CHAUTAUQUA HEALTH AND REHABILITATION

1205 LEITCHFIELD ROAD, OWENSBORO, KY 42303 (270) 684-0464
For profit - Partnership 145 Beds SIMCHA HYMAN & NAFTALI ZANZIPER Data: November 2025 4 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
0/100
#210 of 266 in KY
Last Inspection: April 2025

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

Overview

Chautauqua Health and Rehabilitation has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the facility; this means it is one of the lowest-rated options available. In Kentucky, it ranks #210 out of 266, placing it in the bottom half of facilities, and it is ranked #7 out of 7 in Daviess County, meaning there are no better local options. Although the facility has shown improvement in recent years, reducing issues from 18 in 2021 to only 2 in 2025, it still faces a concerning number of total deficiencies, with 34 issues identified, including four critical ones related to resident safety and care. Staffing is a relative strength, with a turnover rate of 42%, which is below the state average, indicating that staff generally stay longer and may know the residents better. However, the facility's RN coverage is average, and there have been serious incidents, such as a resident being transferred without the necessary assistance, which raises significant safety concerns.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Kentucky
#210/266
Bottom 22%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
18 → 2 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
42% turnover. Near Kentucky's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Kentucky facilities.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 28 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Kentucky. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
⚠ Watch
34 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Overall Rating
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2021: 18 issues
2025: 2 issues

The Good

  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (42%)

    6 points below Kentucky average of 48%

Facility shows strength in fire safety.

The Bad

1-Star Overall Rating

Below Kentucky average (2.8)

Significant quality concerns identified by CMS

Staff Turnover: 42%

Near Kentucky avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Chain: SIMCHA HYMAN & NAFTALI ZANZIPER

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 34 deficiencies on record

4 life-threatening
Apr 2025 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. Observation o...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. Observation on 04/02/2025 at 8:45 AM, on the Dementia unit, revealed medication cups containing medications that had been pre-pulled for 3 residents. The cups were marked with the residents' names in black sharpie. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration, revised 02/20/2024, revealed medications were administered by licensed nurses, or other staff who were legally authorized to do so in the state, as ordered by the physician and in accordance with professional standards of practice. Review of the facility's policy titled, Residents Rights, dated 01/20/2020 and revised on 01/2025, revealed the facility will ensure all staff members are educated on the rights of residents and the responsibility of the facility to properly care for its residents. Observation of Medication Tech (MT)3 on the Dementia unit, on 04/02/2025 at 8:45 AM, revealed she was at the medication cart with the drawer open. There were three medication cups containing medications that had been pre-pulled for three different residents. (Pre-pulled medications is the preparation of medications in advance of administration, often for multiple residents or for a delayed time of administration). The cups were marked with resident names in black sharpie and were in the top drawer of the medication cart. MT3 immediately acknowledged the State Survey Agency Representative observing the cups of medications and disposed of the medications. In an interview with MT3, on 04/03/2025 at 2:30 PM, she stated she should not have pre-pulled the medications prior to administration on 04/02/2025. She further stated she was aware this was a risk for medication error, distraction and administering the wrong medication to residents. She further stated she felt residents on the unit were also vulnerable due to this being a Dementia Unit. During an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 04/04/2025 at 9:15 AM, she stated it was her expectation staff follow the Medication Administration policy. She further stated she would not expect staff to ever pre-pull medications and place them in a cup with the resident's name. In further interview, she stated this was a huge safety risk due to the possibility of medication errors with this unsafe practice. During an interview with the Administrator, on 04/04/2025 at 9:00 AM, she stated it was her expectation staff follow the Medication Administration policy. She further stated she would not expect staff to pull medications for residents, place them in cups marked with their names, and leave them in the medication carts. In further interview, she stated this was a dangerous and unsafe practice as there was a high risk of administering the wrong medication to a resident.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, san...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 of 26 sampled residents, Resident (R)1 and R97. 1. During observation of incontinence care for R97, provided by Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)8 and CNA10, on 04/03/2025 at 10:14 AM, the CNAs removed the urine soaked sheets from the air mattress, used them to wipe the mattress and then threw the sheets on the floor while wearing gloves. The CNAs then failed to perform hand hygiene and don new gloves, but wore the same soiled gloves to provide incontinence care for the resident. Further, the CNAs failed to clean/disinfect the air mattress after providing incontinence care. 2. Furthermore, observation on 04/01/2025 at 9:10 AM, and 04/03/2025 at 9:05 AM, revealed the infusion stand which held R1's enteral feeding bag was soiled with an unidentified brownish matter streaking down the pole. Also the bottom of the stand was soiled with the same unidentified matter. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Infection Prevention and Control Program, revised 09/2024, revealed the facility has established and maintained an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Standard Precautions: all staff shall assume all residents are potentially infected or colonized with an organism that could be transmitted during the course of providing resident care services. Hand hygiene shall be performed in accordance with our facility's established hand hygiene procedures. Environmental cleaning and disinfecting shall be performed according to facility policy. All staff have responsibilities related to the cleanliness of the facility, and are to report problems outside of their scope to the appropriate department. Review of the facility policy titled, Hand Hygiene, revised 02/05/2025, revealed all staff will perform proper hand hygiene procedures to prevent the spread of infection to other personnel, residents, and visitors. The use of gloves does not replace hand hygiene. If your task requires gloves, perform hygiene prior to donning gloves, and immediately after removing gloves. 1. Review of R97's admission record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 06/27/2024 with diagnoses which included non-traumatic brain injury, hypertension, dementia, and parkinson's disease. Review of R97's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated 03/05/2025, revealed the facility assessed the resident to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three out of fifteen, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Observation of incontinence care for R97, provided by CNA8 and CNA10, on 04/03/2025 at 10:14 AM, revealed the resident had a brief in place; however, when the CNAs turned the resident onto his back, the air mattress, and sheet, were visibly wet. The CNAs while wearing gloves, removed the urine soaked sheets from the mattress and CNA 8 used the wet sheets to wipe the mattress and then threw the sheets on the floor. The CNAs then failed to perform hand hygiene and don new gloves, but wore the same soiled gloves to provide incontinence care for the resident. After providing incontinence care, the CNAs while wearing the same soiled gloves, dressed the resident in clean clothes. Additionally, the CNAs did not clean/disinfect the mattress after providing the incontinence care. During an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 04/04/2025 at 8:13 AM, she stated she expected staff to place soiled linen in a plastic bag and not on the floor. She further stated she expected staff to perform hand hygiene and don new gloves prior to performing incontinence care. Further, she stated she expected staff to remove soiled gloves, perform hand hygiene and don new gloves any time gloves became soiled during resident care. In further interview, she stated she expected staff to clean the mattress on the bed with bleach wipes if it became soiled, and then call housekeeping to perform a deep clean of the mattress. During an interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON)/Infection Preventionist, on 04/03/2025 at 10:18 AM, she stated she expected staff to follow the facility's policies regarding infection control practices. She stated staff should not throw soiled linen on the floor, but were to place it in a plastic bag. Further, she stated staff was to perform hand hygiene and glove changes at appropriate times as per policy. In continued interview, she stated resident air mattresses were to be cleaned/disinfected upon becoming soiled. Additionally, she stated education related to infection control practices was conducted annually and periodically during the year. During an interview with the Housekeeping Supervisor, on 04/04/2025 at 9:25 AM, she stated housekeeping services had specific cleaners to clean the floatation [air] mattresses. She stated there was a list of rooms that were periodically deep cleaned to ensure all beds were cleaned during the month. She further stated if a mattress became soiled before the scheduled deep clean, the staff should call housekeeping to perform an immediate cleaning. During an interview with the Administrator, on 04/04/2025 at 10:04 AM, she stated she expected staff to wash hands and don new gloves prior to providing care or performing a procedure for residents. Further, she stated staff should wash hands and don new gloves when the gloves became soiled. Further, she stated staff should never throw dirty linen on the floor. Additionally, the Administrator stated staff was to clean a soiled mattress the best that they could with bleach wipes until housekeeping could perform a deep clean of the mattress. 2. Review of R1's admission Record revealed the facility admitted R1 on 10/17/2023 with diagnoses which included cerebral palsy, anemia, diabetes mellitus, and malnutrition. Review of R1's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated 03/07/2025, revealed the facility was unable to complete an assessment to determine R1's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), and the resident was rarely/never understood. Observation of R1, on 04/01/2025 at 9:10 AM, revealed the resident had an enteral feeding tube and the infusion stand that held the enteral feeding bag was soiled with an unidentified brownish matter streaking down the pole. Further observation revealed the bottom of the pole was soiled with the same unidentified matter. Observation of R1, on 04/03/2025 at 9:05 AM, revealed the infusion stand that held R1's enteral feeding bag was soiled from the top to the bottom with unidentified brownish matter. In an interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)5, on 04/03/2025 at 6:33 PM, she stated the nursing staff was responsible for changing the residents' enteral tube-feed bags. LPN5 stated in reference to R1, night shift changed the enteral tube-feed bag or at least hung a new enteral tube-feed bag for her when she arrived. She stated R1 was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) because of the tube feeding. (EBP is a specific set of infection control practices designed to reduce the transmission of Multidrug Resistant Organisms.) In continued interview with LPN5, on 04/03/2025 at 6:33 PM, she stated since R1 was on EBP, she would don the appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and ensure the pre-set settings were correct before starting the feeding. She stated part of the Infection Control Program (ICP) was to ensure the environment was clean/disinfected and that included the infusion stand that held the tube-feed bags. She further stated it was very important to follow the ICP to ensure residents were protected from potential infections or other hazards. In further interview, LPN5 stated she was surprised to learn the infusion stand in R1's room had been soiled. Additionally, she stated staff should have cleaned the pole with either bleach wipes or the Hydrogen wipes which worked well for disinfecting. During an interview, on 04/04/2025 at 8:45 AM, the DON stated the nursing staff was responsible for changing enteral tube-feed bags. She further stated as part of the infection control process, nursing staff should ensure the infusion stand holding the tube feeding bag was disinfected by wiping it down with either the bleach wipes or the Hydrogen wipes which were the disinfectant wipes that were utilized by the facility. She stated it was her expectation for all nursing staff to ensure they were following the facility's protocols regarding infection control practices to prevent the spread of infections. During an interview, on 04/04/2025 at 9:30 AM, with the Administrator, she stated it was her expectation the nursing staff cleaned and disinfected the tube feeding stands when soiled, especially related to a resident on EBP. Further, she stated it was her expectation all nurses follow their nursing scope of practice and training in ICP and ensure residents were protected from potential harm.
Aug 2021 18 deficiencies 4 IJ (3 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL (J)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Deficiency F0740 (Tag F0740)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record reviews and reviews of the facility's policies, it was determined the facility failed to ensure each...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record reviews and reviews of the facility's policies, it was determined the facility failed to ensure each resident received the necessary behavioral health care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychological well-being, in accordance with the comprehensive assessment and plan of care. This deficient practice affected one (1) (Resident #6) of six (6) sampled residents reviewed for behaviors. Specifically, Resident #6 displayed behaviors directed toward other residents, and no new interventions were implemented to address behaviors. Resident #6 had multiple episodes of verbal and physical aggression towards other residents. Resident #6 exposed self sexually during an activity. Staff reported that when Resident #6 came into the common area, other residents left due to the resident's behaviors. Staff indicated they were fearful Resident #6 would hurt another resident. The Director of Nursing (DON) indicated Resident's #6's behaviors created a stressful environment for the other residents. It was determined the facility's non-compliance with one or more requirements of participation caused, or was likely to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was related to State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, 483.40 (Behavioral Health) at a scope and severity of J. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) began on 04/01/2021 when Resident #6 was yelling and cursing at another resident and the facility failed to investigate the allegation of verbal abuse. The Director of Nursing (DON) and Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) were notified of the IJ and provided with the IJ Template on 08/26/2021 at 12:00 PM. A Removal Plan was requested. The Removal Plan was accepted by the State Survey Agency on 08/27/2021 at 6:00 PM. The IJ was removed on 08/27/2021 at 6:00 PM after the survey team performed onsite verification that the Removal Plans had been implemented. Noncompliance remained at the lower scope and severity of pattern, no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that was not immediate jeopardy. The finding included: On 08/26/2021 at 1:45 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) provided the policy on, Unmanageable Residents, dated 09/2010, and indicated this was the policy currently being used by the facility. Review of the facility's policy revealed that should a resident's behavior become abusive, hostile, assaultive, or unmanageable in any way that would jeopardize his or her safety or the safety of others, the Nurse Supervisor/Charge Nurse must immediately: a) provide for the safety of all concerned, b) notify the resident's attending physician for instructions, notify the Director of Nursing. Complete documentation of the incident must be recorded in the resident's medical record and an incident report must be filed with the Administrator. On 08/26/2021 at 1:45 PM, the DON provided the policy on, Behavioral Assessment, Intervention and Monitoring, dated 12/2016, and indicated this was the policy currently being used by the facility. The policy indicated the interdisciplinary team would evaluate behavior symptoms in a resident to determine the degree of severity, distress, and potential safety risk to the resident, and develop a plan of care accordingly. Safety strategies will be implemented immediately if necessary to protect the resident and others from harm. The care plan will incorporate findings from the comprehensive assessment and be consistent with current standards of practice. Interventions will be individualized and part of an overall care environment that supports physical, functional, and psychosocial needs, and strives to understand, prevent, or relieve the resident's distress or loss of abilities. Interventions and approaches will be based on a detailed assessment of physical, psychological, and behavioral symptoms and their underlying causes. Record review revealed Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of dementia with behavioral disturbances, anxiety/agitation, schizophrenia, adult failure to thrive, anorexia, intellectual disability, and depression. The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #6's cognition was severely impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of three (3) out of fifteen (15). The resident required supervision with ambulation using a walker. Further review revealed the MDS indicated the resident had no behaviors. The most recent Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] indicated a diagnosis of impulse disorder and physical and verbal aggression directed toward others occurred one (1) - three (3) days during the seven (7) day assessment period. Review of a care plan, dated 02/02/2017, indicated Resident #6 exhibited or had the potential to exhibit or demonstrate verbal behaviors such as the use of abusive language and sexually inappropriate language. Interventions included to place resident on one on one, place in lobby to provide decreased stimulation, provide consistent, trusted caregivers and structured daily activities, and postpone activities if resident becomes combative or resistive. Review of the care plan, dated 10/26/2020, indicated Resident #6 exhibited or had the potential to exhibit physical behaviors related to poor anger management, poor impulse control, and public masturbation. Interventions included: resident will have quite time in room to include rest time, listening to music, and to divert by giving alternative choices. Review of a Progress Note, dated 03/26/2021, indicated Resident #6 had a resident-to-resident altercation. Resident #6 continued to curse other residents and threatened to harm self and other residents. Record review revealed a Progress Note, dated 04/01/2021, that indicated Resident #6 was cursing and yelling at another resident. Further review revealed a Progress note, dated 04/03/2021, that indicated Resident #6 was cursing other residents and making multiple verbal threats. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/04/2021 at 3:57 PM, revealed Resident #6 was inappropriately touching another resident. Further review revealed a Progress Note, dated 04/04/2021 at 5:20 PM, indicated Resident #6 was extremely agitated and yelling at other residents. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/09/2021 at 10:04 AM, indicated Resident #6 was verbally aggressive with other residents, threatening harm, and cursing. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/13/2021 at 7:50 AM, indicated Resident #6 was cursing and threatening to harm other residents. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/16/2021, indicated Resident #6 was yelling and cursing at other residents, and the facility had Director of Nursing (DON) come back to the unit. Record review revealed a Progress Note, dated 04/18/2021, indicated Resident #6 was yelling, throwing stuff, and cussing at other residents. On 04/30/2021, Resident #6 was publicly masturbating during an activity. Continued review revealed on 05/08/2021, Resident #6 was yelling and cussing at other residents. On 05/29/2021, Resident #6 had been cursing, yelling, and threatening other residents. Record review revealed a psychiatrist initial visit, dated 06/04/2021, indicated Resident #6 was being seen for depression. However, there was no mention of verbal and physical aggression documented. Continued review revealed a Progress Note, dated 06/05/2021, that indicated Resident #6 was verbally aggressive with another resident. Review of a Psychotherapy Comprehensive Clinical Assessment, dated 06/09/2021, revealed Resident #6 was referred due to concern of increased anxiety, impulsive behavior, and feeling angry. However, there was no mention of verbal and physical aggression documented. Record review revealed a Progress Note, dated 06/14/2021, that indicated Resident #6 had been cursing and yelling at other residents and throwing items in the resident's room. Review of a Physician's Progress Note, dated 06/16/2021, revealed Resident #6 was noted to have the potential to harm staff, other residents, or self. Record of a Physician's Progress Note, dated 06/17/2021, revealed Resident #6 had a long history with physical aggression related to schizoaffective bipolar disorder. Review of Psychotherapy Progress Notes, dated 06/18/2021, 06/23/2021, 07/04/2021, 07/05/2021, 07/17/2021, 07/21/2021, 07/31/2021, 08/06/2021, 08/14/2021 indicated Resident #6 was being seen for individual psychotherapy. However, there was no mention of verbal and physical aggression documented. Record review revealed a Progress Note, dated 06/29/2021, that indicated Resident #6 was threatening to hit other residents, was cursing, and being verbally aggressive with other residents. Record review revealed a psychiatry follow-up note, dated 07/16/2021, indicated Resident #6 was being seen for depression. There was no mention of verbal and physical aggression documented. Record review revealed a Progress Note, dated 07/27/2021, that indicated Resident #6 was cursing and threatening to hit other residents. Continued review revealed a Progress Note, dated 08/11/2021, that indicated Resident #6 was being verbally aggressive with other residents and was threatening to harm other residents. Review of a psychiatry follow-up note, dated 08/15/2021, indicated Resident #6 was being seen for depression. There was no mention of verbal and physical aggression documented. Review of a Progress Note, dated 08/14/2021, indicated Resident #6 had exposed self and touched self inappropriately in front of other residents during an activity. The DON had come to the unit to talk to the resident regarding behaviors. Record review revealed a Progress Note, dated 08/18/2021 at 12:00 AM, indicated Resident #6 was verbally and physically aggressive, was throwing things, trying to break things, slamming the resident's walker, and yelling and cursing. Haldol 2.5 mg (milligrams) was given. Record review revealed a Social Service Note, dated 08/19/2021, that indicated Resident #6 had diagnoses of anxiety and major depressive disorder, schizoaffective disorder, and intellectual disabilities. There were no social service notes available to indicate the facility was providing a plan of care for Resident #6's behaviors. Review of a Psychotherapy Progress Note, dated 08/23/2021, indicated Resident #6 had generalized anxiety and other specified depressive disorders and was seen for individual psychotherapy to explore and utilize coping techniques to manage isolation and depressed mood. During an interview on 08/24/2021, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 indicated Resident #6 threatened to kill other residents, and it was just a matter of time before the resident hurt another resident. She indicated administration was aware of Resident #6's aggressive physical and verbal behaviors. During an interview on 08/24/2021 at 2:16 PM, Resident #54 indicated Resident #6 had kicked (Resident #54) in the leg with 3 staff members present who witnessed the incident. During an interview on 08/24/2021 at 3:30 PM, the Activity Assistant (AA) indicated she had witnessed Resident #6 kick Resident #54. During an interview on 08/25/2021 at 12:59 PM, the SSD (Social Service Director) indicated she was aware of the Resident #6 kicking someone and exposing himself/herself. She indicated the resident was sent back to their room for quite time. She stated she was new to her position, and she was unsure of the previous incidents in the progress notes. During an interview on 08/25/2021 at 2:23 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) indicated she was familiar with Resident #6. She stated they have had behavioral issues with the resident before. The resident had a room to themself so they could go cool off if the resident got upset. The DON stated Resident #6 yelled and sometimes used explicit words. She stated, the resident may say I'm going to hit you., but he/she had not. She was not aware if the resident had ever hit any staff. The DON stated Resident #6 had emptied the catheter bag on the floor. She was not aware that the resident punched the TV or had thrown the walker. She stated he/she had moved the walker towards people. The DON stated she did not doubt that the resident had cursed or yelled at other residents. She stated she did not know any specifics, I don't doubt that there are incidents documented, but I don't know any specifics. Since her time at the facility, they had intervened between the resident and who ever was involved. Continued interview revealed they had called for EMS (emergeny medical services) or an officer for back up if needed. She stated to protect residents, the resident's room was near the nurse's station. When the resident was near people, it made the resident's behaviors worse. They had tried to reward Resident #6's good behavior. Review of a statement for the psychotherapy provider, dated 08/25/2021, indicated Resident #6 started receiving therapy in June of 2021 to decrease mood and reduce anger outbursts. The interventions included using a stress ball for 5-10 minutes when the resident felt his/her stress level was at a five (5) or higher and to practice deep breathing exercises 2-3 times a week. Record review revealed there were no other updates noted to Resident #6's plan of care for behaviors. During an interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:15 PM, the AA indicated Resident #6 exposed self to two female residents during an airshow while outside in the courtyard. During an interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:20 PM, Resident #58 indicated Resident #6 had exposed self to (Resident #58) during the airshow, and that it made the resident feel uncomfortable, Wondering what [Resident #58] did to provoke this. During an interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:30 PM, Resident #87 indicated Resident #6 was exposing self to Resident #58. The resident indicated he/she felt bad for Resident #58. During an interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:20 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) indicated there were no other notes available for psychotherapy services or social services in relation to multiple behaviors displayed over the last several months. The facility provided a Removal Plan that included: 1. Resident #6 was placed on 15 min checks when [the resident] was out of [his/her] room as of 08-26-2021. Resident was seen on 08-25-2021 by psychiatric services and seen again on 08-27-2021. Care plan updated to observe for signs of over stimulation such as grumbling while walking, complaints of other residents, etc. Staff to take resident to room, close the door and practice the interventions recommended by the psychologist such as using a stress ball and deep breathing. IDT met on 08-26-2021 and developed new interventions and updated care plan. 2. All residents with 8 or above were interviewed by social services on 08-25-2021 and 08-26-2021 to ensure there were no concerns of safety, or feelings of abuse while in this facility. None were noted. Unit Manager Nurse, MDS, and SS [social services] assistant evaluated all residents with BIMS 7 and below for any signs of change in baseline mood or behavior and normal daily routine. Documentation placed in medical record 08-26-2021 and 08-27-2021. No concerns or changes noted. 4. LNHA [licensed nursing home administrator], DON [DON], Unit Managers [UM], ADON, MOS [sic, MDS, Minimum Data Set], Business office, Payroll, Activities, Maintenance, Therapy, Scheduling were educated per Regional Director of Clinical Services on 08-26-2021 at 2:15 PM on What is abuse and neglect, when to report abuse and neglect, and to report all abuse to the LNHA. 5. IDT [interdisciplinary team] meeting held 8-27-2021; behaviors reviewed to ensure all residents that have behaviors per the comprehensive assessment have intervention and care plan in place. All interventions and care plans communicated to floor staff per DON 8-27-2021. 6. DON, and LNHA, and or designee will educate all staff on the following: - Abuse and Neglect - When to report suspected abuse and neglect - Reporting of abuse and neglect directly to the administrator immediately - This education completed 8/27/2021 - If any behaviors occur on your shift please protect the resident, stay with them until the Administrator has been notified and intervention is in place. - In addition, a list of all staff has been developed and no persons will be allowed to work without having completed this education prior to assuming the floor. 7. Facility system changes: i. Facility added behavior monitoring to TAR [treatment administration record] to be completed Q [every] shift. ii. All residents with noted behaviors were referred to psych services by assistant social services. iii. Residents with identified behavioral health needs have person centered care plans that were updated on 08-27-2021 by MDS. Care plans include behavioral health needs which are identified in the comprehensive assessment. iv. Individualized interventions related to diagnoses and conditions were added to each resident with behavioral health needs by DON, UM and MOS nurses on 08-27-2021. DON, LNHA, and/or designee audited: i. Behavior documentation audited weekly x 3 months and then quarterly x 12 months. Any concerns will be documented, corrected immediately, and staff will be educated accordingly. ii. A trigger report was run by RN, BSN, RDO on 08-27-2021 and all issues were immediately addressed. The results of the assessments/audits reported reviewed and trended for compliance through the campus quality assurance performance improvement committee for a minimum of 6 months. QAPI [quality assurance performance improvement] meetings weekly times 4 weeks and then monthly thereafter. The IJ was removed on 08/27/2021 at 6:00 PM after the survey team performed onsite verification that the Removal Plans had been implemented. Onsite verification of the implementation of the Removal Plan was conducted during the survey. On 08/27/2021 between the hours of 11:00 AM and 6:00 PM. Review of the educational materials indicated 100% of staff to include all departments had been completed on 08/26/2021. Twelve interviews were conducted to verify in-service training had been completed on the facility's Abuse Policy and Procedure training to include the types of abuse, what to report, to whom to report the allegations of abuse and when to report. Of those interviewed included certified nursing assistants (CNAs), licensed practical nurses (LPNs), registered nurses (RNs), housekeeping and scheduling staff. The staff interviewed revealed knowledge of what constituted abuse, what to do if abuse was observed, both staff to resident abuse and in the event of resident-to-resident abuse, when to report abuse and to whom the abuse should be reported. The interviews revealed a consistent message that staff understood not only the different types of abuse, but that resident-to-resident altercations also constituted abuse. Staff indicated that through training they understood the need to intercede immediately and to always protect the resident before reporting any incident of abuse to the Administrator. Staff also acknowledged that have assuring resident safety, the abuse should be reported immediately. Resident #6 had been placed on every 15-minute checks, and the care plan had been updated on measures to address behaviors, and an IDT meeting was held on 08/27/2021. Resident #6 was seen by psych services on 08/25/2021. Surveyors verified 54 Residents with BIMS 8 or above were interviewed and indicated they felt safe. The LNHA, DON, unit managers, ADON, MDS, business office, payroll department, activities, maintenance, therapy, scheduling received education on what constitutes abuse and when to report.
CRITICAL (K)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #85 on 01/27/2020 and last re-admitted him/her on 04/22/2021. The resid...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #85 on 01/27/2020 and last re-admitted him/her on 04/22/2021. The resident's diagnoses included schizoaffective disorder, vascular dementia with behaviors, early onset Alzheimer's disease, anxiety, and depression. Record review revealed Resident #85 was also readmitted on [DATE], and on readmission experienced agitation, restlessness, hyperactivity, and sought companionship. Review of the most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed the resident had moderately impaired cognition with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of nine (9) out of fifteen (15). The resident's behaviors included physical aggression toward others occurring one (1) to three (3) days during the seven (7) day assessment period; other behaviors not directed toward others were documented as occurring one (1) - three (3) days; and, rejection of care one (1) to three (3) days during the assessment period. No verbal behaviors were identified as occurring during the assessment period. Review of Resident 85's medical record revealed the resident had previously been discharged from another skilled nursing facility due to two (2) resident-to-resident altercations in two (2) days with behaviors that had become more aggressive leading up to the transfer. Review of the Nurse's Progress Notes and/or incident reports indicated Resident #85 had physical or verbal altercations with other residents on the following days: 05/05/2021, 06/13/2021, 07/07/2021, 07/09/2021, 07/24/2021, 08/21/2021, and 08/22/2021. A review of the Nursing Progress Notes dated 03/10/2021 at 2:51 PM indicated Resident #85 was transferred to the hospital for geriatric psychiatric services due to anxiousness, agitation, and endangering self and others. The documentation did not reveal how the resident endangered self or others. A review of the care plan, did not indicate behavior interventions were put into place after readmission. On 08/21/2021 at 2:40 PM, a review of the Nursing Progress Notes, revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #6, observed Resident #85 grab Resident #35 by the shirt. Resident #35 attempted to pull away, and Resident #85 pulled Resident #35 closer. When Resident #85 let go of the resident's shirt, Resident #35 fell to the floor. Resident #35 sustained no apparent injury. Review of a Facility Reported Incident, 08/22/2021, revealed on 08/22/2021, Resident #85 pushed Resident #8 down, resulting in a fracture requiring surgery. Resident #8 remained in the hospital. Record review revealed a verbal aggression behavior care plan, created 08/23/2021, had a goal of decreased impulsive behaviors. Continued review revealed no care plan for physical behaviors of grabbing residents, pushing residents down, or stealing food. Observation at 9:15 AM on 08/23/2021, this Surveyor overheard the Nurse Practitioner ask Resident #85, in the hallway, why the resident had pinched and pushed another resident during the past weekend. The resident's response was not heard. A telephone interview was conducted on 08/23/2021 at 1:43 PM, with Resident #85's Responsible Party (RP). The RP stated staff had called that weekend because Resident #85 had gotten into it with another resident. The RP added Resident #85 had been sent to inpatient behavioral health services multiple times. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 08/25/2021 at 9:53 AM, revealed she was aware that Resident #85 appeared to have had an altercation with Resident #8. The DON acknowledged Resident #85 grabbed at other residents, but she did not think Resident #85 meant this as an aggressive act. Interview with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1, on 08/25/2021 at 9:16 AM, revealed at the present time Resident #85 was on a special observation schedule of every 15 minutes due to an incident over the weekend. CNA #1 stated she had worked the weekend and added on Saturday, 08/21/2021, Resident #85 had pushed Resident #35 down in the living area. The CNA added Resident #85 had grabbed Resident #35 by the shirt and then as Resident #35 tried to get away, Resident #85 let go of the shirt causing Resident #35 to fall. On Sunday, 08/22/2021, Resident #85 hit Resident #8 with the left hand. Resident #8 fell and was transferred to the hospital for a fracture. The CNA stated the only thing done on Saturday to protect other residents was taking Resident #85 to the resident's room and turning on the television. After the incident on Sunday, the CNA stated Resident #85 was taken to the bedroom, where the resident stayed until dinner. The CNA added the 15-minute checks were started on Sunday afternoon after Resident #8 had been transferred to the hospital. CNA #1 stated she worked three (3) twelve (12)-hour shifts per week, and usually at least one day during her three (3) days working, Resident #85 would slap another resident's hand, spit on other residents, and pinch or push other residents. Interview with CNA #2 on 08/25/2021 at 10:19 AM, revealed she had worked on the secure unit on Saturday 08/21/2021. At around 1:00 PM - 1:30 PM, she stated Resident #85 had a hold on Resident #35. When Resident #85 let go, Resident #35 fell, but there was no apparent injury. The CNA stated staff took Resident #85 to his/her bedroom for rest. CNA #2 stated she also worked on Sunday 08/22/2021. The CNA stated that after breakfast (10:30 AM) she had been at the nurse's station and heard Resident #85 making sounds. When she looked up, she saw Resident #85 push Resident #8 with his/her hand and saw Resident #8 fall. At that time, 15-minute checks were started for Resident #85. The CNA added she worked three (3) twelve (12) hour shifts per week, and Resident #85 usually got into an altercation with another resident at least one (1) of the three (3) days. The altercations included grabbing or poking other residents, running over other residents with the wheelchair, pinching other residents, and taking the food of other residents. The CNA indicated she reported the incidents but could not remember exact dates or who the nurse was at the time. Interview with LPN #6, on 08/25/2021 at 11:43 AM revealed that on 08/21/2021 she was sitting at the nurse's station when she heard a CNA yell Resident #85's name. LPN #6 added Resident #85 was pulling Resident #35 close by grabbing Resident #35's clothing. When Resident #85 let go of Resident #35, Resident #35 fell to the floor. LPN #6 stated Resident #85 was put to bed and stayed in the resident's room until dinner. LPN #6 stated staff was not assigned to monitor Resident #85, adding that if another resident had wandered into the room, staff would have to have waited to see if anything happened. LPN #6 stated on Sunday, 08/22/2021, Resident #85 was sitting in the common area of the unit and Resident #8 was also in the area. The LPN stated she heard Resident #8 yell and hit the floor. She stated CNA #1 and CNA #2, who were working, reported to LPN #6 that Resident #85 had pushed Resident #8 down. LPN #6 stated that while she did not see the incident first-hand, she knew Resident #8 had no history of falls and she believed what the two CNAs reported. The LPN stated she averaged working three (3) twelve (12)-hour shifts per week. Of those three (3) days, Resident #85 had a negative interaction with another resident on at least one (1) day. She cited negative interactions to include yelling at other residents and stealing food off other residents' trays. LPN #6 stated the 15-minute check sheets started on Sunday after Resident #8 was transferred to the hospital. On 08/21/2021, when Resident #85 had the aggressive interaction with Resident #35, staff had kept an eye on Resident #85, but had no documentation to support this. LPN #6 stated both incidents were reported to the weekend supervisor. During an interview with LPN #7 on 08/25/2021 at 1:20 PM, he stated that while he was a contract nurse, he had worked in the facility many times and was familiar with Resident #85. LPN #7 described Resident #85 as combative with other residents and believed Resident #85 was aware of the incidents. He supported his position by saying that when asked why another resident had been hit, Resident #85 would respond, Because I wanted to. LPN #7 stated he had not seen Resident #85 hit anyone, but he had seen the resident trying to push other residents down, grabbing other residents, and grabbing other residents' food and drink. The nurse stated he had complained to the DON about the resident's aggressive behavior, but nothing had been done. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 08/25/2021 at 2:26 PM, revealed if one resident placed their hands on another, to include pushing, kicking, and hitting, it would be considered resident-to-resident abuse and would be reported to the State. The DON stated she had not read the 08/21/2021 Nurse's Note nor talked with any of the staff that were there. She added that based on what had been reported to her by the weekend supervisor, she had not thought aggression was a part of the incident and therefore had not been abuse. Further interview on 08/26/2021 at 8:21 AM, with the DON, revealed she was unaware of Resident #85's history of aggression toward other residents. She acknowledged there should have been a care plan revision and interventions placed on 08/21/2021, when Resident #85 grabbed Resident #35 causing him/her to fall. The DON stated she was unsure if placing interventions on Saturday would have prevented the fracture to Resident #8 on 08/22/2021. The facility provided an acceptable credible Action Plan that alleged removal of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ). The facility's Action Plan included: 1. Resident #85 was reported to push Resident #8 resulting in a fractured femur. The incident was reported on 08/26/2021 and the follow up investigation was finalized and reported 08/27/2021. Resident #6 was reported to have exposed himself/herself in a group activity on 08/14/2021. This event was reported to the State Survey agency/OIG (Office of the Inspector General) 08/27/2021. Investigations going forward will include: 2. Conducting observations of the alleged victim, identification of any injuries as appropriate, location where the situation occurred, interaction and relationships between staff and other residents. 3. Interviews conducted with the alleged victim representative, perpetrator, witness, practitioner, outside agencies as needed. The facility conducted a record review for pertinent information such as progress notes, social services notes, physician, therapist and consultant notes, financial records, incident reports, reports from hospital, lab or x ray, medication records and any other agencies as deemed necessary. 4. Depending on the nature of the allegation, the facility put effective measures in place to ensure that further abuse, neglect or exploitation or mistreatment does not occur while the investigation is in progress. The facility will monitor the alleged victim and monitor the other residents at risk, by conducting management visits at different times and shifts. The facility will evaluate if the alleged victim feels safe. If they do not, immediate action will be taken to alleviate fear, i.e. room relocation, increased supervision, etc., immediate notification of the victim's practitioner and the family or the victims responsible party. The facility will oversee the implementation of corrective action and evaluate effectiveness through the QAPI process. All alleged abuse, neglect or exploitation will be monitored and recorded on a reportable event log. The investigation is in progress. 5. All residents with BIMs of 8 or above were interviewed by Social Services on 08-25-2021 and 08-26-2021 to ensure there were no concerns of safety, or feelings of abuse while in this facility. None were noted. The MOS Nurse and SS (Social Services) assistant reviewed residents with BIMS of 7 and below for any signs of change in baseline mood or behavior and normal daily routine. No changes or concerns were identified. 6. The LNHA, DON, Unit Managers, ADON, MOS, Business office, Payroll, Activities, Maintenance, Therapy, Scheduling were educated per the Regional Director of Clinical services on 08-26-2021 at 2:15 PM, on What is abuse, how to prevent abuse and neglect, when to report abuse and neglect, and to report all abuse to the LNHA immediately. The licensed Nursing Home Administrator will make the initial report to the Office of the Inspector General, Department of Community Based Services, the State Ombudsman and local Ombudsman, the responsible parties and the MD or Nurse practitioner within two hours. 7. IDT meting was held on 08-27-2021, the team met and all residents with behaviors affecting others; have interventions and care plans in place. All interventions and care plans were communicated to the floor staff on 08-27-2021. Referrals were made to psychiatric services as appropriate by assistant the Social Services Director. DON, and LNHA, and or designee educated all staff on the following: - Identify types of Abuse and Neglect. - When to report suspected abuse and neglect - Reporting of abuse and neglect directly to the administrator immediately - This education completed by 8/27/2021 - In addition, a list of all staff has been developed and no persons will be allowed to work without having completed this education prior to assuming the floor. 1. Facility system changes: i. behavior monitoring added to TAR to be completed Q shift by [name redacted] RN/Clinical Support services. ii. Facility is reviewing TAR daily in morning clinical meeting. TAR reviewed by DON on 08/27/2021. iii. A trigger report was run by RDO on 08/27/2021 and all concerns were addressed immediately. iv. The facility identified characteristics that could increase the risk for abuse such as attitudes, increase in resident behaviors, reports of shame, fear or retaliation, change in psychological, behavioral or psychosocial outcomes. v. allegations including staff to resident, resident to resident, visitor to resident, neglect, or exploitation facility is to report immediately and immediately start investigation and protect residents. vi. The LNHA had reported all investigations 08-27-2021 2. DON, LNHA, and or designee will audit: i. The Abuse QAPI tool and the reportable events logs completed monthly by the LNHA. Events audited weekly x 3 months and then quarterly x 12 months. Any concerns documented, corrected immediately, and staff educated accordingly. ii. Findings/trends reported at the monthly quality assurance and performance improvement committee by the Director of Nursing or designee for a minimum of six months. iii. QAPI meetings will occur weekly for four weeks to monitor progress and then monthly thereafter. The IJ was removed on 08/27/2021 at 6:00 PM after the survey team performed onsite verification that the Removal Action Plans had been implemented. Onsite verification of the implementation of the Removal Plan was conducted during the survey. On 08/27/2021 between the hours of 11:00 AM and 6:00 PM. Review of the educational materials indicated 100% of staff to include all departments had been completed on 08/26/2021. Twelve interviews were conducted to verify in-service training had been completed on the facility's Abuse Policy and Procedure training to include the types of abuse, what to report, to whom to report the allegations of abuse and when to report. Of those interviewed included certified nursing assistants (CNAs), licensed practical nurses (LPNs), registered nurses (RNs), housekeeping and scheduling staff. The staff interviewed revealed knowledge of what constituted abuse, what to do if abuse was observed, both staff to resident abuse and in the event of resident-to-resident abuse, when to report abuse and to whom the abuse should be reported. The interviews revealed a consistent message that staff understood not only the different types of abuse, but that resident-to-resident altercations also constituted abuse. Staff indicated that through training they understood the need to intercede immediately and to always protect the resident before reporting any incident of abuse to the Administrator. Staff also acknowledged that after assuring resident safety, the abuse should be reported immediately. Observations during the survey revealed Resident #85 was receiving 1:1 supervision. Record review for Resident #85 indicated the care plan had been revised to include exhibited physical behaviors and stealing food from other residents' trays. Interventions for Resident #85 included 1:1 supervision, psychiatric referral, laboratory testing and a care conference with family members to determine the resident's past interest. Resident #6 had been placed on every 15 minute checks, and the care plan had been updated on measures to address behaviors, and an IDT meeting was held on 08/27/2021. Resident #6 was seen by psych services on 08/25/2021. Surveyors verified 54 Residents with BIMS 8 or above were interviewed and indicated they felt safe. The LNHA, DON, Unit Managers, ADON, MDS, business office, payroll department, activities, maintenance, therapy, scheduling received education on what constitutes abuse and when to report. Based on interviews, record reviews and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to protect residents from physical, sexual, and verbal abuse for five (5) (Residents #35, #8, #58, #54, and #87) of five (5) sampled residents reviewed for abuse by Resident #85 and Resident #6. Specifically, Resident #85 knocked down Resident #35 down on 08/21/2021, and knocked Resident #8 down on 08/22/2021, resulting in a femur fracture. Resident #6 had multiple episodes of verbal and physical aggression towards other residents. Resident #6 exposed himself/herself, sexually during an activity, to Resident #58 and Resident #87. Staff reported that when Resident #6 came into the common area, other residents left due to the resident's behaviors. Staff indicated they were fearful Resident #6 would hurt another resident. The Director of Nursing (DON) indicated Resident's #6's behaviors created a stressful environment for the other residents. It was determined the facility's non-compliance with one or more requirements of participation caused, or was likely to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified at 483.12 (Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation) at a scope and severity of K. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was determined to exist on 04/01/2021 when Resident #6 was yelling and cursing at another resident and the facility failed to investigate the allegation of verbal abuse. The Director of Nursing (DON) and Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) were notified of the IJ and were provided the IJ Template on 08/26/2021 at 12:00 PM. AN acceptable Removal Plan was received on 08/27/2021. The IJ was determined to be removed on 08/27/2021, before exit. after the survey team performed onsite verification that the Removal Plans had been implemented. Noncompliance remained at the lower scope and severity of pattern E, no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that was not immediate jeopardy. The findings included: Review of the Abuse Prevention Program, revised 09/2020, indicated in Paragraph #1 that as part of the resident abuse prevention, administration would protect residents from abuse by anyone including, but not necessarily limited to staff, other residents, consultants, volunteers, staff from other agencies, family members, legal representatives, friends, visitors, or any other individuals. Review of the facility's policy, titled, Abuse and Neglect - Clinical Protocol, revised July 2017, revealed Abuse is defined as the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish. Abuse also includes the deprivation by an individual, including a caretaker, of goods or services that are necessary to attain or maintain physical, mental, or psychosocial well-being. The management and staff, with the support of the physicians, will address situations of suspected or identified abuse and report them in a timely manner to appropriate agencies, consistent with applicable laws and regulations. Review of the Unmanageable Resident policy, revised 04/2010, indicated that if a resident's behavior became abusive, hostile, assaultive, or unmanageable in any way that would jeopardize his or her safety or the safety of others, the Nurse Supervisor/Charge Nurse must immediately provide for the safety of all concerned, notify the attending physician for instruction, and notify the Director of Nursing and the resident's representative. The policy further indicated complete documentation of the incident must be recorded in the resident's medical record, and an incident report must be filed with the Administrator. Additionally, unmanageable residents may not be retained by the facility. 1. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #6 on 01/19/2017 with diagnoses of dementia with behavioral disturbances, anxiety/agitation, schizophrenia, adult failure to thrive, intellectual disability, and depression. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed Resident #6's cognition was severely impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three (3) out of fifteen (15). The resident required supervision with ambulation using a walker. The MDS indicated the resident had no behaviors. The most recent Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] indicated diagnoses of impulse disorder and physical and verbal aggression directed toward others occurred one (1) to three (3) days during the seven (7) day assessment period. Review of a care plan, dated 02/02/2017, indicated Resident #6 exhibited or had the potential to exhibit or demonstrate verbal behaviors such as the use of abusive and sexually inappropriate language. Review of a care plan, dated 10/26/2020, indicated Resident #6 exhibited or had the potential to exhibit physical behaviors related to poor anger management, poor impulse control, and public masturbation. Review of a Progress Note, dated 03/26/2021, indicated Resident #6 had a resident-to-resident altercation. Resident #6 continued to curse other residents and threatened to harm self and other residents. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/01/2021, indicated Resident #6 was cursing and yelling at another resident. There was no evidence provided that showed this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/03/2021, indicated Resident #6 was cursing other residents and making multiple verbal threats. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/04/2021 at 5:20 PM, indicated Resident #6 was extremely agitated and yelling at other residents. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/09/2021 at 10:04 AM, indicated Resident #6 was verbally aggressive with other residents, threatening harm, and cursing. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/13/2021 at 7:50 AM, indicated Resident #6 was cursing and threatening to harm other residents. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/16/2021, indicated Resident #6 was yelling and cursing at other residents, and the facility had the Director of Nursing come back to the unit. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/18/2021, indicated Resident #6 was yelling, throwing stuff, and cussing at other residents. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/30/2021, indicated Resident #6 was publicly masturbating during an activity. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 05/08/2021, indicated Resident #6 was yelling and cussing at other residents. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 05/29/2021, indicated Resident #6 had been cursing, yelling, and threatening other residents. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 06/05/2021, indicated Resident #6 was verbally aggressive with another resident. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 06/14/2021, indicated Resident #6 had been cursing and yelling at other residents and throwing items in the resident's room. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Physician's Progress Note, dated 06/16/2021, indicated Resident #6 was noted to have the potential to harm staff, other residents, or self. Review of a Physician's Progress Note, dated 06/17/2021, indicated Resident #6 had a long history with physical aggression related to schizoaffective bipolar disorder. Review of a Progress Note, dated 06/29/2021, indicated Resident #6 was threatening to hit, was cursing, and was being verbally aggressive with other residents. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 07/27/2021, indicated Resident #6 was cursing and threatening to hit other residents. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 08/11/2021, indicated Resident #6 was being verbally aggressive with other residents and was threatening to harm other residents. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 08/14/2021, indicated Resident #6 had exposed himself/herself and touched himself/herself inappropriately in front of other residents during an activity. The DON went to the unit to talk to the resident regarding his/her behaviors. There was no evidence provided that this incident was investigated. Review of a Physician's Progress Note, dated 08/18/2021 at 12:00 PM, indicated Resident #6 was verbally and physically aggressive, was throwing things, trying to break things, slamming the walker, and yelling and cursing. Record review revealed Haldol 2.5 mg (milligrams) was given. During an interview on 08/24/2021 at 3:15 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 indicated Resident #6 threatened to kill other residents, and it was just a matter of time before the resident hurt another resident. She indicated the facility's administration was aware of Resident #6's aggressive physical and verbal behaviors. During an interview on 08/24/2021 at 2:16 PM, Resident #54 indicated Resident #6 had kicked him/her in the leg with three (3) staff members present who witnessed the incident. During an interview on 08/24/2021 at 3:30 PM, the Activity Assistant (AA) indicated she had witnessed Resident #6 kick Resident #54. During an interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:15 PM, the AA indicated Resident #6 exposed himself/herself to two residents during an airshow while outside in the courtyard. During an interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:20 PM, Resident #58 indicated Resident #6 had exposed himself/herself to Resident #58 during the airshow, and that it made the resident feel uncomfortable, wondering what [Resident #58] did to provoke this. During an interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:30 PM, Resident #87 indicated Resident #6 had their genitals in his/her hand and was exposing himself/herself to Resident #58. Resident #87 indicated (he/she) felt bad for Resident #58. During an interview on 08/25/2021, the DON indicated allegations of abuse were to be reported to their immediate supervisor, and it would then be reported to the DON or NHA. She indicated she was not aware of the allegations of physical, verbal, and sexual abuse. The DON indicated she would report verbal allegations of abuse depending on how the other residents felt about it. She indicated the incident of Resident #6 exposing self during an activity should have been reported. During an interview with the Administrator, on 8/26/2021 at 2:30 PM, she stated she was aware of behaviors that Resident #58 had been displaying and that the resident was like a child. She indicated she had not been notified that the resident kicked another resident or that the resident had exposed themself in front of female residents during the outside activity for the air show.
CRITICAL (K)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #85 on 01/27/2020 with diagnoses that included schizoaffective disorder...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #85 on 01/27/2020 with diagnoses that included schizoaffective disorder, vascular dementia with behaviors, anxiety disorder, early onset Alzheimer's, and depression. Review of Resident 85's medical record revealed the resident had previously been discharged from another skilled nursing facility due to two (2) resident-to-resident altercations in two (2) days with behaviors that had become more aggressive leading up to the transfer. Review of the Nursing Progress Notes dated 03/10/2021 at 2:51 PM revealed Resident #85 was transferred to the hospital for geriatric psychiatric services due to anxiousness, agitation, and endangering self and others. The documentation did not reveal how the resident endangered self or others. The facility readmitted Resident #85 on 03/22/2021. Upon readmission Resident #85 experienced agitation, restlessness, hyperactivity, and sought companionship. Review of a SBAR dated 05/22/2021 indicated Resident #85 pushed another resident down. Review of the facility's list of State-Reported Incidents for the past three (3) months revealed there was no report for this incident. There was no documentation presented that supported an investigation of this incident had been completed. Review of a facility reported incident (FRI) dated 07/06/2021 indicated a certified nursing assistant (CNA) came out of the shower room and saw Resident #85 in the hallway with two (2) other unidentified residents, with all residents hitting one another. Review of the facility's list of state-reported incidents revealed a report had not been submitted to the State. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed the facility assessed Resident #85 as moderately cognitively impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of nine (9). Physical behaviors occurred (1) - three (3) days during the assessment period, other behaviors not directed toward others were documented as occurring (1) - three (3) days, and rejection of care (1) - three (3) days. No verbal behaviors were identified as occurring during the assessment period. A review of the facility's list of state-reported incidents revealed no reports had been submitted to the State during the assessment period, although the MDS indicated there had been one (1) - three (3) incidents during the assessment period. Record review revealed on 08/21/2021 at 2:40 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #6 documented she observed Resident #85 grab Resident #35 by the shirt. Resident #35 attempted to pull away, and Resident #85 pulled the resident closer. When Resident #85 let go of the resident's shirt, Resident #35 fell to the floor. Resident #35 sustained no injury. Review of the facility's list of state-reported incidents revealed there had been no submission of a report for Resident #85's incident on 08/21/2021. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #6 was interviewed on 08/25/2021 at 11:43 AM. She stated on 08/21/2021, she was sitting at the nurse's station when she heard a CNA yell Resident #85's name. LPN #6 stated the 08/21/2021 incident with Resident #85 was reported to the weekend supervisor. The Director of Nursing (DON) was interviewed on 08/25/2021 at 2:26 PM. She stated if one (1) resident placed their hands on another, to include pushing, kicking, and hitting, it would be considered resident-to-resident abuse and would be reported to the State agencies. The DON stated she had not read the 08/21/2021 Nurse's Note or talked with any of the staff that were there. She added that based on what had been reported to her by the Weekend Supervisor, she had not thought aggression was a part of the incident and therefore, it was not considered abuse. The DON stated that was the reason the 08/21/2021 incident involving Resident #85 had not been reported or investigated. The DON reviewed the state-reported folder for the 05/07/2021 incident, including the CNA's statement dated 05/05/2021, and stated the CNA might have dated the statement wrong. Observation revealed that on 08/25/2021 at 12:16 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) brought in the facility's state-reported incidents for the past three (3) months. When asked, the NHA confirmed the folders she brought in represented all she had reported to the State Agency or investigated for the past three (3) months. A review of the information provided by the facility indicated Resident #85 had two (2) incidents reported to the State agencies, one (1) incident for 05/05/2021 and another for 08/22/2021. The DON was interviewed on 08/26/2021 at 8:21 AM. She stated she had not reported the incident or investigated the incident involving Resident #85 that occurred on 08/21/2021 due to the way the incident had been presented to her. She reviewed the remaining physically aggressive incident reports and Nurse's Notes and had no reason why those incidents had not been reported or investigated. 3. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #83 on 10/16/2019 with diagnoses that included cerebral palsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, contractures, dysphagia, paranoid schizophrenia, need for assistance with personal care, mild cognitive impairment, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and intermittent explosive disorder. Review of the Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #83, dated 07/27/2021, revealed the facility assessed that Resident #83 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 00 out of 15, which indicated significant cognitive impairment. Resident #83 required extensive assistance of two (2) people with bed mobility, dressing, and toileting. Resident #83 required limited assistance of one person with eating. The resident was totally dependent on staff for bathing. Review of a Progress Note dated 07/20/2021 at 1:05 PM revealed, CNAs asked this nurse to come to room to look at resident. When this nurse went in the room the CNA's (sic) showed me that the resident had some yellow bruising to [the resident's] right inner thigh that wrapped around to the front and back of [the] thigh, 3 small open areas to [the] scrotum, and some discoloration spots to [the] right outer foot. An interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:48 PM with the DON revealed that if an injury was found that has no immediate known cause, it would be unknown and should be reported. The DON stated that when staff reported on 07/20/2021, significant bruising was observed on the resident's thigh it was not reported to the State Survey Agency at that time. The DON stated she concluded it was most likely a result of improper incontinent care. 3b. Review of a Progress Note dated 07/23/2021 at 5:46 PM, for Resident #83 revealed, ER nurse called to inform of acute right hip fracture, unknown cause at this time, DON [Director of Nursing] aware. [The resident had been sent out for a possible bowel obstruction. During the CT scan for this, the fracture was found.] An interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:48 PM with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed she did not report the right hip fracture to the State Survey Agency that was discovered in the hospital and reported to the facility on [DATE]. The DON stated it was not reported since she felt it was also a result of improper incontinent care and that she did not feel either incident met the criteria for reporting. The facility's Removal Plan included: 1. Resident #85 was reported to push Resident #8 resulting in a fractured femur. The incident was reported on 08/26/21 and the follow up investigation was finalized and reported 08/27/21. Resident #6 was reported to have exposed (himself/herself) in a group activity on 08/14/21. This event reported to OIG (Office of the Inspector General/Sttae Survey Agency) 08/27/21. 2. All incidents identified during the survey reported on 08/27/2021 3. All alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation were reported immediately but not later than two hours after the allegation if they result in serious bodily injury, but not later than 24 hours if they do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury. 4. All the findings of the investigation reported to the Administrator and to the Survey Agency within 5 working days. 5. Alleged violations identified are reported to the Administrator. LNHA will immediately report and protect the identified residents prior to conducting the investigation. 6. LNHA, DON, Unit Managers [UM], ADON, MOS [sic] [Minimum Data Set, MDS], Business office, Payroll, Activities, Maintenance, Therapy, Scheduling were educated per Regional Director of Clinical services on 08-26-2021 at 2:15 pm on What is abuse, how to prevent abuse and neglect, when to report abuse and neglect, and to report all abuse to the LNHA immediately. The licensed Nursing Home Administrator makes the initial report to the Office of the Inspector General, Department of Community Based Services, the State Ombudsman and Local Ombudsman, the responsible parties and the MD or Nurse practitioner within two hours. 7. IDT [interdisciplinary team] meeting held 8-27-2021 reviewed behaviors for all residents that have behaviors affecting others. Interventions and care plans were put in place by DON, UM and MOS [sic, MDS]. All interventions and care plans communicated to floor staff per [NAME], and referrals made to psychiatric services as appropriate. DON, and LNHA, and or designee educated all staff on the following: - Identify types of Abuse and Neglect. - When to report suspected abuse and neglect - Reporting of abuse and neglect directly to the administrator immediately - This education completed 08/27/2021 - In addition, a list of all staff has been developed and no persons will be allowed to work without having completed this education prior to assuming the floor. 1. DON, LNHA, and or designee reported all findings to QAPI i. The Abuse QAPI [quality assurance performance improvement] tool and the reportable events logs completed monthly by the LNHA. Events audited weekly x 3 months and then quarterly x 12 months. Any concerns will be documented, corrected immediately, and staff educated accordingly. ii. Findings/trends reported at the monthly quality assurance and performance improvement committee by the Director of Nursing or designee for a minimum of six months. iii. QAPI meetings weekly for four weeks to monitor progress and then monthly thereafter. The IJ was removed on 08/27/2021 at 6:00 PM after the survey team performed onsite verification that the Removal Plans had been implemented. Onsite verification of the implementation of the Removal Plan was conducted during the survey. On 08/27/2021 between the hours of 11:00 AM and 6:00 PM. Review of the educational materials indicated 100% of staff to include all departments had been completed on 08/26/2021. Twelve interviews were conducted to verify in-service training had been completed on the facility's Abuse Policy and Procedure training to include the types of abuse, what to report, to whom to report the allegations of abuse and when to report. Of those interviewed included certified nursing assistants (CNAs), licensed practical nurses (LPNs), registered nurses (RNs), housekeeping and scheduling staff. The staff interviewed revealed knowledge of what constituted abuse, what to do if abuse was observed, both staff to resident abuse and in the event of resident-to-resident abuse, when to report abuse and to whom the abuse should be reported. The interviews revealed a consistent message that staff understood not only the different types of abuse, but that resident-to-resident altercations also constituted abuse. Staff indicated that through training they understood the need to intercede immediately and to always protect the resident before reporting any incident of abuse to the Administrator. Staff also acknowledged that have assuring resident safety, the abuse should be reported immediately. Observations during the survey revealed Resident #85 was receiving 1:1 supervision. Record review for Resident #85 indicated the care plan had been revised to include exhibited physical behaviors and stealing food from other resident's trays. Interventions for Resident #85 included 1:1 supervision, psychiatric referral, laboratory testing and a care conference with family members to determine the resident's past interest. Resident #6 had been placed on every 15 minute checks, and the care plan had been updated on measures to address behaviors, and an IDT meeting was held on 08/27/2021. Resident #6 was seen by psych services on 08/25/2021. Surveyors verified 54 Residents with BIMS 8 or above were interviewed and indicated they felt safe. The LNHA, DON, unit managers, ADON, MDS, business office, payroll department, activities, maintenance, therapy, scheduling received education on what constitutes abuse and when to report. Based on interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to report abuse allegations and injuries of unknown origin to the State Survey Agency for six (6) (Residents #35, #8, #58, #54, #83, and #87) out of six (6) residents reviewed for abuse. Resident #6 had multiple occurrences of cursing, yelling, throwing things, threatening other residents, and publicly masturbating in front of other residents. These incidents were not reported. Resident #85 had physical or verbal altercations with other residents and the incidents were not reported. One of the physical altercations with Resident #85 caused Resident #8 to fall, and Resident #8 sustained a hip fracture. Resident #83 had injuries of unknown origin, including bruising and a hip fracture, that were not reported to the State Survey Agency. It was determined the facility's non-compliance with one or more requirements of participation caused, or was likely to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified at 483.12 (Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation) at a scope and severity of K. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) determined to exist on 04/01/2021 when Resident #6 was yelling and cursing at another resident and the facility failed to investigate the allegation of verbal abuse. The Director of Nursing (DON) and Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) were notified of the IJ and provided with the IJ Template on 08/26/2021 at 12:00 PM. A Removal Plan was requested. The Removal Plan was accepted by the State Survey Agency on 08/27/2021 at 6:00 PM. The IJ was removed on 08/27/2021 at 6:00 PM after the survey team performed onsite verification that the Removal Plans had been implemented. Noncompliance remained at the lower scope and severity of pattern, no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that was not immediate jeopardy. The findings included: Review of the facility's policy, The Abuse Prevention Program, reviewed September 2020 indicated under Paragraph #7 that allegations of abuse would be investigated and reported within the timeframes required by federal requirements. A review of the facility;s policy, titled, Abuse and Neglect - Clinical Protocol, revised July 2017, revealed abuse is defined as the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish. Abuse also includes the deprivation by an individual, including a caretaker, of goods or services that are necessary to attain or maintain physical, mental, or psychosocial well-being. The management and staff, with the support of the physicians, will address situations of suspected or identified abuse and report them in a timely manner to appropriate agencies, consistent with applicable laws and regulations. 1. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #6 on 01/19/2017 with diagnoses of dementia with behavioral disturbances, anxiety/agitation, schizophrenia, adult failure to thrive, anorexia, intellectual disability, and depression. The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #6's cognition was severely impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of three (3) out of fifteen (15). The resident required supervision with ambulation using a walker. This MDS indicated the resident had no behaviors. The most recent Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] indicated diagnoses of impulse disorder and physical and verbal aggression directed toward others occurred one (1) - three (3) days during the seven (7) day assessment period. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/01/2021, indicated Resident #6 was cursing and yelling at another resident. There was no evidence provided that this was reported to the State Survey Agency. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/03/2021, indicated Resident #6 was cursing other residents and making multiple verbal threats. There was no evidence provided that this was reported to the State Survey Agency. Review of Progress Note, dated 04/04/2021 at 5:20 PM, indicated Resident #6 was extremely agitated and yelling at other residents. There was no evidence provided that this was reported to the State Survey Agency. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/09/2021 at 10:04 AM, indicated Resident #6 was verbally aggressive with other residents, threatening harm, and cursing. There was no evidence provided that this was reported to the State Survey Agency . Review a Progress Note, dated 04/13/2021 at 7:50 AM, indicated Resident #6 was cursing and threatening to harm other residents. There was no evidence provided that this was reported to the State Survey Agency. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/16/2021, indicated Resident #6 was yelling and cursing at other residents, and the facility had the Director of Nursing come back to the unit. There was no evidence provided that this was reported to the State Survey Agency. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/18/2021, indicated Resident #6 was yelling, throwing stuff, and cussing at other residents. There was no evidence provided that this was reported to the State Survey Agency . Review of a Progress Note, dated 05/08/2021, indicated Resident #6 was yelling and cussing at other residents. There was no evidence provided that this was reported to the State Survey Agency. Review of a Progress Note, dated 05/29/2021, indicated Resident #6 had been cursing, yelling, and threatening other residents. There was no evidence provided that showed this was reported to the State Survey Agency. Review of a Progress Note, dated 06/29/2021, indicated Resident #6 was threatening to hit, was cursing, and was being verbally aggressive with other residents. Review of a Progress note, dated 07/27/2021, indicated Resident #6 was cursing and threatening to hit other residents. There was no evidence provided that showed this was reported to the State Survey Agency. Review of a Progress Note, dated 08/11/2021, indicated Resident #6 was being verbally aggressive with other residents and was threatening to harm other residents. There was no evidence provided that showed this was reported to the State Survey Agency. During an interview on 08/24/2021 at 3:15 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 indicated Resident #6 threatened to kill other residents, and it was just a matter of time before the resident hurt another resident. During an interview on 08/24/2021 at 2:16 PM, Resident #54 indicated Resident #6 had kicked Resident #54 in the leg with three (3) staff members present who witnessed the incident. During an interview on 08/24/2021 at 3:30 PM, the Activity Assistant (AA) indicated she had witnessed Resident #6 kick Resident #54. Record review and interview revealed there were no reports filed with the State Survey Agency for the verbal, physical, or sexual abuse allegations. During an interview on 08/25/2021, with the DON revealed allegations of abuse were to be reported to their immediate supervisor, and it would then be reported to the DON or NHA. She indicated she was not aware of the allegations of physical, verbal, and sexual abuse. The DON indicated she would report verbal allegations of abuse depending on how the other residents felt about it. She indicated the incident of Resident #6 exposing self during an activity should have been reported.
CRITICAL (K)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of the facility's Abuse Prevention Program, under Paragraph #7, revealed that allegations of abuse would be investigat...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of the facility's Abuse Prevention Program, under Paragraph #7, revealed that allegations of abuse would be investigated and reported within the timeframes required by federal requirements. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #85 on 01/27/2020 with diagnoses that included schizoaffective disorder, vascular dementia with behaviors, anxiety disorder, early onset Alzheimer's, and depression. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the facility assessed Resident #85 as moderately cognitively impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine (9) out of fifteen (15). Physical behaviors occurred one (1) to three (3) days during the assessment period, other behaviors not directed toward others were documented as occurring one (1) to three (3) days, and rejection of care one (1) to three (3) days. No verbal behaviors were identified as occurring during the assessment period. Review of the Nurse's Progress Notes and/or incident reports indicated Resident #85 had physical or verbal altercations with other residents on the following days: 06/13/2021, 07/09/2021, 07/24/2021, 08/21/2021 and 08/22/202; however, there was no documented evidence the incidents were investigated by the facility. Record review revealed that on 08/21/2021 at 2:40 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #6 documented she observed Resident #85 grab Resident #35 by the shirt. Resident #35 attempted to pull away, and Resident #85 pulled Resident #35 closer. When Resident #85 let go of Resident #35's shirt, Resident #35 fell to the floor. Resident #35 sustained no apparent injury. Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 was interviewed on 08/25/2021 at 9:16 AM. CNA #1 stated at the present time, Resident #85 was on a special observation schedule of every 15 minutes due to an incident over the weekend. CNA #1 stated she had worked the weekend and stated on Saturday, 08/21/2021, Resident #85 had pushed Resident #35 down in the living area. The CNA stated Resident #85 had grabbed Resident #35 by the shirt, and. then as Resident #35 tried to get away, Resident #85 let go of the shirt causing Resident #35 to fall. The CNA stated Resident #85 had been taken to the room and remained in the room until dinner. No special monitoring had been placed for Resident #85. The CNA stated 15-minute checks had not started until 08/22/2021 when Resident #85 pushed Resident #8 down, resulting in a fracture for Resident #8. CNA #2 was interviewed on 08/25/2021 at 10:19 AM. She stated she had worked in the secure unit on Saturday 08/21/2021. Further interview revealed around 1:00-1:30 PM, Resident #85 had a hold on Resident #35's shirt. When Resident #85 let go, Resident #35 fell, but there was no apparent injury. The CNA stated staff took Resident #85 to the bedroom for rest. CNA #2 stated she also worked on Sunday 08/22/2021. The CNA stated after breakfast (10:30 AM) she was at the nurse's station and heard Resident #85 making sounds. When she looked up, she saw Resident #85 push Resident #8 and saw Resident #8 fall. At that time, 15-minute checks were started for Resident #85. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #6 was interviewed on 08/25/2021 at 11:43 AM. She stated on 08/21/2021 she had been sitting at the nurse's station when she heard a CNA yell Resident #85's name. LPN #6 added Resident #85 was pulling Resident #35 close by grabbing Resident #35's clothing. When Resident #85 let go of Resident #35, Resident #35 fell to the floor. LPN #6 stated Resident #85 was put to bed and stayed in the room until dinner. Staff was not assigned to monitor Resident #85, adding that if another resident had wandered into the room, staff would have to have waited to see if anything happened. The nurse stated the incidents had been reported to the weekend supervisor. During the survey, the weekend supervisor was supposed to come in for an interview, but she did not. Follow up phone calls made to the weekend supervisor were not answered. The DON was interviewed on 08/25/2021 at 2:26 PM. The DON stated she had not investigated the incident that occurred on 08/21/2021. She had not read the Nurse's Notes regarding the incident nor talked to any staff involved based on the report received from the weekend supervisor. The DON stated the incident was investigated by the weekend supervisor. Requests were made several times for investigative information related to the 08/21/2021 incident. No information was provided. The DON reviewed the Nurse's Progress Notes and incident reports from other physically aggressive incidents involving Resident #85 and other residents. She stated she would look for any investigations and if found would return them to the Surveyors for review. No investigations were provided. When the DON reviewed the SBARs or the incident reports for the other incidents, she was unable to provide documentation of investigation. 3a. Record review revealed Resident #83 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including cerebral palsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, contractures, dysphagia, paranoid schizophrenia, abnormal posture, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, muscle weakness, type 2 diabetes, need for assistance with personal care, mild cognitive impairment, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and intermittent explosive disorder. A review of the Significant Change Minimum Data Set for Resident #83 dated 07/27/2021 indicated that Resident #83 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of zero (00) out of fifteen (15), indicating significant cognitive impairment. Resident #83 required extensive assistance of two (2) persons with bed mobility, dressing, and toileting. Resident #83 required limited assistance of one person with eating. The resident was totally dependent on staff for bathing. A review of a Progress Note dated 07/20/2021 at 1:05 PM revealed, CNAs [Certified Nurse Aide] asked this nurse to come to room to look at resident. When this nurse went in the room the CNA's [sic] showed me that the resident had some yellow bruising to [the resident's] right inner thigh that wrapped around to the front and back of [the] thigh, 3 small open areas to [the] scrotum, and some discoloration spots to [the] right outer foot. An interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:48 PM, with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed that when staff reported observing significant bruising on Resident #83's thigh on 07/20/2021, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) talked to the staff about their observations. The DON stated that after the ADON spoke to staff, it was determined that CNA staff probably accidentally caused the bruising while providing care. The DON stated that due to the resident's contractures, staff must hold the resident's thighs apart while providing incontinent care. The DON acknowledged there was no documentation of those conversations or determination of the cause. The DON stated she did not ask the ADON for any documentation related to her findings, but there was education provided to the staff. The DON further stated that the nurse practitioner (NP) was made aware, and that she followed up on it. During the interview, the DON reviewed the progress notes and verified the NP did not document anywhere that there was ever any follow up on the bruising when she saw the resident on 07/20/2021. When asked if she would expect staff to document that injuries of an unknown origin are followed up on, the DON stated she would expect nurses to act according to their license and document accordingly. An interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:48 PM with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) revealed that when the bruise on Resident #83 was reported by the CNA staff, the ADON talked to staff about the bruise. The NHA stated she did not follow up with the ADON to see if she documented anything in relation to her investigation. The NHA stated there was no documentation that an investigation into how the bruising occurred was completed. An interview on 08/26/2021 at 1:38 PM with the ADON revealed she was on E Hall on 07/20/2021 when staff observed bruising to Resident #83's thigh and staff informed the DON and NP. The ADON stated she looked at the resident's thigh and confirmed bruising and assumed it occurred when CNAs were providing perineal care. The ADON stated staff would use the bend of their arms to open the resident's legs in order to clean the resident's groin and thigh area, and that may have caused the bruising. The ADON stated there was no documentation that staff were interviewed about the bruising. The ADON stated at that time, the ADON provided information to staff on proper perineal care and did education, but there was no documentation in relation to the education and that no staff signed that they attended. The ADON stated it was very informal, and she did not document anything in the electronic medical record because the NP was aware. The ADON stated she assumed the NP was documenting about it. The ADON was unaware that the NP never mentioned or documented anything in relation to the bruising on the resident's thigh but confirmed she never checked to make sure there was documentation. 3b. Review of Resident #83's Progress Note dated 07/23/2021 at 5:46 PM, revealed, ER nurse called to inform of acute right hip fracture, unknown cause at this time, DON aware. [The resident had been sent out for a possible bowel obstruction. During the computer tomography (CT) scan for this, the fracture was found.] An interview on 08/25/2021 at 12:00 PM, with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed she was aware that the hospital reported on 07/23/2021 that Resident #83 had an acute right hip fracture. The hospital did additional testing, and it was ruled as a chronic condition and not a new acute injury. The DON stated she would get the hospital records and provide those to the Surveyor. The DON also stated she was not sure why there was not any documentation in the Progress notes related to the follow-up or outcome of the final diagnosis. Review of the Imaging dated 07/24/2021 of the CT Cystogram per contrast protocol revealed Resident #83 had a comminuted and impacted fracture in the proximal right femur in the sub-capital region. Further review revealed the assessment was right femoral neck fracture of undetermined age. An interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:48 PM with the DON revealed she did not feel Resident #83's fracture was an injury of unknown origin and therefore it did not need to be investigated. The DON stated they received a report on 07/24/2021 from urology and from the CT scan, and that there were two different findings, but she did not follow up with either urology or with the hospital about the CT scan to verify both results. The DON stated she never contacted urology to ask how they made their determination that it appears to be a chronic since the CT scan contradicted the urology report stating there was a comminuted and impacted fracture in the right femur of undetermined age. The DON stated the facility never initiated an investigation into how the fracture occurred or interviewed any staff in relation to the fracture. The DON stated she felt the fracture was also a result of how the bruising was determined to have been caused due to staff separating the resident's legs during care. The facility's Removal Plan included: 1. Resident #85 was reported to push Resident #8 resulting in a fractured femur. The incident was reported on 08/26/21 and the follow up investigation finalized and reported 08/27/21. Resident #6 was reported to have exposed [himself/herself] in a group activity on 08/14/21. This event reported to OIG [Office of Inspector General] 08/27/21. Investigations going forward will include: - Conducted observations of the alleged victim, identification of any injuries as appropriate, location where the situation occurred, interaction and relationships between staff and other residents. - Interviews conducted with the alleged victim representative, perpetrator, witness, practitioner, outside agencies as needed. The facility conducted a record review for pertinent information such as progress notes, social services notes, physician, therapist and consultant notes, financial records, incident reports, reports from hospital, lab or x ray, medication records and any other agencies as deemed necessary. - Depending on the nature of the allegation, the facility has put effective measures in place to ensure that further abuse, neglect or exploitation or mistreatment does not occur while the investigation is in progress. The facility will monitor the alleged victim and monitor the other residents at risk, by conducting management visits at different times and shifts. The facility evaluated if the alleged victim felt safe. If they do not, immediate action will be taken to alleviate fear, i.e. room relocation, increased supervision, etc., immediate notification of the victim's practitioner and the family or the victims responsible party. The facility oversees the implementation of corrective action and evaluates effectiveness through the QAPI process. All alleged abuse, neglect or exploitation monitored and recorded on a reportable event log. 2. All residents with BIMs of 8 or above were interviewed by Social Services on 08-25-2021 and 08-26-2021 to ensure there were no concerns of safety, or feelings of abuse while in this facility. None were noted. MOS nurse and SS assistant reviewed residents with BIMS of 7 and below for any signs of change in baseline mood or behavior and normal daily routine. No changes or concerns were identified. 3. LNHA, DON, Unit Managers, ADON, MOS, Business office, Payroll, Activities, Maintenance, Therapy, Scheduling were educated per regional director of Clinical services on 8-26-2021 at 2:15 PM on What is abuse, how to prevent abuse and neglect, when to report abuse and neglect, and to report all abuse to the LNHA immediately. The licensed Nursing Home Administrator will make the initial report to the Office of the Inspector General, Department of Community Based Services, the State Ombudsman and Local Ombudsman, the responsible parties and the MD or Nurse practitioner within two hours. 4. IDT meeting held 8-27-2021; behaviors reviewed to ensure all residents that have behaviors affecting others have interventions and care plans in place. All interventions and care plans were communicated to floor staff by way of the [NAME]. Education on this provided by DON on 8-27-2021. Referrals were made to psychiatric services as appropriate by Social services assistant. DON, and LNHA, and or designee educated all staff on the following: - Identify types of Abuse and Neglect. - When to report suspected abuse and neglect - Reporting of abuse and neglect directly to the administrator immediately - This education completed by 8/27/2021 - In addition, a list of all staff has been developed and no persons will be allowed to work without having completed this education prior to assuming the floor. 1. Facility system changes: i. Behavior monitoring to TAR to be completed every shift. By the RN ii. Facility has reviewed TAR daily in morning clinical meeting. Reviewed 8-27-2021 by DONs iii. Weekend Manager reviews TAR every weekend. iv. IDT team reviews weekly TAR meeting to ensure new interventions were effective and care plans were updated. Review nursing notes for trigger words daily to identify events that occurred throughout the day. Any triggers reported to the Administrator immediately and the licensed Nursing Home Administrator will make the initial report to the Office of the Inspector General (State Survey Agency), Department of Community Based Services, the State Ombudsman and Local Ombudsman, the responsible parties and the MD or Nurse practitioner within two hours. v. Behaviors affecting others addressed immediately as appropriate, residents with noted behaviors will be referred to psych services. DON, LNHA, and or designee audited: i. The Abuse QAPI tool and the reportable events logs completed monthly by the LNHA. Events audited weekly x 3 months and then quarterly x 12 months. Any concerns documented, corrected immediately, and staff will be educated accordingly. ii. Findings/trends reported at the monthly quality assurance and performance improvement committee by the Director of Nursing or designee for a minimum of six months. iii. QAPI meetings weekly for four weeks to monitor progress and then monthly thereafter. The IJ was removed on 08/27/2021 at 6:00 PM after the survey team performed onsite verification that the Removal Plans had been implemented. Onsite verification of the implementation of the Removal Plan was conducted during the survey. On 08/27/2021 between the hours of 11:00 AM and 6:00 PM. Review of the educational materials indicated 100% of staff to include all departments had been completed on 08/26/2021. 1. Resident #85 was reported to push Resident #8 resulting in a fractured femur. The incident was reported on 08/26/2021 and the follow up investigation finalized and reported 08/27/2021. Resident #6 was reported to have exposed [himself/herself] in a group activity on 08/14/2021. This event was reported to OIG on 08/27/2021. 2. Surveyors verified 54 Residents with BIMS 8 or above were interviewed and indicated they felt safe. 3. Review of the educational materials indicated 100% of staff to include all departments had been completed on 08/26/2021. Twelve interviews were conducted on 08/27/2021 between the hours of 11:00 AM - 6:00 PM to verify in-service training had been completed on the facility's Abuse Policy and Procedure training to include the types of abuse, what to report, to whom to report the allegations of abuse and when to report. Of those interviewed included certified nursing assistants (CNAs), licensed practical nurses (LPNs), registered nurses (RNs), housekeeping and scheduling staff. The staff interviewed revealed knowledge of what constituted abuse, what to do if abuse was observed, both staff to resident abuse and in the event of resident-to-resident abuse, when to report abuse and to whom the abuse should be reported. The interviews revealed a consistent message that staff understood not only the different types of abuse, but that resident-to-resident altercations also constituted abuse. Staff indicated that through training they understood the need to intercede immediately and to always protect the resident before reporting any incident of abuse to the Administrator. Staff also acknowledged that have assuring resident safety, abuse should be reported immediately. The LNHA, DON, unit managers, ADON, MDS, business office, payroll department, activities, maintenance, therapy, scheduling received education on what constitutes abuse and when to report. 4. Observations during the survey revealed Resident #85 was receiving 1:1 supervision. Record review for Resident #85 indicated the care plan had been revised to include exhibited physical behaviors and stealing food from other resident's trays. Interventions for Resident #85 included 1:1 supervision, psychiatric referral, laboratory testing and a care conference with family members to determine the resident's past interest. Resident #6 had been placed on every 15-minute checks, and the care plan had been updated on measures to address behaviors, and an IDT meeting was held on 08/27/2021. Resident #6 was seen by psych services on 08/25/2021. Based on interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to investigate abuse allegations for six (6) (Residents #35, #8, #58, #54, #87 and #83) out of six (6) residents reviewed for abuse by Resident #85 and Resident #6. Resident #6 had multiple occurrences of cursing, yelling, throwing things, threatening other residents, and publicly masturbating in front of other residents. These incidents were not investigated. Resident #85 had physical or verbal altercations with other residents and the incidents were not investigated. One of the physical altercations with Resident #85 caused Resident #8 to fall, and Resident #8 sustained a hip fracture. Resident #83 had injuries of unknown origin, including bruising and a hip fracture, that were not thoroughly investigated. It was determined the facility's non-compliance with one or more requirements of participation caused, or was likely to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was related to State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, 483.12 (Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation) at a scope and severity of K. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) began on 04/01/2021 when Resident #6 was yelling and cursing at another resident and the facility failed to investigate the allegation of verbal abuse. The Director of Nursing (DON) and Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) were notified of the IJ and provided with the IJ Template on 08/26/2021 at 12:00 PM. A Removal Plan was requested. The Removal Plan was accepted by the State Survey Agency on 08/27/2021 at 6:00 PM. The IJ was removed on 08/27/2021 at 6:00 PM after the survey team performed onsite verification that the Removal Plans had been implemented. Noncompliance remained at the lower scope and severity of pattern, no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that was not immediate jeopardy. The findings included: Review of the facility's The Abuse Prevention Program reviewed September 2020 indicated under Paragraph #7 that allegations of abuse would be investigated and reported within the timeframes required by federal requirements. A review of the facility's policy, titled, Abuse and Neglect - Clinical Protocol, revised July 2017, revealed abuse is defined as the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish. Abuse also included the deprivation by an individual, including a caretaker, of goods or services that are necessary to attain or maintain physical, mental, or psychosocial well-being. The management and staff, with the support of the physicians, will address situations of suspected or identified abuse and report them in a timely manner to appropriate agencies, consistent with applicable laws and regulations. 1. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #6 with diagnoses of dementia with behavioral disturbances and schizophrenia. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] indicated Resident #6's cognition was severely impaired with Brief Interview for Mental Score (BIMS) of three (3) out of fifteen (15). Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/01/2021, indicated Resident #6 was cursing and yelling at another resident. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/03/2021, revealed Resident #6 was cursing other residents and making multiple verbal threats. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/04/2021 at 5:20 PM, indicated Resident #6 was extremely agitated and yelling at other residents. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/09/2021 at 10:04 AM, indicated Resident #6 was verbally aggressive with other residents, threatening harm, and cursing. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/13/2021 at 7:50 AM, indicated Resident #6 was cursing and threatening to harm other residents. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/16/2021, indicated Resident #6 was yelling and cursing at other residents, and the facility had the Director of Nursing come back to the unit. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/18/2021, indicated Resident #6 was yelling, throwing stuff, and cussing at other residents. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 04/30/2021, indicated Resident #6 was publicly masturbating during an activity. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 05/08/2021, indicated Resident #6 was yelling and cussing at other residents. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 05/29/2021, indicated Resident #6 had been cursing, yelling, and threatening other residents. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 06/05/2021, indicated Resident #6 was verbally aggressive with another resident. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 06/14/2021, indicated Resident #6 had been cursing and yelling at other residents and throwing items in the resident's room. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Physician's Progress Note, dated 06/16/2021, indicated Resident #6 was noted to have the potential to harm staff, other residents, or self. Review of a Physician's Progress Note, dated 06/17/2021, indicated Resident #6 had a long history with physical aggression related to schizoaffective bipolar disorder. Review of a Progress Note, dated 06/29/2021, indicated Resident #6 was threatening to hit, was cursing, and was being verbally aggressive with other residents. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 07/27/2021, indicated Resident #6 was cursing and threatening to hit other residents. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 08/11/2021, indicated Resident #6 was being verbally aggressive with other residents and was threatening to harm other residents. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Progress Note, dated 08/14/2021, indicated Resident #6 had exposed himself/herself and touched self inappropriately in front of other residents during an activity. The DON had come to the unit to talk to the resident regarding behaviors. There was no evidence provided that showed this was investigated. Review of a Physician's Progress Note, dated 08/18/2021 at 12:00 PM, indicated Resident #6 was verbally and physically aggressive, was throwing things, trying to break things, slamming the walker, and yelling and cursing. Haldol 2.5 mg (milligrams) was given. During an interview on 08/24/2021 at 3:15 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 indicated Resident #6 threatened to kill other residents, and it was just a matter of time before the resident hurt another resident. She indicated the facility's administration was aware of Resident #6's aggressive physical and verbal behaviors. During an interview on 08/24/2021 at 2:16 PM, Resident #54 indicated Resident #6 had kicked Resident #54 in the leg with three (3) staff members present who witnessed the incident. During an interview on 08/24/2021 at 3:30 PM, the Activity Assistant (AA) indicated she had witnessed Resident #6 kick Resident #54. During an interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:15 PM, the AA indicated Resident #6 exposed self to two (2) female residents during an airshow while outside in the courtyard. During an interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:20 PM, Resident #58 indicated Resident #6 had exposed self to Resident #58 during the airshow, and that it made the resident feel uncomfortable, wondering what [Resident #58] did to provoke this. During an interview on 08/26/2021 at 12:30 PM, Resident #87 indicated Resident #6 had their genitals in his/her hand and was exposing self to Resident #58. Resident #87 indicated (gender) felt bad for Resident #58. There were no investigations completed for these verbal, physical, or sexual abuse allegations. During an interview on 08/25/2021 at 2:23 PM, the DON indicated allegations of abuse were to be reported to their immediate supervisor, and it would then be reported to the DON or Nursing Home Administrator (NHA). The DON stated she was not aware of the allegations of physical, verbal, and sexual abuse. The DON indicated she would report verbal allegations of abuse depending on how the other residents felt. She indicated the incident of Resident #6 exposing self during an activity should have been reported.
CONCERN (D)

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #67 on 01/18/2021 and readmitted the resident on 02/14/2021 with diagno...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #67 on 01/18/2021 and readmitted the resident on 02/14/2021 with diagnoses that included disruption of a surgical wound, obstructive uropathy and morbid obesity. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], indicated Resident #67 was cognitively intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of fourteen (14) out of fifteen (15). The assessment further indicated the resident had an indwelling urinary catheter and surgical wounds. Review of the 08/2021 Treatment Administration Record (TAR), revealed an entry to check placement of the privacy bag for the indwelling urinary catheter every shift. Further review revealed each day had been checked and initialed which indicated the privacy bag was in place. Review of the care plan for Resident #67, last reviewed on 08/12/2021, indicated a privacy bag should be provided for the resident's indwelling urinary catheter. Observation of Resident #67 on 08/23/2021 at 2:47 PM, revealed the drainage bag for the indwelling urinary catheter did not have a privacy bag. Further observation revealed urine was visible to anyone in the hall as the door to the room was opened. Observation on 08/24/2021 at 2:00 PM, revealed no privacy bag was seen covering the urinary drainage bag. Interview with the resident, at that time, revealed the last time he/she remembered the bag being covered was about three (3) weeks ago. Interview with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #2, on 08/25/2021 at 10:33 AM, revealed Resident #67 should have a privacy bag covering the urinary drainage bag. CNA #2 added she had served breakfast to the resident and had not noticed the drainage bag was not covered. Interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #1, on 08/25/2021 at 10:34 AM, revealed the urinary drainage bag should be always covered to maintain privacy. The nurse stated she was uncertain about the facility's policy for covering catheter drainage bags. RN #1 added she was unaware if Resident #67's catheter drainage bag was covered since she had not been in the resident's room yet that shift. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 08/26/2021 at 8:15 AM, revealed the standard of care was to cover the urinary drainage bag, but to be sure she needed to review the facility policy. The DON did not return a policy for covering the urinary drainage bag. Based on observations, interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure dignity for three (3) of three sampled residents (Residents #22, #83 and #67) reviewed for dignity. Resident #22 was observed not dressed or covered. Resident #83 and Resident #67 did not have a privacy bag for their urinary catheter drainage bags. The findings included: Review of the facility's policy, titled, Quality of Life-Dignity, revised August 2009, revealed, Residents should be treated with dignity and respect at all times. Treated with dignity means the resident would be assisted in maintaining and enhancing his or her best self-esteem and self-worth. Residents should be encouraged and assisted to dress in their own clothes rather than hospital gowns. Helping the resident to keep urinary catheter bags covered. 1. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #22 on 06/08/2019 with diagnoses that included cerebral infarction, hemiplegia and hemiparesis, contracture to the elbow and wrist, aphasia, muscle weakness, type 2 diabetes, major depressive disorder, dysphagia, lack of coordination, abnormal posture, and essential hypertension. Review of the Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed the facility assessed Resident #22 to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of six (6) out of fifteen (15), which indicated significant cognitive impairment. Further review revealed Resident #22 required the extensive assistance of two (2) persons with bed mobility, transfer, dressing, and toileting, and required supervision of one (1) person with eating. The resident was totally dependent on staff for bathing. Review of the care plans, dated 07/11/2019, revealed Resident #22 was not care planned for any preference related to clothing or lack of clothing. Further review revealed Resident #22 was not care planned for being resistive to care related to dressing. Observation on 08/23/2021 at 11:11 AM, revealed Resident #22 lying in bed without any clothing on and covered by only a sheet. Further observation revealed the sheet was only partially covering Resident #22, leaving the resident almost fully exposed. Observation on 08/24/2021 at 10:31 AM, revealed Resident #22 lying down in bed covered with only a sheet. Further observation revealed when the sheet was pulled back Resident #22 had nothing on under the sheet other than briefs. Observation on 08/25/2021 at 9:07 AM, revealed Resident #22 lying in bed wearing a hospital gown. Observation on 08/26/2021 at 9:10 AM, revealed Resident #22 lying in bed wearing a hospital gown. Interview with Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #5, on 08/26/2021 at 9:31 AM, revealed staff complete a spot check in the morning first, then they get breakfast trays and get residents up and ready for breakfast. CNA #5 stated staff go back around at nine o'clock to complete resident bed baths, showers, and clothing changes. The CNA stated Resident #22 typically wore a hospital gown, and she was unsure if Resident #22 had his/her own personal clothing. Further interview revealed Resident #22 would put clothes on if the resident was out of bed. CNA #5 stated she was not aware of any issues with Resident #22 being resistive to care. CNA #5 stated after activities of daily living (ADL) care was provided, all residents would and should have on either clothing or a hospital gown. CNA #5 stated that no resident should ever be left naked or undressed. Interview with CNA #6, on 08/26/2021 at 10:13 AM, revealed that at 6:30 AM, staff did a walk-through and checked on residents. She stated at that time, staff started incontinent care and wiped residents' faces before breakfast. CNA #6 stated after breakfast, staff started ADL care such as providing bed baths, showers, or partial baths. The CNA stated all residents were provided full ADL care which included providing clean clothes, denture/oral mouth care, washing their faces, and grooming. CNA #6 stated Resident #22 was unable to verbalize and make his/her needs known, and that Resident #22 required staff to turn him/her every two hours. CNA #6 stated Resident #22 did not like ADL care but allowed staff to complete it. Continued interview revealed Resident #22 primarily wore a hospital gown and liked to pull down the arms but had never completely removed the gown. CNA #6 stated Resident #22 would allow staff to adjust the gown when that occurred. She stated there should never be an occasion when Resident #22 was completely naked. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 08/26/2021 at 8:15 AM, revealed she would need to check the facility's ADL and dignity policy. No policy was presented. During a follow up interview, on 08/26/2021 at 12:48 PM, revealed the DON stated she still had not had a chance to review the policy. 2. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #83 on 10/16/2019 with diagnoses that included cerebral palsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, contractures, abnormal posture, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, and mild cognitive impairment. Review of the Significant Change Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], revealed the facility assessed Resident #83 to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of zero (00) out of fifteen (15), which indicated significant cognitive impairment. Resident #83 required extensive assistance of two persons with bed mobility, dressing, and toileting. Further review revealed Resident #83 required limited assistance of one person with eating. The resident was totally dependent on staff for bathing. Review of Resident #83's care plan, initiated on 10/17/2019, revealed the resident required an indwelling suprapubic catheter due to neurogenic bladder. Further review revealed interventions were to provide a privacy bag. Observation on 08/23/2021 at 10:25 AM, revealed Resident #83 lying in bed, with a catheter drainage bag on the right side of the bed, exposed and not in a privacy bag. Interview with CNA #5, on 08/26/2021 at 10:52 AM, revealed the CNA staff were responsible for cleaning a resident's catheter tubing and ensuring that the catheter drainage bag was in a privacy bag. The CNA stated that catheter privacy bags were in central supply, and staff could ask a nurse to get a bag. CNA #5 stated it was staff's responsibility to correct issues such as a catheter bag not placed in a privacy bag. Interview with CNA #6, on 08/26/2021 at 11:24 AM, revealed the CNA staff were responsible for emptying catheter bags, checking the color of output, ensuring the catheter bag were placed in a privacy bag, tubing was never on the floor, and the bag was not overflowing or leaking.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0625 (Tag F0625)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure one (1) of five (5) sampled residents (Resident #42) reviewed for hospitalizations rece...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure one (1) of five (5) sampled residents (Resident #42) reviewed for hospitalizations received a bed-hold notice. Staff failed to ensure a bed-hold notice was provided to Resident #42 or the resident's representative prior to the hospitalization on 08/18/2021. The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Bed Hold, not dated, revealed that prior to transfer, written information would be given to the residents and the residents' representatives that explained in detail: a.) the rights and limitations of the resident regarding bed holds; b.) the reserve bed payment policy as indicated by the state plan (Medicaid residents); c.) the facility's per diem rate required to hold a bed (non-Medicaid residents) or to hold a bed beyond the state bed-hold period (Medicaid residents); and d.) the details of the transfer (per the Notice of Transfer). Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #42, on 05/24/2021, with a recent hospitalization on 08/18/2021 with diagnoses that included Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Depression, Anemia, Anxiety, and Hypercholesterolemia. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 07/02/2021, revealed the facility assessed Resident #42's cognition as severely impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of four (4) out of fifteen (15). The resident was not interviewable. Record review revealed a bed-hold notice was provided to Resident #42 for the hospitalizations on 06/10/2021 and 07/16/2021. These were signed by the resident. However, there was no bed-hold notice for the hospitalization on 08/18/2021. Interview with the Business Office Manager (BOM), on 08/24/2021 at 1:24 PM, revealed the facility had not completed a bed-hold notification for Resident #42. An interview with the Director of Nurses (DON), on 08/24/2021 at 1:47 PM, revealed the nurse on the floor was supposed to ensure all the necessary paperwork was completed prior to transfers. She stated there was a red folder at the nurses' station that had all the paperwork. The DON stated they used agency staff, and that could have been how it was missed. An interview with the DON, on 08/26/2021 at 9:23 AM, revealed she did not know why the bed-hold notice was not completed for this resident. An interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA), on 08/26/2021 at 9:39 AM, revealed the bed-hold notice should have been completed at the time of the transfer, and the BOM was the staff who followed up on them the next day.
CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Resident #85 was initially admitted by the facility on 01/27/2020 and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Schi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Resident #85 was initially admitted by the facility on 01/27/2020 and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Schizoaffective Disorder, Vascular Dementia with Behaviors, early onset Alzheimer's Disease, Anxiety, and Depression. A review of Resident #85's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 07/30/2021, revealed the facility assessed the resident to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine (9) out of fifteen (15), indicating moderately impaired cognition. The resident's behaviors included physical aggression toward others. Review of Resident #85's hospital Discharge summary, dated [DATE], revealed the resident had been admitted to a geriatric behavior unit, on 01/11/2020, from a nursing home due to increasingly aggressive behaviors and altercations with two (2) different residents in two (2) days. A review of the nurse's progress notes and/or incident reports indicated Resident #85 had physical or verbal altercations with residents on 05/05/2021, 06/13/2021, 07/07/2021, 07/09/2021, 07/24/2021, 08/21/2021 and 08/22/2021. Review of Resident #85's care plan, with a start date of 08/23/2021, addressed the resident's verbal aggression. There was not a care plan that addressed Resident #85's physically aggressive behaviors directed toward other residents. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 08/25/2021 at 2:26 PM, revealed Resident #85's physical behaviors should have been care planned. The DON reviewed the care plan for Resident #85 and confirmed physically aggressive behaviors had not been addressed. Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to implement fall care plan interventions for bed wedges for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #3)reviewed for falls. The facility failed to develop a care plan for physical behaviors for one (1) of six (6) residents reviewed for behaviors (Resident #85). The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, revised December 2016, revealed: A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that included measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs was developed and implemented for each resident. The comprehensive care plan would describe the services that were furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being. Per the policy, the care plan would incorporate identified problem areas and incorporate risk factors associated with identified problems. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #3 on 02/09/2019 with diagnoses that included Parkinson's Disease, repeated Falls, Muscle Weakness, Anxiety Disorder, Hyperlipidemia, Major Depressive Disorder, Cognitive Communication Deficit, Weakness, Abnormalities of Gait and Mobility, and Unsteadiness on Feet. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment for Resident #3, dated 05/18/2021, revealed the facility assessed Resident #3 to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of eleven (11) out of fifteen (15), indicating no cognitive impairment. Resident #3 required limited assistance of two (2) persons with bed mobility, transfer, dressing, and toileting. The resident was totally dependent on staff for bathing. Review of a Progress Note, dated 08/03/2021 at 4:15 PM, revealed Resident #3 was sitting on the mat next to bed. The resident stated [they] slid onto the mat because the bed was small. Per the note, the resident tends to sleep sideways most of the time. Continued review of the note revealed updated care plan to place wedges on bilateral sides of the bed to help stabilize theresident while sleeping. Per the note, the intervention were effective and the resident stated [he/she] was sleeping more comfortably. Further review of the note, the resident refused to keep non-skid socks on with three (3) staff attempts, fall mats on bilateral sides of bed, fluids and bedside table within reach and the call light within reach. There were no signs or symptoms or complaints of pain or discomfort noted. Safety measures were maintained. Review of Resident #3's care plan for falls, initiated on 02/22/2021, revealed an intervention added on 08/03/2021 for wedges on bilateral sides of the bed. An observation of Resident #3, on 08/23/2021 at 10:59 AM, revealed the resident lying in bed with fall mats on both sides of the bed and grab bars in the up position; however, no wedges were observed in the bed with the resident. An observation of Resident #3, on 08/24/2021 at 2:20 PM, revealed the resident in bed with grab bars in the up position, fall mats to both sides of the bed, and no wedges in the bed. An observation of Resident #3, on 08/25/2021 at 1:07 PM, revealed the resident in bed with grab bars in the up position and fall mats to both sides of the bed, but no wedges in the bed. An interview on 08/26/2021 at 10:40 AM, with Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #5, revealed she had checked on Resident #3 three (3) times that morning. The CNA stated staff could access the resident's care plan to see what type of interventions were in place. CNA #5 stated she checked the care plan daily. Continued interview revealed CNA #5 stated Resident #3 had a bed in the lower position and fall mats. The CNA stated she was aware Resident #3 should have wedges. However, she stated she puts pillows under the resident sometimes. CNA #5 stated it was not her place to decide to use pillows instead of the wedges that the resident was care planned to have. CNA #5 stated she did not request wedges that morning from therapy when she observed that Resident #3 did not have them. She stated she did not report it to any nurse or supervisor. An interview on 08/26/2021 at 11:42 AM, with CNA #7, revealed Resident #3 did not have a wedge or anything, so staff put pillows under the resident at times. CNA #7 stated she looked at the care plans daily when she charted. CNA #7 stated the last time she looked at Resident #3's care plan was on Sunday 08/22/2021. CNA #7 stated there were currently no wedges available in the facility for Resident #3. Continued interview revealed the lack of wedges was reported to nursing staff about a week ago, but she was not sure of who specifically it was reported to. An interview on 08/26/2021 at 1:25 PM, with the Director of Nursing (DON), revealed she was unaware why the care plan was not being implemented related to wedges for Resident #3 as the care plan was updated for the resident to have bilateral wedges in bed on 08/03/2021. The DON stated she was unaware that staff stated there were not any wedges available in the building for residents. She stated she expected staff to implement and ensure interventions were in place and in use after they had been identified and the care plan was updated. The DON stated it was ultimately her responsibility, along with the clinical team, to ensure care plans were implemented. Continued interview revealed they currently had a partner program with department managers in place. The DON stated that department managers walked around at least once weekly to check on residents and ensure all things such as current interventions were in place. The DON stated it was supposed to be completed weekly, but the DON was unsure of when it was completed last, and there was no documentation related to this. On 08/26/2021 at 1:40 PM, an observation of the linen closet with the DON revealed that wedges were stored in there, but there were none currently on the shelves. The DON stated there should be some around in the building.
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** Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and review of the facility's policies, it was determined the facility failed ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and review of the facility's policies, it was determined the facility failed to provide nail care and failed to shave one (1) of four (4) dependent residents (Resident #46) from the sampled residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). The findings included: Review of the facility's policy on Care of Fingernails/Toenails, revised 2010, indicated the purpose of the policy was to clean the nail bed, to keep the nails trimmed, and to prevent infection. Under General Guidelines, the policy nail care included daily cleaning and regular trimming. Documentation including the date and time nail care was provided, the name of the person who administered nail care, and documentation of refusal with the intervention(s) attempted. Review of the facility's policy, titled Shaving the Resident, revised 2010, indicated the purpose was to promote cleanliness and to provide skin care. After shave documentation should include the time and date of the shave along with the name of the person that provided the shave. Directions included notifying the supervisor of any refusals. Record review revealed Resident #46 was initially admitted by the facility on 04/28/2019 and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia without behaviors, and peripheral vascular disease. Review of Resident #46's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment with a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of four (4) out of fifteen (15). Resident #46 was not identified to have physical or verbal behaviors or rejection of care. The facility assessed Resident #46 to require extensive assistance with bathing and personal hygiene. Review of Resident #46's Comprehensive Care Plan for refusal of care, last revised 05/16/2020, indicated a goal of the resident refusing care less than ten (10) times through the next review. Interventions included providing the resident with opportunities for choice, allowing time for expression of feelings, encouragement, explaining care and the reason for the care and simplifying tasks into simple one step directions. A review of the resident's progress notes from 08/23/2021 through 08/25/2021, revealed no documented evidence Resident #46 refused nail care or shaving. Review of the Behavior Observation sheet from 08/23/2021 through 08/25/2021, revealed one (1) episode of rejection of care on 08/23/2021. Observations of Resident #46, on 08/23/2021 at 12:19 PM, 08/24/2021 at 10:40 AM, 11:10 AM and 3:55 PM, revealed Resident #46's nails were extended over the end of the fingertips and black matter was seen underneath the nails. Continued observations revealed unshaven facial hair was present. Observation of Resident #46, on 08/25/2021 at 8:55 AM, revealed the resident was sitting in the common area on the unit. The resident's facial hair was long and black matter was seen under long nails. The resident had no socks or shoes on. Interview with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1, on 08/25/2021 at 8:58 AM, revealed she had worked on that unit for five (5) months and knew the residents. The CNA stated if residents refused care, she reported the refusal to the nurse for documentation. She added if the resident refused, she would leave the resident and return later and try again to provide the needed care. CNA #1 stated, Resident #46 was dependent on staff for all ADLs including nail care and shaving. She acknowledged the CNA assigned to a given resident was responsible for shaving the resident, cleaning and clipping nails. The CNA added Resident #46 did not refuse care. Per interview, CNA #1 saw Resident #46 and stated the resident needed a shave and the resident's nails needed to be cleaned and clipped. Interview with CNA #2, on 08/25/2021 at 10:11 AM, revealed she typically worked the unit where Resident #46 lived and was familiar with the resident. Continued interview revealed the resident was dependent on staff for daily care and did not have a history of refusing care. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 08/26/2021 at 8:38 AM, revealed she would need to review the facility's policy on nail care and shaving residents prior to and questions. Per interview, the DON stated, from a standard of care perspective, shaving should be done with showers. The DON stated she would hope there was no black matter under any residents' nails and added the danger of long nails would be a resident could sustain scratches or skin tears.
CONCERN (D)

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, interviews and record review it was determined the facility failed to complete weekly wound assessments for two (2) of two (2) sampled residents (Residents #7 and #25) reviewed ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews and record review it was determined the facility failed to complete weekly wound assessments for two (2) of two (2) sampled residents (Residents #7 and #25) reviewed for wound assessments and failed to follow physician's orders and utilize pressure reducing interventions for one (1) of two (2) sampled residents (Resident #7) reviewed for pressure ulcers. The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Pressure Injuries Overview, revised October 2019, revealed that an avoidable ulcer developed due to one or more of the following not being completed. This list included implementation of interventions that were consistent with the resident's needs, goals, and professional standards of practice. The policy also indicated lack of monitoring, evaluation, or reassessment of the interventions could lead to the development of pressure ulcers. 1. Review of the medical record revealed the facility admitted Resident #7, on 11/21/2018, with diagnoses of Dementia without behaviors, Falls, Generalized Muscle Weakness, Anxiety, and Major Depression. Review of Resident #7's Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 05/20/2021, revealed Resident #7 had both short- and long-term memory impairment. Behaviors occurring during the assessment period included physical behaviors, verbal behaviors, and rejection of care. The resident was identified as requiring the extensive assistance with bed mobility, eating and personal hygiene. Per the MDS, Resident #7 had a pressure ulcer over a bony prominence, and was at risk of developing additional pressure ulcers. The assessment indicated the existing pressure ulcer was an unstageable wound described as a deep tissue injury (DTI). While nutritional and hydration interventions were not identified as used, the MDS indicated Resident #7 received specialized turning and repositioning and had both a pressure reducing device for the bed and chair. Review of Resident #7's current Comprehensive Care Plan, revealed interventions to prevent further skin breakdown and to assist in healing current breakdown included floating both heels while in bed, treatments as ordered and weekly assessments by a licensed nurse. A review of the 07/2021 Treatment Administration Record (TAR) indicated nurses had signed daily that Resident #7's heels had been elevated. Also signed daily was that Resident #7 had been out of bed daily. Review of the 08/2021 TAR indicated Resident #7's feet had been elevated while in bed and Resident #7 had been out of bed daily. An observation made, on 08/23/2021 at 11:42 AM, revealed Resident #7's feet were flat on the bed. There was no pillow seen on the bed or near the bed on which to float the resident's heels. Observations were made on 08/24/2021 at 8:10 AM. The resident was in bed with feet/heels lying flat on the bed. No wedges or pillows for elevating Resident #7's feet were seen in the room. A decorative pillow was observed in the wheelchair that was positioned at the head of the resident's bed. During an observation on 08/24/2021 at 4:00 PM, revealed Resident #7 was seen lying in bed on his/her left side with his/her feet on the bed. Further observation revealed no boots or pillows elevated the resident's feet. A decorative pillow remained in a wheelchair next to the resident's bed. An observation of Resident #7 was made on 08/25/2021 at 9:28 AM with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1. Resident #7 was lying in bed with his/her feet not elevated. The CNA removed the resident's left sock to reveal a quarter sized area on the left heel that was covered in black tissue. Interview with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1, on 08/25/2021 at 9:28 AM, revealed Resident #7 had the pressure ulcer on the heel since 05/2021. The CNA added she had been told the pressure ulcer was the result of the resident lying in bed and that when Resident #7 was in bed, both feet should be elevated. The CNA added the resident had a special boot at one time, but she had not seen the boot for at least two (2) weeks. Per interview, the CNA could give no reason why the resident's feet were not elevated while in bed. An interview was held, on 08/25/2021 at 10:28 PM, with CNA #2. She stated she was familiar with Resident #7. The CNA stated Resident #7 had special boots to elevate his/her feet for a while. She added the last time she had seen the boots was about three (3) weeks ago when the boots had been sent to the laundry and had not been returned. An observation was made with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #7, on 08/25/2021 at 3:30 PM, of Resident #7. Observation revealed Resident #7 was lying in bed with his/her feet not elevated. Interview with LPN #7, on 08/25/2021 at 3:39 PM, revealed Resident #7 was in bed and did not have his/her feet elevated. Per interview he was unaware why the resident's feet were not elevated and did not know why the resident was still in bed. Observations throughout the survey revealed Resident #7 was not out of bed during the survey. The Director of Nursing (DON) was interviewed, on 08/26/2021 at 8:41 AM. She stated the administrative nursing team was responsible for making sure pressure ulcer reducing interventions were in place. The DON added the team should be checking daily to make sure all interventions were in place and all refusal of any intervention should be documented. 2. Review of Resident #7's Weekly Pressure Wound Observation Tool revealed no weekly assessment of Resident #7's left heel deep tissue injury (DTI) for the months of May 2021 and June 2021. Review of the Weekly Pressure Wound Observation Tool, dated 07/17/2021, revealed the date Resident #7 acquired the DTI was 06/22/2021. The location was documented as the right heel. Measurements were one point two (1.2) centimeters (cm) by one (1) cm with 100% necrotic (dead) tissue. The overall condition of the wound was listed as improving. The treatment was to apply skin prep. Review of the 07/2021 Treatment Administration Record (TAR) indicated skin prep had been applied to the left heel daily. Record review revealed on 08/12/2021, a nurse indicated on the weekly skin review that Resident #7's DTI was on the left heel. Review of the Weekly Wound Observation Tool dated 08/14/2021 identified a left heel DTI for Resident #7. The DTI had an onset date of 06/22/2021. Measurements were 3.0 cm x 2.2 cm with 100% necrotic tissue. Overall impression of the wound was documented as improving. The treatment remained for skin prep daily. Review of the August 2021 TAR indicated skin prep daily to the heel per Physician's Orders. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 08/26/2021 at 8:41 AM revealed a wound care physician had just started in the facility and would be responsible for weekly measurements and weekly wound assessments. Prior to the wound physician, the DON stated the nurses on the halls were responsible for weekly assessments of their assigned residents. She could offer no explanation why Resident #7 had missing weekly wound assessments. 3. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #25 on 03/07/2020 and readmitted the resident on 03/25/2021 with diagnoses that included, Cerebral Palsy, Aphasia, Seizure Disorder, and one (1) Stage Three (3) Pressure Ulcer. Review of Resident #25's Significant Change in Condition Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 06/03/2021, indicated the resident had a Staff Assessment of Mental Status (SAMS) showing severe cognition deficit. The MDS indicated the resident required extensive assistance for transfers with two (2) plus persons, toileting, and personal hygiene. The resident required total dependence on staff for bed mobility, dressing, and eating. Further review revealed the resident had limited range of motion in all four (4) extremities. Review of the care plan, indicated Resident #25 had skin breakdown to the heel and thigh. Review of the Treatment Administration Record (TAR), dated 08/01/2021 - 08/31/2021, indicated Resident #25 had orders for low air loss mattress, apply skin prep to left heel once daily, and clean the right heel with soap and water, cover with foam, and wrap with Kerlix gauze. Review of a Weekly Pressure Wound Observation Note, dated 07/10/2021, indicated Resident #25 had a pressure ulcer to the left gluteal fold measuring one and two tenths (1.2) centimeters (cm) by one and two tenths (1.2) cm that was initially identified. Review of a Weekly Pressure Wound Observation Note, dated 07/11/2021, indicated Resident #25 had a pressure ulcer to the left heel measuring one and four tenths (1.4) cm by three and two tenths (3.2) cm by zero (0) cm and a pressure area to the left heel measuring one and one tenth (1.1) cm by one (1) cm by zero (0) cm, and another to the left heel measuring one and two tenths (1.2) cm by zero and four tenths (0.4) cm by zero (0) cm that was originally identified on 05/07/2021. Review of a shower sheet, dated 08/14/2021, indicated Resident #25 had two (2) wounds to the left heel measuring three (3) cm by two and two tenths (2.2) cm and one (1) wound to the left buttock measuring one (1) cm by three and two tenths (3.2) cm, and one (1) wound to the right buttock measuring one (1) cm by three and two tenths (3.2) cm. Review of a Wound Evaluation & Management Summary, dated 08/20/2021, indicated Resident #25 had an unstageable pressure ulcer to the left heel measuring one (1) cm by (0.5) cm by zero (0). Further review revealed there was no other wound documentation available. During an interview on 08/26/2021, at 8:41 AM, the ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing) indicated pressure ulcers were to be assessed and documented weekly. She indicated there was no other wound documentation available for review for Resident #25.
CONCERN (D)

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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure fall investigations were completed after a fall occurred for two (2) residents (Resident ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure fall investigations were completed after a fall occurred for two (2) residents (Resident #83 and Resident #3) out of five (5) residents reviewed for falls. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Fall Management Program, dated December 2018, revealed the facility strived to maintain a hazard free environment, mitigate fall risk factors and implement preventative measure. The facility recognized even the most vigilant efforts may not prevent all falls and injuries. In those cases, intensive efforts would be directed toward minimizing or preventing injury. Should the resident experience a fall the attending nurse shall complete a post fall assessment, this included an investigation of the circumstances surrounding the fall to determine the cause of the episode, a reassessment to identify possible contributing factors, interventions to reduce risk of repeat episode and a review by the IDT to evaluate thoroughness of the investigation and appropriateness of the interventions. 1. Record review revealed Resident #83 was admitted by the facility on 10/16/2019 with diagnoses including Cerebral Palsy, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Hip and Knee Contractures, Dysphagia, Paranoid Schizophrenia, Abnormal Posture, need for assistance with personal care, Mild Cognitive Impairment, Major Depressive Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and Intermittent Explosive Disorder. Review of the Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #83, dated 07/27/2021, revealed Resident #83 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of zero (00) out of fifteen (15), indicating significant cognitive impairment. Continued review revealed Resident #83 required extensive assistance of two persons with bed mobility, dressing, and toileting. Further review revealed Resident #83 required limited assistance of one (1) person with eating. The resident was totally dependent on staff for bathing. Review of Resident #83's Comprehensive Care Plan, initiated on 10/09/2020, revealed the resident was at risk for falls related to impaired mobility and cognitive impairment. Further review revealed the first and only intervention added to the care plan in 2021, was on 07/15/2021 for adaptive positioning cover to mattress. Review of a Change-of-Condition evaluation for Resident #83, completed on 06/08/2021 at 1:30 PM, revealed a fall occurred on 06/07/2021. Further review revealed the resident rolled out of bed, and the bed was locked and in lowest position. The resident was verbal and alert, able to make needs known, and voiced no complaint, pain, or discomfort. No new skin areas were noted. Review of the progress notes for Resident #83 revealed there was no documented evidence related to the fall that occurred on 06/07/2021. A review of Falls Investigation revealed no documented evidence an investigation was completed at the time of the fall. Continued review revealed the falls investigation for 06/07/2021 was completed on 08/25/2021, during the time of the survey. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 08/26/2021 at 1:25 PM, revealed the facility had no documentation that an investigations was completed for the fall that occurred on 06/07/2021 for Resident #83, per the facility's policy. 2. Record Review revealed Resident #3 was admitted by the facility on 02/09/2019 with diagnoses including Parkinson's Disease, Repeated Falls, Muscle Weakness, Anxiety Disorder, Hyperlipidemia, Major Depressive Disorder, Cognitive Communication Deficit, Weakness, Abnormalities of Gait and Mobility, and Unsteadiness on Feet. Review of Resident #3's Quarterly Minimum Data (MDS) Set, dated 05/18/2021, revealed that facility assessed Resident #3 to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of eleven (11) out of fifteen (15), indicating some cognitive impairment. Continued review revealed Resident #3 required limited assistance of two (2) persons with bed mobility, transfer, dressing, and toileting. Resident #3 required supervision with set-up only with eating. The resident was totally dependent on staff for bathing. Review of Resident #3's Comprehensive Care Plan for falls, initiated on 02/11/2021, revealed interventions added on 02/11/2021 were to provide verbal cues, place call light within reach, maintain a clutter free environment, place personal items within reach, and observe for unsafe actions and intervene. Interventions added on 03/19/2021 were for staff to assist the resident with desired items. Interventions added on 04/03/2021 were for staff to ensure the resident had on non-skid socks when out of bed. Lastly, an intervention was added on 08/03/2021 revealed wedges on bilateral sides of bed. Review of a Situation Background Assessment Recommendation (SBAR) communication form for Resident #3, completed on 02/10/2021, revealed a fall occurred on 02/10/2021. Continued review revealed no specific information related to the fall was indicated. Review of Resident #3's progress notes, dated on 02/10/2021 at 10:50 AM, revealed SBAR Summary for Providers: Staff were called to the resident's room per CNA. Staff observed the resident sitting on buttocks on the floor beside the bed. The resident denied hitting head and denied pain or discomfort. No apparent injury was noted. The resident stated, I was trying to get in the bed and my chair slipped away from me. Staff encouraged the resident to call for assistance and lock the wheelchair when not in use. The resident verbalized understanding. A review was conducted of a SBAR communication form for Resident #3, completed on 03/19/2021, related to a fall. Continued review revealed no specific information related to the fall was indicated. Review of Resident #3's progress notes, dated on 03/19/2021 at 5:59 PM, revealed Resident [Resident #3] was attempting to get chips off floor when [the resident] slid to floor without injury noted. Staff will assist resident with desired items to prevent future falls. Review of a SBAR communication form, completed on 04/03/2021, revealed Resident #3 was sent to emergency room for evaluation after a fall occurred. No specific information related to the fall was included. Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated on 04/03/2021 at 5:29 PM, revealed Called to resident's room by CNAs stating that resident has fall[en]. Resident states that [the resident] was trying to get up and fell. States that [the resident] hit head on the floor. Upon examination resident noted to have a laceration 2 cm [centimeters] * [by] 0.4cm to the back of [the] head with moderate amount of blood on floor. Resident vitals assessed. Reports pain to back of head. Pressure applied to wound to control bleeding. Bleeding controlled with pressure applied. Ambulance services contacted for transport. Physician notified and gave order to send to ER. Note: Staff to ensure resident is wearing nonskid socks to prevent future incidents. Review of Resident #3's progress notes, dated on 04/05/2021 at 1:00 AM, revealed Patient seen today for follow up for recent fall and medication review. On 04/03/2021 the patient had a fall and was complaining of neck pain and right shoulder pain. [The resident] was sent to the ER for further evaluation. In the ER the patient had a computed tomography (CT) [scan] of the head without contrast and a CT [scan] of the cervical spine without contrast that was negative for any acute abnormality. Patient also had an x-ray of [the] right shoulder that showed an Anterior and Inferior Dislocation of the Humeral component of the Right Shoulder Arthroplasty. Patient's right shoulder was reduced in emergency room (ER) and was placed in a sling. Patient also obtained a small laceration to the back of [the] head that was too small to be repaired. Patient has a history of Dementia and Parkinson's with multiple falls in the past primarily related to impulsive behavior and unsteady gait. Today the patient states [the patient's] head feels a little sore but not bad. The patient was sitting in [the] wheelchair without the sling to [the] right arm, the patient states [the patient] does not need the sling and is fine without it. Review of Resident #3's progress note, dated on 08/03/2021 at 4:15 PM, revealed Resident sitting on mat next to bed. Resident stated [the resident] slid onto the mat because the bed is small. Resident tends to sleep sideways on most of the time. Updated care plan to place wedges on bilateral sides of the bed to help stabilize resident while sleeping. Intervention effective and resident states [the resident] is sleeping more comfortably. Resident refuses to keep non-skid socks on x3 attempts, fall mats on bilateral sides of bed. Fluids and bedside table within reach. Call light within reach. no s/s [signs/symptoms] or c/o [complaints of] pain or discomfort noted. Safety measures maintained. A review of documentation for Resident #3 revealed no documented evidence an SBAR was completed for the fall that occurred on 08/03/2021. Review of the facility's Falls Investigations revealed there was no documented evidence the attending nurse completed a post fall assessment to include an investigation of the circumstances surrounding the fall to determine the cause of the episode, a reassessment to identify possible contributing factors, interventions to reduce risk of repeat episode and a review by the IDT to evaluate thoroughness of the investigation and appropriateness of the interventions for Resident #3's falls on 02/10/2021, 03/19/2021, 04/03/2021 or 08/03/2021 per the facility's policy. A further review revealed falls investigations for the fall that occurred on 08/03/2021 was completed on 08/25/2021, at the time of the survey. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 08/25/2021 at 12:00 PM, revealed she would expect that an investigation be completed at the time a fall occurs, and the clinical team would be responsible for ensuring that it was completed. Continued interview with the DON on 08/25/2021 at 2:23 PM, revealed when a fall occurred, the floor nurse completed a RMF (Risk Management Form) and based on the information entered, that may trigger additional areas that request more information. The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) would meet the next morning and review all the incident reports/falls reports, and they would look at possible patterns, injury if any, and interventions for appropriateness and adjust as needed. Minimum Data Set (MDS) staff would updates the care plan, but the DON was responsible for ensuring the care had been updated to reflect any new interventions. Interview with the DON, on 08/26/2021 at 1:25 PM, revealed the facility had no documentation that investigations were completed for the falls that occurred on 02/10/2021, 03/19/2021, 04/03/2021, and 08/03/2021 for Resident #3, at the time of the fall.
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** Based on observations, interviews, record review and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to s...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record review and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to secure an indwelling urinary catheter to prevent trauma or accidental dislodgement for one (1) of four (4) sampled residents (Resident #67) with an indwelling urinary catheter. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Catheter Care Urinary, revised 09/2014, indicated the purpose of the procedure was to prevent catheter associated urinary tract infections. Review of the section Maintaining Unobstructed Urine Flow, revealed staff should ensure the resident was not lying on the catheter tubing and to keep the catheter tubing free of kinks. Review of the section titled Changing Catheter, revealed the catheter should remain secured with a leg strap to the resident's inner thigh to reduce friction and movement at the insertion site. Record review revealed Resident #67 was initially admitted by the facility on 01/18/2021 and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Disruption of a Surgical Wound, Obstructive Uropathy, Diabetes, and Morbidly Obese. Review of Resident #67's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed the facility assessed the resident to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fourteen (14) out of fifteen (15), indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Continued review revealed the resident had an indwelling urinary catheter, surgical wounds required extensive to total care for bed mobility, transfers and bathing, and limited to extensive care for toileting and personal hygiene. The resident was independent with eating and mobility in wheelchair. Review of Resident #67's Annual Examination, dated 01/25/2021, revealed an indwelling urinary catheter had been placed due to multiple abdominal wounds that involved the resident's groin to inner thighs. Review of the 08/2021 Physician's orders, revealed a Physician's order, dated 08/09/2021, to secure the indwelling urinary catheter to prevent pulling or dislodgement of the catheter and to check every shift. Review of Resident #67 Comprehensive Care Plan, last reviewed on 08/12/2021, indicated a requirement of an indwelling urinary catheter; however, there was no documented evidence it included securing the catheter tubing. Observation of catheter care being provided by Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #2 and CNA #3, on 08/25/2021 at 10:50 AM, revealed Resident #67 had an indwelling catheter in place. Continued observation of the care revealed Resident #67 had no strap to secured the catheter tubing to the thigh. Interview with CNA #2, on 08/25/2021 at 11:10 AM, revealed there was no strap securing Resident #67's indwelling catheter. Continued interview revealed the catheter should have a strap securing the catheter tubing to the resident's leg and she would notify the resident's nurse. Interview with Resident #67, on 08/23/2021 at 2:47 PM, revealed the catheter was placed during a hospitalization after surgery. The resident stated the catheter was not secured to prevent pulling. Continued interview with Resident #67, on 08/24/2021 at 2:00 PM, revealed the catheter was not secured to the resident's leg. Per interview the catheter tubing was not secured and had been under his/her abdominal folds. Interview with Registered Nurse (RN), #1 on 08/25/2021 at 10:34 AM, revealed she was assigned to care for Resident #67. Continued interview revealed she was not certain about the facility's policy for securing catheters and was unable to state if Resident #67's catheter was secured. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 08/26/2021 at 8:15 AM, revealed she was unsure about the facility's policy for securing an indwelling urinary catheter. Continued interview revealed the dangers of not having the catheter tubing secured could cause trauma from the tubing being pulled on.
CONCERN (D)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure o...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure oxygen therapy was administered per the physician's orders for two (2) of three (3) residents with oxygen (Resident #27 and Resident #16). Findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled, Oxygen Administration revised October 2019, revealed the purpose was to provide guidelines for safe oxygen administration. Continued review revealed staff should verify there was Physician's order for the procedure. Further review revealed, after completing the oxygen setup of adjustment, the following information should be recorded in the resident's medical record: the rate of oxygen flow, the route, and the rationale. 1. Record review revealed Resident #27 was admitted by the facility, on 03/25/2019, with diagnoses including Quadriplegia, Type 2 Diabetes, Muscle Weakness, Contractures, Cognitive Communication Deficit, Anxiety Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder. Review of Resident #27's Quarterly Minimum Data (MDS) Set, dated 06/06/2021, reveal the facility assessed the resident to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15) out of fifteen (15), indicating no cognitive impairment. Continued review revealed Resident #27 required extensive assistance of two (2) persons with bed mobility, transfer, dressing, toileting, and eating. The resident was totally dependent on staff for bathing. Further review revealed Resident #27 required oxygen therapy. Review of Resident #27's Comprehensive Care Plan, initiated 04/24/2019, revealed the resident was at risk for respiratory complications related to a history of pneumonia and required Oxygen use. Continued review revealed interventions in place were oxygen to be administered as ordered. Review of Resident #27's physician's orders, dated August 2021, revealed an order for Oxygen to be administered continuously at two (2) liters per minute via a nasal cannula. Observation of Resident #27, on 08/23/2021 at 3:31 PM, 08/24/2021 at 9:13 AM and 08/25/2021 at 9:30 AM, revealed the resident was wearing a nasal cannula device for Oxygen administration. Continued observations revealed the Oxygen concentration setting was set at three (3) liter per minute. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5, on 08/25/2021 at 9:30 AM, revealed Resident #27's Oxygen concentration setting was set at three (3) liters per minute; however, it should be set at two (2) liters per minute. LPN #5 stated staff should be checking to ensure the Oxygen setting was set on the correct concentration for administration of the Oxygen every shift. 2. Record review revealed Resident #16 was re-admitted by the facility, on 04/05/2020 with diagnoses including Cardiomyopathy, Heart Failure, Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure, Quadriplegia, Type 2 Diabetes, Contracture Right Hand, Contracture Left Hand, Contracture Left Elbow, Contracture Right Elbow, Cognitive Communication Deficit, Dementia, Anemia, Major Depressive Disorder, Chronic Kidney Disease, and Anxiety. Review of Resident #16's Annual Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], revealed the facility assessed the resident to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of one (1) out of fifteen (15), indicating serious cognitive impairment. Resident #16 required extensive assistance of 2 persons with bed mobility, transfer, dressing, toileting, and eating. The resident was totally dependent on staff for bathing. Further review revealed Resident #16 required oxygen therapy. Review of Resident #16's Comprehensive Care Plan, initiated 09/18/2019, revealed the resident exhibited or was at risk for respiratory complications related to a history of Upper Respiratory Infections, Pneumonia, and a diagnosis of Acute or Chronic Respiratory Failure and required Oxygen use. Continued review revealed interventions in place were Oxygen was to be administered as ordered. Review of Resident #16's Physician's orders, dated August 2021, revealed an order for Oxygen to be administered continuously at two (2) liters per minute via nasal cannula. Observation of Resident #16, on 08/23/2021 at 12:36 PM, 08/24/2021 at 9:11 AM, 08/24/2021 at 1:20 PM and 08/25/2021 at 9:15 AM, revealed the resident was wearing a nasal cannula device for Oxygen administration. Continued observations revealed the Oxygen concentration setting was set at four (4) liter per minute. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 08/25/2021 at 9:15 AM, revealed Resident #16's Oxygen Concentration setting was set at four (4) liters per minute. Per interview, she was not aware of what concentration the Physician ordered for Resident #16. Continued interview revealed Resident #16 was a Hospice resident and that maybe the Hospice nurse wanted the concentration set at a higher setting. However, the DON stated, she expected licensed nurses to act within their licensure and ensure residents received the correct Oxygen setting per the Physician's orders.
CONCERN (D)

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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed ensure the medical record was complete, accurately documented, readily accessible and systemicall...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed ensure the medical record was complete, accurately documented, readily accessible and systemically organized for one (1) resident (Resident #101) out of five -seven (57) sampled residents. Review of Resident #101's medical record revealed the facility failed to accurately and completely document insulin administration and blood glucose monitoring. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy, titled, Insulin Administration, revised September 2014, revealed staff should check blood glucose levels per the physician order or facility protocol. The policy revealed documentation needed to include the resident's blood glucose result, as ordered; the dose and concentration of the insulin injection. Medical record review revealed Resident #101 was admitted by the facility on 11/14/2019 with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's Disease, Depression, Dementia, and Type 2 Diabetes. Review of Resident #101's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 07/29/2021, revealed the facility assessed Resident #101's cognition as severely impaired with a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of four (4) out of fifteen (15), indicating the resident was not interviewable. Continued review revealed Insulin injections were marked as given to the resident two (2) out of the seven (7) day look-back period. Review of the 07/2021 Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #101 revealed the resident was ordered by the physician to be administered Humalog Solution one hundred (100) unit/ml (milliliters) Insulin Lispro (Human) Inject as per sliding scale: If zero to one hundred fifty (0-150) = administer zero (0) units and call MD if blood glucose is less than seventy (70); one hudred fity-one to two hundred (151-200) = administer two (2) units; two hundred and one to two hundred and fifty (201- 250) = administer four (4) units; two hundred fifty-one to three hundred (251-300) = administer six (6) units; three hundred and one to three hundred and fifty (301-350) = administer eight (8) units; three hundred fifty-one and over (351+) = administer ten (10) units and call MD immediately for further instruction if blood glucose greater than four hundred 400), subcutaneously before meals for thirty (30) days. Start date 07/27/2021, discontinue date 08/05/2021. Continued review of Resident #101's 07/2021 MAR revealed the MAR was blank on 07/29/2021, 07/30/2021, and 07/31/2021 at 6:30 AM. There was no documentation that the insulin had been administered per the physician's orders and no documented evidence a blood glucose level was obtained. Further review of the MAR revealed the MAR was blank on 08/02/2021, 08/03/2021, and 08/04/2021 at 6:30 AM. There was no documentation that the insulin had been administered per the physician's orders and no documented evidence a blood glucose level was obtained. A record review of the 08/2021 MAR for Resident #101 revealed the resident was ordered by the physician to be administered Humalog Solution one hundred (100) unit/ml Insulin Lispro (Human) Inject as per sliding scale: If zero to one hundred and fifty (0-150) = administer zero (0) units and call MD if blood glucose was less than seventy (70); one hundred fifty-one to two hundred (151-200) = administer two (2) units; two hundred and one to two hundred and fifty (201- 250) = administer four (4) units; two hundred fifty-one to three hundred (251-300A) = administer six (6) units; three hundred and one to three hundred and fifty (301-350) = administer eight (8) units; three hundred fifty-one and greater (351+) = administer ten (10) units and call MD immediately for further instruction if blood glucose greater than four hundred (400), subcutaneously before meals for thirty (30) days. Start date 08/05/2021, discontinue date 08/19/2021. Continued review of Resident 101's 08/2021 MAR revealed the MAR was blank on 08/18/2021 at 6:00 AM. There was no documentation that the insulin had been administered per the physician's orders and no documented evidence a blood glucose level was obtained. Further record review of the 08/2021 MAR revealed the resident was ordered by the physician to be administered Humalog OG Solution one hundred (100) unit/ml (Insulin Lispro) Inject three (3) units subcutaneously before meals for diabetes. Start date: 08/19/2021. Review of the 08/2021 MAR revealed the MAR was blank on 08/20/2021 at 1630 (4:30 PM). There was no documentation that the Humalog OG Solution one hundred (100) unit/ml insulin had been administered per the physician's orders and no documented evidence a blood glucose level was obtained. Continued review revealed the MAR was blank on 08/21/2021, 08/22/2021, and 08/23/2021 at 6:30 AM. There was no documentation that the Humalog OG Solution one hundred (100) unit/ml insulin had been administered per the physician's orders and no documented evidence a blood glucose level was obtained. Interview with the Director of Nurses (DON), on 08/24/2021 at 1:47 PM, revealed it looked as if they had started giving insulin at meals but had not been very successful. Continued interview revealed if the MAR was blank, then that meant there was no proof the medication had been given to the resident. She said if the resident refused, it should have been documented. An interview with the DON, on 08/26/2021 at 9:23 AM, revealed it was her expectation for the nursing staff to read the MAR and follow the physician's orders. She said there were concerns if insulin was not given with the blood sugars remaining high. She said this resident did not always allow the staff to give insulin in the morning, but it should have been accuratey and completed documented in the resident's medical record.
CONCERN (F)

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

Deficiency F0801 (Tag F0801)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure there was a qualified food and nutrition director with appropriate competencies and skil...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure there was a qualified food and nutrition director with appropriate competencies and skill sets to carry out food and nutrition services for all one hundred eleven (111) residents in the facility. The facility failed to ensure the Director for Food and Nutrition Services was a Certified Dietary Manager (CDM), a Certified Food Service Manager, had a national certification for food service management or had an Associates or higher degree in food service management. The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Professional Staffing revised 10/2019, revealed a qualified Food Services Director was one who: was a Certified Dietary Manager; or was a Certified Food Service Manager; or had similar national certification for food service management and safety from a national certifying body; or had an Associate's or higher degree in food service management or in hospitality, if the course of study included food service or restaurant management from an accredited institution of higher learning, and in states that have established standards for Food Service Manager or Dietary Managers, meet state requirements for food service managers or dietary managers .The qualified Dietitian or other clinically qualified nutrition professional would provide guidance and oversight to the Dining Services Director for the consistent preparation and service of all regular and therapeutic diets and the training and supervision of all department staff. Cross reference: F803 (Menus) and F812 (Kitchen sanitation) Review of the Dietary Manager's (DM) personnel records revealed it contained no specific training related to food service management. Continued review revealed the DM had a chef position from 03/05/2019 to 07/01/2021 and was placed in the current position of DM July 1,2021. Interview with the Registered Dietitian (RD) and the Regional Director of Culinary Services (RDCS), on 08/25/2021 at 12:15 PM, revealed a new company for the kitchen staff had been contracted about seven (7) weeks ago. The RD said the DM would not be in the facility the rest of the week. Continued interview revealed the RDCS was the Dietary Manager's supervisor. Per interview, the Dietary Managere was not a Certified Dietary Manager and had not been enrolled in the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) course. Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA), on 08/26/2021 at 9:39 AM, revealed she was aware they needed to have a qualified dietary manager or CDM in place. Continued interview revealed the Dietary Manager had previously worked at the facility as a cook and then went to an assisted living facility. Per inteview, the Dietary Manager came back to the facility with the new contract company, on 07/01/2021, as the Dietary Manager. The Administrator stated, she was under the impression the Dietary Manager was a qualified DM. She said the Registered Dietician was only contracted for two (2) days a week. Further interview revealed the current Dietary Manager was not a CDM or qualified DM and not certified in ServSafe (Safe food handling).
CONCERN (F)

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

Menu Adequacy (Tag F0803)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the menus and recipes were followed in one (1) of one (1) facility kitche...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the menus and recipes were followed in one (1) of one (1) facility kitchen with the potential to affect one hundred and eleven (111) residents. The findings include: Review of the facility's polic,y titled Menus revised 10/2019, revealed menu cycles would include standardized recipes. Continued review revealed the Menus were served as written, unless changed in response to preference, unavailability of an item, or a special meal. Review of the menus provided by the Registered Dietitian (RD), on 08/25/2021 at 12:15 PM, revealed the following menu: 08/24/2021 Tuesday lunch: Southern fried chicken, orange twist, macaroni and cheese, buttered chopped spinach, dinner roll, and cookie, 08/25/2021 Wednesday lunch: Salisbury steak, beef gravy, chopped parsley rice pilaf, buttered kernel corn, dinner roll, and orange sherbet. Observations of the lunch preparation in the kitchen, on 08/25/2021 at 9:51 AM, revealed the Dietary Aide (DA) was preparing a pureed dessert. Continued observation revealed the DA put a spoonful of the fruit/marshmallow mixture into the food processer and added thickener at various times, without measuring or referring to a recipe for puree texture. The DA said the mixture was called raspberry ambrosia. Per interview, the Dietary Manager (DM) was out of the facility for the next couple of days. The DA stated, a fill-in Dietary Manager was in the facility the day before. Interview with Resident #98, on 08/24/2021 at 12:16 PM, revealed the resident received chicken tenders, macaroni salad, green beans, and a cookie. Interview with an unsampled resident, on 08/25/2021 at 2:18 PM, revealed the resident received a lot of the same alternates, and the grilled cheese was more like a buttered sandwich. The resident said they received too many fruit cups. Interview with [NAME] #1, on 08/25/2021 at 10:09 AM, revealed the dietary staff did not have any supervision at this time, and they were just winging it. Continued interview revealed the lunch meal consisted of a chicken sandwich with chicken patties, potato wedges, and peas. Interview with [NAME] #1 and Registered Dietician (RD), on 08/25/2021 at 11:24 AM, revealed the RD was noted to have the menus from the menu book. Per intrview, [NAME] #1 had not seen the menus before. [NAME] #1 stated she changed the menu because she could not prepare seafood and the residents had green beans the day before so she changed the vegtable to peas. The RD advised [NAME] #1 that after she made the changes, the whole meal consisted of starches. Continued interview revealed [NAME] #1 was not aware that peas were a starch. Interview with the [NAME] #1, on 08/25/2021 at 11:35 AM, revealed she did not have any recipes for the food items she prepared. She stated the only thing she knew for sure were the serving sizes. Continued interview revealed she had been making up her own recipes as she went along. She said the Dietary Manager would type up a menu every day and would give that to them to prepare, but no standard menu was available. Interview with the Registered Dietitian (RD) and the Regional Director of Culinary Services (RDCS), on 08/25/2021 at 12:15 PM, revealed they provided the Dietary Manager with a copy of the necessary in-services for the staff, the menu, and the recipes that accompanied the menu. They said they did not know what happened to them after that point. Per interview, the kitchen was managed by a different contract company. The RD stated the menu book in the kitchen had missing sections and was not the same as the official menus provided by the RDCS. The RDCS stated the menus and recipes had been printed for the Dietary Manager, but they were unable to find them in the kitchen. Interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA), on 08/26/2021 at 9:39 AM, revealed she was unaware the menus and recipes were not being followed until this week. She stated the menu and recipe binders were presented to the Dietary Manager by the new company weeks ago.
CONCERN (F)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and review of the facility's policies, it was determined the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with profess...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and review of the facility's policies, it was determined the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for one (1) of one (1) kitchen and one (1) of two (2) nourishment refrigerators with the potential to affect all one hundred and eleven (111) residents. Staff failed to ensure cold foods were covered, expired foods were disposed of, the kitchen and equipment were cleaned, food was stored at the proper temperature, and food was prepared and held at the proper temperatures prior to meal service. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Food Preparation revised 10/2019, revealed time/temperature control for safety (TCS) hot food items would be heated according to the following guidelines: mechanically altered foods: reheated to one hundred and sixty-five (165) degrees Fahrenheit (F) for fifteen (15) seconds; reheated foods: one hundred and sixty-five (165) degrees Fahrenheit for 15 seconds and then discarded after two (2) hours. The cook ensures that all foods were held at appropriate temperatures, greater than one hundred and thirty-five (135) degrees Fahrenheit for hot holding and less than forty-one (41) degrees Fahrenheit for cold food holding. Temperature for TCS foods should be recorded at time of serving and monitored periodically during meal service periods as indicated. Review of the facility's policy titled, Food Storage: Cold revised 10/2019, revealed the Dining Services Director/ Cook(s) ensure that all perishable foods would be maintained at a temperature of forty-one (41) degrees Fahrenheit or below except during necessary periods of preparation and service. The Dining Service Director/ Cook(s) ensured that all food items were stored properly in covered containers, labeled, and dated and arranged in a manner to prevent cross contamination. Review of the facility's policy titled, Ice revised 10/2019, revealed the Dining Services Director would ensure that the ice bins were cleaned monthly and as needed. The Dining Services Director would ensure that proper utensils or clean gloved hands were used for handling. Review of the facility's policy titled, Environment revised 10/2019, revealed the Dining Services Director would ensure that the physical plant was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner, including floors, walls, ceilings, lighting, and ventilation. 1. Observations of the kitchen walk-in refrigerator, on 08/23/2021 at 8:47 AM, revealed a five (5) pound container of cottage cheese with a use-by-date of 08/14/2021. Continued observation revealed a hard plastic container of tuna salad that was open to air and not fully covered. There was a package of bologna, opened to air and not fully covered. 2. Observations of the kitchen, on 08/23/2021 at 8:47 AM, revealed the walk-in refrigerator flooring had dirty brown grout throughout. The flooring was dirty with food debris. The walk-in freezer flooring had areas of melted ice cream, frozen and unclean. The dry storage area flooring had food debris and old spills throughout. The inside of the ice machine was dirty with liquid spatter throughout. The dish machine area flooring was dirty with food debris. Observations of the kitchen, on 08/25/2021 at 7:30 AM, revealed thick lint and food debris along the racks in the walk-in refrigerator. The inside of the ice machine remained dirty with liquid spatter throughout. Observations of the lunch preparation in the kitchen, on 08/25/2021 at 9:51 AM, revealed the Dietary Aide (DA) was preparing a pureed dessert. Observation revealed she took out a food processer from the lower shelf. Continued observation revealed the food processer had various dried-on liquid spatter throughout the outside of the container. Further observation revealed the DA continued to puree a fruit/marshmallow dish with the soiled equipment. After using the food processor, the DA cleaned the outside of the food processor and placed it on the lower shelf. Observation of the food processor on the lower shelf revealed it remained soiled with liquid spatter along the crevices and the lower shelf had food debris on the shelf. Interview with DA, on 08/25/2021 at 10:12 AM, revealed the Dietary Manager (DM) was out of the facility for the next couple of days. She stated a fill-in Dietary Manager was in the facility the day before. Observations of the kitchen, on 08/25/2021 at 10:04 AM, revealed the wall behind the hand washing sink was soiled with brown smears, the trash container was soiled all along the outside of the container, the steam table remained soiled from the breakfast meal, the table behind the steam table was soiled with food debris, the ceiling above the trash container and above the steam table was soiled with an unknown liquid spatter. A dietary staff member used a beverage pitcher to scoop ice out of the ice machine with bare hands. The ice scoop was not used. The dietary staff member touched the bottom of the pitcher with a bare hand and the bottom of the pitcher touched the ice inside of the ice machine. At 11:12 AM, food was placed onto the dirty steam table and the steam table was not cleaned prior. An interview with the Registered Dietitian (RD) on 08/25/2021 at 1:41 PM said they had no logs and did not know the last time the ice machine was cleaned. She said, It's disgusting. She confirmed the kitchen had been dirty since she started in the building, and she had been trying to get things cleaned and fixed. 3. Observations of the nourishment refrigerator nearest the main dining room on 08/23/2021 at 11:36 AM revealed a temperature of sixty (60) degrees F. The door to the refrigerator lacked the ability to seal closed. The refrigerator contained resident food items, including yogurt containers. A dietary staff member in the area said she was the Dietary Manager. At 11:42 AM, she said she was not aware she needed to monitor the refrigerator temperatures. She acknowledged the temperature was high and the food needed to be disposed of as soon as possible. 4. Observations of food preparation on 08/25/2021 at 10:18 AM revealed the [NAME] blended some chicken for the mechanical texture. She placed the food into the oven. She took out some breaded chicken from the oven and temped the food item. The temperature was one hundred twenty (120) degrees F, and the food was placed back into the oven. At 10:53 AM, she took the breaded chicken out of the oven and took the temperature again with a temperature of one hundred twenty (120) degrees F. At 11:12 AM, hamburger patties were placed onto the steam table. The [NAME] took the breaded chicken out of the oven and the food item had a temperature of one hundred thirty-one (131) degrees F. At 11:18 AM, the peas were placed onto the steam table. At 11:30 AM, the [NAME] placed the breaded chicken into the Robo Coupe for processing. She said the temperature of the chicken was one hundred forty (140) degrees F. At 11:35 AM, she said the ground chicken had a temperature of one hundred forty-five (145) degrees F. She said she only needed to reheat the food. The pureed chicken had a temperature of one hundred thirty-five (135) degrees after processing and was placed onto the steam table, without reheating. The [NAME] said that the pureed chicken stayed hot because of the added hot water. The tall cart next to the steam table contained pimento cheese sandwiches, out at room temperature. The tray line started at 11:45 AM with no temperatures taken of the food items prior to service. The [NAME] finished pureeing the peas with a temperature of one hundred twenty-seven (127) degrees F, and they were placed back into the oven. The mashed potatoes remained on the stove with a temperature of one hundred twenty-nine (129) degrees F. An interview with the [NAME] on 08/25/2021 at 12:00 PM revealed the food items were not reheated to the proper temperatures. She said since the food was precooked, then it needed to be reheated to one hundred forty (140) degrees F. The [NAME] was unaware food items needed to be reheated to a temperature of one hundred sixty-five (165) degrees F. An interview with the RD and the Regional Director of Culinary Services (RDCS) on 08/25/2021 at 12:15 PM revealed the RD said the kitchen was responsible for checking the temperature of the nourishment refrigerators. She confirmed that had not been done, and there were no temperature logs available. An interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) on 08/26/2021 at 9:39 AM revealed orientation should have been completed with the Dietary Manager at the start. She said all the refrigerators should have been checked with temperatures maintained at less than 40 degrees F. She said she was not aware of the kitchen concerns until this week.
CONCERN (F)

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

QAPI Program (Tag F0867)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on interview, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure an effective Quality Assurance (QA) program was in place. The facility's census was 111 ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure an effective Quality Assurance (QA) program was in place. The facility's census was 111 residents. Staff failed to ensure the QA program put plans in place to correct past deficiencies, identify its' own deficiencies, and resolve those deficiencies. The findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Committee, dated 07/2016, revealed the primary goals of the QAPI Committee are to .help identify actual and potential negative outcomes relative to resident care and resolve them appropriately; support the use of root cause analysis to help identify where patterns of negative outcomes point to underlying systemic problems; help departments, consultants and ancillary services implement systems to correct potential and actual issues in quality of care. 1. Review of the facility's repeat deficiencies from the 07/25/2019 survey included: -F686- failure to provide care and services related to pressure ulcers. -F690- failure to provide catheter care. -F695- failure to ensure proper oxygen care and services. -F880- failure to ensure proper infection control practices were in place 2. Cross reference tags: -F550- failed to ensure residents were dressed and catheter cover was provided. -F600- failed to ensure residents were safe from abuse. -F609- failed to ensure allegations of abuse were reported timely. -F610- failed to ensure allegations of abuse were thoroughly investigated. -F656- failed to ensure care plans were implemented. -F686- failed to provide care and services related to pressure ulcers. -F689- failed to provide care and services for the prevention of falls. -F690- failed to ensure proper catheter care. -F740- failed to ensure proper behavioral plans were in place. -F801- failed to ensure qualified dietary manager was in place. -F803- failed to ensure menus and recipes were followed. -F812- failed to ensure adequate kitchen sanitation. -F880- failed to ensure proper infection control practices were in place An interview with the Nursing Home Administration (NHA) on 08/27/2021 at 6:25 PM revealed they had not completed a live QA meeting in months. She stated they completed Zoom QA meetings with the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) and then would report that information to the medical director. Three (3) staff members were recorded in attendance according to the sign-in sheets. She stated the current QA focus was the new company transition and the accuracy of weights. The Administrator stated they also reviewed COVID-19 and visitation. She said those were the primary areas of concern. Continued interview revealed they discussed reportable incidents with the medical director this day. She said they had some Performance Improvement Plans (PIP) areas of focus which included employee retention and the dining program. She said they did not have any documentation for the PIPs. She said she did not think there was any improvement in the PIPs. She said they reviewed falls every week in the critical at risk (CAR) meetings. She said she attended the CAR meetings when she was available. The Administrator stated she was not aware of any kitchen sanitation or menu issues until this week. She said everything had been a struggle with COVID-19 and they had been overwhelmed.
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

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and the review of a facility policy, it was determined that the facility fail...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and the review of a facility policy, it was determined that the facility failed to keep the indwelling catheter drainage bag off the floor for one (1) of four (4) sampled residents (Resident #67); and, failed to maintain social distancing in the main hallway and wear the face mask properly in three (3) locations within the building. The deficient practice occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic and had the potential to affect all residents. The findings included: Review of the facility's policy, titled Catheter Care, Urinary, revised 09/2014, indicated under the section Infection Control that the catheter tubing and bag were to be kept off the floor. 1. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #67 on 01/18/2021 and re-admitted him/her on 02/14/2021 with diagnoses that included disruption of a surgical wound and obstructive uropathy. Review of Resident #67's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated the resident was cognitively intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of fourteen (14) out of fifteen (15). The assessment indicated the resident had an indwelling urinary catheter. Observations of the urinary drainage bag with at least half of the bag lying on the floor were made on 08/23/2021 at 2:47 PM; 08/24/2021 at 2:00 PM; and, on 08/25/2021 at 10:30 AM An interview was conducted with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #2 on 08/25/2021 at 10:33 AM. The CNA, who was assigned to the resident, stated she had not noticed the drainage bag on the floor. Interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #1 on 08/25/2021 at 10:34 AM, who was assigned to the resident, stated urinary drainage bags should be kept off the floor. She was unable to say how Resident #67's urinary drainage bag was positioned since she had not been in the resident's room that shift. An interview with CNA #3 was conducted on 08/25/2021 at 11:12 AM. The CNA stated she had emptied the urinary drainage bag and had not noticed when the bed was lowered that the bag landed on the floor. The Director of Nursing (DON) was interviewed on 08/26/2021 at 8:15 AM. The DON stated a basic standard of care included that the catheter drainage bag should not be placed on the floor related to infection control issues. 2. On 08/24/2021 at 10:50 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #9 was observed sitting at the A Unit nurse's station. His mask was below his nose. Interview with the LPN, at that time, revealed he had been taught to wear his mask above his nose, but the mask kept sliding down. LPN #9 stated he had tried many different types of masks with the same results. On 08/24/2021 at 10:51 AM, six (6) members of housekeeping staff were seen in the hall outside of the laboratory door. The staff members, in some cases, were almost shoulder to shoulder. Housekeeper #1 stated someone in housekeeping had tested positive and the six (6) standing in front of the lab were waiting to be tested since they had close contact with the positive member of their team. Unit Manager (UM) #1 was interviewed on 08/24/2021 at 10:56 AM. She stated staff had been taught to social distance. She denied any active cases of COVID-19 in the building at this time. Observation on 08/24/2021 starting at 12:30 PM, revealed three (3) employees came through the front door and stopped at the front desk to be screened. Two (2) of the three (3) employees were wearing their masks below their noses. The receptionist, who was screening employees, did not direct the employees to reposition their masks above their noses. Both employees went down the front hall to be COVID-19 tested. When interviewed, the receptionist stated she had been taught the proper way to wear a mask was above the nose. She stated there were so many things going on, she had not noticed the two (2) employees wearing the mask below their noses. An interview was conducted on 08/24/2021 at 3:00 PM with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and DON to discuss concerns with the breaks in infection control protocols considering the COVID-19 positive employee reported on 08/24/2021. The interview included staff coming through the front door and walking up to the screening desk with no mask, nurses throughout the building not wearing their mask properly and the lack of social distancing. The NHA stated initially a basket of masks had been placed by the door for employees to wear before screening, but someone had told her to remove the basket and place the basket of masks on the screening table. The NHA and the DON stated they understood the seriousness of the situation since they now had a positive employee. The NHA stated residents and staff had a choice of wearing a mask or not.
Jul 2019 14 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to treat two (2) residents, not in the selected sample of twenty-eight (28) residents with respect an...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to treat two (2) residents, not in the selected sample of twenty-eight (28) residents with respect and dignity. (Resident #19 and Resident A). Observation revealed staff failed to provide utensils for Resident #19, as he/she was using the ear piece of his/her glasses to stir his/her coffee. Additionally, staff was standing while feeding Resident A. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Treatment: Considerate and Respectful, last revised 07/01/19 revealed the policy of the facility was to promote respectful and dignified care for residents in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his/her quality of life while recognizing each resident's individuality. When in Dining room: Promote resident independence and dignity in dining such as avoidance of staff standing over residents while assisting them to eat. 1. Observation on 07/23/19 at 7:12 AM during the breakfast meal revealed Resident #19's Brief Interview for Mental Status {BIMS} score of fifteen {15}, revealed he/she was cognitively intact. He/she was observed using his/her eye glasses to stir coffee after placing sweet and low in the coffee. Further observation revealed the resident had no utensils on the table. At 7:15 AM, the Unit Manager noted the resident without utensils and brought him/her the table utensils to eat and stir coffee. Interview with Resident #19 on 07/23/19 at 7:10 AM revealed, he/she did not know why utensils had been given to the table, but he/she could use what he/she had. He/she stated he/she would do whatever needed to get the coffee stirred up. Interview with the Unit Manager in the dining room on 07/23/19 at 7:16 AM revealed the staff should have provided proper utensils for the residents. She stated she thought it was just an oversight. She also revealed that residents who required feeding should never be fed while staff was standing at their side. 2. Observation during the breakfast meal on 07/23/19 at 7:23 AM revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5 was standing at Resident A's side looking down at him/her while feeding him/her. Interview with LPN #5 on 07/23/19 at 7:48 AM revealed she would either stand or sit next to the resident when feeding them. She stated she was not sure what the facility dignity policy said regarding standing at residents' side when feeding. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/25/19 at 3:15 PM revealed she expected all residents to be treated with dignity and respect. She stated no resident should be fed while staff were standing up and looking down on the resident and all staff should have proper utensils when eating.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0558 (Tag F0558)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, st...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff and the public related to one resident (Resident #106) of twenty-eight (28) sampled residents. Resident #106 was unable to reach the call light on four observations. The call light was attached to the privacy curtain next to the bed. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Call Lights, last reviewed 03/01/16 revealed, All facility patients will have a call light or alternative communication device within their reach at all times when unattended. Staff will respond to call lights and communication devices promptly. The purpose is to ensure safety and communication between staff and patients. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #106 on 11/14/18 with diagnoses which included End Stage Renal Disease, Hypothyroidism, Anemia, Atherosclerotic Heart Disease, Atrial Fibrillation, and Congestive Heart Failure. Review of a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/09/19 revealed the facility assessed Resident #106's cognition as intact with a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of twelve (12) which indicated the resident was interviewable. Further review of the MDS revealed the facility assessed the resident was totally dependent with two (2) person assist for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, personal hygiene, and bathing. Observations on 07/25/19 at 11:10 AM, 12:48 PM and 3:05 PM revealed Resident #106 was sitting up in bed and the resident's call light was clipped to the privacy curtain. Interview with Resident 106 on 07/25/19 at 3:07 PM revealed he/she could not reach the call light. The resident was observed to try to reach the call light but was unable to reach. The resident stated he/she would have to yell to get help. The resident was located on the last room on right at the end of the hall. He/She revealed he/she couldn't remember if it had happened before, he/she thought it had. Interview with Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #6 on 07/25/19 at 3:20 PM revealed she did not know who placed the call light on the curtain. CNA #6 stated the call light should be placed in easy reach of the resident and secured. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/25/19 at 3:49 PM revealed she expected all call lights to be accessible to the residents and not attached to the privacy curtains.
CONCERN (D)

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure one (1) of twenty-eight (28) sampled residents had the right to a safe, clean, comfortable ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure one (1) of twenty-eight (28) sampled residents had the right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment (Resident #38). Resident #28's privacy curtain was soiled; however, staff failed to change out the privacy curtain. The findings include: Review of facility policy titled, Cleaning: Resident/Patient Areas, revealed staff is to use a Seven-Step cleaning procedure to clean all areas and equipment in the Center/Assisted Living Community. All resident/patient areas are cleaned at least daily and include resident/patient rooms, dining rooms, day rooms, lounges, tubs/showers, therapy rooms, etc. The purpose is to ensure all areas of the Center/Assisted Living Community are clean. The Cleaning is accomplished using the Seven-Step Cleaning Procedures which includes the following cleaning procedures: High dusting, Spot cleaning and surface sanitizing, bathroom cleaning, waste collection, floor dust mopping, floor wet mopping, room inspection-visually inspect room after completing all tasks and correct any issues before leaving the room. Observations, on 07/23/19 at 7:46 AM, and on 07/24/19 at 8:59 AM, revealed Resident #38's privacy curtain was pulled and a pink stain was noted on the curtain. Interview with the Housekeeping Supervisor on 07/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed he expected staff to replace a privacy curtain when soiled. He stated there were extras available in the building. Interview with the Administrator on 07/25/19 at 12:55 PM, revealed he expected staff to alert housekeeping staff of the soiled privacy curtain and the soiled privacy curtain to be changed.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0655 (Tag F0655)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure it developed and implemented a baseline care plan that included the instruct...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure it developed and implemented a baseline care plan that included the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that met professional standards of quality care for one (1) of twenty-eight (28) sampled residents (Residents #273). Resident #273 was admitted to the facility with a urinary catheter in place on 07/20/19; however, review of the Baseline Care Plan revealed there was no baseline care plan in place to address the care of the resident's catheter. The findings include: Review of the facility policy, Person-Centered Care Plan, last revised 07/01/19, revealed the facility must develop and implement a person-centered care plan that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care that meets professional standards of quality care. A comprehensive, individualized care plan will be developed within seven days after completion of the comprehensive assessment for each patient that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet a patient's medical, nursing, nutrition, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessments. The care plan must describe services to be furnished. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #273 on 07/20/19 with a diagnosis of Traumatic Subdural Hemorrhage without loss of consciousness. Further review revealed the facility had not completed his/her admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with no Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score available. Observation of Resident #273, on 07/24/19 at 9:25 AM, revealed he/she had a urinary catheter in place with a strong urine odor. However, review of the Baseline Care Plan, dated 07/22/19, revealed no documented evidence of a care plan in place to address the resident's urinary catheter. Interview with Unit Manager (UM) #1, on 07/25/19 at 3:07 PM, revealed nursing should have had a care plan in place, to address the urinary catheter. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/25/19 at 3:07 PM, revealed the resident should have had a care plan for urinary catheter.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the Comprehensive Care Plan was reviewed and revised for one (1) of twenty-eight (28) sam...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the Comprehensive Care Plan was reviewed and revised for one (1) of twenty-eight (28) sampled residents (Residents #101) Staff failed to revise Resident #101's care when a new pressure ulcer was identified. The findings include: Review of the facility policy, Person Centered Care Plan, last revised 07/01/19 revealed care plans will be reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments, and as needed to reflect the response to care and changing needs and goals. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #101 on 06/25/19 with diagnoses which included Cerebral Infarction, Psychosis, Anxiety Disorder, Schizophrenia, Major Depressive Disorder, and Retention of Urine. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/02/19, revealed the facility assessed Resident #101's cognition as moderately impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine (9), which indicated the resident was interviewable. The resident was difficult to understand due to the effects of the Cerebral Infarction history. Review of the Skin Integrity Report for Resident #101 revealed an initial wound date of 07/22/19 for a Pressure Ulcer related to Moisture Associated Skin Damage with measurement of eighteen (18) centimeters (cm) by (16) sixteen cm. However, review of the Comprehensive Care Plan for Resident at risk for skin breakdown related to impaired mobility and bowel incontinence dated 05/31/19 revealed no documented evidence of a revision for care for the pressure ulcer identified on 07/22/19. Interview with the Unit Manager on 07/25/19 at 1:58 PM revealed she expected the charge nurses to ensure the weekly skin assessments were completed and if new skin breakdown was found, it should be reflected on the Comprehensive Care Plan as a revision. She stated she expected her units' nurses to follow the facility policies. She revealed the charge nurses were responsible for revising the care plan when a new order was written or a new pressure area found. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/25/19 at 2:41 PM revealed expected if new skin breakdown was found, the Comprehensive Care Plan would reflect a revision in skin integrity with interventions to reflect treatment of the wound.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

1. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #106 on 11/14/18 with diagnoses which included End Stage Renal Disease, Hypothyroidism, Anemia, Atherosclerotic Heart Disease, Atrial Fibrillat...

Read full inspector narrative →
1. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #106 on 11/14/18 with diagnoses which included End Stage Renal Disease, Hypothyroidism, Anemia, Atherosclerotic Heart Disease, Atrial Fibrillation, and Congestive Heart Failure. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/09/19, revealed the facility assessed Resident #106's cognition as intact with a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of twelve (12), which indicated the resident was interviewable. Review of the Comprehensive Care Plan for Resident has an enteral feeding tube to meet nutritional needs related to malnutrition, dated 11/26/18, with an intervention to include monitor skin around peg tube site, skin care and dressing as ordered. However, observation of a G-tube assessment/dressing change, on 07/24/19 at 3:14 PM, revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 failed to follow the Comprehensive Care Plan for proper technique of G-tube care, when she failed to use proper handwashing, infection control practices by not cleaning the overbed table prior to placing a barrier, and afterward failed to dispose of contaminated soiled dressings. She also failed to remove gloves and wash her hands prior to touching the resident's bed clothing. Interview with LPN #1, on 07/24/19 at 3:28 PM, revealed she was a travel nurse, and stated that's the way I always do it. I'm not sure what the facility policy says and didn't have any education from the facility prior to starting to work. 2. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #322 on 07/18/19 with diagnoses which included Necrotizing Fascitis, Pseudomonas Aeruginosa as cause of Disease, Type II Diabetes Mellitus, and Lower Abdominal, Pelvic and Perineal Pain. There was no evidence of an MDS available for review at this time due to his/her recent admission date. Review of the a Laboratory Report revealed the resident had been diagnosed with a Urinary Tract Infection on 07/24/19. Review of the Comprehensive Care Plan for, Resident at risk for Skin Breakdown revealed and intervention for treatment as ordered. However, observation of a dressing change, on 07/25/19 at 1:14 PM, revealed a Stage IV Pressure Ulcer which had been surgically debrided. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) failed to follow the Comprehensive Care Plan by not following the handwashing policy, failed to follow infection control measures by not contaminating the wound, and failed to use aseptic technique during wound care by taking her own scissors from her pocket, which were used to cut the supplies, without cleaning the scissors. Interview with ADON on 07/25/19 at 2:15 PM revealed she should have washed her hands and performed wound care per policy. She stated she should have followed the care plan as written for Resident #322. She further revealed she should have positioned Resident #322 so that recontamination wound not occur. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 07/25/19 at 2:42 PM, revealed she expected all staff to follow care plans. Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the services provided or arranged by the facility, as outlined by the comprehensive care plan, meet professional standards of quality for two (2) of twenty-eight (28) sampled residents (Resident #106 and #322). Staff failed to provide wound care and gastrostomy tube site care according to the care plan that met professional standards of practice related to handwashing, not cleaning overbed table prior to pacing a barrier, not contaminating the wound, and using aseptic technique related to using clean scissors.
CONCERN (D)

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure two ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure two (2) of four (4) residents reviewed with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, and prevent infection. (Residents #101 and #322). Resident #101 was care planned at risk for skin breakdown on 05/31/19; however, the facility failed to conduct weekly skin assessments to identify skin breakdown. On 07/22/19, staff identified Resident #101 had a Stage II pressure ulcer to coccyx; however, the facility failed to revise the care plan. In addition, licensed staff failed to provide wound care appropriately by not washing hands, and ensuring aseptic technique was followed. Resident #322 had a Stage IV pressure wound to the abdomen/groin/labia which was surgically debrided due to Necrotizing Fasciitis. However, licensed staff failed to provide wound care appropriately by not washing hands, and ensuring the wound was not contaminated during wound care. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Skin Integrity Management, last revised 07/01/19, revealed the implementation of an individual patient's skin integrity management occurs within the care delivery process. The purpose is to provide safe and effective care to prevent the occurrence of pressure ulcers, manage treatment, and promote healing of all wounds. Perform skin inspection weekly. Implement special wound care treatments/techniques as indicated and ordered. Perform wound observations and measurements and complete Skin Integrity Report upon initial identification of altered skin integrity, weekly, and with anticipated decline of wound. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #101 on 06/25/19 with diagnoses which included Cerebral Infarction, Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction, Psychosis, Anxiety Disorder, Schizophrenia, Major Depressive Disorder, Epilepsy and Retention of Urine. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/02/19 revealed the facility assessed Resident #101's cognition as moderately impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine (9) which indicated the resident was interviewable; however, due to the resident's Stroke, the resident was very difficult to understand. Further review of the Quarterly MDS revealed the resident was at risk for developing pressure ulcers and the resident had no pressure ulcers at any stage. Review of the Weekly Skin Assessments revealed there was no documented evidence weekly skin assessments had been completed from 06/21/19 through 07/21/19. Review of a weekly skin assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Stage II pressure ulcer was identified to the resident's coccyx with measurements of 18 cm by 16 cm. Review of the Skin Integrity Report for Resident #101 revealed an initial wound date of 07/22/19 for a Pressure Ulcer related to Moisture Associated Skin Damage wound with measurements of 18 cm by 16 sixteen cm. Review of the Comprehensive Care Plan for Resident at risk for skin breakdown related to impaired mobility and bowel incontinence dated 05/31/19 revealed there was no documented evidence the resident had any skin breakdown. Review of the July 2019 Physician Orders revealed an order to cleanse area to coccyx/buttocks with foaming cleanser and pat dry. Apply Remedy Gydraguard ever shift and as needed with incontinent episodes. Observation of wound care to Stage II pressure ulcer of Resident #101's coccyx, on 07/25/19 at 9:12 AM, revealed the resident was in isolation for C-diff. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) and Licensed Practical Nurse #1 (LPN) performed wound care. The ADON placed the Hydra guard in a medication cup on the overbed table on top of a paper towel. The ADON then used disposable wash cloths with foam cleanser to clean his/her peri and coccyx area, and placed the dirty cloths on the bed sheets. When the ADON ran out of cloths, she opened the bedside table drawer with her dirty gloved hands and reached in to get more wash cloths. She then attempted to clean the wound area with dirty gloves on. The ADON continued to use the dirty gloves that she had used to clean peri area and coccyx. She then, without changing gloves or washing hands, placed the Hydra Guard on the wound. 2. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #322 on 07/18/19 with diagnoses which included Necrotizing Fascitis, Pseudomonas Aeruginosa as cause of Disease, Type II Diabetes Mellitus, and Lower Abdominal, Pelvic and Perineal Pain. There was no evidence of an MDS available for review at this time due to his/her recent admission date. Further review of Resident #322's medical record revealed Resident #322 was admitted with an Stage IV abdominal/groin/labia pressure wound which had been surgically incised and debrided. Review of the Comprehensive Care Plan for Resident at risk for skin breakdown related to bed rest, limited mobility and has actual skin breakdown to abdomen/groin/labia due to necrotizing fasciitis dated 07/22/19 revealed a goal for the wound to be free from signs and symptoms of infection with an intervention for treatment as ordered. Review of Physician Orders for July 2019 revealed an order to cleanse wound to upper abdomen to right labia with wound cleanser, pack lightly with Maxorb Rope, cover with Optilock non-adhesive Super Absorbent Wound Dressing, secure with Medifix dressing retention tape, and change every other day and as needed. Observation of dressing change to Resident #322's Stage IV Pressure Ulcer on 07/25/19 at 1:14 PM which had been surgically debrided revealed the ADON and LPN #2 performed the wound care. The ADON failed to change gloves and wash hands when entering the room. She donned gloves and after she removed the dirty soiled dressing and failed to wash her hands after replacing the wound dressing to prevent infection. She also failed to clean the scissors she removed from her pocket prior to cutting the supplies. Further observation revealed the ADON did not position the resident properly for maximum visualization of the wound, which caused contamination of wound due to the wound extending to the labia which was in close proximity to the urinary meatus. When the ADON would spread the wound open, and then let go after cleaning, the wound would be recontaminated by the resident's peri area and upper thigh. Interview with ADON on 07/25/19 at 2:15 PM revealed she should have washed her hands and performed wound care per policy. She stated she should have followed the care plan as written for Resident #101 and #322. She revealed the care plans are to be updated when a problem is found and Resident #101 should have had a care plan for skin breakdown. She revealed she contaminated Resident #322's wound more with the C-diff stool by smearing it over the open wound. She further revealed she should have positioned Resident #322 so that recontamination wound not occur. Interview with the Director Of Nursing (DON) on 07/25/19 at 2:42 PM regarding wound care revealed, staff are expected to follow care plans, facility policies and physician orders. She stated if correct aseptic technique is not followed, she expected the wounds to not heal and probably expected them to get worse.
CONCERN (D)

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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents who entered the facility with an indwelling catheter received appr...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents who entered the facility with an indwelling catheter received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections; for one (1) of four (4) sampled residents (Resident #322). Staff failed to provide Resident #322's catheter care according to the facility policy to prevent urinary tract infections. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Catheter: Indwelling Urinary, Care of, last revised 02/01/19, revealed catheter care should be performed twice daily and as needed. Perform as follows: cleanse hands, put on gloves, use personal protective equipment as needed. Wash perineal area with no rinse perineal cleanser. Pat dry. For female: use downward strokes from pubic to rectal area using alternate sites of wash cloth with downward strokes to prevent contamination. Cleanse the proximal third of the catheter with soap and water, washing away from insertion site. Rinse. 1. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #322 on 07/18/19 with diagnoses which included Necrotizing Fascitis, Pseudomonas Aeruginosa as cause of Disease, Type II Diabetes Mellitus, and Lower Abdominal, Pelvic and Perineal Pain. No Minimum Data Set (MDS) was available for review due to recent admission date. Observation on 07/25/19 at 11:00 AM of urinary catheter care revealed the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) had difficulty viewing the resident's perineal area and continued to contaminate the area by her inability to hold the meatus open due to poor position of resident. The ADON neglected to cleanse the catheter tubing at site and downward per policy. Further observation revealed there was no barrier placed between an open abdominal wound and the perineal area which caused contamination from wound seepage into perineal area around catheter. The resident was obese and the abdominal wound extended into the groin and right labia. Interview with Resident #322 on 07/24/19 at 10:28 AM revealed the resident was alert; however, was confused regarding dates and times. Review of a Laboratory Report revealed Resident #322 was diagnosed with an Urinary Tract infection on 07/26/19. Interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), on 07/25/19 at 11:45 AM, revealed she should have positioned the resident better to be able to view the perineal area appropriately so she could have prevented contamination of the area. She stated she should have placed a waterproof barrier between the wound and peri area and cleansed the catheter tube per policy. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/25/19 at 2:48 PM revealed she expected her staff to follow facility policy and procedures when carrying out resident care. She stated she expected proper infection control practices be followed with no exceptions.
CONCERN (D)

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

Tube Feeding (Tag F0693)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents who were fed by enteral means received the appropriate treatment an...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents who were fed by enteral means received the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding including but not limited to aspiration pneumonia for one (1) of twenty-eight (28) sampled residents (Resident #74). Resident #74 had a gastrostomy tube and self administered feeding and medication; however, the facility failed to assess, care plan, and obtain a physician order for the resident to administered his/her own medication/feedings. Resident #74 stated he/she did not check for tube placement prior to administration. The findings include: Review of facility policy titled, Enteral Feeding Administration, dated 10/01/18, revealed when administrating enteral feeding to measure the tube from the point of entry into the skin to the end of the tube to determine whether the catheter has migrated. If the length of tube significantly changed, do not administer feeding and notify the physician. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #74 on 09/19/10 with diagnoses which included Gastrostomy. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 06/22/19 revealed the facility assessed Resident #74's cognition as intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15) which indicated the resident was interviewable. Observation on 07/23/19 at 7:26 AM revealed Resident #72 feeding self through a gastrostomy tube. He/she communicated by using a writing board related to a tracheostomy, and wrote he/she always administered his/her own medications and feedings. Interview with Resident #74 on 07/24/19 at 2:33 PM revealed he/she checks for residual by pulling the tube up, but does not check for placement. He/she wrote he/she gave all his/her medication, and also feeding through the gastrostomy tube. Further review of Resident #72's record revealed there was no physician order for the resident to administered his/her medication/feeding. In addition, there was no documented evidence the resident was assessed and/or care planned for self administration of medication/feeding. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5 on 07/24/19 at 2:45 PM revealed Resident #74 administers his/her own medications but they are kept at the nurses station and prepared by the nurse. LPN #5 stated the nurse always stays with him/her until the medications are gone, but the resident does it all him/herself. Interview with the Nurse Practitioner on 07/25/19 at 2:20 PM revealed she was not to keen on the idea of Resident #74's self-administration of medications/feedings but feels the resident is very independent and feels he/she knows what he/she is doing, but understands not checking for placement is a concern. She stated a physician for self administration should have been put in place or obtained before starting. Interview with the Unit Manager on 07/24/19 at 3:25 PM revealed Resident #74 does not have an order to self administer medication/feeding, and she was unable to provide an assessment of self administration of medication/feedings. Interview with Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/25/19 at 3:30 PM revealed Resident #74 should be taught to check placement, and if refuses, the nurse should do it for him/her.
CONCERN (D)

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

Staffing Information (Tag F0732)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview and review of the facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to post the nurse staffing data on 07/23/19, 07/24/19 and 07/25/19 at the beginning of each shi...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and review of the facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to post the nurse staffing data on 07/23/19, 07/24/19 and 07/25/19 at the beginning of each shift. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Posting Staffing, last revised 09/01/13, revealed in accordance with federal and state regulations, Genesis Healthcare Centers would post the census, shift hours, number of staff and the total actual hours worked by licensed and unlicensed staff who would be directly responsible for patient care for each shift and on a daily basis. The posting would be prominently displayed and accessible for patient, visitor and staff viewing. Observations of staff posting on 07/23/19 at 11:30 AM, revealed the staff information for 07/23/19 7:00 AM, 3:00 PM and 11:00 PM was posted; however, further observations on 07/24/19 at 9:00 AM and 07/25/19 at 10:15 AM, revealed the 07/23/19, 7:00 AM, 3:00 PM and 11:00 PM staff information remained posted with no new information posted. Interview with the Staffing Scheduler, on 07/25/19 at 10:31 AM, revealed she forgot to update the staffing for 07/24/19 and was not working on 07/25/19. She stated the bookkeeper would have been responsible to update the posting in her absence. Interview with the Bookkeeper, on 07/25/19 at 10:15 AM, revealed she was not aware the staffing scheduler was absent on 07/25/19 and had not updated the posting. She stated it was her responsibility to update the posting when the staffing scheduler was absent. Interview with the Administrator, on 07/25/19 at 10:40 AM revealed the staffing was supposed to be posted daily.
CONCERN (E)

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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to provide a sa...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to provide a safe environment for residents, staff and the public. Observations of two (2) of twenty-eight (28) sampled residents had items at bedside that could be harmful to other residents or themselves. The facility failed to identify what personal belongings Resident #900 brought to the facility on admission on [DATE], and on 06/28/19, Resident #900 threatened to harm him/herself with a buck knife that was in a candy dish in his/her room. In addition, Resident #272 was admitted on [DATE] and observation on 07/24/19 revealed a package of Ipratropium-Albuterol Solution 0.5-2.5 milligrams (mg) and a Proventil HFA Aerosol solution Inhaler, at the resident's bedside. Review of a list of residents that wandered on the E-Wing that was provided by the facility revealed there were three (3) residents that wandered on E-Wing. 1. Review of the facility policy titled, Weapons, last revised 02/01/19, revealed the company prohibits the possession of firearms, knives, or any other dangerous weapon in company property. All company employees including contract workers and temporary employees, as well as residents, volunteers, visitors , and vendors on company property are covered by this policy. A license to carry a weapon does not supersede company policy. The purpose of the policy is to maintain a workplace safe and free of violence for all employees, residents, volunteers, visitors, and vendors. Review of the facility policy titled, Personal Property: Patient's, last revised 07/24/18, revealed personnel will identify and record the patient's belongings upon admission to the facility. The patient will be allowed to use his/her personal belongings to the extent possible. Patients will be encouraged to send valuables home; however, a personal property lock box/area may be made available and items can be stored in a secured area of the Center. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #900 on 06/16/19 with diagnoses which included Major Depressive Disorder and Morbid Obesity. Further review revealed there was a personal belongings list in resident's chart dated 06/16/19 that had not been completed by staff. Review of the Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 06/28/19, revealed the facility assessed Resident #900's cognition as intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15), which indicated the resident was interviewable. Further review of the record revealed the resident was hospitalized at this time and was not available for interview by the surveyor. Review of the Event Summary Report, dated 07/16/19 at 9:00 AM, revealed Resident #900 became irritated with staff and threw his/her medicine at them because the resident wanted to receive the medication at lunchtime instead of when it was ordered. Further review of the report revealed the nurse went to inform the Director of Nursing (DON) and Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN), the resident said he/she had a knife and he/she was going to end it all. Interview with the Certified Medication Aide (CMA), on 07/24/19 at 2:14 PM, revealed Resident #900 told her he/she had a knife, so a CNA stayed with the resident while she went to report the incident to the Administrative team. Interview with the Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN), on 07/25/19 at 10:43 AM, revealed the CMA came to get her and told her Resident #900 had a knife and said he/she was going to kill him/herself. The APRN stated she took off running down to the resident's room and found the resident with both hands under the bedding. She stated she asked the resident if he/she intended to harm her or him/herself and the resident stated I want to end it all. The APRN revealed she asked the resident where the knife was, the resident pointed to a bowl of candy, and she retrieved a knife (Buck knife), fork and spoon from the bottom of the bowl of candy. Interview with the Director of Social Services, on 07/25/19 at 9:26 AM, revealed he was in the morning meeting and they were told that Resident #900 was refusing his/her morning medications and was fussing. He stated when he arrived the resident was talking about harming him/herself and heard the APRN say to the resident to give me the knife. He revealed he secured the knife. Interview with the Unit Manager (UM), on 07/25/19 at 9:08 AM and 07/25/19, revealed Resident #1's personal belongings checksheet was not completed on admission and it should have been completed on the midnight shift by the Certified Nurse Aide (CNA). An attempt to reach CNA #50, on 07/25/19 at 1:09 PM was unsuccessful. Interview with CNA #51, on 07/25/19 AT 1:14 PM, revealed she had only worked at the facility for two (2) months and had not been told that it was her responsibility to complete the Personal Belonging Checklist. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 07/24/19 at 11:08 AM, revealed Resident #1 told the CMA that he/she had a pocket knife and wants out of here. The DON stated the resident told her the knife was located in a candy basket and the APRN retrieved the knife, gave it to her, and she gave it to the Social Services Director who kept the knife. She stated staff were not aware the resident had a knife in the room nor when he received it. She revealed CNA's on the night shift are expected to complete personal belonging checksheets after the resident is admitted . 2. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #272 on 07/16/19 with diagnoses which included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disorder (COPD), Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Old Myocardial Infarction, and Need for Assistance with Personal Care. No Minimum Data Set (MDS) was available due to the resident being a new admission. Observation on 07/24/19 at 3:34 PM revealed a package of Ipratropium-Albuterol Solution 0.5-2.5 mg and a Proventil HFA Aerosol solution Inhaler at the resident's bedside. Interview with Resident #272 on 07/24/19 at 3:38 PM revealed he/she had brought the medication from home, and had not been offered these medications since at the facility either as needed (PRN) or scheduled. He/she stated she was mixing up his/her own breathing solution and using it about every four (4) hours, and using the inhaler whenever he/she needed it, and could not really tell how often. Interview with Certified Medication Aide (CMA) #5 on 07/24/19 at 9:08 AM revealed the medications should not be in Resident #272's room. She stated she had not noticed the medications being in the room. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5 on 07/24/19 at 3:50 PM revealed she was not sure why the medications were in the resident's room but knew they should not have been, and did not know how long they had been in there. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 07/25/19 at 3:13 PM revealed all medications should be safely locked in the medication or treatment cart, and the only resident that should be self-administrating their medication are the ones who have been safely assessed to do so.
CONCERN (E)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure resi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents who required respiratory care were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences (Residents #32, #23, and #74) Residents ##32, and #23 received oxygen and/or nebulizer treatments; however, staff failed to ensure oxygen (O2) tubing and nebulizer masks were stored in a plastic bag when not in use and/or changed out weekly. In addition, staff failed to ensure Resident #74's suction tubing, [NAME], and canister were not dated to ensure changed out weekly. The findings include: 1. Review of facility policy titled Respiratory Equipment/Supply Cleaning/Disinfection, not dated, revealed as a guide for changing tubing and other respiratory equipment list as follows: Oxygen delivery service, Nebulizer/Aerosols/Humidifiers, and suction catheters, change every seven (7) days and as needed (PRN) for soiling; suction canister, change weekly and PRN when filled; and suction connecting tubing, change weekly and PRN for soiling Record review revealed Resident #32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's Disease, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), Asthma, and Emphysema. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 05/24/19, revealed the facility assessed Resident #32's cognition as severely impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of six (6) which indicated the resident was not interviewable. Review of Resident #32's Physician's Orders dated July 2019 revealed to administer Oxygen (O2) at 2 liters per minute (l/m) per nasal cannula (NC), oxygen tubing, change weekly label each component with date and initial on day shift every Sunday. Further review revealed to administer Brovana Nebulization Solution (breathing treatment) 15 micrograms (mcg)/2 milliliters (ml) two times a day (BID) for COPD, and Ipratropium-Albuterol Solution 0.5-2.5 (3mg/3ml) every 6 hours as needed for shortness of breath (SOB). Observation on 07/23/19 at 6:52 AM revealed Resident #32 had a Nebulizer machine on his/her bed side tray, not in use but running, and the mask and tubing was uncovered and wrapped around the resident's rollator/walker. Observation 07/23/19 at 9:24 AM revealed the Nebulizer mask continued to be wrapped around the rollator walker. Further observation revealed the storage bag for the mask was dated 06/30/19 and the Nebulizer tubing was dated 07/07/19. In addition, observation of the O2 tubing revealed it was not dated. The observation was showed to Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5 and she stated all tubing and supplies should be changed weekly but had not been. 2. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #23 on 09/05/17 with diagnoses which included Dementia, coughing and wheezing. Review of the Annual MDS assessment, dated 05/11/19 revealed the facility assessed Resident #23's cognition as severely impaired with a BIMS score of two (2) which indicated the resident was not interviewable. Review of Resident July 2019 Physician's Orders revealed to provide O2 at 2L/min per N/C and to change the tubing on day shift, every Sunday, date and label all components. Observation on 07/23/19 at 10:15 AM revealed the O2 tubing was dated 07/07/19. 3. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #74 on 09/19/10 with diagnoses of History of Malignant Neoplasm of the Larynx, Dysphagia, Oropharyngeal Phase, and a Tracheostomy. Review of the Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 06/22/19, revealed the facility assessed Resident #74's cognition as intact with a BIMS score of fifteen (15)which indicated the resident was interviewable. Observation on 07/23/19 at 7:25 AM revealed Resident #74 had a tracheostomy stoma, and suction setup, with [NAME] (used to suction) in a bag, with no date noted on the tubing. Observation on 07/25/19 at 10:24 AM with LPN #5 revealed a suction machine set up with approximately two (2) inches of yellowish brown sputum noted in canister as described by LPN #5. Further observation revealed the suction tubing or cannister was not dated. Interview with LPN #5 on 07/23/19 at 10:21 AM revealed all tubing, canisters, and masks should be changed weekly, but clearly had not been. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/25/19 at 3:15 PM revealed it was the responsibility of evening nurses to change out all tubing on Sundays as per Medication Administration Record (MAR), Treatment Administration Record (TAR) and facility policy.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure insulin pens were dated when opened and expired insulin pens were removed from fou...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure insulin pens were dated when opened and expired insulin pens were removed from four (4) of five (5) insulin carts observed. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy, titled Storage and Expiration Dating of Medications, Biological's, Syringes and Needles, revised 10/31/16, revealed once any medication or biological package was opened, the facility should follow the manufacturer/supplier guidelines with respect to expiration dates for opened medications. Facility staff should record the date opened on the medication container when the medication has a shortened expiration date once opened. Observation on 07/25/19 at 9:03 AM, revealed: D Wing - one (1) of two (2) insulin carts was checked and one (1) insulin pen was not dated when opened. C Wing- two (2) of (2) insulin carts were observed and three (3) insulin pens had expired and three (3) insulin pens were not dated when opened. E Wing- one (1) of one (1) insulin cart was observed and three (3) insulin pens were not dated when opened. Interviews on 07/25/19 with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 at 9:45 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) #1 at 9:50 AM, RN #2 at 9:55 AM and the Director of Nursing (DON) at 10:03 AM, revealed multi-dose vials were supposed to be dated when opened and any expired medications should be removed from the medication carts and destroyed or sent back to the pharmacy. They stated it was the nurse who opened the medications responsibility to ensure the multi-dose vials were dated and expired medications were removed from the carts.
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure it must establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program d...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure it must establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for two (2) of twenty-eight (28) residents (Resident #101 and Resident 106). The facility failed to ensure an isolation sign was placed on Resident #101's door and failed to wash hands during wound care for Resident #101 and during Gastostomy Tube site care for Resident #106. The findings include: Review of the facility policy, Hand Hygiene dated 02/15/01 and revised 11/28/17 revealed adherence to the hand hygiene practices is maintained by all Center personnel. This includes hand washing with soap and water when hands are visibly soiled and after exposure to known or suspected Clostridium difficile or infectious diarrhea and the use of alcohol based hand rubs for routine decontamination in clinical situation. The purpose of the policy is to improve hand hygiene practices and reduce the transmission of pathogenic microorganisms. Perform hand hygiene: before patient care, before an aseptic procedure, after any contact with blood or other body fluids, even if gloves are worn, after patient care and after contact with the patient's environment. 1. Review of the facility policy Wound Dressings dated 06/01/96 and revised 11/28/17 revealed to gather supplies, use personal protective equipment as indicated, clean over-bed table, place clean barrier on the over-bed table and place supplies on the barrier, place a plastic bag for soiled dressing supplies within easy reach, cleanse hands. If a break in aseptic technique occurs, stop the procedure, remove gloves, cleanse hands, and apply clean gloves. Open dressings without contaminating. Keep the dressing/gauze within the open packet and place it directly on top of the barrier. Apply clean gloves. If applicable, place bed protector under or adjacent to wound site and remove the soiled dressing. Discard dressing and gloves according to infection control policy. Cleanse hands. Apply gloves. Cleanse or irrigate wound as ordered. Apply treatment medication as ordered. Apply and secure clean dressing. Remove gloves and discard according to infection control procedure. Apply prepared label. Cleanse hands. Reusable dressing care equipment (bandage scissors) must be cleaned and disinfected according to manufacturer's instructions if shared between patients. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #101 on 06/25/19 with diagnoses which included Cerebral Infarction, Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction, Psychosis, Anxiety Disorder, Schizophrenia, Major Depressive Disorder, Epilepsy and Retention of Urine. Review of a Laboratory Report revealed Resident #101 was diagnosed with C-diff; however, observation on 07/23/19 at 9:42 AM and 11:58 AM; and on 07/24/19 at 9:46 revealed there was no Isolation warning on the door. Further observation revealed there was Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) hanging on door. Interview with Certified Nurse Aide who was walking down the hall at this time revealed the resident had C-Diff. Interview with the Unit Manager on 07/24/18 at 10:00 AM regarding isolation procedures revealed the resident did have a sign on the door. This surveyor and the Unit Manager walked to the resident's door and found no sign posted for Isolation. The Unit Manager revealed the sign should have been up when the resident was diagnosed with C-Diff. Observation of wound cleansing and treatment for Resident #101 to coccyx area on 07/25/19 01:33 PM by the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). The resident was turned to left side with ADON starting care. She placed the Hydra guard in a medication cup on the over bed table on top of a paper towel. The table was not cleaned prior to placing a barrier down. She took disposable wash cloths with foam cleanser and cleaned his peri and coccyx area. She ran out of cloths and opened the bed side table drawer with her dirty gloved hands and reached in to get more wash cloths. She also placed her dirty cloths on the bed sheets without a bag. After cleaning the coccyx/peri area, without washing hands and changing gloves she placed the Hydra Guard on the wound. Interview with ADON on 07/25/19 at 2:15 PM revealed she should have washed her hands per policy and should have cleaned the overbed table prior to placing barrier down. She stated she should also have had a bag to place the soiled wipes into instead of placing them on the bed. 2. Review of the facility policy titled, Transabdominal Enteral Tubes: Care of, last revised 10/17/18 revealed regarding gastrostomy tube care to place supplies on a clean barrier on the bedside table. Cleanse hands. Put on gloves. Remove old dressing gently, discard in plastic bag. Remove gloves, discard in plastic bag. Cleanse hands. Put on gloves. Clean the skin immediately around the exit site using a cotton tipped applicator moistened with saline solution. Apply dressing. Label the dressing with date, time, and initials. Remove gloves and cleanse hands. Discard supplies according to infection control procedure. Assist patient to a comfortable position with call light within easy reach. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #106 on 11/14/18 with diagnoses which included End Stage Renal Disease, Hypothyroidism, Anemia, Atherosclerotic Heart Disease, Atrial Fibrillation, and Congestive Heart Failure. Observation of G-tube dressing change on 07/24/19 at 3:14 PM revealed Licensed Practical Nurse #1. failed to clean the over bed table prior to placing the supplies on the table. She then removed the soiled dressing, placed in trash, without washing hands and changing gloves, and then cleaned the G-tube site. Without washing hands or changing gloves, she applied the clean dressing. She then touched resident's bed covering with the soiled gloves. She then left room without cleaning overbed table and removing soiled dressings from the trash. Interview with LPN #1 on 07/24/19 at 3:20 PM revealed she had not had any education from the facility prior to starting work. She stated she knew there were policies but was not sure where they were. She also revealed she guessed she should have washed her hands more but, that's the way I do it. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 07/25/19 at 2:42 PM revealed she expected Isolation signs attached to the resident's doorway when placed in isolation per policy.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Kentucky facilities.
  • • 42% turnover. Below Kentucky's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 4 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 34 deficiencies on record, including 4 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: This facility has 4 Immediate Jeopardy findings. Serious concerns require careful evaluation.

About This Facility

What is Chautauqua's CMS Rating?

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

How is Chautauqua Staffed?

CMS rates CHAUTAUQUA HEALTH AND REHABILITATION's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 42%, compared to the Kentucky average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care. RN turnover specifically is 58%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Chautauqua?

State health inspectors documented 34 deficiencies at CHAUTAUQUA HEALTH AND REHABILITATION during 2019 to 2025. These included: 4 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 30 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Chautauqua?

CHAUTAUQUA HEALTH AND REHABILITATION 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 SIMCHA HYMAN & NAFTALI ZANZIPER, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 145 certified beds and approximately 123 residents (about 85% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in OWENSBORO, Kentucky.

How Does Chautauqua Compare to Other Kentucky Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Kentucky, CHAUTAUQUA HEALTH AND REHABILITATION's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (42%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Chautauqua?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the below-average staffing rating.

Is Chautauqua Safe?

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

Do Nurses at Chautauqua Stick Around?

CHAUTAUQUA HEALTH AND REHABILITATION has a staff turnover rate of 42%, which is about average for Kentucky 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 Chautauqua Ever Fined?

CHAUTAUQUA HEALTH AND REHABILITATION 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 Chautauqua on Any Federal Watch List?

CHAUTAUQUA HEALTH AND REHABILITATION 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.