/23 at 11:30 PM, documented the nurse heard R14 scream and went to investigate. The nurse found R14 lying on her left side with her left arm behind her. Her oxygen tubing was off, and there was candy scattered on the floor. R14 reported pain to her left arm and was unable to move her left arm without pain. R14 went to the emergency room. The note documented no interventions at that time. R14 returned from the hospital with a left clavicle fracture. On 06/26/23 at 09:18 AM, R14 sat in her room, in a recliner. She wore oxygen via nasal cannula. R14 reported she no longer had shoulder pain from the fractured clavicle. She stated it was healed On 06/26/23 at 12:14 PM observation revealed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) O assisted R14 to the bathroom. CNA O assisted R14 to a wheelchair and wheeled the resident into the bathroom. CNA O assisted R14 with toileting needs and then returned the resident to her recliner. CNA O reported R14 was usually continent, and used her call light, but recently had been calling out for assistance. On 06/27/23 at 09:40 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated the care plan had not been updated following the fall for R14 which resulted in a clavicle fracture. Administrative Nurse D and verified no new interventions were implemented to prevent further falls. Administrative Nurse D reported she had not reported the fall to the state agency because she thought if the care plan was followed, a report did not have to be made. The facility's Resident Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, and Mistreatment policy, dated 06/2022, documented the facility administration shall be cooperative with the state Health Department officials in accordance with Kansas's law to protect the rights and safety of the resident. The time period for reporting a serious bodily injury is a two hour limit, if the event that causes the reasonable suspicion result in serious bodily injury to a resident, the covered individual shall report the suspicion immediately, but no later than two hours after forming the suspicion. All others within 24 hours if the events that caused the reasonable suspicion do not result in serious bodily injury to the resident, the covered individual shall report the suspicion not later than 24 hours after forming the suspicion, and if a crime has been committed law enforcement will also be advised The facility failed to report to the state agency R14's fractured clavicle from an unwitnessed fall which placed the resident at risk for unidentified and ongoing abuse or neglect. The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to report to the state agency Resident (R)16's injuries of unknown origin and failed to report to the state agency R14's unwitnessed fall resulting in fracture. This placed the residents at risk for unidentified and ongoing abuse or neglect. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R16 documented diagnoses of dementia without behavioral disturbance (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), and edema (swelling). The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R16 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, toileting and extensive assistance of one staff for dressing, eating and personal hygiene. The MDS further documented R16 had no skin issues. The Quarterly MDS, dated 05/03/23, documented R16 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and extensive assistance of two staff for dressing, eating and personal hygiene. The MDS further documented R16 had skin tears. The Care Plan, dated 05/05/23, initiated on 04/27/22, documented R16 would lose her balance, fall, or bumped into things, and could not remember. The care plan directed staff to check her skin weekly, use a pressure distribution device air mattress, and ensure that R16 had a foot cradle on her bed to prevent the sheets from rubbing on her feet. The update, dated 05/22/23, directed staff to apply sleeve protectors during the day and take them off at night. The Investigation, dated 03/03/23 at 03:17 PM, documented R16 had a skin tear to her right forearm that staff had noticed while getting her ready for bed. The investigation further documented R16 had severely impaired cognition, was unable to state when or how the skin tear happened and education was given to staff. The Investigation, dated 04/19/23 at 03:04 AM, documented R16 had a skin tear on her left forearm which measured 1.5 centimeters (cm) x 1.2 cm and had a V shape. The area was cleansed with normal saline, adhesive closures were applied, covered with a non stick dressing and wrapped with gauze. The investigation documented, staff did not know if the skin tear happened when changing her clothes, and due to R16's severely impaired cognition, she was unable to state when or how the skin tear happened; education was given to staff. The Investigation, dated 04/28/23 at 07:10 PM, documented R16 had a skin tear on her right arm which measured 0.1 cm x 2.5 cm. The area was cleansed with normal saline, skin approximated, and two closure strips were applied. The investigation further documented staff were unsure when it happened. The Investigation, dated 05/22/23 at 11:24 AM, documented staff found a skin tear to R16's right forearm which measured 4.7 cm x 0.1 cm, during her shower, and staff were unsure how the skin tear was obtained. On 06/26/23 at 08:57 AM, observation revealed R16 had sleeve protectors on her arms. On 06/22/23 at 12:30 PM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) O stated R16 had to have sleeve protectors on her arms at all times because of skin tears. On 06/26/23 at 02:17 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated when staff tell her there is a skin tear or bruise, she will complete an investigation by talking with the staff, the resident, and will look at the resident's environment to see if she can figure out what happened. LN H further stated R16 had to wear the sleeve protectors or wear long sleeve to protect her skin because it was so fragile. On 06/27/23 at 09:45 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated she was unaware she was required to report any injuries of unknown origins. The facility's Resident Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, and Mistreatment policy, dated 06/2022, documented the facility administration shall be cooperative with the state Health Department officials in accordance with Kansas's law to protect the rights and safety of the resident. The time period for reporting a serious bodily injury is a two hour limit, if the event that causes the reasonable suspicion result in serious bodily injury to a resident, the covered individual shall report the suspicion immediately, but no later than two hours after forming the suspicion. All others within 24 hours if the events that caused the reasonable suspicion do not result in serious bodily injury to the resident, the covered individual shall report the suspicion not later than 24 hours after forming the suspicion, and if a crime has been committed law enforcement will also be advised. The facility failed to report to the state agency R16's skin tears of unknown origin. This placed the resident at risk for unidentified and ongoing abuse or neglect.
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

The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents, with one reviewed for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD-psychiatric disorder characterized by an acute emotional respons...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents, with one reviewed for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD-psychiatric disorder characterized by an acute emotional response to a traumatic event or situation involving severe environmental stress, such as natural disaster, military combat, serious automobile accident, airplane crash or physical torture). Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for PTSD for one sampled resident, Resident (R) 36, to provide direction to staff to ensure R36 received care to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident. This placed the resident at risk for unmet needs. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R36 documented diagnoses of PTSD, dementia without behavioral disturbance (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), cerebral infarction (a disruption of blood flow to the brain due to problems with the blood vessels that supply it), and major depression (abnormal emotional state characterized by exaggerated feelings of sadness, worthlessness, emptiness and hopelessness). The Quarterly MDS, dated 05/02/23, documented R36 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, toileting, and extensive assistance of one staff for transfers, ambulation, mobility in his wheelchair, dressing, and personal hygiene. The MDS further documented R36 had no behaviors and received antidepressant (medication that is used to treat mood disorders and relieve symptoms of depression) medication. The EMR lacked documentation a Trauma Informed Care Assessment was completed for R36. The Care Plan, dated 05/02/23, imitated on 12/01/22, documented R36 was unaware of safety risks and directed staff to keep an eye on his behaviors. The EMR lacked documentation a care plan for R36's PTSD was developed. The Physician's Order, dated 11/25/22, directed staff to administer donepezil (cognition-enhancing medication), 10 milligrams (mg), by mouth, daily in the morning for dementia and directed staff to administer Celexa (an antidepressant medication), 20 mg, by mouth, daily in the evening for depression. The Nurse's Note, dated 05/26/23 at 03:16 PM, documented R36 became agitated with his morning cares. The Nurse's Note, dated 06/14/23 at 04:11 PM, documented R36 was aggressive with staff during cares, hit and grabbed at staff several times during the shift. The note further documented staff explained what they were doing and out of nowhere, R36 started to hit and grab their arms. The Nurse's Notes, dated 06/22/23 at 04:32 PM, documented at lunch, R36 grabbed a staff members braid and pulled down on it. The noted further documented, staff were able to get the resident to let go by removing his hand from her braid. On 06/26/23 at 12:22 PM, observation revealed staff pushed R36's wheelchair into the living room area in front of the television; R36 had no behaviors. On 06/22/23 at -9:30 AM, Administrative Nurse E verified she had not developed a care plan for R36's PTSD and verified a trauma informed care assessment was not completed. On 06/22/23 at 11:50 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) O stated R36 could be resistive of cares at times and staff tried to redirect him. On 06/26/23 at 02:17 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated R36 had times of aggression, swung at staff and pulled hair. LN H further stated staff redirected him LN H said she was unaware of R36's PTSD diagnosis, and stated R36 did not receive mental health services. On 06/26/23 at 03:36 PM, Social Services X stated she had discussed R36's PTSD with his representative and had spent time with the resident but due to transporting residents to their appointments, she had not completed any assessments or been involved with the care plan team to develop a care plan for direction to staff on what would trigger his PTSD. On 06/27/23 at 09:45 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated, the facility would complete Trauma Informed Care Assessment on residents with the diagnosis of PTSD and stated a care plan for R36's PTSD was now completed. The facility's Care Plan policy, undated, documented, a care plan would be developed for each resident using the results of the comprehensive assessment and would include measurable objectives and timetables to meet all resident needs. The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for R36, who had a diagnosis of PTSD. This placed the resident at risk for unmet 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 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents of which 18 were reviewed for care planning. Based o...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents of which 18 were reviewed for care planning. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to revise the care plan with interventions to prevent falls for Resident (R) 14, 57, and 21. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for injuries to uncommunicated care needs. Findings included: - The Medical Diagnosis section in R14's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) included diagnoses of dorsalgia (back pain), scoliosis (curvature of the spine), major depressive disorder (abnormal emotional state characterized by exaggerated feelings of sadness, worthlessness, emptiness and hopelessness), osteoporosis (abnormal loss of bone density and deterioration of bone tissue with an increased fracture risk), anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty and irrational fear) disorder, fatigue, kyphosis (outward curvature of the spine), cervicalgia (neck pain), fracture of left clavicle (collarbone), shortness of breath, and panic disorder. The Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R14 had intact cognition, and required extensive assistance of one staff for activities of daily living (ADL). The MDS recorded R14 was not steady and was only able to stabilize with human assistance. R14had occasional incontinence of urine, received scheduled and as needed pain medication, and was short of breath with exertion. The MDS further documented R14 had one fall with no injury and one fall with injury. The Activity of Daily Living Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 01/16/23, documented R14's family chose comfort care due to R14's decline. R14 needed extensive assistance with most of her ADL and was failing to thrive. R14 had falls on 08/15/22 and 10/14/22. The CAA further documented R14 took two antidepressants (class of medications used to treat mood disorders), a Fentanyl (narcotic pain medication) patch, and had as needed pain and antianxiety (class of medications that calm and relax people) medications The Quarterly MDS, dated 04/03/23, documented R14 had moderately impaired cognition. The Quarterly MDS, dated 06/13/23, documented R14 had severe cognitive impairment, had other behavioral symptoms not directed toward others, and required extensive assistance of one staff for ADL. R14, received scheduled, as needed, and non-medication interventions for pain, and had a fall with major injury. The Care Plan, dated 10/27/22, documented R14 had the potential to fall down and hurt herself because of fatigue. The nurses needed to request a therapy screen for R14 if needed, and the nurse aides were to keep R14's room well-lit when she was up and to remind her to get up slowly. On 04/16/23 the care plan added intervention to stay with R14 during toileting. On 04/24/23 the care plan further documented R14 had not met her goal of avoiding major injury due to a clavicle fracture. The Fall Note on 08/15/22 at 02:11 AM, documented the nurse heard a noise and R14 calling out for help. The nurse went to investigate and found R14 lying on her back in the bathroom with her head resting against the door frame. R14 had a hematoma to the right side of her head the size of a golf ball. R14 complained of pain in her head and buttocks. R14 was unable to tell the nurse what caused the fall. The note recorded R14 was independent and had appropriate lighting and footwear on; her floor was clean and dry, and an assistive device (walker) was with the resident. The fall note further documented no new interventions at that time. The Fall Note, on 10/14/22 at 08:21 PM, documented R14 was getting ready for bed, and getting clothes to her closet, when she became unsteady and fell. R14 was sitting on her bottom with her head resting against the bed and her hand on her chest. R14 was very short of breath. Staff provided teaching on the use of the call light if R14 felt unsteady. The note documented no new interventions at that time and stated the care plan was followed. The Fall Note on 04/21/23 at 11:30 PM, documented the nurse heard R14 scream and went to investigate. The nurse found R14 lying on her left side with her left arm behind her. Her oxygen tubing was off, and there was candy scattered on the floor. R14 reported pain to her left arm and was unable to move her left arm without pain. R14 went to the emergency room. The note documented no interventions at that time. R14 returned from the hospital with a left clavicle fracture. On 06/26/23 at 09:18 AM, R14 sat in her room, in a recliner. She wore oxygen via nasal cannula. R14 reported she no longer had shoulder pain from the fractured clavicle. She stated it was healed On 06/26/23 at 12:14 PM observation revealed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) O assisted R14 to the bathroom. CNA O assisted R14 to a wheelchair and wheeled the resident into the bathroom. CNA O assisted R14 with toileting needs and then returned the resident to her recliner. CNA O reported R14 was usually continent, and used her call light, but recently had been calling out for assistance. On 06/27/23 at 09:40 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated the care plan had not been updated following the fall for R14 which resulted in a clavicle fracture. Administrative Nurse D and verified no new interventions were implemented to prevent further falls. Administrative Nurse D reported she had not reported the fall to the state agency because she thought if the care plan was followed, a report did not have to be made. The facility's undated Care Plan policy, documented a care plan will be developed for each resident using the results of the comprehensive assessment. Each care plan will include measurable objectives and timetables to meet all resident needs identified in the comprehensive assessment. The care plan describes services furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being. Care plans will be reviewed and revised on a quarterly basis by the interdisciplinary care plan team and also as needed when changes occur. The facility failed to identify and implement interventions to the care plan to prevent R14 from falling resulting in a major injury and placed the resident at risk of further falls and uncommunicated care needs. - R57's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) recorded diagnoses of atrial fibrillation (rapid, irregular heartbeat), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD- progressive and irreversible condition characterized by diminished lung capacity and difficulty or discomfort in breathing), hypertension (elevated blood pressure), anemia (condition without enough healthy red blood cells to carry adequate oxygen to body tissues), Parkinson's disease (slowly progressive neurologic disorder characterized by resting tremor, rolling of the fingers, masklike faces, shuffling gait, muscle rigidity and weakness), pain, sleep disorder, and dystonia (movement disorder that cause slow repetitive movements). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set, (MDS) dated [DATE], documented R57 had intact cognition, rejection of care behavior one to three days during the look back period, required extensive assistance with activities of daily living, was not steady and only able to stabilize with staff assistance, and used a walker. The MDS further documented R57 was frequently incontinent of urine, received an antidepressant (medication used to treat mood disorder) and hypnotic (medication used to induce sleep) on a routine basis. R57 used bed and chair alarms. The Fall Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 03/21/23, documented R57 had a history of multiple falls, impaired balance, impulsivity, anxiety disorder and depression (mood disorder). R57 had multiple falls from self-transferring and walking without assistance. R57 had a chair and bed alarm to alert staff when he was moving about and to stay with him during toileting. The Care Plan dated 12/22/22, documented R57 needed assistance because of having physical challenges, and frequent falls. R57 had trouble making decisions. The care plan directed staff to transfer R57 with a gait belt, walk using a four wheeled walker; R57 wore a Wanderguard device (personal alarm which alerts staff when close to alarmed exits) on his left ankle. The care plan further documented R57 had the potential to fall and hurt himself because of Parkinson's disease. The care plan further directed staff to keep an eye on his behaviors, make sure the call light was within reach, establish an activity of daily living program, to stay with R57 during toileting, make sure glasses are within reach, encourage R57 to use assistance, and to report pain and behaviors to nurse. R57's Care Plan documented an intervention dated 12/29/22 which directed R57 used an alarm on his bed, chair and floor. On 01/20/23 the plan documented R57 was to use gripper socks at bedtime. On 02/16/23 the plan was updated to direct R57 had the potential to fall and hurt himself due to Parkinson's disease and dementia/Alzheimer's disease. An intervention dated 06/20/23 directed R57 used a self-locking wheelchair. The Fall Note dated 01/20/23 at 01:48 AM, documented R57 had just been assisted by a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) with getting ready for bed, and he was sitting in his recliner watching television. The CNA then went to assist R57's roommate. The CNA reported hearing a thud and R57 was sitting on the floor in front of his recliner. The fall note documented no actions were needed and direct staff to continue to observe resident. The care plan was updated for R57 to wear slipper socks at bedtime and to give R57 frequent reminders to call for assistance when getting up. The Fall Note dated 01/20/23 at 10:34 PM, documented staff checked on R57 because the room door was shut. R57 was sitting in his chair with blood on the floor and his left knee. R57's walker was folded and turned on its side. R57 informed staff he did fall. The pad alarm was on his table and unplugged enough not to alarm the pagers. R57 had previous skin issues to his left knee from a previous fall and had acquired new skin tears and abrasions to just below the left knee, left upper arm, left ankle and upper buttocks. The note documented R57 received education to use the call light and not to remove pad alarm from the chair. The Fall Note dated at 02/02/23 at 05:10 AM documented staff were notified by the alarm and found R57 sitting on the floor in his room. R57 had an abrasion to his left knee, which was cleansed, and a dressing applied. The note documented action taken was to observe, teach use of call light, and safe use of devices. The intervention listed to adjust toileting schedule and staff to frequently remind R57 to use his call light for assistance for his safety. The Fall Note dated 03/02/23 at 11:33 PM documented R57 was assisted to the bathroom with his walker and gait belt. R57 lost his balance and fell partially on the couch, landing on his left knee sustaining injury to left knee and first aid was immediately applied. The fall note documented no interventions at that time. The Fall Note dated 03/28/23 at 12:49 PM documented staff observed R57 starting to stand up from his recliner when he fell on his left knee. Staff were not able to get to the resident before the fall. The nurse found R57 sitting on his couch. R57 reported he wanted to see what laundry had put in his closet. The fall note further documented staff educated R57 on the importance of using the call light; R57 had a bed alarm and chair alarm. He often attempted to ambulate in his room without calling for assistance and to give frequent reminders to use the call light to call and wait for assistance. No interventions at that time. The Fall Note dated 04/25/23 at 04:24 PM documented R57 was on his left knee in front of his bed. R57 reported he was trying to get into his wheelchair for supper and stated his call light was attached to his recliner and he should have used it. The chair alarm was working and answered promptly. The fall note further documented staff visited with R57 on the importance of using the call light to call staff for assistance and waiting for staff to get there to assist him. Resident verbalized understanding. No intervention was documented. On 06/26/23 at 03:38 PM observation revealed R57 sitting in his recliner watching television. R57 stated he had been admitted to the facility because of falling. He reported he was taking a sleeping pill and staff reported he had been walking around at night, but he does not remember this happening. R57 stated the facility wanted him to remain seated as the intervention to keep him from falling and when the alarms go off, they come running. He did report the staff remind him to use the call light and wait for assistance. R57 also reported he wanted to return home at the end of summer. On 06/27/23 at 09:45 AM. Administrative Nurse D stated due to R57's intact cognition the facility had not implemented new interventions to prevent his falls. The facility's undated Care Plan policy, documented a care plan will be developed for each resident using the results of the comprehensive assessment. Each care plan will include measurable objectives and timetables to meet all resident needs identified in the comprehensive assessment. The care plan describes services furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being. Care plans will be reviewed and revised on a quarterly basis by the interdisciplinary care plan team and also as needed when changes occur. The facility failed to identify and implement interventions to the care plan to prevent R57 from falling resulting in a major injury and placed the resident at risk of further falls and uncommunicated care needs. - The Electronic Medical Record for R21 recorded diagnoses of dementia, anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), other symptoms and signs involving cognitive functions and awareness, and Alzheimer's disease (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R21 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and extensive assistance of one staff for mobility, dressing, and personal hygiene. The MDS further documented R21 had no behaviors and received antidepressant (class of medications used to treat mood disorders and relieve symptoms of depression) medication seven days of the look back period. The Care Plan, dated 05/12/23, initiated on 05/19/22, documented R21 had the inability to remember things that happened a short time ago, and the inability to make decisions. R21 had poor safety awareness, and the plan directed staff to watch to see if R21's behavior changed. The update, dated 08/12/22 directed staff to evaluate R21 for situational stressors, evaluate effectiveness of her medication and monitor her for adverse effects of the medications. It directed to record R21's behaviors, encourage her to participate in activities, and offer comfort and support. The care plan lacked documentation of R21's behaviors and lacked person centered approached to address behaviors. The Physician's Order, dated 06/08/21, directed staff to monitor for side effects of Cymbalta (antidepressant medication) and monitor for behaviors. The Physician's Order, dated 06/12/23, directed staff to administer Cymbalta, 20 milligrams (mg), 1 capsule, by mouth, for the diagnosis of anxiety. The Nurse's Note, dated 08/30/22 at 04:19 PM, documented R21 kicked towards another resident, though no contact was made. Staff told her it was inappropriate to kick towards people. The Nurse's Note, dated 10/21/22 at 02:02 PM, documented R21 kicked at another resident's wheelchair frame and staff told her that it was inappropriate and to not do it again. The Nurse's Note, dated 10/23/22 at 03:34 PM, documented R21 took papers off the desk at the nurse's station and attempted to look at them. The note further documented staff retrieved the papers and R21 attempted to take papers and food off the medication cart. The note documented staff took R21 to her room and told her not to take things off other people's places. At 04:34 PM, the note documented R21 left her room and another resident was in the hallway and R21 kicked at the other resident's wheelchair. The Nurse's Note, dated 02/24/23 at 03:02 PM, documented R21 was whistling and disturbing other resident's and staff took her to her room. The Nurse's Note, dated 02/26/23 at 02:25 PM, documented R21 was whistling in the dining room upsetting other residents, staff asked her to stop but she continued to whistle. The note further documented R21 was taken to her room, her call light given, and staff explained that it hurt other resident's ears and she replied, I don't care. The Nurse's Note, dated 03/02/23 at 02:37 PM, documented R21 was whistling and it disturbed other resident's, and she was taken to her room. The Nurse's Note, dated 03/05/23 at 01:36 PM, documented R21 whistled despite nursing staff asked her to quit. The note documented at 04:36 PM, R21 was asked by staff and residents to stop whistling, she refused, and staff took her to her room, and gave her call light and a magazine. The note further documented the intervention only lasted a short time and R21 began to whistle again until her family came in the afternoon to visit. The note documented, later in the dining room, R21 began to holler and progressively got louder. Staff asked R21 if she needed anything and she stated No. The Nurse's Note, dated 03/14/23 at 12:11 PM, documented R21 whistled while in the dining room, other residents had already voiced that it was agitating to them, especially those with hearing aids. The note documented staff asked her multiple times to stop and she was taken back to her room, given her call light, lunch tray, and she stopped whistling. The Nurse's Note, dated 03/26/23 at 01:05 PM, documented R21 whistled in the common area, was asked to stop by staff because other residents complained of this behavior. The note further documented staff took R21 to her room, gave her a call light and a magazine. The Nurse's Note, dated 04/06/23 at 09:19 PM, documented R21 whistled in the hallway after dinner, was asked to stop by two staff members due to it hurt other resident's ears. The note documented staff told R21 that if she wished to keep whistling, she needed to do it in her room. R21 stated she did not want to go to her room and would stop whistling. The note documented, R21 stopped whistling until the nurse walked away, and then she continued to whistle. The Nurse's Note, dated 04/09/23, documented R21 was observed kicking the bird cage; she was asked to sit and watch them, and not kick the cage. The note further documented R21 continued to kick the glass, and staff took her to her room. The Nurse's Note, dated 04/26/23 at 03:42 PM, documented R21 whistled even after she was asked to stop. R21 started crying, and stated she never did anything right. The Nurse's Note, dated 05/06/23 at 03:08 AM, documented on the previous evening, R21 was in another resident's room and was assisted out by staff. The note further documented R21 went back into the other resident's room, and again was taken out by staff. The note documented, after R21 was taken out of the room, and while out in the hallway, she pulled on another resident's hair. The Nurse's Note, dated 05/11/23 at 03:44 PM, documented R21 was rude to another resident during breakfast and staff moved her to another table. The Nurse's Note, dated 05/14/23 at 10:55 AM, documented at 09:30 AM, R21 wheeled herself in front of another resident; staff asked her to move away from the other resident, in which she did not move away but wheeled closer and leaned toward the other resident's face and said, move out of my way. Staff intervened and moved R21 away. The note documented R21 began to whistle and upset other residents and staff took her to her room. The Nurse's Note, dated 06/06/23 at 04:02 PM, documented R21 whistled in the hallway, other residents complained and asked her to stop. The further documented R21 refused and staff told her that if she did not stop she would need to go to her room. The note documented R21 got into the nurse's face and whistled loudly, and staff took her to her room. On 06/22/23 at 12:04 PM, observation revealed R21 sat in her wheelchair in the living room area and had no behaviors at that time. On 06/22/23 at 12:40 PM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) O stated R21 liked to whistle, and it often disturbed other residents. CNA O said R21 had no other behaviors, and staff take R21 to her room when she has behaviors. On 06/26/23 at 02:18 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated R21 liked to whistle and it disturbed other residents. LN H said sometimes R21 would get into other residents' faces and whistle. LN H said most of the time R21 would stop when asked to stop but when she did not, staff took her to her room. On 06/26/23 at 03:31 PM, Social Services X stated when R21 had behaviors, she stepped in and helped staff redirect . Social services X said provided 1:1 with R21. Social Services X stated R21 did not receive any mental health services. On 06/27/23 at 09:45 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated R21 whistled and upset other residents. Administrative Nurse D said staff would work on other interventions for R21's behavior and verified R21 did not receive any mental health services. The facility Care Plans policy, undated, documented residents had personalized plan that stated specific cares needed and would be reviewed and revised on a quarterly basis by the care team and also when changes occur. The facility failed to revise the care plan for R21 with person centered interventions which addressed dementia related behaviors. This placed the resident at risk for uncommunicated and/or unmet needs.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents. Based on observation, record review and interview t...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents. Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to prevent medication administration errors for Resident (R) 10's when staff crushed and mixed the medications and placed them in R10's food. The services the facility provided R10 did not meet professional standards of quality. This deficient practice placed R10 at risk for adverse reactions by not receiving the appropriate amount of medications prescribed. Findings included: - R10's Electronic Medical Record (EMR), documented diagnoses of epilepsy (a disorder in which nerve cell activity in the brain is disturbed, causing seizures), bipolar disorder (a disorder with episodes of mood swings ranging from depressive lows to manic highs), and anxiety disorder (mental health disorder with feelings of worry, anxiety, or fear that interferes with daily activities). The Quarterly Minimum Date Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of seven indicating severely impaired cognition. The MDS documented R10 required extensive assistance with transfers and locomotion and rejected care one to three days of the look back period. The revised Safety Care Plan, dated 06/03/23, instructed staff to keep the resident safe if a seizure occured and to provide seizure medication as ordered. The Physician Orders, dated 06/01/23, documented to administer the following medications: Keppra (an anticonvulsant medication to prevent seizures) 500 milligrams (mg) by mouth (PO) two times a day (BID) Docusate Sodium (stool softener medication)100mg PO BID Risperidone (antipsychotic medication) 2.5 mg PO BID Depakote (seizure medication) 125 mg capsule delayed release PO BID, Tylenol (pain medication) 500 mg PO in the evening, Zoloft ( an antidepressant medication) 100mg PO in the evening, R10's EMR lacked an order to crush and mix medications. The Nurses Note dated 06/19/23 at 07:55PM, documented R10's evening medications were crushed and mixed in his meat sandwich during the supper meal. The note recorded R10 ate half of the sandwich therefore half of R10's medications were received. The Nurses Note, dated 06/21/23 at 07:22PM, documented R10's evening medications were crushed and mixed in the tartar sauce and placed on his fish sandwich. The note further documented R10 ate half of the fish sandwich therefore he technically received half of his medication. According to the Food and Drug Administration for the medications Keppra, Risperidone and Depakote. Crushing the medications was discouraged. Review of R10's Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed documentation on 06/19/23 and 06/21/23 that R10 received half of his evening medication. On 06/27/23 at 08:00AM, observation revealed R10 seated in his wheelchair at a dining table. On 06/22/23 at 08:15AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G stated, depending on R10's mood, R10's medications were sometimes crushed and placed in his food. On 06/27/23 at 09:15AM, Administrative Nurse D verified the documentation on 06/19/23 and 06/21/23, regarding R10's medications being crushed and placed in his meals. Administrative Nurse D verified this practice of medication administration was inappropriate. The undated facility policy, Medication Administration, stated medications are to be administered as prescribed by the resident's physician. All medication errors should be reported. The facility failed to administer R10's medications in an appropriate manner, by crushing the medications and placing in his food. These services the facility provided R10 did not meet professional standards of quality for medication administration, placing R10 at risk for not receiving the appropriate doses of the medications.
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 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents with one reviewed for discharge. Based on record rev...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents with one reviewed for discharge. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop a discharge summary that included a recapitulation (a concise summary of the resident's stay and course of treatment in the facility) of the resident's stay for Resident (R)67. This placed the resident at risk for unmet care needs. Findings included: - R67's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed the resident admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R67 had intact cognition, delusions, and no behavioral symptoms. The MDS further documented R67 required supervision with activities of daily living, had an indwelling urinary catheter (tube placed in the bladder to drain urine into a collection bag), received an antidepressant (class of medications used to treat mood disorders) and an antibiotic (medication to treat infections), had no therapy services and did not have an active discharge planning already occurring. The Psychosocial Well-Being Care Area Assessment dated 03/21/23, documented R67 verbally stated embarrassment being in the facility. R67 had a desire to please others and was concerned about not doing things right. The CAA further documented the facility would continue to facilitate mental health and primary care doctor appointments. The Care Plan, dated 03/21/23, documented R67 needed to determine if it was safe to return to home because R67 wanted or expected to go home in the future. The care plan directed staff to talk about discharge, goals, and explore discharge options. The Nurses Note, dated 04/26/23 at 12:35 PM, documented communication to the physician, R67 plans to return home the following Monday, and requested R67's medication prescriptions sent to the pharmacy so they could be picked up on the Monday of discharge. R67's EMR lacked evidence a discharge summary which included a recapitulation was developed. On 06/27/23 at 09:44 AM, Administrative Nurse D verified the facility used a discharge summary, which did not include a complete recapitulation of R67's stay. The facility's undated Discharge Summary policy, documented it was the policy of this facility that residents who have a planned discharge from the facility will have a completed discharge plan and recapitulation of stay completed to facilitate continuity of care after discharge. A comprehensive discharge summary will describe for the next provider the resident's course of stay, medical conditions and diagnose, the results of relevant laboratory and other diagnostic testing completed I the facility, consultations completed in the facility and medications prescribed at discharge. The facility failed to develop a discharge summary that included a recapitulation of the resident's stay for R67. This placed the resident at risk for unmet care needs.
CONCERN (D)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents, with two reviewed for skin conditions not pressure ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents, with two reviewed for skin conditions not pressure related. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to implement interventions to prevent skin tears for one sampled resident, Resident (R) 16, and the facility failed to protect skin to prevent bruises during a transfer for R65. This placed the residents at risk for further injury. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R16 documented diagnoses of dementia without behavioral disturbance (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), and edema (swelling). The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R16 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, toileting and extensive assistance of one staff for dressing, eating and personal hygiene. The MDS further documented R16 had no skin issues. The Quarterly MDS, dated 05/03/23, documented R16 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and extensive assistance of two staff for dressing, eating and personal hygiene. The MDS further documented R16 had skin tears. The Care Plan, dated 05/05/23, initiated on 04/27/22, documented R16 would lose her balance, fall, or bumped into things, and could not remember. The care plan directed staff to check her skin weekly, use a pressure distribution device air mattress, and ensure that R16 had a foot cradle on her bed to prevent the sheets from rubbing on her feet. The update, dated 05/22/23, directed staff to apply sleeve protectors during the day and take them off at night. The Investigation, dated 03/03/23 at 03:17 PM, documented R16 had a skin tear to her right forearm that staff had noticed while getting her ready for bed. The investigation further documented R16 had severely impaired cognition, was unable to state when or how the skin tear happened and education was given to staff. The Investigation, dated 04/19/23 at 03:04 AM, documented R16 had a skin tear on her left forearm which measured 1.5 centimeters (cm) x 1.2 cm and had a V shape. The area was cleansed with normal saline, adhesive closures were applied, covered with a non stick dressing and wrapped with gauze. The investigation documented, staff did not know if the skin tear happened when changing her clothes, and due to R16's severely impaired cognition, she was unable to state when or how the skin tear happened; education was given to staff. The Investigation, dated 04/28/23 at 07:10 PM, documented R16 had a skin tear on her right arm which measured 0.1 cm x 2.5 cm. The area was cleansed with normal saline, skin approximated, and two closure strips were applied. The investigation further documented staff were unsure when it happened. The Investigation, dated 05/22/23 at 11:24 AM, documented staff found a skin tear to R16's right forearm which measured 4.7 cm x 0.1 cm, during her shower, and staff were unsure how the skin tear was obtained. On 06/26/23 at 08:57 AM, observation revealed R16 had sleeve protectors on her arms. On 06/22/23 at 12:30 PM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) O stated R16 had to have sleeve protectors on her arms at all times because of skin tears. On 06/26/23 at 02:17 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated when staff tell her there is a skin tear or bruise, she will complete an investigation by talking with the staff, the resident, and will look at the resident's environment to see if she can figure out what happened. LN H further stated R16 had to wear the sleeve protectors or wear long sleeve to protect her skin because it was so fragile. On 06/27/23 at 09:45 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated staff should have implemented interventions to protect R16's skin. The facility's Prevention of Pressure Ulcers/Injuries policy, undated, directed staff to review the resident's care plan and identify the risk factors as well as interventions designed to reduce or eliminate those considered modifiable, inspect the skin on a daily basis when performing or assisting with personal care or activities of daily living, evaluate, report, and document potential changes in the skin, and review the interventions and strategies for effectiveness on an ongoing basis. The facility failed to idenifty and implement interventions to prevent skin tears for R16 until multiple skin tears were sustained over the course of several months. This placed the resident at risk for further injuries. - The Electronic Medical Record (ER) for R65 documented diagnoses of compression fracture (when forced together bone surfaces caused a bone to break), anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), interferer disc disorder (a breakdown of one or more of the discs that separate the bones of the spine), and inflammatory spindly (when the immune system attacks the spine an sometimes the joints of the arms and legs). The admission Minimum Data Set (MD'S), dated 06/13/23, documented R65 had intact cognition and required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. The MDS further documented R65 had no skin issues. The Care Plan, dated 06/05/23, documented R65 had the potential for skin injury and directed staff to check her skin weekly, use one staff, a gait belt, and a front wheeled walker for transfers, and keep skin healthy and intact. The Investigation, dated 06/21/23 at 06:50 AM, documented the bath aide found four bruises on the resident's upper inner arm and notified the charge nurse. The investigation further documented the bruises on the left upper arm which measured 5.0 centimeter (cm) x 3.0 cm, was dark purple in color, the next bruise measured 2.0 cm x 0.5 cm and was a medium shade of purple, the next bruise was 3.0 cm in diameter, and the next bruise down was 2.0 cm in diameter and was dark purple. Staff interviewed R65 who stated she thought it happened when an evening shift staff helped her to stand up. The investigation documented the family and physician were notified and told to monitor the bruises. Staff were educated on how to transfer residents, and no abuse or neglect was suspected. On 06/22/23 at 08:30 AM, observation revealed R65 in her recliner with family at her side. The resident had four purple bruises on her upper left arm. When asked by this surveyor what happened to her arm, she stated, No one beat on me, if that's what you are worried about! and laughed. R65 stated the nurse had measured the bruises and took pictures, and stated, she bruised easily and thought it could have been from the blood pressure cuff or when assisted with a transfer. On 06/26/23 at 02:43 PM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M stated R65 had a lot of anxiety and did not like to have a lot of staff in her room around her. CNA M stated R65 came from the hospital with fractures in her back, was a one person transfer with a gait belt, walker, and staff should not to pull on the resident's arms. On 06/26/23 at 02:40 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) I stated R65 had bruises from a younger staff person who had put the gait belt on the resident but did not use it when she was assisting her in a transfer. LN I further stated, R65 had a lot of anxiety and stated she did not want to get the staff member in trouble that had transferred her. On 06/27/23 at 09:45 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated staff were educated on proper transfer techniques and a mandatory meeting was scheduled in which transfers were part of the agenda. The facility's Prevention of Pressure Ulcers/Injuries policy, undated, directed staff to review the resident's care plan and identify the risk factors as well as interventions designed to reduce or eliminate those considered modifiable, inspect the skin on a daily basis when performing or assisting with personal care or activities of daily living, evaluate, report, and document potential changes in the skin, and review the interventions and strategies for effectiveness on an ongoing basis. The facility failed to prevent bruises on R65's arm during a transfer, this placed the resident at risk for further bruising and injury.
CONCERN (D)

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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents with two being reviewed for bowel/bladder incontinence, indwelling catheter (tube placed in the bladder to drain urine into ...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents with two being reviewed for bowel/bladder incontinence, indwelling catheter (tube placed in the bladder to drain urine into a collection bag), and urinary tract infections (UTI). Based on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide Resident (R) 35 with sanitary catheter care while draining the urine drainage bag which placed R35 for risk of infection and cathter related complications. Findings included: -The Medical Diagnosis section within R35's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) included diagnoses of mild cognitive impairment, diabetes mellitus (when the body cannot use glucose, not enough insulin made or the body cannot respond to the insulin), hypertension (elevated blood pressure), anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty and irrational fear) disorder, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH-age-associated prostate gland enlargement that can cause urination difficulty) with lower urinary tract symptoms, mechanical complication of other urinary catheter, urinary incontinence, hematuria (blood in the urine), urine retention, and UTI. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated 04/10/23, documented R35 had intact cognition, rejected care four to six days of the seven day look back period, and required extensive assistance of one staff for activities of daily living (ADLs). R35 was not steady and only able to stabilize with human assistance and used a walker for mobility. The MDS further documented R35 had an indwelling urinary catheter and was frequently incontinent of bowel. R35 took antianxiety and antidepressant (class of medications used to treat mood disorders and relieve symptoms of depression [(abnormal emotional state characterized by exaggerated feelings of sadness, worthlessness, emptiness and hopelessness]) medications daily. The Urinary Incontinence/Catheter Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 01/16/23, documented R35 had an indwelling catheter due to obstructive uropathy (obstructed urinary flow). The physician attempted to remove the catheter while R35 was in the hospital and facility but was unsuccessful due to urinary retention. R35 had no signs of infection or retention at that time. The Urinary Catheter Care Plan, dated 01/10/23, documented R35 had a catheter because of an obstruction. The care plan directed staff to offer fluids, provide care for the catheter, and to keep track of R35's urine output. The Physician Order on 01/20/23, instructed staff to change the catheter and drainage bags monthly and to irrigate the catheter with 60 cubic centimeters (cc's) normal saline or sterile water daily in the evening. The Nurses Note, dated 01/25/23 at 02:32 PM, documented R35 received an antibiotic (medication used to treat infection), had a catheter in place, and was self- transferring from wheelchair to bed. The note further documented the nurse explained to R35 that self-transferring created a risk to pull on the catheter. On 06/22/23 at 12:34 PM, observation revealed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) P assisted R35 to his bathroom to empty the urine drainage bag. CNA P removed the urine drainage bag from the privacy bag attached to the lower part of the walker, laid it directly on the floor, without a barrier between the soiled floor and drainage bag. CNA P drained the urine into a urinal to measure the amount, then wiped the drainage spout with an alcohol swab and returned the soiled drainage bag to the privacy bag. On 06/26/23 at 12:42 PM, observation revealed CNA Q assist R35 to his bathroom to empty the urine drainage bag. CNA Q removed the urine drainage bag from the privacy bag attached to the lower part of the walker, laid it directly on the floor, without a barrier between the soiled floor and drainage bag, to drain the urine from the tubing. CNA Q drained the urine into a urinal to measure the amount, then wiped the drainage spout with an alcohol swab and returned the drainage bag into the privacy bag. On 06/26/23 at 03:30 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) L stated the CNAs should not have laid the catheter drainage bag directly on the floor to drain the tubing. On 06/26/23 at 03:36 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated she expected the staff not ensure the drainage bag was not placed directly on the floor to drain and measure the urine. The facility's undated Catheter Care policy documented to never allow a catheter drainage bag or tubing on the floor or above the level of the bladder. The facility utilizes catheter bags with an anti-reflux valve to prevent urine from back flowing into the bladder. The facility failed to provide sanitary catheter care by placing the drainage bag directly on the floor which placed R35 at risk for urinary tract infections and catheter related complications.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0699 (Tag F0699)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents, with one reviewed for post -traumatic stress disorder (PTSD-psychiatric disorder characterized by an acute emotional respon...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents, with one reviewed for post -traumatic stress disorder (PTSD-psychiatric disorder characterized by an acute emotional response to a traumatic event or situation involving severe environmental stress, such as natural disaster, military combat, serious automobile accident, airplane crash or physical torture). Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 36 received trauma-informed care to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident which placed the resident at risk for unmet behavioral health care needs. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R36 documented diagnoses of PTSD, dementia without behavioral disturbance (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), cerebral infarction (a disruption of blood flow to the brain due to problems with the blood vessels that supply it), and major depression (abnormal emotional state characterized by exaggerated feelings of sadness, worthlessness, emptiness and hopelessness). The Quarterly MDS, dated 05/02/23, documented R36 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, toileting, and extensive assistance of one staff for transfers, ambulation, mobility in his wheelchair, dressing, and personal hygiene. The MDS further documented R36 had no behaviors and received antidepressant (medication that is used to treat mood disorders and relieve symptoms of depression) medication. The EMR lacked documentation a Trauma Informed Care Assessment was completed for R36. The Care Plan, dated 05/02/23, imitated on 12/01/22, documented R36 was unaware of safety risks and directed staff to keep an eye on his behaviors. The EMR lacked documentation a care plan for R36's PTSD was developed. The Physician's Order, dated 11/25/22, directed staff to administer donepezil (cognition-enhancing medication), 10 milligrams (mg), by mouth, daily in the morning for dementia and directed staff to administer Celexa (an antidepressant medication), 20 mg, by mouth, daily in the evening for depression. The Nurse's Note, dated 05/26/23 at 03:16 PM, documented R36 became agitated with his morning cares. The Nurse's Note, dated 06/14/23 at 04:11 PM, documented R36 was aggressive with staff during cares, hit and grabbed at staff several times during the shift. The note further documented staff explained what they were doing and out of nowhere, R36 started to hit and grab their arms. The Nurse's Notes, dated 06/22/23 at 04:32 PM, documented at lunch, R36 grabbed a staff members braid and pulled down on it. The noted further documented, staff were able to get the resident to let go by removing his hand from her braid. On 06/26/23 at 12:22 PM, observation revealed staff pushed R36's wheelchair into the living room area in front of the television; R36 had no behaviors. On 06/22/23 at -9:30 AM, Administrative Nurse E verified she had not developed a care plan for R36's PTSD and verified a trauma informed care assessment was not completed. On 06/22/23 at 11:50 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) O stated R36 could be resistive of cares at times and staff tried to redirect him. On 06/26/23 at 02:17 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated R36 had times of aggression, swung at staff and pulled hair. LN H further stated staff redirected him LN H said she was unaware of R36's PTSD diagnosis, and stated R36 did not receive mental health services. On 06/26/23 at 03:36 PM, Social Services X stated she had discussed R36's PTSD with his representative and had spent time with the resident but due to transporting residents to their appointments, she had not completed any assessments or been involved with the care plan team to develop a care plan for direction to staff on what would trigger his PTSD. On 06/27/23 at 09:45 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated, the facility would complete Trauma Informed Care Assessment on residents with the diagnosis of PTSD and stated a care plan for R36's PTSD was now completed. Upon request, a policy for PTSD/Trauma Informed Care was not provided by the facility. The facility failed to ensure R36, who was diagnosed with PTSD, received trauma informed care and services for his behavioral health needs This placed the resident at risk for unmet behavioral health care needs.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0744 (Tag F0744)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents, with five reviewed for dementia (progressive mental...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents, with five reviewed for dementia (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion) care. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide the necessary treatment and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical and psychosocial well-being for Resident (R) 21, who had dementia and related behaviors. This placed the resident at risk for decreased quality of life. Findings included: - The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R21 recorded diagnoses of dementia, anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), other symptoms and signs involving cognitive functions and awareness, and Alzheimer's disease (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R21 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and extensive assistance of one staff for mobility, dressing, and personal hygiene. The MDS further documented R21 had no behaviors and received antidepressant (class of medications used to treat mood disorders and relieve symptoms of depression) medication seven days of the look back period. The Care Plan, dated 05/12/23, initiated on 05/19/22, documented R21 had the inability to remember things that happened a short time ago, and the inability to make decisions. R21 had poor safety awareness, and the plan directed staff to watch to see if R21's behavior changed. The update, dated 08/12/22 directed staff to evaluate R21 for situational stressors, evaluate effectiveness of her medication and monitor her for adverse effects of the medications. It directed to record R21's behaviors, encourage her to participate in activities, and offer comfort and support. The care plan lacked documentation of R21's behaviors and lacked person centered approached to address behaviors. The Physician's Order, dated 06/08/21, directed staff to monitor for side effects of Cymbalta (antidepressant medication) and monitor for behaviors. The Physician's Order, dated 06/12/23, directed staff to administer Cymbalta, 20 milligrams (mg), 1 capsule, by mouth, for the diagnosis of anxiety. The Nurse's Note, dated 08/30/22 at 04:19 pm, documented R21 kicked towards another resident, though no contact was made. Staff told her it was inappropriate to kick towards people. The Nurse's Note, dated 10/21/22 at 02:02 PM, documented R21 kicked at another resident's wheelchair frame and staff told her that it was inappropriate and to not do it again. The Nurse's Note, dated 10/23/22 at 03:34 PM, documented R21 took papers off the desk at the nurse's station and attempted to look at them. The note further documented staff retrieved the papers and R21 attempted to take papers and food off the medication cart. The note documented staff took R21 to her room and told her not to take things off other people's places. At 04:34 PM, the note documented R21 left her room and another resident was in the hallway and R21 kicked at the other resident's wheelchair. The Nurse's Note, dated 02/24/23 at 03:02 PM, documented R21 was whistling and disturbing other resident's and staff took her to her room. The Nurse's Note, dated 02/26/23 at 02:25 PM, documented R21 was whistling in the dining room upsetting other residents, staff asked her to stop but she continued to whistle. The note further documented R21 was taken to her room, her call light given, and staff explained that it hurt other resident's ears and she replied, I don't care. The Nurse's Note, dated 03/02/23 at 02:37 PM, documented R21 was whistling and it disturbed other resident's, and she was taken to her room. The Nurse's Note, dated 03/05/23 at 01:36 PM, documented R21 whistled despite nursing staff asked her to quit. The note documented at 04:36 PM, R21 was asked by staff and residents to stop whistling, she refused, and staff took her to her room, and gave her call light and a magazine. The note further documented the intervention only lasted a short time and R21 began to whistle again until her family came in the afternoon to visit. The note documented, later in the dining room, R21 began to holler and progressively got louder. Staff asked R21 if she needed anything and she stated No. The Nurse's Note, dated 03/14/23 at 12:11 PM, documented R21 whistled while in the dining room, other residents had already voiced that it was agitating to them, especially those with hearing aids. The note documented staff asked her multiple times to stop and she was taken back to her room, given her call light, lunch tray, and she stopped whistling. The Nurse's Note, dated 03/26/23 at 01:05 PM, documented R21 whistled in the common area, was asked to stop by staff because other residents complained of this behavior. The note further documented staff took R21 to her room, gave her a call light and a magazine. The Nurse's Note, dated 04/06/23 at 09:19 PM, documented R21 whistled in the hallway after dinner, was asked to stop by two staff members due to it hurt other resident's ears. The note documented staff told R21 that if she wished to keep whistling, she needed to do it in her room. R21 stated she did not want to go to her room and would stop whistling. The note documented R21 stopped whistling until the nurse walked away, and then she continued to whistle. The Nurse's Note, dated 04/09/23, documented R21 was observed kicking the bird cage; she was asked to sit and watch them, and not kick the cage. The note further documented R21 continued to kick the glass, and staff took her to her room. The Nurse's Note, dated 04/26/23 at 03:42 PM, documented R21 whistled even after she was asked to stop. R21 started crying, and stated she never did anything right. The Nurse's Note, dated 05/06/23 at 03:08 AM, documented on the previous evening, R21 was in another resident's room and was assisted out by staff. The note further documented R21 went back into the other resident's room, and again was taken out by staff. The note documented, after R21 was taken out of the room, and while out in the hallway, she pulled on another resident's hair. The Nurse's Note, dated 05/11/23 at 03:44 PM, documented R21 was rude to another resident during breakfast and staff moved her to another table. The Nurse's Note, dated 05/14/23 at 10:55 AM, documented at 09:30 AM, R21 wheeled herself in front of another resident; staff asked her to move away from the other resident, in which she did not move away but wheeled closer and leaned toward the other resident's face and said, move out of my way. Staff intervened and moved R21 away. The note documented R21 began to whistle and upset other residents and staff took her to her room. The Nurse's Note, dated 06/06/23 at 04:02 PM, documented R21 whistled in the hallway, other residents complained and asked her to stop. The further documented R21 refused and staff told her that if she did not stop she would need to go to her room. The note documented R21 got into the nurse's face and whistled loudly, and staff took her to her room. On 06/22/23 at 12:04 PM, observation revealed R21 sat in her wheelchair in the living room area and had no behaviors at that time. On 06/22/23 at 12:40 PM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) O stated R21 liked to whistle, and it often disturbed other residents. CNA O said R21 had no other behaviors, and staff take R21 to her room when she has behaviors. On 06/26/23 at 02:18 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated R21 liked to whistle and it disturbed other residents. LN H said sometimes R21 would get into other residents' faces and whistle. LN H said most of the time R21 would stop when asked to stop but when she did not, staff took her to her room. On 06/26/23 at 03:31 PM, Social Services X stated when R21 had behaviors, she stepped in and helped staff redirect . Social Services X said provided 1:1 with R21. Social Services X stated R21 did not receive any mental health services. On 06/27/23 at 09:45 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated R21 whistled and upset other residents. Administrative Nurse D said staff would work on other interventions for R21's behavior and verified R21 did not receive any additonal behavioral or mental health services. Upon request, a policy for dementia care was not provided by the facility. The facility failed to provide the necessary dementia care and services for R21, who had dementia related behaviors. This placed the resident at risk for decreased quality of life.
CONCERN (D)

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

Drug Regimen Review (Tag F0756)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents, with six reviewed for unnecessary medications. Base...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents, with six reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Pharmacy Consultant addressed the facility's lack of assessing and monitoring behaviors and side effects for Resident (R) 60's use of Haldol (antipsychotic medication class used to treat major mental disorder characterized by a gross impairment in reality and other mental emotional conditions). This deficient practice placed the resident at risk for unnecessary psychotropic (alters mood or thought) medication. Findings included: - R60's Electronic Health Record (EHR) documented diagnoses of schizophrenia (a psychiatric disorder that affects a person's ability to think, feel, and behave clearly). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS documented the resident received antipsychotic medication on a routine basis, and had verbal behaviors, hallucinations (a perception of having seen, heard, touched, tasted, or smelled something that wasn't actually there) and delusions (a false belief or judgment about external reality). The Black Box Warning (BBW-most stringent warning for drugs and alert to serious side effects, such as injury or death) Care Plan, dated 05/08/23, documented the use of antipsychotic medications. The Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated 05/04/23, directed staff to administer Haldol 3 milligrams by mouth at 09:00AM and 09:00 PM daily for diagnosis of schizophrenia. Review of R60's EHR for May 2023 and June 2023, laced evidence of behavior monitoring, and lacked evidence staff monitored for adverse side effects of the administration of Haldol. The Registered Pharmacy Consultant Visit on 06/05/23 lacked recommendations to the facility regarding the lack of monitoring of adverse side effects and behaviors for the use of the Haldol. On 06/27/23 at 07:45AM, observation revealed R60 sat on a dining chair in the dining room with no behaviors noted. On 06/26/23 at 08:40AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G verified the lack of documentation or monitoring of adverse reactions or behaviors for the use of the Haldol. On 06/27/23 at 09:10AM, Administrative Nurse D verified the facility lacked documentation and monitoring of the resident for behaviors and potential side effects for the use of the Haldol. The facility's undated Psychotropic Medication Use policy, documented residents receiving antipsychotic medications are to be assessed for adverse reactions and behaviors and to document on the MAR (Medication Administration Record). The facility's undated Consultant Pharmacy policy, documented residents are to have medications reviewed monthly by the Registered Pharmacist and recommendations are to be provided to the facility and the resident's physician. The facility's Pharmacy Consultant failed to ensure the facility was assessing and monitoring R60's use of Haldol, placing the resident at risk for adverse side effects.
CONCERN (D)

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

Medication Errors (Tag F0758)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents, with six reviewed for unnecessary medications. Base...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents, with six reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to assess and monitor behaviors and side effects related to Resident (R) 60's use of Haldol (antipsychotic medication class used to treat major mental disorder characterized by a gross impairment in reality and other mental emotional conditions). This deficient practice placed the resident at risk for unnecessary psychotropic (alters mood or thought) medication. Findings included: - R60's Electronic Health Record (EHR) documented diagnoses of schizophrenia (a psychiatric disorder that affects a person's ability to think, feel, and behave clearly). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS documented the resident received antipsychotic medication on a routine basis, and had verbal behaviors, hallucinations (a perception of having seen, heard, touched, tasted, or smelled something that wasn't actually there) and delusions (a false belief or judgment about external reality). The Black Box Warning (BBW-most stringent warning for drugs and alert to serious side effects, such as injury or death) Care Plan, dated 05/08/23, documented the use of antipsychotic medications. The Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated 05/04/23, directed staff to administer Haldol 3 milligrams by mouth at 09:00AM and 09:00 PM daily for diagnosis of schizophrenia. Review of R60's EHR for May 2023 and June 2023, lacked evidence of behavior monitoring, and lacked evidence staff monitored for adverse side effects of the administration of Haldol. On 06/27/23 at 07:45AM, observation revealed R60 sat on a dining chair in the dining room with no behaviors noted. On 06/26/23 at 08:40AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G verified the lack of documentation or monitoring of adverse reactions or behaviors for the use of the Haldol. On 06/27/23 at 09:10AM, Administrative Nurse D verified the facility lacked documentation and monitoring of the resident for behaviors and potential side effects for the use of the Haldol. The facility's undated Psychotropic Medication Use policy, documented residents receiving antipsychotic medications are to be assessed for adverse reactions and behaviors and to document on the MAR. The facility failed to ensure appropriate assessment and monitoring for R60's use of Haldol, placing the resident at risk for adverse side effects.
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 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents. Based on observation, record review and interview t...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents. Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to prevent medication administration errors for Resident (R) 10 when staff crushed and mixed his medications and placed them in R10's food. This deficient practice placed R10 at risk for adverse reactions by not receiving the appropriate amount of medications prescribed. Findings included: - R10's Electronic Medical Record (EMR), documented diagnoses of epilepsy (a disorder in which nerve cell activity in the brain is disturbed, causing seizures), bipolar disorder (a disorder with episodes of mood swings ranging from depressive lows to manic highs), and anxiety disorder (mental health disorder with feelings of worry, anxiety, or fear that interferes with daily activities). The Quarterly Minimum Date Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of seven indicating severely impaired cognition. The MDS documented R10 required extensive assistance with transfers and locomotion and rejected care one to three days of the look back period. The revised Safety Care Plan, dated 06/03/23, instructed staff to keep the resident safe if a seizure occurred and to provide seizure medication as ordered. The Physician Orders, dated 06/01/23, documented to administer the following medications: Keppra (an anticonvulsant medication to prevent seizures) 500 milligrams (mg) by mouth (PO) two times a day (BID) Docusate Sodium (stool softener medication)100mg PO BID Risperidone (antipsychotic medication) 2.5 mg PO BID Depakote (seizure medication) 125 mg capsule delayed release PO BID, Tylenol (pain medication) 500 mg PO in the evening, Zoloft ( an antidepressant medication) 100mg PO in the evening, R10's EMR lacked an order to crush and mix medications. The Nurses Note dated 06/19/23 at 07:55PM, documented R10's evening medications were crushed and mixed in his meat sandwich during the supper meal. The note recorded R10 ate half of the sandwich therefore half of R10's medications were received. The Nurses Note, dated 06/21/23 at 07:22PM, documented R10's evening medications were crushed and mixed in the tartar sauce and placed on his fish sandwich. The note further documented R10 ate half of the fish sandwich therefore he technically received half of his medication. Review of R10's Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed documentation on 06/19/23 and 06/21/23 that R10 received half of his evening medication. According to the Food and Drug Administration for the medications Keppra, Risperidone and Depakote, crushing the medications was discouraged. On 06/27/23 at 08:00AM, observation revealed R10 seated in his wheelchair at a dining table. On 06/22/23 at 08:15AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G stated, depending on R10's mood, R10's medications were sometimes crushed and placed in his food. On 06/27/23 at 09:15AM, Administrative Nurse D verified the documentation on 06/19/23 and 06/21/23, regarding R10's medications being crushed and placed in his meals. Administrative Nurse D verified this practice of medication administration was inappropriate. The undated facility policy, Medication Administration, stated medications are to be administered as prescribed by the resident's physician. All medication errors should be reported. The facility failed to administer R10's medications in an appropriate manner when staff crushed and mixed the medications without an order, and placed in the resident's food. This deficient practice placed R10 at risk for inappropriate doses of the medications and decreased effectiveness.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0804 (Tag F0804)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to prepare pureed foods (a texture-modified diet in...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 66 residents. The sample included 18 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to prepare pureed foods (a texture-modified diet in which all foods have a soft, pudding-like consistency) by methods that conserve nutritive value, flavor, and appearance for nine residents who received pureed diets placing the residents at risk for inadequate nutrition. Findings included: - On 06/22/23 at 08:35 AM, observation revealed Dietary Staff (DS) CC prepare pureed meal for nine residents. DS CC placed nine plus servings of refrigerated meatloaf into a blender, then added milk from a gallon jug, blending the mixture until desired consistency. DS CC placed the blended meat into serving pans placing additional milk on top of the mixture before placing in the oven for heating. On 06/26/23 at 02:16 PM DS BB stated DS CC should have used beef broth to puree the meat. DS BB stated the facility was getting used to using the recipes obtained recently from a consulting diet source. The pureed meat recipe instructions directed to combine beef base and water to make a broth, place portions in a sanitized food processor and to add bread and broth and to blend until smooth. The facility's Pureed policy, dated 2022, documented the actual processing of pureed food is a simple task when the right equipment and proper techniques are used. It is important to follow the recipe or any community policy/procedure regarding pureeing foods. The facility failed to prepare foods by methods that conserve palatable and nutritive value for nine residents who received a pureed diet, placing the residents at risk for inadequate nutrition.
Dec 2021 4 deficiencies
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 65 residents. The sample included 16 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to label Resident (R) 6's, and R35's insulin (hormo...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 65 residents. The sample included 16 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to label Resident (R) 6's, and R35's insulin (hormone which allows cells throughout the body to uptake glucose) pens with the date opened, expiration date and resident name in two of four medication carts. Findings included: - On 11/29/21 at 09:55 AM, observation of the North [NAME] medication cart, revealed R6's Humalog (a fast acting insulin that starts working faster and works for a shorter period of time than regular insulin) flex pen lacked a date opened, date of expiration, and resident name. On 11/29/21 at 10:10 AM, observation of the South East medication cart, revealed R35's Levemir (a long acting insulin that can work for around 24 hours or longer) flex pen lacked a date opened, date of expiration, and resident name. On 11/29/21 at 09:55 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G verified R6 received insulin daily, and the insulin flex pen lacked a date opened, a date of expiration, and/or a resident's name. On 11/29/21 at 10:10 AM, LN H stated the nurses were to date the insulin pens/vials when opened, label with the resident's name, and discard expired medications. The facility's Pen Devices for Insulin Administration policy, dated 01/11/21, documented staff would write on the label and the insulin flex pen date opened and the end date 28 days after opening. The facility failed to label and date when opened, the expiration date and resident name, R6's Humalog flex insulin pen, and R35's Levemir flex pen, placing the residents at risk for receiving ineffective medications.
CONCERN (D)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

The facility had a census of 65 residents. The sample included 16 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to prevent the development and transmission of infe...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 65 residents. The sample included 16 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to prevent the development and transmission of infection when staff failed to properly store Resident (R)29 and R30's oxygen tubing and nasal cannula (a device used to deliver supplemental oxygen or increased airflow to a person in need of respiratory help). Findings included: - On 12/01/21 at 11:25 AM, observation revealed R29 and R30's oxygen tubing and nasal cannula, coiled up, unbagged, and placed under the handle of the oxygen concentrator in the East dining room. On 12/02/21 at 11:00 AM, observation revealed R29 and R30's oxygen tubing and nasal cannula coiled up, unbagged, and placed under the handle of the oxygen concentrator in the East dining room. On 12/02/21 at 11:10 AM, Administrative Nurse H stated R29 and R30 used their oxygen continuously and the facility had enough concentrators to place one in the resident's room and another concentrator was left in the dining room for the resident's use. Administrative Nurse H stated the staff should store the resident's nasal cannula and tubing in a plastic bag when not in use. Upon request no policy was provide by the facility. The facility failed to store R29 and R30's oxygen tubing and nasal cannula in a sanitary environment, placing the resident at risk for infection.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0801 (Tag F0801)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

The facility had a census of 65 residents. The sample included 16 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to employ a full time certified dietary manager for...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 65 residents. The sample included 16 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to employ a full time certified dietary manager for 43 residents who resided in the facility and received meals from the facility kitchen. Findings included: - On 11/29/21 at 10:00 AM, observation revealed Dietary Staff (DS) BB and DS CC serving food and preparing lunch for the residents. On 11/29/21 at 10:00 AM, DS BB and DS CC stated they were co-managers of dietary for the facility and verified neither was certified by the state as a certified dietary manager. On 12/02/21 at 03:30 PM, Administrative Staff A verified the facility should have a certified dietary manager. The facility's Dietary Manager Certification policy, dated January 2021, documented the facility required the dietary manager to be a full time employee and have either a Registered Dietician license or a Dietary Certification by the state of Kansas. The facility failed to employ a full time certified dietary manager for the 64 residents who resided in the facility and received meals from the facility kitchen, placing the residents at risk for receiving inadequate nutrition.
CONCERN (E)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

The facility had a census of 65 residents. The sample included 16 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to prepare and serve food in the facility kitchen u...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 65 residents. The sample included 16 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to prepare and serve food in the facility kitchen under sanitary conditions. Findings included: - On 11/29/21 at 10:00 AM, observation in the facility kitchen revealed one large air unit above a food preparation area had blackish and gray substances on the air vents and the filter was full of blackish substance, with a small amount hanging down. Further observation revealed peeling ceiling paint around the air unit and a two-foot-long area of peeling paint over the bakery preparation area with an approximately 4-inch x 8-inch strip hanging down. The Kitchen Cleaning Schedule documented the last staff entry dated 11/08/21. Review of the facility maintenance requests for the month of November 2021 revealed no requests for cleaning the vent in the kitchen or fixing the peeling paint. On 11/29/21 at 10:00 AM, Dietary Staff CC verified the dirty air vent and peeling paint areas in the kitchen and verified the last initialed entry on the cleaning schedule was 11/08/21. On 11/29/21 at 10:10 AM, Administrative Staff A verified the peeling paint and stated maintenance staff would clean the air unit. The facility's Dietary Cleaning Procedures policy, dated January 2021, documented staff were to report any defective equipment to the environmental department. Staff were to follow and document the Kitchen Cleaning Schedule Form. Staff members were responsible for checking the cleaning schedule daily to ensure tasks scheduled for that day are performed. Filters were to be cleaned monthly. The facility failed to prepare and serve food in a sanitary kitchen for the 64 residents who resided in the facility and received their meals from the facility kitchen, placing the residents at risk for food borne illness.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • 38% turnover. Below Kansas's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s), $43,403 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 30 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $43,403 in fines. Higher than 94% of Kansas facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
  • • Grade F (38/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 38/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Apostolic Christian Home's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns APOSTOLIC CHRISTIAN HOME 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 Apostolic Christian Home Staffed?

CMS rates APOSTOLIC CHRISTIAN HOME's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 38%, compared to the Kansas average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Apostolic Christian Home?

State health inspectors documented 30 deficiencies at APOSTOLIC CHRISTIAN HOME during 2021 to 2024. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, and 28 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Apostolic Christian Home?

APOSTOLIC CHRISTIAN HOME is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 76 certified beds and approximately 54 residents (about 71% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in SABETHA, Kansas.

How Does Apostolic Christian Home Compare to Other Kansas Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Kansas, APOSTOLIC CHRISTIAN HOME's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.9, staff turnover (38%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Apostolic Christian Home?

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

Is Apostolic Christian Home Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, APOSTOLIC CHRISTIAN HOME 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 Apostolic Christian Home Stick Around?

APOSTOLIC CHRISTIAN HOME has a staff turnover rate of 38%, which is about average for Kansas nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Apostolic Christian Home Ever Fined?

APOSTOLIC CHRISTIAN HOME has been fined $43,403 across 2 penalty actions. The Kansas average is $33,513. 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 Apostolic Christian Home on Any Federal Watch List?

APOSTOLIC CHRISTIAN HOME 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.