PINNACLE PARK NURSING & REHAB CENTER

2936 GEORGIA AVENUE, SALINA, KS 67401 (785) 825-6954
For profit - Limited Liability company 60 Beds RECOVER-CARE HEALTHCARE Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
75/100
#34 of 295 in KS
Last Inspection: July 2024

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

Overview

Pinnacle Park Nursing & Rehab Center has received a Trust Grade of B, indicating it is a good option for families seeking care, though there are some areas for improvement. It ranks #34 out of 295 facilities in Kansas, placing it in the top half, and is the best facility among six in Saline County. The facility's trend is stable, with the same number of issues reported in 2022 and 2024, though it has 21 total deficiencies, including one serious incident where a resident developed a Stage 3 pressure ulcer due to inadequate preventive measures. Staffing is a relative strength, with a turnover rate of 30%, which is significantly better than the Kansas average of 48%, but the facility has not ensured annual performance evaluations for its CNAs, which could affect care quality. Additionally, while there have been no fines, recent inspection findings indicate concerns around infection control practices and the handling of soiled laundry, which pose risks for residents.

Trust Score
B
75/100
In Kansas
#34/295
Top 11%
Safety Record
Moderate
Needs review
Inspections
Holding Steady
5 → 5 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
30% turnover. Near Kansas's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Kansas facilities.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 44 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Kansas. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
Violations
⚠ Watch
21 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★★★
5.0
Overall Rating
★★★★☆
4.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2022: 5 issues
2024: 5 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
  • 5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (30%)

    18 points below Kansas average of 48%

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

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 30%

16pts below Kansas avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Chain: RECOVER-CARE HEALTHCARE

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 21 deficiencies on record

1 actual harm
Jul 2024 5 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

The facility had a census of 56 residents. The sample included 14 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to revise Resident (R)5's Care Plan to reflect her ...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 56 residents. The sample included 14 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to revise Resident (R)5's Care Plan to reflect her Hoyer lift (total body mechanical lift) transfer requirements. This deficient practice placed R5 at risk for impaired care due to uncommunicated care needs. Findings Including: - The Medical Diagnosis section within R5's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) included diagnoses of heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, major depression (major mood disorder), cognitive-communication disorder, abnormalities of gait, muscle weakness, and unsteadiness of her feet. R5's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) completed 06/21/24 noted a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 indicating mild cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated she was dependent on staff for bed mobility, transfers, toileting, dressing, bathing, and personal hygiene. The MDS indicated she was at risk for falls. The MDS noted she had two non-injury and one minor injury fall since her last assessment. R5's Functional Abilities Care Area Assessment (CAA) completed 09/26/23 indicated she required staff assistance with most of her activities of daily living (ADLs). The CAA indicated the facility will provide care-planned interventions to reduce the risks related to ADL decline. R5's Falls CAA completed 09/26/23 indicated she was at risk for falls related to her medical diagnoses and impaired balance. The CAA indicated the facility will provide care-planned interventions to reduce the risks related to ADL decline. R5's Care Plan initiated 11/12/23 indicated she required assistance with her ADLs related to her medical diagnoses and weakness. The plan indicated she required substantial to maximal assistance from staff for bathing, toileting, bed mobility, transfers, personal hygiene, and dressing. The plan indicated she used a high-back reclining wheelchair for mobility. The plan indicated she was at risk for falls. The plan instructed staff to anticipate her needs, ensure her call light was within reach, and ensure her environment remained free from spills or clutter. On 11/08/22 R5's plan indicated staff received education on transporting her in a shower chair related to a fall that occurred on 10/29/22. On 01/09/24 R5's plan was updated for fall interventions to show verbal education was provided to a bath aide to ensure R5's chair remained close while bathing for a fall that occurred on 12/28/23. On 06/03/24 R5's plan was updated to use two staff members if the resident needs to stand longer than a pivot. R5's plan lacked indication she required a Hoyer lift for transfers. On 07/23/24 at 08:00 AM R5 sat in her recliner in her room. Her call light was within reach. R5's wheelchair sat next to her bed. Her wheelchair had an auto-lock mechanism installed on it. R5 had bruising around her eyebrows and upper nose. She stated it occurred during a fall. On 07/24/24 at 08:21 AM an inspection of R5's room revealed a Hoyer lift was left placed in her room directly in front of her bed. On 07/24/24 at 10:05 AM CNA MM stated R5 was a high fall risk related to her weakness and inability to know her limitations. She stated R5 required two staff and a Hoyer lift after falling multiple times during care. She stated all direct care staff had access to view the care plans. She stated R5's Hoyer lift transfer requirements should be listed in the care plan. On 07/24/24 at 10:30 AM LN G stated R5 required two staff and a Hoyer lift for transfers due to her recent decline. She stated the care plans indicate the levels of assistance and transfer type for each resident. On 07/24/24 at 11:19 AM Administrative Nurse D stated that R5's ability to assist during care recently declined due to her weakness and physical limitations. She stated R5 required a total mechanical lift due to her inability to safely transfer. She stated that R5's plan of care indicated she was a total mechanical lift. She stated the care plans could be updated by all staff by reviewed by the interdisciplinary team. She stated fall interventions should be implemented within 48 hours of a fall or incident and revised on the care plans. The facility's Care Plan Revisions policy implemented 01/2020 indicated the facility will ensure each resident's care plan will be initiated and revised to reflect the resident's comprehensive care needs. The policy indicated the facility's interdisciplinary team will review and collaborate to provide interventions that meet the resident's care needs. The facility failed to revise R5's care plan to reflect her Hoyer lift transfer requirements. This deficient practice placed R5 at risk for impaired care due to uncommunicated care needs.
CONCERN (D)

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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

The facility had a census of 56 residents. The sample included 14 residents with seven residents reviewed for accidents and/or hazards. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 56 residents. The sample included 14 residents with seven residents reviewed for accidents and/or hazards. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure safe care practices were followed during staff-assisted care resulting in multiple preventable falls for Resident (R)5. This deficient practice placed R5 at risk for further falls and injuries. Findings Including: - The Medical Diagnosis section within R5's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) included diagnoses of heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, major depression (major mood disorder), cognitive-communication disorder, abnormalities of gait, muscle weakness, and unsteadiness of her feet. R5's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) completed 06/21/24 noted a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 indicating mild cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated she was dependent on staff for bed mobility, transfers, toileting, dressing, bathing, and personal hygiene. The MDS indicated she was at risk for falls. The MDS noted she had two non-injury and one minor injury fall since her last assessment. R5's Functional Abilities Care Area Assessment (CAA) completed 09/26/23 indicated she required staff assistance with most of her activities of daily living (ADLs). The CAA indicated the facility will provide care-planned interventions to reduce the risks related to ADL decline. R5's Falls CAA completed 09/26/23 indicated she was at risk for falls related to her medical diagnoses and impaired balance. The CAA indicated the facility will provide care-planned interventions to reduce the risks related to ADL decline. R5's Care Plan initiated 11/12/23 indicated she required assistance with her ADLs related to her medical diagnoses and weakness. The plan indicated she required substantial to maximal assistance from staff for bathing, toileting, bed mobility, transfers, personal hygiene, and dressing. The plan indicated she used a high-back reclining wheelchair for mobility. The plan indicated she was at risk for falls. The plan instructed staff to anticipate her needs, ensure her call light was within reach, and ensure her environment remained free from spills or clutter. On 11/08/22 R5's plan indicated staff received education on transporting her in a shower chair related to a fall that occurred on 10/29/22. On 01/09/24 R5's plan was updated for fall interventions to show verbal education was provided to a bath aide to ensure R5's chair remained close while bathing for a fall that occurred on 12/28/23. On 06/03/24 R5's plan was updated to use two staff members if the resident needs to stand longer than a pivot. R5's Fall During Staff Assist report completed 10/29/22 indicated R5 fell while Certified Nurses Aid (CNA) LL assisted her in the shower room. The report indicated R5's shower chair had tipped while a CNA LL attempted to provide her with a shower resulting in R5 falling to the floor. The report indicated no injuries occurred during the fall episode. R5's Fall During Staff Assist report completed 12/28/23 indicated R5 fell while CNA KK assisted with undressing her in the shower room. The report indicated R5 reported she needed to sit and could no longer stand. The report indicated the shower chair was not in reach and R5 had to be assisted to the ground. The report indicated R5 had to be laid flat on the grab and lifted with a full lift (Hoyer lift- total body mechanical lift). R5's Fall During Staff Assist report completed 05/30/24 indicated R5 fell during staff bathroom care. The report indicated R5 was standing in the bathroom holding onto the railing. The note indicated CNA T was performing care on her and R5 began to fall. The report indicated that CNA T was unable to hold R5 up and she fell backward against the staff member and then lowered to the ground. The report indicated no injuries occurred during the fall episode. R5's Fall During Staff Assist report completed 07/02/24 indicated R5 fell during staff-assisted toileting. The report indicated R5 stood and held onto the handrail in her bathroom as CNA T unfastened her brief. The report indicated R5 fell against the CNA T and then to the floor. The report indicated CNA T attempted to lift R5 back up to a standing position resulting in a second fall to the floor landing on her bottom and then right side. The note indicated R5 received a bump and bruise around her right eyebrow. No interventions were implemented related to this fall episode. R5's EMR under Progress Notes revealed a nursing note completed on 07/06/24. The note indicated the nurse walked into R5's room and found her on the floor in front of her recliner. The note indicated two direct care staff had attempted to change her incontinence brief and she slid down to the floor. The note indicated no injuries occurred during the fall episode. The report indicated R5 had to be laid flat on the ground and lifted with a full lift. The facility could not provide a fall investigation for this fall incident as requested. R5's Fall During Staff Assist report completed 07/14/24 indicated R5 fell while in her room. The report indicated R5 was pushed in her wheelchair by CNA NN and parked next to her recliner. The report indicated CNA NN left the room to get a bed pad for R5's recliner. The report indicated R5 stood up as CNA NN reentered the room. The report indicated CNA NN attempted to assist but R5 fell face-first into the recliner. The note indicated CNA NN attempted to lift R5 to a standing position but resulted in an assisted fall to the ground. The report indicated R5 had to be lowered to a lying position and transferred to the bed with a full mechanical lift. The report indicated no injuries occurred during the fall episode. No fall interventions were implemented. On 07/23/24 at 08:00 AM R5 sat in her recliner in her room. Her call light was within reach. R5's wheelchair sat next to her bed. Her wheelchair had an auto-lock mechanism installed on it. R5 had bruising around her eyebrows and upper nose. She stated it occurred during a fall. On 07/24/24 at 10:05 AM CNA MM stated R5 was a high fall risk related to her weakness and inability to know her limitations. She stated R5 required two staff and a Hoyer lift after falling multiple times during care. She stated R5 would often fall and had to be supervised closely during transfers and care. She stated R5 had weakness standing up and should not be left standing for long periods of time. On 07/24/24 at 10:30 AM LN G stated R5 required two staff and a Hoyer lift for transfers due to her recent decline. She stated R5 was at a risk for falls and was to be watched closely for care and attempts at standing from her wheelchair. She stated staff were to provide reminders and redirection for her to wait for staff assistance during transfers. On 07/24/24 at 11:19 AM Administrative Nurse D stated that R5's ability to assist during care recently declined due to her weakness and physical limitations. She stated R5 required a total mechanical lift due to her inability to safely transfer. She stated staff should be closely monitoring her during care and attempt to intervene during fall episodes. She stated the facility attempted to promote independence during care, but R5's functional abilities had gotten progressively worse. The facility's Accidents and Supervision (undated) indicated the facility would ensure each resident will be comprehensively assessed for safety and falls. The policy indicated the facility will provide sufficient staff and supervision to reduce the risks of falls and accidents. The facility failed to ensure safe care practices were followed during assisted care resulting in multiple falls for R5. This deficient practice placed R5 at risk for further falls and injuries.
CONCERN (D)

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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility reported a census of 56 residents. The sample included 14 residents with two reviewed for bowel and bladder inconti...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility reported a census of 56 residents. The sample included 14 residents with two reviewed for bowel and bladder incontinence. Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to implement individualized toileting interventions to improve Resident (R)17's bowel and bladder incontinence or prevent worsening based on his incontinence evaluation. This deficient practice placed R17 at risk for complications related to incontinence. Findings Included: - The Medical Diagnosis section within R17's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) included diagnoses of legal blindness, muscle weakness, stiffness to his right knee, unsteadiness on his feet, and lack of coordination. A review of R17's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) completed 05/20/24 noted a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating intact cognition. The MDS indicated he required partial to moderate assistance with personal hygiene, toileting, and dressing. The MDS indicated his vision was severely impaired. The MDS indicated he was frequently incontinent of bladder and occasionally incontinent of bowel with no toileting program. The MDS indicated he was at risk for skin breakdown and pressure ulcers (localized injury to the skin and/or underlying tissue usually over a bony prominence, as a result of pressure, or pressure in combination with shear and/or friction). The MDS noted he had pressure-reducing devices for his bed and chair. R17's Functional Abilities Care Area Assessment (CAA) completed 09/15/23 indicated he required assistance from staff for his activities of daily living (ADLs) related to his impaired gait, muscle weakness, and visual impairment. The CAA indicated the facility will provide care-planned interventions to reduce the risks related to ADL decline. R17 Urinary Incontinence CAA was not triggered for incontinence. R17's Care Plan initiated on 11/12/23 indicated he required assistance with his ADLs. The plan indicated he required assistance with toileting transfers. The plan indicated he was at risk for skin impairment related to bowel and bladder incontinence. The plan instructed staff to provide checks and changes to maintain dignity for urinary incontinence. The plan lacked interventions related to R17's occasional bowel incontinence. The plan instructed staff to provide peri-care after incontinence episodes. The plan lacked individualized interventions to maintain and promote R17's highest level of functioning related to incontinence. R17's EMR revealed a Bowel and Bladder assessment dated [DATE]. The assessment indicated he was incontinent of both bladder and bowel. The assessment indicated he could communicate his needs. The assessment indicated his urinary incontinence was new. The assessment noted he could void correctly without incontinence but was incontinent at least once daily. The assessment indicated he was appropriate for a toileting program and a good candidate for self-toileting. R17's EMR under Tasks revealed he had numerous episodes of bowel and bladder incontinence throughout the month of July 2024. On 07/22/24 at 10:23 AM R17 sat in his recliner in his room. R17's sensory cane rested on his television dresser across the room from him. R17 stated he received staff assistance during care but often would take himself to the restroom. He was not sure if he was placed on a toileting program but stated he often had incontinence. On 07/24/24 at 10:20 AM Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) R said most of the residents were toileted upon request or asked during care interactions. She stated the care plan should include individualized toileting interventions for some residents with incontinence. She stated she was not sure if R17 required a toileting program or interventions. She stated R17 could take himself or he asked to be taken to the restroom. On 07/24/24 at 10:31 AM Licensed Nurse (LN) G stated all residents were screened upon admission for bowel and bladder. She stated toileting interventions should be implemented on residents noted to be appropriate. She stated the care plan should be updated to reflect the toileting interventions. She stated she was not sure if R17 was provided toileting interventions or on a toileting program. On 07/24/24 at 11:19 AM Administrative Nurse D stated each resident was screened for incontinence upon admission, quarterly, annually, and anytime a change of condition occurred related to bowel and bladder. She stated the admission nurse would report the evaluation findings to the interdisciplinary team and individualized interventions would be implemented as needed. She stated each resident should be offered toileting frequently throughout the day and provided preventative skin care. The facility's Incontinence policy revised 09/09/20 indicated all residents assessed for bowel and bladder incontinence will be provided the appropriate treatment and services to prevent infections and improve incontinence to the highest extent possible. The facility failed to implement individualized toileting interventions to improve and/or maintain R17's bowel and bladder function based on his incontinence evaluation. This deficient practice placed R17 at risk for complications related to incontinence.
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0730 (Tag F0730)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

The facility identified a census of 56 residents. The sample included 14 residents and five Certified Nurse Aides (CNA) were reviewed for performance evaluations and the associated in-service training...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility identified a census of 56 residents. The sample included 14 residents and five Certified Nurse Aides (CNA) were reviewed for performance evaluations and the associated in-service training. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure five of the five CNA staff reviewed had the required yearly performance evaluations completed. This placed the residents at risk for inadequate care. Findings included: - A review of the facility's staffing list revealed the following CNAs were employed with the facility for more than 12 months: CNA 0, hired on 08/27/21, had no yearly performance evaluations upon request. CNA P, hired on 08/04/20, had no yearly performance evaluations upon request. CNA Q, hired on 12/12/22, had no yearly performance evaluations upon request. CNA R, hired on 02/21/22, had no yearly performance evaluations upon request. CNA S, hired on 05/27/23, had no yearly performance evaluations upon request. On 07/23/24 at 04:04 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated the facility was not currently up to date on performance evaluations for CNAs and said a performance plan was implemented recently to address the situation. The facility's Evaluation Process policy dated 12/01/19 documented it was the policy of the facility to review the work performance of employees with a formal written evaluation annually. The facility failed to ensure the five CNA staff reviewed had the required yearly performance evaluations completed. This placed the residents at risk for inadequate care.
CONCERN (F)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

The facility identified a census of 56 residents. The facility identified two residents on contact-based precautions and six on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP-infection control interventions design...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility identified a census of 56 residents. The facility identified two residents on contact-based precautions and six on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP-infection control interventions designed to reduce transmission of resistant organisms that employ targeted gown and glove use during high contact care). Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to follow sanitary infection control standards related to the handling of soiled laundry, hand hygiene, storage of oxygen tubing while not in use, and disinfecting of shared equipment. These deficient practices placed the residents at risk for infectious diseases. Included Findings: - On 07/22/24 at 08:00 AM an electric razor with brown shavings was laid on an EBP cart outside of Resident (R)22's room. The soiled razor was not in a container. On 07/22/24 at 08:10 AM, Certified Nursing Aide (CNA) M pushed the Hoyer (total body mechanical lift) from Resident (R)22's room into R49's room without sanitizing the Hoyer lift. CNA M did not perform hand hygiene upon leaving R22's room and before entering R49's room. On 07/22/23 at 01:28 PM, R18's oxygen cannula was wrapped around her wheelchair and was not in a sanitary container. On 07/23/24 at 08:07 AM CNA M placed R22's soiled linens directly on the floor while changing R22's bed. R22 was on EBP. CNA M did not sanitize the floor immediately after the soiled linens were picked up. On 07/23/24 at 07:08 AM two commercial washers were filled with wet clothing left from the 10:00 PM to 12:00 AM shift. Two commercial dryers had lint in the lint traps. An inspection of the soiled area of the laundry room revealed there was no personal protective equipment (PPE-gloves and gowns used in transmission-based precautions) available. On 07/24/24 at 07:51 AM CNA T pushed a resident down the 200 hall; CNA T had a dirty unbagged hospital gown in her right hand. On 07/24/24 at 07:57 AM, CNA M and CNA N donned two pairs of gloves each, and donned gowns. Neither CNA performed hand hygiene. R18, who was on contact precautions for Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA-a type of bacteria resistant to many antibiotics), laid on her bed on her back. CNA N fastened R18's brief. CNA N and CNA M rolled R18 from left to right, putting her sling underneath her. CNA M and CNA N doffed both sets of gloves. Without performing hand hygiene, CNA M and CNA N each donned clean gloves and put R18 in her wheelchair using the Hoyer lift. Wearing the same gloves, CNA N placed R18's oxygen nasal cannula into R18's nares. CNA M placed R18's urinary catheter bag underneath her wheelchair. Wearing the same gloves, CNA N brushed R18's hair and put her boots on her heels. CNA N doffed her gloves and gown and then performed hand hygiene. CNA M doffed her gloves and gown and then pushed the Hoyer lift to the hallway without sanitizing the Hoyer lift or performing hand hygiene. CNA M proceeded to walk into another room. On 07/23/24 at 07:50 AM Housekeeping Staff V stated she was unaware that laundry could not sit in the washers overnight. She stated the night laundry worker puts a load in the washers before she leaves at 12:00 AM. She stated red red-bagged laundry (indicating transmission-based precautions) was washed separately but she did not do anything different for the red-bagged laundry. She stated gloves were available to the laundry staff. Housekeeping Staff V stated there were gowns on the washer in the clean area if the gowns were needed. She stated she did assess water temperatures for any laundry including the red bagged laundry and said the temperatures were assessed by a supervisor. Housekeeping Staff V said she was unaware if the washers were monitored by temperature or by chemicals. On 07/24/24 at 08:10 AM Housekeeping Staff U stated she was unaware laundry could not sit in the washer overnight and stated that she was told laundry could sit in the washer if the seal on the washing machine wasn't broken. She stated the overnight staff did all the red-bagged laundry, and she had been trained to wear PPE when handling red-bagged laundry. On 07/24/24 at 08:16 AM CNA M stated she did not know she was supposed to clean equipment between residents or how to accomplish that but stated she would ask. CNA M stated she did forget to do hand hygiene before entering R49's room, and said she should have done hand hygiene when going from resident to resident, and when she left the residents' rooms. On 07/24/24 at 11:18 AM Administrative Nurse D stated shared equipment was to be cleaned after each resident's use. She stated oxygen tubing should always be stored in a container when not in use and each resident had their own bag on their canister and wheelchairs. Administrative D stated staff should do hand hygiene when going from resident to resident, dirty to clean, and when leaving a resident's room. The facility's Hand Hygiene, Cleaning and Disinfection of Resident -Care Equipment, Handling of Soiled Linen, Laundry, Transmission-Based Precautions policy documented the facility's undated Hand Hygiene policy documented all staff would perform proper hand hygiene procedures to prevent the spread of infection to other personnel, residents, and visitors. This applied to all staff working in all locations within the facility. The use of gloves did not replace hand hygiene. If the task requires gloves, perform hand hygiene prior to donning gloves, and immediately after removing gloves. Aligning with principles of started precautions, staff shall consider all previously worn clothing and used linens as potentially contaminated. It was the policy of this facility to handle, store, process, and transport linen in a safe and sanitary method to prevent the spread of infection. Resident-care equipment can be a source of indirect transmission of pathogens. Reusable resident-care equipment will be cleaned and disinfected to break the chain of infection. The facility staff will apply Transmission-Based Precautions (TBP), in addition to standard precautions, to residents who are known or suspected to be infected or colonized with certain infectious agents requiring additional controls to prevent transmission. The facility failed to follow sanitary infection control standards related to the handling of soiled laundry, hand hygiene, storage of oxygen tubing while not in use, and disinfecting of shared equipment. These deficient practices placed the residents at risk for infectious diseases.
Jul 2022 5 deficiencies
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 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents with five 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 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents with five reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility's consultant pharmacist failed to notify the Director of Nursing (DON), medical director, or physician of recommendations for a 14 day stop date or physician's rationale for extended use with a stop date for as needed (PRN) psychotropic medications (medications used to treat mental illness, moods, behaviors) for one sampled resident, Resident (R) 43. This placed the resident at risk for unnecessary psychotropic medications and adverse side effects. Findings included: - The Physician Order Sheet, dated 06/02/22, recorded R43 had diagnoses of end-stage renal disease (medical condition in which a person's kidneys cease functioning ), Parkinson's Disease (disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement and often includes tremors, stiffness, rigidity), major depression (mental health disorder characterized by persistent depressed mood, causing significant impairment of daily life), and anxiety (mental health disorder characterized by worry and fear that interferes with daily life). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], recorded R43 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 (cognitively intact) with no behaviors. The MDS recorded R43 required limited staff assistance with all activities of daily living (ADLs) and received scheduled antianxiety medication (medications used to calm and relax people with excessive anxiety, nervousness, and tension) seven days a week. The Medication Care Plan, dated 05/20/22, recorded R43 had frequent anxiety and restlessness related to her health problems and family concerns. The care plan directed staff to administer R43's medications as ordered by the physician, and monitor the medications for effectiveness, and/or adverse side effects. The Physician's Order, dated 01/18/22, directed staff to administer Ativan (antianxiety medication used to treat anxiety, agitation, and behavior problems) 1.0 milligrams (mg) every 6 hours PRN to R43 for anxiety. Review of R43's medical record lacked documentation the PRN Ativan had a 14 day stop date or physician's rationale for extended use with a stop date. Review of the February 2022 Medication Administration Record (MAR), recorded staff administered prn Ativan to R43 eighteen times. Review of the March 2022 MAR, recorded staff administered prn Ativan to R43 twenty-six times. The Pharmacist Medication Reviews, dated 02/10/22 and 03/12/22, lacked documentation the pharmacist addressed the 14 day stop date or a physician's rationale for extended use for R43's PRN Ativan. The Pharmacist Medication Recommendation, dated 04/13/22, requested the physician provide a rationale to continue use of R43's PRN Ativan without a stop date. The Pharmacist Medication Recommendation recorded the physician completed the rationale on 04/15/22 to continue R43's PRN Ativan without a stop date. Review of the April 2022 MAR, recorded staff administered prn Ativan to R43 nineteen times. Review of the May 2022 MAR, recorded staff administered prn Ativan to R43 sixteen times. Review of the June 2022 MAR, recorded staff administered prn Ativan to R43 fourteen times. On 06/30/22 at 07:52 AM, observation revealed R43 walked with a walker in her room and transferred herself to a recliner. On 07/06/22 at 08:47 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated the pharmacist had not addressed R43's PRN psychotropic medications without a 14 day stop date or physician's rationale for extended use with a stop date. The facility's Medication Regimen Review policy, dated 01/01/20, directed the pharmacist to ensure medication orders followed federal regulations and report irregularities to the attending physician, DON and medical director. The facility's consultant pharmacist failed to notify the Director of Nursing (DON), medical director, or physician of recommendation for a 14 day stop date or physician's rationale for extended use with a stop date forR43's PRN psychotropic medication, placing the resident at risk for unnecessary psychotropic medications and 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 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents with five 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 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents with five reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a 14 day stop date or physician's rationale for extended use with a stop date for PRN (as needed) psychotropic medication (medications that affect a person's mental state) for one sampled resident, Residents (R) 43. This placed the residents at risk for unnecessary psychotropic medications and adverse medication side effects. Findings included: - The Physician Order Sheet, dated 06/02/22, recorded R43 had diagnoses of end-stage renal disease (medical condition in which a person's kidneys cease functioning ), Parkinson's Disease (disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement and often includes tremors, stiffness, rigidity), major depression (mental health disorder characterized by persistent depressed mood, causing significant impairment of daily life), and anxiety (mental health disorder characterized by worry and fear that interferes with daily life). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], recorded R43 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 (cognitively intact) with no behaviors. The MDS recorded R43 required limited staff assistance with all activities of daily living (ADLs) and received scheduled antianxiety medication (medications used to calm and relax people with excessive anxiety, nervousness, and tension) seven days a week. The Medication Care Plan, dated 05/20/22, recorded R43 had frequent anxiety and restlessness related to her health problems and family concerns. The care plan directed staff to administer R43's medications as ordered by the physician, and monitor the medications for effectiveness, and/or adverse side effects. The Physician's Order, dated 01/18/22, directed staff to administer Ativan (antianxiety medication used to treat anxiety, agitation, and behavior problems) 1.0 milligrams (mg) every 6 hours PRN to R43 for anxiety. Review of R43's medical record lacked documentation the PRN Ativan had a 14 day stop date or physician's rationale for extended use with a stop date. Review of the February 2022 Medication Administration Record (MAR), recorded staff administered prn Ativan to R43 eighteen times. Review of the March 2022 MAR, recorded staff administered prn Ativan to R43 twenty-six times. The Pharmacist Medication Reviews, dated 02/10/22 and 03/12/22, lacked documentation the pharmacist addressed the 14 day stop date or a physician's rationale for extended use for R43's PRN Ativan. The Pharmacist Medication Recommendation, dated 04/13/22, requested the physician provide a rationale to continue use of R43's PRN Ativan without a stop date. The Pharmacist Medication Recommendation recorded the physician completed the rationale on 04/15/22 to continue R43's PRN Ativan without a stop date. Review of the April 2022 MAR, recorded staff administered prn Ativan to R43 nineteen times. Review of the May 2022 MAR, recorded staff administered prn Ativan to R43 sixteen times. Review of the June 2022 MAR, recorded staff administered prn Ativan to R43 fourteen times. On 06/30/22 at 07:52 AM, observation revealed R43 walked with a walker in her room and transferred herself to a recliner. On 06/30/22 at 02:22 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G stated R43 was alert and oriented, had frequent anxiety and restlessness, and would request staff administer her PRN Ativan. On 07/06/22 at 08:47 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated the facility had not addressed R43's PRN psychotropic medications without a 14 day stop date or physician's rationale for extended use with a stop date. The facility's Psychotropic Drug policy, dated 01/01/20, directed staff to ensure PRN psychotropic medications had a 14 day stop date, or a physician's rationale for extended use with a stop date. The facility failed to ensure a 14 day stop date or physician's rationale for extended use with a stop date for R43's PRN psychotropic medications, placing the resident at risk for unnecessary psychotropic medications and adverse medication side effects.
CONCERN (E)

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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

The facility had a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure hazardous chemicals were securely stored. ...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure hazardous chemicals were securely stored. This deficient practice placed four cognitively impaired, independently mobile residents at risk for accidents. Findings included: - On 06/29/22 at 08:00 AM, observation revealed a sink in the dining room, by the kitchen, with a broken lock on the door under the sink. A one-quart sized spray bottle with at least 50 milliliters (ml) of orangish colored fluid, without a label was in the unsecured cabinet. On 06/29/22 at 08:00 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M stated she did not know what was in the spray bottle and verified it should be thrown away. On 06/29/22 at 08:12 AM, observation revealed the 100 hall shower room unlocked and a one-quart sized spray bottle of yellowish liquid with a label stating C-diff solution tablets, Keep Out of Reach of Children, hazardous to humans and animals. unsecured. On 06/29/22 at 08:12 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M verified the shower room door should have been locked and stated the door stayed unlocked until physically pulled shut. 06/30/22 07:47 AM, Administrative Staff A verified the cleaning chemicals should have been locked up. The Accidents and Supervision policy, dated 11/2017, documented the facility would establish and utilize a systemic approach to address resident risk and environmental hazards to minimize the likelihood of accidents. All staff were to observe for potential hazards in the environment and develop interventions. The facility failed to ensure hazardous chemicals were inaccessible to residents, placing the four independently mobile, cognitively impaired residents at risk for accidents.
CONCERN (E)

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

The facility had a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to provide an accurate reconciliation of controlled ...

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 provide an accurate reconciliation of controlled drugs at the end of daily work shifts. This placed residents at risk for misappropriation of medications by staff. Findings included: - On 06/29/22 at 08:02 AM, observation on the 100-hall medication cart revealed staff counted and signed the Controlled Drug Record flow sheet for one work shift on 06/01/22, 06/08/22 and 06/11/22 (three times out of a possible 58 work shifts). On 06/29/22 at 08:15 AM, observation on the 200-hall medication cart revealed staff counted and signed the Controlled Drug Record flow sheet for one work shift on 06/02/22, 06/11/22, 06/13/22, 06/23/22 and 06/29/22 (five times out of a possible 58 work shifts). On 06/22/22 at 08:15 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated two staff should count the narcotic drugs every shift and sign the Controlled Drug Record flow sheet to verify the narcotic count was accurate. On 07/06/22 at 08:44 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated two staff should count the narcotic drugs every shift and sign the Controlled Drug Record flow sheet to verify the narcotic count was accurate. The Controlled Substance Administration & Accountability, policy, dated 01/01/20, directed staff to follow safeguards/guidelines to prevent loss or diversion of narcotic medications. The Controlled Substance Administration & Accountability, policy directed two staff to conduct an audit of narcotic medications at the end of every shift and sign the Controlled Drug Record flow sheet to verify the narcotic count was accurate. The facility failed to provide an accurate reconciliation of controlled drugs at the end of daily work shifts, placing residents at risk for misappropriation of medications by staff.
CONCERN (F)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

The facility had a census of 58 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to store, distribute, and serve food in accordance w...

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 store, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the 58 residents who resided in the facility and received their meals from the facility kitchen , when the facility kitchen failed to ensure clean and sanitary food prep areas, failed to dispose of expired food items, and had expired Parts Per Million (PPM-sanitizer strength test) strips. This placed the 58 residents at risk for foodborne illness. Findings included: - On 06/29/22 at 8:00 AM, observation revealed in the following in the kitchen: The walk-in refrigerator had six uncovered hamburger patties on a tray, 21 hotdogs in an unsealed plastic container, and three uncovered slices of cheese on a plastic container. The floor had clear standing water underneath the air conditioner to the wall underneath the three-well sink, approximately five feet (ft) long, two ft wide, by 1/4 inch (in) deep. The white upright freezer had approximately one half inch of ice all over the inside of the freezer. Numerous areas of varying sizes of brownish substance was observed on the wall above and below the sink located by the entrance door. The pipes underneath the sink located by the entrance door, and underneath the three-well sink had a blackish substance on them. The mopboard all around the kitchen had a brownish substance on it. On 06/29/22 at 8:15 AM, observation revealed staff conducted a PPM using a bottle of strips expired on 06/01/22. On 06/29/22 at 08:35 AM, Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) CC verified the findings in the walk-in refrigerator and stated staff should not place food items uncovered, unlabeled or undated in the refrigerator. Observation revealed CDM CC discarded the food items. On 07/06/22 at 11:41 AM, CDM BB verified the issues in the kitchen and stated kitchen staff had a daily cleaning schedule and should follow it. CDM BB verified the PPM strips were expired and staff should not use them to test the PPM of the dishwasher water. The Kitchen Cleaning Schedule documented daily tasks the cooks, dietary aides, and dishwasher should complete. The facility's Food Storage Policy, dated 03/21, documented sufficient storage facilities would be provided to keep foods safe, wholesome and appetizing. All containers must be legible and accurately labeled and dated. Food would be stored at appropriate temperatures and by methods designed to prevent contamination or cross contamination. The facility's General Sanitation of Kitchen Policy, dated 05/18/17, documented food and nutrition services staff would maintain the sanitation of the kitchen through compliance with a written, comprehensive cleaning schedule. The facility to store, distribute, and serve food, in accordance with professional standards for food service safety, This placed the 58 residents who resided at the facility and received food from the facility kitchen at risk for receiving a foodborne illness.
Jan 2021 11 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents with five reviewed for pressure ulcers. Based on obs...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents with five reviewed for pressure ulcers. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to provide interventions to prevent the development of pressure ulcers for two of five sampled residents, Resident (R) 33, who developed a Stage 3 pressure ulcer (full thickness skin loss potentially extending into the subcutaneous tissue layer, just under the skin), and R11, who developed one unstageable pressure ulcer (wound bed covered with slough,dead tissue that may be white, tan, or yellow or eschar,a dry dark scab). Findings included: - R33's Physician Order Sheet, dated 12/06/20, documented diagnoses of diarrhea, history of rectal or anal cancer, stasis dermatitis (skin inflammation in the lower legs caused by fluid buildup), and tinea cruris (fungal infection in the skin of the genitals, inner thighs, and buttocks). R33's Admission/5-Day Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, indicating intact cognition. The MDS documented the resident required extensive assistance of two staff for transfers and toilet use, extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility and personal hygiene, and supervision with one staff assistance for eating. The MDS documented R33 was frequently incontinent of urine and always incontinent of bowel. The MDS documented R33 had a Stage 2 pressure ulcer (partial thickness skin loss into but no deeper than the dermis, outer layer of skin) present on admission. The MDS documented the resident had pressure reducing devices for his chair and bed, required nutrition or hydration program interventions for skin problems, was not on a turning/repositioning program, and required no pressure ulcer/injury care. The Pressure Ulcer Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 12/20/20, documented the resident was at risk for pressure related skin breakdown related to decreased functioning with activities of daily living (ADLs) and incontinent of bladder and bowel. The Basic Care Plan, dated 12/16/20, documented R33 was dependent for meeting his emotional, intellectual, physical, and social needs related to cognitive deficits and was focused on the activities that R33 enjoyed. The care plan lacked interventions for prevention of pressure ulcers. The Braden Scale, (predicts risk for pressure ulcers) dated 12/14/20, documented a score of 11 (high risk). The Skin Integrity Care Plan, dated 01/06/21, directed staff to educate the resident, resident's family, and caregivers to the causes of skin breakdown including transfer/positioning requirements, good nutrition, and frequent repositioning. The care plan further directed staff to avoid positioning R33 on his left buttock, to monitor nutritional status, and obtain lab work. The care plan documented a Stage 3 pressure ulcer to left buttock and directed staff to apply treatment as ordered. The ADL Assistance Care Plan, dated 01/06/21, recorded the resident required extensive staff assistance with bed mobility, and directed staff to turn and reposition the resident every two hours and as necessary. The admission Skin Assessment dated 12/14/20, documented R33 had a healing sore to the left gluteal fold measuring 1 centimeter (cm) x 0.5 cm. The Skin/Wound Note, dated 12/18/20, documented redness and an open area to inner left buttocks area. Staff cleaned, dried, and applied A&D ointment (ointment to treat minor skin irritations). No measurements documented in the note. The Weekly Skin Assessment Note, dated 12/23/20, documented no new areas of concern. The Nurse's Note, dated 12/24/20, documented a pea sized open area to left buttock and staff applied a foam dressing to the area. No measurements documented in the note. The Weekly Skin Assessment, dated 12/28/20, documented skin intact and no new skin areas identified. The Weekly Skin Assessment, dated 01/04/21, documented redness to left buttock. The Skin/Wound Note, dated 01/05/21 at 02:47 PM, documented R33 had a declining area to his left buttock, treatments were not effective due to loose stools. Staff informed the Director of Nursing (DON) and the resident's family of area. Air mattress placed to bed, Roho cushion (pressure relieving cushion) placed in wheelchair, and repositioning program implemented. Staff called R33's physician and requested a multivitamin with minerals, Prostat (protein supplement), and Vitamin C and awaited a return call. The Wound Note, dated 01/05/21 at 03:13 PM, documented a Stage 3 pressure ulcer to left gluteal fold that measured 1.76 cm x 0.7 cm x 0.2 cm with 70% epithelial (the thin tissue layer forming the outer layer of the body's surface) and 30% slough. Staff notified the primary care physician of the wound and he gave orders to apply skin prep (protective solution to protect good skin from adhesive) to peri wound, silver alginate (natural fiber dressing that absorbs drainage and forms a gel-like covering over the wound) to wound bed, cover with foam dressing, and change dressing daily. Staff would request orders for Prostat, Vitamin C, and multivitamin for wound healing. Staff would place the resident on a turning and repositioning program and air mattress. The note documented staff educated the resident about repositioning program to be implemented and placed a Roho cushion in the resident's wheelchair. The note documented staff continued to monitor area with cares and would reassess. Awaited return call for nutritional supplements. The Skin/Wound Note, dated 01/12/21, documented the Stage 3 pressure ulcer was 100% closed. On 01/07/21 at 01:30 PM, observation revealed Licensed Nurse (LN) removed the old foam wound dressing revealing a moderate amount of bright bloody drainage. Observation revealed the wound tear drop shaped and open, with a red, beefy wound bed. LN H cleansed the wound with wound cleaning solution, applied skin prep to the peri-wound, applied Silver alginate to the wound bed, and covered with a new foam dressing. On 01/07/21 at 01:45 PM, LN H stated R33 was very incontinent of stool. When R33 came to this facility he had no appetite and had an area to his left buttock that had just healed, but no open areas. After he obtained the pressure ulcer, the facility placed a Roho cushion in his wheelchair, started a turning/repositioning schedule when he was in bed, obtained a new mattress with a special overlay, and started him on Prostat, Vitamin C, and a multivitamin for wound healing . On 01/11/21 at 09:02 AM, LN I stated R33 did not have any pressure relieving interventions prior to developing the pressure ulcer. Staff were going in and checking and changing his incontinent brief, so he had been repositioned some, and R33 was able to reposition himself if he wanted to. On 01/12/21 at 09:56 AM, LN HH stated that she had performed the admission skin assessment and R33 had no open areas to his buttocks. He did have an area of newly healed skin to his right buttock that measure 1 cm x 0.5 cm. It was healthy pink skin but fragile. On 01/12/21 at 01:48 PM, CNA P stated she and another CNA toileted and showered R33 on 12/24/20. CNA P stated when she wiped the resident's buttocks the wipe was bloody and there was an open area. CNA P stated she informed the nurse and the nurse placed a foam dressing to the open area. On 01/12/21 at 03:46 PM, LN K stated her regional nurse consultant performed the admission MDS and documented a Stage 2 pressure ulcer. LN K contacted the regional nurse consultant by email and was told she got her information from the hospital's admission packet. The packet documented a Stage 2 pressure ulcer to the right superior buttock. On 01/12/21 at 03:50 PM, LN H stated if she would have known R33 had a pressure ulcer on admission she would have ensured pressure relieving measures were in place. LN H stated the usual protocol for any open areas was to report them to her upon finding them, document the measurements, and implement interventions. LN H stated she did not know why the nurses who documented the previous open areas did not inform her of them or document them better and did not know how the Weekly Skin Assessments did not show that there were any areas of concern. On 01/12/21 at 04:28 PM, LN L stated she was informed on 12/24/20 that the resident had an open area to his left buttock. LN L stated she did not measure the area and did not inform the wound care nurse about the area. On 01/12/21 at 10:12 PM, LN GG stated she found an open area to the left buttock on 12/18/20 at 04:39 AM that measured 2.0 cm x 0.5 cm. LN GG stated she notified the charge nurse the next morning by leaving her night sheet on the charge nurse's desk and also gave verbal report about the open area to the morning nurse that was taking over for her. On 01/12/21 at 04:04 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated R33 did not have a Stage 2 pressure ulcer prior to his admission to the facility. After reviewing the resident's admission documentation Administrative Nurse D stated the facility missed it and if she had known she would have ensured that interventions were in place to ensure R33 did not obtain any pressure ulcers. Administrative Nurse D stated the nurses that found the open areas to R33's left buttock should have notified her or the wound care nurse about them and documented the measurements and interventions in the nurse's notes. The facilities Pressure Injury Prevention and Management policy, dated 01/01/20, documented in order to prevent the formation of avoidable pressure injuries and to promote healing of existing pressure injuries that facility will implement evidence-based interventions by implementing individualized interventions that will address specific factors identified in the resident's risk assessment and skin assessment; prevention devices will be utilized in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations; interventions will be documented in the care plan and communicated to all staff; licensed nurses will conduct a pressure injury risk assessment, using the Braden Scale, on resident's upon admission/readmission, weekly times four weeks, then quarterly; and licensed nurses will perform assessments of pressure injuries and ensure the assessments are documented in wound rounds or in Skin/Wound Portal in Point Click Care. The staging of pressure injuries will be clearly identified. The facility failed to implement individualized interventions for R33 to prevent pressure ulcers, failed to adequately monitor the resident's skin condition, and failed to document and communicate R33's open areas to his left buttocks, placing the resident at risk for worsening pressure areas. - R11's Physician's Order Sheet, dated 12/08/20, documented diagnoses of degenerative changes to one or many joints characterized by swelling and pain, vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion caused by decreased blood flow to the brain), anemia (condition without enough healthy red blood cells to carry adequate oxygen to body tissues), and cerebrovascular disease (disorder that affect the blood vessels and blood supply to the brain). R11's Annual MDS, dated 03/26/20 documented a BIMS of three, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS documented R11 required two staff extensive assistance with transfers and toileting, extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, dressing, personal hygiene, and bathing, and independent with staff supervision for eating. The MDS documented the resident had no weight loss or difficulty eating, and no pressure ulcers. R11's Quarterly MDS, dated 12/09/20, documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS recorded R11 had long and short-term memory problems and severely impaired decision-making process. R11 required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, toilet use, personal hygiene, and bathing, supervision of one staff for eating and locomotion on the unit, no weight loss, no difficulty eating, and at risk for pressure ulcers. The MDS documented the resident had no pressure ulcers, and had a pressure relieving devices for the bed and chair. The Pressure Ulcer/Injury CAA, dated 03/26/20, documented R11 was at risk for pressure related skin breakdown and required extensive assistance with bed mobility, dressing, hygiene, and bathing, total staff assistance with toileting and transfers. The CAA documented R11 was non-ambulatory, required limited assistance with locomotion, and used a wheelchair for mobility. The CAA documented R11 was incontinent of bowel and bladder and unable to voice the need for elimination. The CAA directed staff to turn and reposition R11 with rounds if needed, monitor skin condition as needed, and perform weekly skin checks. The 01/07/21 update directed staff to apply an air mattress to the resident's bed and Roho (pressure cushion) to the resident's wheelchair. The Skin Integrity Care Plan, dated 01/03/21 documented R11 was at risk for alterations in skin integrity related to decreased mobility and fragile skin. The care plan directed staff to educate R11, family, and caregivers as to causes of skin breakdown including transfer/repositioning requirements, good nutrition, and frequent repositioning. The care plan directed staff to ensure use of pressure redistribution surface to bed and chair, to assess skin during routine cares, and encourage repositioning assisting if R11 was unable to himself. The Skin Integrity Care Plan, dated 01/07/21 documented R11 had an unstageable pressure ulcer to the left inner buttock and directed staff to follow treatment as ordered. The Braden Scale, dated 06/26/20 and 09/26/20 , documented a score of 12 (high risk). The Weekly Skin Check, dated 12/28/20, documented no new skin concerns, various bruises, and skin tears in various stages of healing. The Weekly Skin Check, dated 01/05/21, documented no new skin areas of concern. The Skin/Wound Assessment, dated 01/07/21 documented an unstageable pressure ulcer to the right buttock that measured 1.16 cm x 0.65 cm x 0.1 cm. The Skin/Wound Note, dated 01/07/21, documented the resident had an open area to the right inner buttock that measured 1.2 cm x 0.6 cm x 0.1 cm. The note documented R11 was incontinent of bowel and bladder, staff provided incontinence care every 2-3 hours, and repositioned every 2-3 hours while in bed at night and as needed. The note documented R11 was combative with staff at times and had numerous bruises in different stages of healing to bilateral arms. Therapy gave the resident a new wheelchair with a new cushion this week. The Nurses Note, dated 01/07/21, documented the facility had placed a Roho cushion to R11's wheelchair and had ordered an air mattress. The air mattress was put in place on 01/11/21. The facility placed R11 on a turning/repositioning schedule of being laid down after meals and the every 2 hours while in bed on 01/07/21. The Nurses Note, dated 01/07/21, documented R11's physician assessed the resident and recommended discussion with resident's family to admit to hospice care. Family would like R11 to finish his skilled days, then reassess, and proceed with hospice after re-evaluating. The Nurse's Note, dated 01/07/21, documented the physician ordered dressing changes to the right inner buttock every three days, cleanse area to right inner buttock with wound cleanser, apply skin prep, cover with Duoderm (foam dressing) and administer liquid protein 30 milliliters (ml) twice a day, Thera tablet (multi vitamin) 1 tablet daily, and Vitamin C 500 milligrams (mg) daily. On 01/07/21 at 01:50 PM, observation revealed CNA O and CNA P checked R11's incontinent brief. After CNA O cleaned resident buttocks observed a pressure ulcer on the right buttock. Staff notified LN H who came to R11's room, cleaned the area, applied skin prep to the peri wound, and covered the wound with a foam dressing. The wound measured 1.16 cm x 0.65 cm x 0.1 cm, wound covered with yellow slough and peri wound purplish/red in color all the way around the wound. On 01/11/21 at 08:51 AM, LN I stated the facility performed weekly skin assessments and assessed the skin during showers two times a week. R11 was able to turn and reposition some in the bed, once up in the wheelchair he stayed up from breakfast until after lunch and then will lay down after lunch. LN I stated R11 had a pressure relieving mattress and a Roho (pressure relieving cushion) cushion in his wheelchair. On 01/11/21 at 01:50 PM, CNA O stated she previously reported the skin area to LN Land stated she always reported any bumps, rashes, bruises, or open areas to her nurse, the charge nurse, or the wound care nurse. CNA O stated she should have notified the wound care nurse when she found the area. On 01/11/21 at 04:30 PM, LN H stated she felt the pressure ulcer came from him constantly scooching around in his wheelchair. R11 had a foam cushion in his wheelchair and we have since changed it to a Roho cushion. On 01/12/21 at 04:15 PM, LN L stated she saw the wound to R11's right buttocks on 01/04/21. LN L stated she told LN H about it and LN H said she would go later and look at it and put a patch on it. LN L stated she did not measure the wound because she thought LN H wound do that when she looked at it. On 01/12/21 at 03:21 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated she heard R11 had an open area to his buttocks and supposedly the nurse who found it said she told me about it the same day, but I don't recall her telling me. The nurse should have documented the area, told the wound nurse about the area so interventions could have been put in place the same day. The facilities Pressure Injury Prevention and Management policy, dated 01/01/20, documented in order to prevent the formation of avoidable pressure injuries and to promote healing of existing pressure injuries that facility will implement evidence-based interventions by implementing individualized interventions that will address specific factors identified in the resident's risk assessment and skin assessment; prevention devices will be utilized in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations; interventions will be documented in the care plan and communicated to all staff; licensed nurses will conduct a pressure injury risk assessment, using the Braden Scale, on resident's upon admission/readmission, weekly times four weeks, then quarterly; and licensed nurses will perform assessments of pressure injuries and ensure the assessments are documented in wound rounds or in Skin/Wound Portal in Point Click Care. The staging of pressure injuries will be clearly identified. The facility failed to implement individualized interventions for R11 to prevent pressure ulcers, failed to adequately monitor the resident's skin condition, and failed to document and communicate R11's open areas to his left buttocks, placing the resident at risk for worsening pressure areas. R11 developed an unstageable pressure ulcer.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0582 (Tag F0582)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 with three residents reviewed for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Beneficiary Liability notices. Based on record revi...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 with three residents reviewed for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Beneficiary Liability notices. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide the Advanced Beneficiary Notice (ABN) CMS Form 10055 for skilled services to the resident or their representative for three of three sampled residents, Resident (R) 26, R30, and R8. Findings included: - The Medicare ABN informed the beneficiary that Medicare may not pay for future skilled therapy and provided a cost estimate for continued services. The form included an option for the beneficiary to (1) receive specified services listed, and bill Medicare for an official decision on payment. I understand if Medicare does not pay, I would be responsible for payment, but could appeal to Medicare. (2) receive therapy listed, but do not bill Medicare, I am responsible for payment of services. (3) I do not want the listed services. The facility lacked documentation staff provided R26 (or their representative) ABN Form 10055 when the resident's skilled services ended 12/25/20. The facility provided the resident or representative a facility generated form which lacked a cost estimate for continued services. The facility lacked documentation staff provided R30 (or their representative) ABN Form 10055 when the resident's skilled services ended 12/25/20. The facility provided the resident or representative a facility generated form which lacked a cost estimate for continued services. The facility lacked documentation staff provided R8 (or their representative) ABN Form 10055 when the resident's skilled services ended 12/09/20. The facility provided the resident or representative a facility generated form which lacked a cost estimate for continued services. On 01/11/21 at 01:31 PM, Social Service Staff (SS) X verified the facility had not provided the cost estimate for continued services and had not used the specific CMS Form 10055. On 01/12/21 at 11:30 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated she expected staff to use the proper forms when providing beneficiary notices. The facility's Advance Beneficiary Notice policy, dated 11/01/19, documented when services are being terminated CMS Form 10055 should be issued to the resident or representative. The facility failed to provide R26, R8, and R30, or their representative, with the appropriate non-coverage notice and cost estimate for further services, placing the resident at risk for making uninformed decisions regarding skilled services.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0655 (Tag F0655)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents with five reviewed for pressure ulcers. Based on obs...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents with five reviewed for pressure ulcers. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide a baseline care plan on admission to include skin issues and interventions to prevent the development of pressure ulcers for one of five sampled residents, Resident (R) 33, who was admitted to the facility with a Stage 2 pressure ulcer (partial thickness skin loss into but no deeper than the dermis, outer layer of skin). Findings included: - R33's Physician Order Sheet, dated 12/06/20, documented diagnoses of diarrhea, history of rectal or anal cancer, stasis dermatitis (skin inflammation in the lower legs caused by fluid buildup), and tinea cruris (fungal infection in the skin of the genitals, inner thighs, and buttocks). R33's Admission/5-Day Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, indicating intact cognition. The MDS documented the resident required extensive assistance of two staff for transfers and toilet use, extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility and personal hygiene, supervision with one staff assistance for eating, and frequently incontinent of urine and always incontinent of bowel. The MDS documented R33 had a Stage 2 pressure ulcer present on admission, pressure reducing devices for his chair and bed, nutrition or hydration program interventions for skin problems, not on a turning/repositioning program, and no pressure ulcer/injury care. The Pressure Ulcer Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 12/20/20, documented the resident at risk for pressure related skin breakdown related to decreased functioning with activities of daily living (ADLs) and incontinent of bladder and bowel. R33's Basic Care Plan, dated 12/16/20, documented R33 was dependent for meeting his emotional, intellectual, physical, and social needs related to cognitive deficits and focused on the activities that R33 enjoyed. The Braden Scale, (predicts risk for pressure ulcers) dated 12/14/20, documented a score of 11 (high risk). The admission Skin Assessment dated 12/14/20, documented R33 had a healing sore to the left gluteal fold measuring 1 centimeter (cm) x 0.5 cm. On 01/07/21 at 01:30 PM, observation revealed Licensed Nurse (LN) removed the old foam wound dressing from the left gluteal wound, revealing a moderate amount of bright bloody drainage. Observation revealed the wound tear drop shaped and open, with a red, beefy wound bed. LN H cleansed the wound with wound cleaning solution, applied skin prep to the peri-wound, applied Silver alginate to the wound bed, and covered with a new foam dressing. On 01/12/21 at 09:45 AM, LN K stated she initiated a basic care plan after admission, but it was not a Baseline Care Plan. On 01/12/21 at 04:04 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated R33's baseline care plan should have been completed within 48 hours after his admission to the facility. The facility's Baseline Care Plan policy, dated 02/01/20, documented the facility will develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care. The baseline care plan will be developed within 48 hours of a resident's admission and include: initial goals based on admission orders, physician's orders, dietary orders, therapy orders, social services orders, and PASARR recommendations if applicable. The admitting nurse or supervising nurse on duty, shall gather information from the admission physical assessment, hospital transfer information, physician orders, and discussion with the resident and resident representative if applicable. Interventions shall be initiated that address the resident's current needs including: any health and safety concerns to prevent decline or injury, such as elopement, fall, or pressure injury risk. Supervising nurse shall verify within 48 hours that a baseline care plan has been developed. The facility failed to implement a baseline care plan for R33 that included skin issues and interventions to prevent the development of pressure ulcers, placing the resident at risk for inappropriate care.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0661 (Tag F0661)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents. Based on record review and interview the facility failed to complete a discharge summary which included a recapitulation of...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents. Based on record review and interview the facility failed to complete a discharge summary which included a recapitulation of the resident's stay, summary of the resident's status, and post-discharge plan of care and instructions for one sampled resident, Resident (R)40. Findings Included: - The Progress Note, dated 11/18/20 at 08:53 AM, recorded R40 discharged on this date, see full assessment for post discharge services and recapitulation of stay. The facility's Discharge Assessment and Education Form, dated 11/08/20, recorded R40's vital signs, and Activities Summary. Continued review of the discharge assessment revealed the following sections not completed: Discharge Location Responsible Party/Parties Family/Friend Support Physician/Physicians Information Pharmacy Information Discharge Services (home health, nursing, therapy, meals, transportation) Medical Equipment/supplies Nursing Home Contact Recapitulation of Stay (therapies, labs, nursing, dietary, social services) Post Discharge Follow-Up Cares (physician, therapy, treatments, labs) Education (medications, treatments, disease/illness management) Advanced Directives (copies included) - advanced directives, living will, care plan, discharge instructions On 01/11/21 at 01:05 PM, Social Service (SS) X stated R40 discharged to home after recovery and rehab at the facility. SS X stated she completes the Social Service summary on the discharge form, and nursing staff completes the remaining information for the resident's discharge. On 01/11/21 at 01:45 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated R40 discharged to home after receiving rehab services at the facility. Administrative Nurse D verified staff should have completed Discharge Assessment and Education Form, and provided information to R40, when discharged , to include in her medical record. The facility's undated Discharge Summary and Plan of Care policy directed staff to ensure a discharge planning process in place to address resident discharge goals and needs. The discharge summary includes caregiver support, medical home services, physician follow-up care, medications, medical equipment, labs, and education for disease/illness/injury management. The facility failed to complete a discharge summary for R40 that included a recapitulation of the resident's stay, summary of the resident's status, and post-discharge plan of care and instructions, placing the resident at risk for medical problems.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0676 (Tag F0676)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - R20's Annual MDS, dated 10/09/20, documented the resident had a BIMS score of three, indicating severe cognitive impairment. T...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - R20's Annual MDS, dated 10/09/20, documented the resident had a BIMS score of three, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS documented the resident required extensive assistance with ADLs and it was very important for her to choose between a tub bath, shower, bed bath, or sponge bath. The ADL Care Plan, dated 10/29/20, documented the resident required extensive staff assistance with showers and instructed staff to provide the resident showers twice a week. The care plan instructed staff to avoid scrubbing and pat dry sensitive skin. The Bathing Schedule Sheet lacked the resident's name on the sheet. The October 2020 Bathing Record documented the resident received a shower on the following days: 10/06 10/09 10/13 10/20 (6 days) 10/23 10/27 10/30 The December 2020 Bathing Record documented the resident received a shower on the following days: 12/1 12/9 (7 days) 12/18 (8 days) 12/29 (10 days) The January 1-8, 2021 Bathing Record documented the resident received a shower on the following day: 01/05 (6 days) On 01/07/21 at 08:02 AM, observation revealed the resident sat in a wheelchair at the dining room table with greasy hair. On 01/12/21 at 08:02 AM, observation revealed the resident had greasy hair and sleep (eye discharge) in both eyes. On 01/12/21 at 08:02 AM, CNA N verified the resident was not on the bathing schedule sheet and the resident should receive a shower on Tuesday and Friday mornings. CNA N stated when the facility had an outbreak of COVID-19 (highly contagious respiratory infection) residents missed their showers due to lack of staff. On 01/12/21 at 09:00 AM, Administrative Nurse D verified R20's lack of showers and stated residents should receive a shower twice a week or as care planned. The facility's undated Bathing a Resident policy instructed staff to assist the resident with showering as needed. The facility failed to provide R20 bathing as care planned, placing the resident at risk for poor personal hygiene. The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents, with four reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide necessary bathing to maintain appropriate grooming and personal hygiene for three of four sampled residents, Resident (R) 20, R 25 and R27. Findings included: - R25's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], recorded the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 (cognitively intact) with disruptive behaviors. The MDS recorded R25 incontinent of bowel and urine, required extensive staff assistance with personal hygiene, and bathing activity did not occur during the seven day assessment period. The ADL Care Plan, dated 12/10/20, recorded R25 required extensive staff assistance with dressing, grooming, and bathing. The care plan directed staff to shower R25 two times a week, and offer a bed bath if she refused the scheduled shower. The facility's Bathing Schedule, dated 01/11/21, directed staff to provide R25 showers on Tuesday and Friday. The facility's Bathing Report, dated 10/01/20 to 01/11/21 (103 days), recorded R25 received showers on the following days: 10/02/20 10/06/20 10/21/20 (14 days) 11/10/20 (19 days) 01/06/21 (56 days) 01/07/21 On 01/07/21 at 08:15 AM, observation revealed R25 sat in her wheelchair while staff propelled her to the dining room. On 01/11/21 at 09:40 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M stated the facility had two bath aides and each bath aide provided showers for residents on assigned halls. CNA M stated she was not aware of a printed bathing schedule and she used a communication board in the shower room to schedule residents' showers. CNA M stated residents usually received showers two times a week unless the resident refused or not available (illness, out of building, activities). CNA M stated she recorded resident refusals or not available on the bathing report in the computer, but did not report the resident's missed shower to the charge nurse or administrative nurse. CNA M stated staff offered residents, who missed showers, alternate times and days to shower. On 01/11/21 at 01:58 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G stated bath aides provided most of the residents' showers, residents usually showered two times a week, and residents should receive showers as scheduled. LN G stated staff had not reported resident's missed showers due to refusals or not available. On 01/12/21 at 10:03 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated the facility's two bath aides provided most of the residents' showers, and recorded the information on the bathing record. Administrative Nurse A stated residents usually showered two times a week (less during the Covid-19 (highly contagious respiratory infection) outbreak), and staff should report missed showers to the charge nurse to ensure alternate times and dates were offered to complete the resident's shower. The facility's undated Bathing a Resident policy directed staff to assist residents as needed with bathing to ensure proper hygiene and prevent skin issues. The facility failed to provide R25 necessary bathing to maintain appropriate grooming and personal hygiene, placing the resident at risk for infections and skin problems. - R27's Quarterly MDS, dated 12/15/20, recorded the resident had severe cognitive impairment with inattention and disorganized thinking. The MDS recorded R27 incontinent of bowel and urine, required extensive staff assistance with personal hygiene, and bathing activity did not occur during the seven day assessment period. The ADL Plan, dated 12/18/20, recorded R27 required extensive staff assistance for dressing, grooming, and bathing. The care plan directed staff to shower R27 two times a week and as needed, and directed staff to record and report if R27 refused to shower. The facility's Bathing Schedule, dated 01/11/21, directed staff to provide R27 showers on Tuesday and Friday. The facility's Bathing Report, dated 10/01/20 to 01/11/21 (103 days), recorded R27 received showers on the following days: 10/02/20 10/06/20 10/15/20 (8 days) 10/21/20 11/03/20 (12 days) 11/10/20 12/22/20 (41 days) 01/06/21 (15 days) On 01/06/21 at 01:18 PM, observation revealed R27 rested quietly in bed on his back with the head of bed elevated. Continued observation revealed R27's beard soiled with dried food around the mouth and on his chin. On 01/11/21 at 9:40 AM, CNA M stated the facility had two bath aides, and each bath aide provided showers for residents on assigned halls. CNA M stated she was not aware of a printed bathing schedule, and she used a communication board in the shower room to schedule residents' showers. CNA M stated residents usually received showers two times a week unless the resident refused or not available (illness, out of building, activities). CNA M stated she recorded resident's refusal or not available on the bathing report in the computer, but did not report the resident's missed shower to the charge nurse or administrative nurse. CNA M stated staff offered residents, who missed showers, alternate times and days to shower. On 01/11/21 at 01:58 PM, LN G stated bath aides provided most of the residents' showers, residents usually showered two times a week, and residents should receive showers as scheduled. LN G stated staff had not reported residents missed showers due to refusals or not available. On 01/12/21 at 10:03 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated the facility's two bath aides provided most of the residents' showers, and recorded the information on the bathing record. Administrative Nurse A stated residents usually showered two times a week (less during the Covid-19 outbreak), and staff should report missed showers to the charge nurse to ensure alternate times and dates were offered to complete the resident's shower. The facility's undated Bathing a Resident policy directed staff to assist residents as needed with bathing to ensure proper hygiene and prevent skin issues. The facility failed to provide R27 necessary bathing to maintain appropriate grooming and personal hygiene, placing the resident at risk for infections and skin problems.
CONCERN (D)

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents, with four reviewed for activities of daily living (...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents, with four reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to provide necessary bathing to maintain appropriate grooming and personal hygiene for one of four sampled residents, Resident (R) 32. Findings included: - R32's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], recorded the resident had severe cognitive impairment, incontinent of bowel and urine, and required total staff assistance with personal hygiene and bathing. The ADL Care Plan, dated 12/20/20, recorded R32 required total staff assistance with dressing, grooming, and bathing. The care plan directed staff to shower R32 two times a week, and apply lotion to the resident's skin while in the shower. The facility's Bathing Schedule, dated 01/11/21, directed staff to provide R32 showers on Monday and Thursday. The facility's Bathing Report, dated 12/01/20 to 01/11/21 (42 days), recorded R32 received showers on the following days: 12/03/20 12/07/20 12/09/20 12/18/20 (8 days) 01/06/21 (18 days) On 01/07/21 at 02:00 PM, observation revealed R32 rested in bed with the head of bed elevated and did not respond to staff verbal or physical interactions. Continued observation revealed staff repositioned R32's torso and extremities, administered medications and nutritional fluids through R32's peg tube (tube surgically inserted into the stomach to provide means for nutritional fluids and medications when oral intake is not adequate or safe), and the resident continued not to respond. On 01/11/21 at 09:40 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M stated the facility had two bath aides, and each bath aide provided showers for residents on assigned halls. CNA M stated she was not aware of a printed bathing schedule, and she used a communication board in the shower room to schedule residents' showers. CNA M stated residents usually received showers two times a week unless the resident refused or not available (illness, out of building, activities). CNA M stated she recorded resident's refusal or not available on the bathing report in the computer, but did not report the resident's missed shower to the charge nurse or administrative nurse. CNA M stated staff offered residents, who missed showers, alternate times and days to shower. On 01/11/21 at 01:58 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G stated bath aides provided most of the residents' showers, residents usually showered two times a week, and residents should receive showers as scheduled. LN G stated staff had not reported residents missed showers due to refusals or not available. On 01/12/21 at 10:03 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated the facility's two bath aides provided most of the residents' showers, and recorded the information on the bathing record. Administrative Nurse A stated residents usually showered two times a week (less during the COVID-19 (highly contagious respiratory illness) outbreak), and staff should report missed showers to the charge nurse to ensure alternate times and dates were offered to complete the resident's shower. The facility's undated Bathing a Resident policy directed staff to assist residents as needed with bathing to ensure proper hygiene and prevent skin issues. The facility failed to provide R32 necessary bathing to maintain appropriate grooming and personal hygiene, placing the resident at risk for infections and skin problems.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0685 (Tag F0685)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview,...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to follow up on one of 14 residents reviewed for vision, Resident (R) 26, who reported he could no longer see clearly out of his eyeglasses. Findings included: - R26's Physician Order Sheet, dated 12/07/20, documented the resident had a diagnosis of type two diabetes mellitus (when the body cannot use glucose, not enough insulin made or the body cannot respond to the insulin). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact cognition. The MDS documented the resident required supervision with eating and locomotion on the unit, limited staff assistance with bed mobility, dressing, and personal hygiene, and total staff assistance with transfers and toilet use. The MDS documented the resident had adequate vision with corrective lenses. The Impaired Vision Function Care Plan, dated 10/22/20, directed staff to arrange consultation with eye care practitioner as required and ensure appropriate visual aid glasses were available to support resident's participation in activities. The care plan directed staff to identify and record factors affecting visual function and monitor, document, report any signs or symptoms of acute eye problems or change in his ability to perform activities of daily living (ADLs) due to visual loss. Review of the Social Service Notes (SSD) lacked documentation regarding the resident inability to see clearly out of his eyeglasses or contacting the eye doctor. The Social Service Note, dated 01/11/21 at 02:42 PM, documented the resident reported his glasses were not working as well as they used to, but when he first received his glasses, he felt they were fine. The note documented SSD called the eye doctors office to inquire about the resident's concern, the office staff relayed to SSD that Medicaid and Medicare would allow the resident to have a new pair of eye glasses after 02/19/21, and an appointment was set up for 02/11/21. On 01/07/21 at 09:00 AM, observation revealed the resident sat in an electric wheelchair in his room, without his eyeglasses, and held the newspaper up approximately 6 inches from his face. On 01/11/21 at 01:19 PM, Social Services Staff (SS) X stated the resident reported to her about a week ago that he was unable to see clearly out of his eyeglasses. SS X stated she did not call the eye doctor because the resident had an eye exam approximately six months ago and Medicaid and Medicare would only pay for an exam every two years. SS X stated she had not spoken to the resident about paying for the eye exam because he only received $62.00 a month and could not afford an eye exam. SS X stated she had not spoken to the resident's representative about paying for the exam. 01/11/21 at 03:00 PM, SS X stated she was unaware the resident could go to the eye doctor if it was medically necessary before his two years was up until she was informed by the receptionist at the eye doctor when she phoned them today. 01/12/21 at 12:08 PM, Administrative Staff D stated she expected SS X to follow up with the eye doctor immediately if the resident complained of vision problems. The facility's Resident and Family Grievance policy, dated 08/01/19, documented the facility would provide prompt efforts to resolve a resident's complaint/grievance. The policy documented SSD had been designated as the grievance official and is responsible for overseeing the grievance process. The facility failed to follow up with R26's eye doctor when the resident reported he could no longer see clearly out of his eyeglasses, placing the resident at risk for inability to participate in activities.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0692 (Tag F0692)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 41 resident. The sample included 14 residents with seven reviewed for weight loss. Based on observa...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 41 resident. The sample included 14 residents with seven reviewed for weight loss. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement a recommendation made by the registered dietitian for one of seven sampled residents, Resident (R) 11. Findings included: - R11's Physician's Order Sheet, dated 12/08/20, documented diagnoses of degenerative changes to one or many joints characterized by swelling and pain, vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion caused by decreased blood flow to the brain), anemia (condition without enough healthy red blood cells to carry adequate oxygen to body tissues), and cerebrovascular disease (disorder that affect the blood vessels and blood supply to the brain). The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of three, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS documented R11 required two staff extensive assistance with transfers, extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, and independent with staff supervision for eating. The MDS documented the resident was 71 inches tall, weighed 183 pounds (lbs), and had no weight loss or difficulty eating. R11's Quarterly MDS, dated 12/09/20, documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS recorded R11 had long and short-term memory problems and severely impaired decision-making process. R11 required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility and transfers, 71 inches tall and weighed 178 lbs. No weight loss, and no difficulty eating. The Nutritional Status Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 03/26/20, documented the resident weighed 183 lbs, had a height of 71 inches, and received a regular diet with regular texture. The CAA documented the resident required extensive assistance with bed mobility, total assistance with transfers, and was non-ambulatory. Will care plan to maintain current weight. The Nutrition Care Plan, dated 01/03/21 directed staff to assist and wake up resident for all meals and administer medications as ordered. The resident was currently on weight loss interventions including weekly weights, health shakes, and assisted dining prior to COVID-19 (highly contagious respiratory infection) outbreak. The resident's weight was down another approximately 14 lbs and had poor intake while he was sick with COVID-19. The care plan directed staff to continue offering the resident health shakes three times a day and requested order for Remeron (appetite stimulant medication). Discussed weight loss with midlevel provider. The Nutritional Assessment, dated 12/07/20, documented on 11/25/20 the resident weighed 178.1 lbs, indicating a Body Mass Index (BMI) of 24.8, not significant, but decreasing, and down to 178 pounds from 182 pounds in two months. R11 received a regular diet with fortified foods and received health shakes three times a day which added 600 kilocalories a day. R11 required some assistance with meals and had a fair appetite. The Nutrition/Dietary Note, dated 10/08/20, documented R11 had a significant weight loss of 5.4% in 30 days. R11 required assistance with meals and received a regular diet. The note documented R11 wandered away from meals which was likely the cause of the weight loss. R11's meals should be left in place for the entire meal so he could come back and forth and eat as he liked. R11 continued to receive a health shake three times day to supplement intakes as well as fortified foods added on 10/07/20 along with weekly weights to better monitor. The IDT Note, dated 10/16/20, documented R11 would continue on weekly weights and continue to receive the health shakes for weight loss. Family also continued to bring R11 cookies and candy. Staff continued to encourage R11 to eat at mealtimes, but he refused at times. Staff continued the resident's current plan of care. The Nutrition/Dietary Note, dated 10/21/20, documented R11 experienced some weight loss and implemented house shakes and fortified breakfast cereal. The Nurses Note, dated 12/03/21 documented R11 tested positive for COVID-19. The Nutrition/Dietary Note, dated 12/16/20, documented R11 had a significant weight loss of 5.3% in 30 days and 9.2% in 90 days with overall decreasing trend despite interventions related to COVID. R11 required assistance with meals, with intakes 0-100%. The note documented R11 was on a regular diet with fortified foods and health shakes three times day. The note documented a recommendation to change health shakes to Med Pass (fortified nutritional shake) 120 cubic centimeter (cc) three time a day to try more concentrated kilocalories and protein. Will continue to monitor and reassess as needed. Review of the December 2020 and January 2021 Medication Administration Record, lacked implementation of Med Pass. The Nurses Note, dated 01/07/21 documented R11's provider made rounds and due to R11 having an overall decline in the last year that was amplified by COVID-19 diagnosis he would like the facility to talk with the family about R11 being a candidate for hospice care. Family would like R11 to finish his skilled days, then to reassess, and proceed with hospice after re-evaluated. R11's Vital Sign Log-Weights recorded the following weights: 11/11/20 180.6 lbs 12/16/20 170.3 lbs - Med Pass recommended by Consultant HH, but not implemented 1/6/21 164.1 lbs The July 2020-January 5,2021 Administration Record lacked documentation of percentage intakes of the house shake. The January 6-8, 2021 Administration Record documented the following house shake intakes: 7 AM-10 AM - 25-50% 11 AM-2 PM - 25% 4 PM - 7 PM - 25-100% On 01/07/21 at 08:14 AM, observation revealed R11 sat in the dining room and drank coffee and orange juice independently. Staff served the resident a bowl of oatmeal, two pieces of French toast and a sausage patty. Staff did not cut the food up for the resident or butter/place syrup on the French toast. The resident independently ate the oatmeal, picked up the butter container and looked at it, then placed it back down on the table. Staff then came over to the table and assisted R11 with cutting up his sausage and prepared his French toast. R11 ate 25% of his breakfast and drank 120 milliliters (ml) of orange juice. On 01/07/21 at 12:01 PM, observation revealed staff served R11 his lunch meal, which included cut up crispy chicken thigh, green beans, potato casserole, and pie with juice and coffee to drink. R11 became distracted easily, took a couple of bites of pie, rolled back and forth in his wheelchair, then left the dinner table at 12:06 PM. The plate of food remained full and the resident took three bites of pie. At 12:16 PM the resident returned to the table and ate two more bites of pie. Staff came over to assist him with taking a bite of chicken, a drink of juice, and he took several more bites of green beans. R11 at less than 25% of his meal. On 01/07/21 at 08:49 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) N stated the resident hadn't had a very good appetite lately. The resident needed limited assistance cutting his food. Normally before COVID-19 started he ate 100% or more, but after COVID-19 he lost his appetite. Now he normally eats about 25% of his meals. 01/11/21 at 01:49 PM, CNA O stated we have had a lot of difficulty getting R11 to stay in the dining room to eat. I don't know if he gets nutritional supplements, but his family brings in chocolates and he will eat those. I just always assume that he's not going to eat well and offer him a snack anyway. On 01/11/21 at 04:30 PM, LN J stated the dietary recommendations came to her and she forwarded them on to Administrative Nurse D. She remembered something about the Med Pass not being available on the facility's formulary and they were getting a similar product. She stated she thought Administrative Nurse D e-mailed the Registered Dietitian (RD) regarding the matter. On 01/11/21 at 09:42 AM, Dietary Staff (DS) BB stated Administrative Nurse D let her know if there were any weight loss concerns. The resident took the house shake and he probably consumed about 50% of it. He liked to come and go in and out of the dining room, so he would eat a little at each time. Staff tried to give him things that he liked, like cheeseburgers. On 01/11/21 02:37 PM, DS BB stated she was not aware of the recommendation. The RD sends the recommendations to her and to nursing, but she cannot do anything without an order. On 01/11/21 17:46 PM, Consultant HH stated she was aware the resident lost weight and that is why she made the recommendation to nursing to start Med Pass to increase the resident's kilocalories. Once she made the recommendation, it would be up to nursing to contact the PCP to get the order for the new intervention. She was not aware of any e-mails she had received from Administrative Nurse D at this facility. She was told by the facility this evening the Med Pass had been backordered and they couldn't get it in. In that event, the facility should continue the current order until the Med Pass could be obtained and then get the order to implement the recommendation. On 01/12/21 at 11:23 AM, LN J stated she made a mistake and she assumed Administrative Nurse D e-mailed the RD about the Med Pass not being on the facility formulary. The Med Pass was on our formulary now. It was obviously something that just got missed. On 01/12/21 at 01:00 PM, Medical Records GG stated she was sure she ordered the Resource 2.0 (nutritional supplement) because it was the replacement for Med Pass on the facility formulary, but looking back through her orders she could not find any record of ordering the Resource 2.0. On 01/12/21 at 03:50 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated sometimes the RD's recommendations were something they did not have in the building, like the Med Pass which was not on the formulary at the time and they would have substituted Resource 2.0 instead, but the Resource 2.0 was on backorder. The facility's Weight Monitoring policy, dated 01/01/20, documented the facility will ensure that all residents maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that this is not possible. Interventions will be identified, implemented, monitored, and modified as appropriate, consistent with the resident's assessed needs, choices, preferences, goals and current professional standards to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status. The facility failed to implement a new nutritional recommendation for R11 made by the Registered Dietitian in a timely manner, placing R11 at risk for increased weight loss and lack of nutrition.
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 41 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to label two insulin (medication used to regulate the level of sugar (glucose) in the...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 41 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to label two insulin (medication used to regulate the level of sugar (glucose) in the blood) flex pens (a device used to inject insulin) with the date opened in one of three medication carts. Findings included: - On 01/06/21 at 09:02 AM, observation of a medication cart revealed Resident (R) 189's open Novolog (fast-acting insulin) flex pen and R16's open Humalog (fast-acting insulin) kwick pen without an open date. On 01/06/21 at 09:02 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) E verified the above finding and stated staff should date insulin pens when opened. LN E discarded the insulin pens. On 01/12/21 at 11:30 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated staff should date all insulin flex pens with the date opened. The facility's Insulin Pen Policy, dated 01/01/20, documented once an insulin pen is opened staff should clearly label it. Insulin pens should be destroyed after 28 days or according to manufacturers recommendations. The facility failed to label two insulin pens with the date opened, placing the two residents at risk for receiving ineffective medication.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0883 (Tag F0883)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents with five reviewed for immunizations. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide the current Cente...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents with five reviewed for immunizations. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide the current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) pneumococcal and influenza vaccine information to make an informed decision for five of five sampled residents or their representative, Resident (R) 26, R20, R12, R36, and R10. Findings included: - On 01/12/21 at 03:00 PM, review of R26, R20, R12, R36, and R10's immunization records documented the use of the CDC's Inactive Influenza Vaccine, What You need to Know Vaccine Information Statement, dated 08/15/19, and the Pneumococcal Polysaccharide Vaccine (PPSV23): What you need to Know Vaccine Statement, dated 11/05/15, but lacked the current fact sheet dated 10/30/19. On 01/12/21 at 03:15 PM, Medical Record Staff GG verified the facility did not provide the residents or their representative with the current CDC information for the administration of influenza and pneumococcal immunizations. On 01/12/21 at 11:30 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated she expected staff to provide the residents or representatives with the current CDC information for the administration of influenza and pneumococcal immunizations. The facility's influenza Vaccination policy, dated 11/01/19, documented prior to administration of the influenza vaccine, the resident receiving immunization, or his/her legal representative, would be provided a copy of CDC's current vaccination information statement relative to influenza vaccination. The facility's Pneumococcal Vaccination policy, dated 11/01/19, documented prior to administration of the pneumococcal vaccine, the resident receiving immunization, or his/her legal representative, would be provided a copy of CDC's current vaccination information statement relative to pneumococcal vaccine. The facility failed to provide R26, R20, R12, R36, and R10, or their representatives, with the current CDC influenza and pneumococcal immunization information, placing the residents at risk for making uninformed decisions.
CONCERN (F)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

- On 01/07/21 at 09:23 AM, observation revealed CNA O transferred R11 to bed and provided incontinent cares. Observation revealed CNA O wore gloves and removed R11's soiled brief, cleansed the residen...

Read full inspector narrative →
- On 01/07/21 at 09:23 AM, observation revealed CNA O transferred R11 to bed and provided incontinent cares. Observation revealed CNA O wore gloves and removed R11's soiled brief, cleansed the resident's groin and buttocks, and applied a clean incontinent brief wearing the same soiled gloves. On 01/11/21 at 09:21 AM, observation revealed CNA O entered R11's room to provide incontinent cares, R11 incontinent of bowel and urine. Continued observation revealed CNA O wore gloves and removed R11's soiled brief, cleansed the resident's groin and buttocks, and wearing the soiled gloves, applied ointment to R11's buttocks. On 01/07/21 at 09:35 AM, CNA O stated she was not aware she needed to change her soiled gloves before touching R11's clean skin, incontinent briefs, and clothes. On 01/12/21 at 03:58 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated the facility provided staff education and training for handwashing, gloving, and infection control, and staff should provide appropriate incontinent cares. The facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program policy, dated 11/01/19, directed staff to wash hands and change gloves to prevent contamination and spread of infection. The facility failed to ensure staff changed gloves appropriately while providing incontinent cares for R11, placing the resident at risk for infection. The facility had a census of 41 residents. The sample included 14 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide a sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections, when staff cleaned a Clostridium Difficile (C-Diff-infection of the large intestine (colon) caused by bacteria) resident's room in the 100 Hall, and failed to change gloves appropriately when providing incontinent cares for Resident (R) 11 and R12. Findings included: - On 01/07/21 at 12:00 PM, observation, during cleaning of a C-Diff resident's room, revealed Housekeeping Staff (HS) U, wearing an N95 mask, parked her housekeeping cart in the hall outside of the room entrance door, applied gloves and a gown, and tied the waist string but not the top string of the gown in the back. HS U took a white cloth, duster on a long handle, spray bottle of premixed C-Diff solution, mop with mop pad which had been presoaked in Virex (disinfectant cleaner) solution, then entered the resident's room. HS U sprayed the C-Diff solution on her cloth, wiped off the room door handles, door frame, then continued around the room using same procedure to wipe off bedside table (removing items), dresser (removing items) and high touch areas of the room. Continued observation revealed HS U used the duster and dusted all around the room where the wall met the ceiling, tied up the two trash can bags in the room, with her gown falling down in front past her chest towards the floor, leaving the chest area open, and name badge showing. Continued observation revealed HS U wiped down the bathroom door handle, bars, sink, and toilet top, then toilet seat and underneath the lid. HS U then removed and discarded gloves in the bathroom trash, mopped the bathroom floor, then returned to the housekeeping cart in the hall outside the resident's room carrying the C-Diff spray bottle, mop with contaminated mop pad on it, and placed the dust mop in the cart with the duster part up. HS U then placed the mop pad on the floor in front of the housekeeping cart, touching the carpet, then removed and discarded the mop pad in a plastic bag on her cart, and removed and discarded gloves and gown in the red container in the hall outside the resident's room. HS U applied a new disposable gown and gloves, went back into the room, retrieved the trash bags, removed her gown in the bathroom trash bag, and tied up the bag. HS U then brought the trash bags out, placed them in the red container along with her gloves, and applied hand sanitizer on her hands. On 01/07/21 at 12:30 PM, HS U verified she had not fastened the top string on her disposable gown and it kept coming down in front, brought contaminated dust mop and mop pad into the hall and placed on the carpeted floor. HS U stated she used the dust mop to clean in other resident rooms. On 01/07/21 at 12:30 PM, HS V stated housekeeping staff, when cleaning a C-Diff isolation room, should tie the top of their gowns, discard a contaminated mop pad inside the resident's room, and not reuse a dust mop after being contaminated. On 01/07/21 at 01:49 PM, Administrative Nurse J stated the procedure for staff when entering a C-Diff isolation room, should use contact isolation precautions (wear gown and gloves) when providing cares and should also wear foot covers. Administrative Nurse J stated the housekeeping supervisor was in charge of training her staff on how to clean the room. The facility's Management of C-Diff Infection policy, dated 03/01/20, documented all staff are to wear gloves and a gown upon entry into the residents room and while providing care for the resident with C-Diff infection. Hand hygiene should be performed by handwashing with soap and water in accordance with facility policy for hand hygiene. Use disposable equipment whenever possible. The facility failed to provide a sanitary environment to prevent the transmission of C-Diff when housekeeping staff failed to tie the top of her gown contaminating her clothing, used a mop in the isolation resident's bathroom, brought in the hall and touched the floor carpet, and brought a contaminated duster to the cart to be reused in other residents' rooms, placing the 41 residents at risk for acquiring an infection. - On 01/11/21 at 02:17 PM, observation revealed Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) Q and CNA MM entered R12's room, applied gloves, placed a gait belt on the resident and propelled her to the bathroom in her wheelchair. CNA MM locked the brakes of the wheelchair, cued the resident to stand, and assisted her to stand and pivot turn to the toilet. CNA MM pulled the resident's pants down, the resident sat down on the toilet, and immediately started to urinate. When finished, CNA Q and CNA MM assisted the resident in standing using a gait belt. CNA MM provided peri-care, then with the same soiled gloves, pulled up the residents pants and incontinent brief, took hold of the resident's gait belt, assisted the resident to stand, and transferred to her wheelchair. Observation revealed CNA Q propelled the resident to her bed. CNA Q and CNA MM, with the same soiled gloves, assisted the resident to stand and transferred to the bed. CNA MM, wearing the same soiled gloves, assisted the resident to lie down by lifting her legs into bed and then removed her shoes. CNA MM then removed and discarded her gloves. On 01/12/21 at 09:11 AM, observation revealed CNA MM and CNA NN entered R12's room, applied a gait belt to the resident's waist, and CNA NN propelled the resident in a wheelchair to the bathroom. CNA NN locked the brakes, both CNAs assisted the resident to stand and pivoted over the toilet. CNA MM pulled down the resident's pants and removed her urine saturated incontinent brief, wet pants, and shoes. CNA NN brought CNA MM two clean briefs and clean pants, and CNA MM, with the same soiled gloves, applied the incontinent briefs, pants, and shoes on the resident. Further observation revealed both aides assisted the resident to stand and CNA MM, with the same soiled gloves, pulled up the residents pants after CNA NN provided peri-care with his right hand, removed and discarded his right hand glove. Further observation revealed CNA MM and CNA NN assisted the resident to a wheelchair, then CNA MM removed and discarded her gloves. On 01/12/21 at 09:25 AM, CNA MM verified the resident's brief was saturated with urine, she had not changed gloves, after removing the resident's incontinent brief and wet pants, and stated she should have changed them. On 01/12/21 at 11:30 AM, Administrative Nurse D stated she expected staff to change gloves between dirty and clean when providing incontinent cares for the resident. The facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program policy, dated 11/01/19, directed staff to wash hands and change gloves to prevent contamination and spread of infection. The facility staff failed to change gloves, after they became contaminated while providing incontinent cares for R12, placing the resident at risk for infection.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Kansas facilities.
  • • 30% turnover. Below Kansas's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • 21 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
Bottom line: Generally positive indicators. Standard due diligence and a personal visit recommended.

About This Facility

What is Pinnacle Park Nursing & Rehab Center's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns PINNACLE PARK NURSING & REHAB CENTER an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Kansas, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.

How is Pinnacle Park Nursing & Rehab Center Staffed?

CMS rates PINNACLE PARK NURSING & REHAB CENTER's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 30%, compared to the Kansas average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Pinnacle Park Nursing & Rehab Center?

State health inspectors documented 21 deficiencies at PINNACLE PARK NURSING & REHAB CENTER during 2021 to 2024. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 20 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.

Who Owns and Operates Pinnacle Park Nursing & Rehab Center?

PINNACLE PARK NURSING & REHAB CENTER is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by RECOVER-CARE HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 60 certified beds and approximately 57 residents (about 95% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in SALINA, Kansas.

How Does Pinnacle Park Nursing & Rehab Center Compare to Other Kansas Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Kansas, PINNACLE PARK NURSING & REHAB CENTER's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 2.9, staff turnover (30%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Pinnacle Park Nursing & Rehab Center?

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

Is Pinnacle Park Nursing & Rehab Center Safe?

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

Do Nurses at Pinnacle Park Nursing & Rehab Center Stick Around?

PINNACLE PARK NURSING & REHAB CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 30%, 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 Pinnacle Park Nursing & Rehab Center Ever Fined?

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

Is Pinnacle Park Nursing & Rehab Center on Any Federal Watch List?

PINNACLE PARK NURSING & REHAB CENTER 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.