CHRISTIAN HEIGHTS NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTE

124 WEST NASHVILLE STREET, PEMBROKE, KY 42266 (270) 475-4227
For profit - Limited Liability company 60 Beds BENJAMIN LANDA Data: November 2025 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation
Trust Grade
48/100
#153 of 266 in KY
Last Inspection: February 2025

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

Overview

Christian Heights Nursing and Rehabilitation Center has a Trust Grade of D, which indicates below-average quality and raises some concerns about the care provided. They rank #153 out of 266 facilities in Kentucky, placing them in the bottom half of the state, and #3 out of 4 in Christian County, with only one local option being better. The facility's trend is worsening, as issues have increased from 1 in 2020 to 2 in 2025, suggesting that the quality of care is declining. Staffing is a weakness, with a rating of 2 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 54%, which is around the state average, meaning staff may not stay long enough to build strong relationships with residents. Although there have been no fines, which is a positive aspect, the facility has had serious concerns, such as a resident being able to leave the premises unsupervised, risking safety, and failures related to food safety and maintaining a clean living environment for many residents.

Trust Score
D
48/100
In Kentucky
#153/266
Bottom 43%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Worse
1 → 2 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
54% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Kentucky facilities.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 24 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Kentucky. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
✓ Good
Only 4 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Overall Rating
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2020: 1 issues
2025: 2 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in fire safety.

The Bad

2-Star Overall Rating

Below Kentucky average (2.8)

Below average - review inspection findings carefully

Staff Turnover: 54%

Near Kentucky avg (46%)

Higher turnover may affect care consistency

Chain: BENJAMIN LANDA

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 4 deficiencies on record

1 life-threatening
Feb 2025 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (F) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safet...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Food items were not sealed and/or covered to prevent contamination. Opened food items were not dated as required. Food maintained on ice during lunch meal service exceeded the required 41-degree Fahrenheit temperature limit for cold food items. The facility's failure had the potential to affect 56 of the facility's 57 residents who consumed food from the kitchen. The findings include: 1. Review of the undated facility policy, titled, Labeling and Dating, revealed proper labeling and dating ensured that all foods were stored rotated, and utilized in a first in-first out manner. Further review revealed all foods should be dated upon receipt before being stored and opened or leftover items must be labeled and dated with the date they are prepared or opened, and the use by date. Review of the facility policy titled, Food Storage; Dry Goods, revised 02/2023, revealed all dry goods would be appropriately stored in accordance with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) food code. Further review revealed all packaged food items would be kept clean, dry, and properly sealed. Review of the facility policy titled, Food Storage; Cold Foods, revised 02/2023, revealed all foods would be stored wrapped, or in covered containers, labeled and dated, and arranged in a manner to prevent cross-contamination. Observation of the kitchen, on 02/20/2025 at 9:30 AM, revealed the following: a. Dietary staff were preparing sandwiches for lunch on an island in the middle of the kitchen. A tray with twelve baked cookies was sitting out, uncovered and unattended. Continued observation revealed a heating/cooling duct system with seven discolored vents blowing over the top of the island where food was being prepared. b. Refrigerator 3 contained cheese slices which were stored in a plastic container and were exposed to contamination, due to an unsecured lid. A bag of shredded mozzarella cheese was opened but was not labeled with the received date, the open date, or a use by date. c. The dry pantry storage area with freezers located across the hall from the kitchen revealed Freezer 3 was also soiled with food particles. A box of frozen beef patties was opened but unsealed and exposed to potential contamination. The box was not marked with the required received date, opened date, or use by date. Further observation of dry storage goods revealed a bulk box of rice in its original container which was not covered and was exposed to possible contamination. In an interview with [NAME] 2, on 02/21/2025 at 2:00 PM, he stated he was aware of the processes for food safety which included labeling, dating, and storing food items. He stated every food item received should have a receive date, open date, and use by date. He added that any food items should also be sealed properly to prevent cross contamination. [NAME] 2 stated that all kitchen staff were responsible for ensuring that foods were labeled, dated, and stored correctly. [NAME] 2 further stated there was potential for bacteria growth on foods that were cross contaminated, and residents were at risk if staff were not following facility policies and processes. In an interview with [NAME] 1, on 02/21/2025 at 2:15 PM, she stated the cookies left out on the counter should have been covered to prevent exposure of airborne particles. She stated all items that were opened should be sealed properly and have a receive date, open date, and use by date to prevent serving food past its shelf life. She stated cross contamination was potentially harmful to the residents and could cause sickness. In an interview with the Dietary Manager, on 02/21/2025 at 2:30 PM, he stated expectations for the dietary staff was to ensure that all food items that were received had a receive date. Further, if an item was opened, it would require an open date and a use by date to ensure freshness. He stated there were signs posted throughout the kitchen as a reminder to staff of the importance of marking those required dates on the food products. Additionally, any food item that had been opened should be sealed correctly whether in the pantry, refrigerator, or freezer to prevent residents from receiving food that was freezer burned or exposed to cross contamination which could result in resident illness. Furthermore, if those policies and procedures were not being followed, it would prevent staff from providing the residents the best homelike experience in the facility and that was priority. In an interview with the District Dietary Manager, on 02/21/2025 at 2:30 PM, he stated his expectations were that staff were following facility policy and procedures to ensure food safety. Interview with the Administrator, on 02/21/2025 at 4:00 PM, revealed his expectations were that staff ensured food was stored according to facility policy which included dating food items with a receive, open, and use by date. He stated ensuring foods were sealed properly was just as important as storage dates, as both affected the quality of the food. 2. Review of the undated facility policy titled, Time and Temperature Control and Recording, revealed bacteria and other foodborne pathogens can grow quickly in the temperature danger zone of 41 to 135 degrees Fahrenheit. Further review revealed proper holding and transport of food was critical for resident safety and wellness. Review of the facility policy titled, Food Storage; Cold Foods, revised 02/2023, revealed all perishable foods would be maintained at a temperature of 41degrees Fahrenheit or below except during necessary periods of preparation and service. Observation of the kitchen, on 02/20/2025 at 11:45 AM, revealed lunch was being served and food items were maintained on a steam table. At this time, the District Dietary Manager assisted with temping both hot and cold food items. All hot foods were 186 degrees Fahrenheit (F) or higher. However, observation revealed that two foods to be served cold were over 41 degrees F. A pan with ice on the end of the steam table contained mayonnaise-based broccoli salad and mayonnaise-based potato salad. The broccoli salad was 72 degrees F, and the potato salad was 45 degrees F. In an interview with [NAME] 2, on 02/21/2025 at 2:00 PM, he stated that the steam table was to be held at 145 degrees Fahrenheit for hot foods but was not aware of the temperature for the cold food items that were maintained on the cold side of the steam table. He stated potential concerns for residents being exposed to food not being maintained at proper temperatures could cause salmonella or other sickness. In an interview with [NAME] 1, on 02/21/2025 at 2:15 PM, she stated she had temped every meal on the steam table prior to meal service. She stated hot foods were to be held at 165 degrees Fahrenheit, and confirmed cold foods were to be held at 41 degrees Fahrenheit or below. In an interview with the District Dietary Manager, on 02/21/2025 at 2:30 PM, he stated his expectations were that staff were following facility policy and procedures to ensure food safety. Further interview with the District Dietary Manager revealed that the temperatures for the two cold salads were not acceptable and indicated that staff needed further training. Interview with the Administrator, on 02/21/2025 at 4:00 PM, revealed there could be harmful outcomes for residents if staff were not following the facility policies and processes regarding appropriate temperatures for both hot and cold foods to prevent bacteria growth, or potential salmonella illness. Additionally, practicing proper food safety processes were important as it would ensure residents were provided the best quality of care in a homelike environment.
CONCERN (F) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0921)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to provide a functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for 20 of 57 residents ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to provide a functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for 20 of 57 residents (Resident (R) 7, R10, R16, R19, R22, R25, R26, R33, R35, R38, R40, R42, R43, R46, R47, R48, R49, R50, R55, and R110.) Resident rooms had broken and/or missing floor tiles, peeling paint, and/or holes in walls. Four residents (R19, R46, F47, and R50) were noted to have an unsanitary commode in poor repair. The findings include: Review of the facility policy, Resident Rights Standard of Practice, originated 04/2024, revealed the facility follows the guidance of Regulatory Group 483.10, F550-F586, which includes the right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. Review of the facility policy, Homelike Environment Standard of Practice, last reviewed 10/2020, revealed the facility shall maximize, to the extent possible, characteristics of the facility to reflect a personalized, homelike setting. This shall include cleanliness and order and pleasant, neutral scents. Observation of the facility during an initial tour on 02/18/2025, beginning at 10:55 AM. revealed the following: a. R48 and R55's room had chipped paint and gouge marks on the door and doorframe. The rubber baseboard was pulled away from the wall, and there were yellow/orange stains on the floor. During an interview with R48 on 02/21/2025 at 4:00 PM, he stated it would be nice if the peeling paint and poor condition of the walls and floor was repaired. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/01/2024 revealed the resident was cognitively intact, based on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15/15. b. R25 and R40's room had a hole in the bathroom door. The baseboard was pulled away from the wall. The walls had a large area of chipping paint. In an interview on 02/21/2025 at 4:05 PM with R40, she stated she would like to see it fixed, referring to the condition of the walls, floors, and paint. Review of an MDS, with an ARD of 02/15/2025, revealed R40 was cognitively intact, based on a BIMS score of 14/15. c. R110 and R16's room had a strong odor of urine. The floor had broken tile and was uneven. Food particles were noted on the floor. d. R43 and R10's room had broken tiles in the floor. e. R42 and R49's room had multiple broken and missing tiles in the floor. f. R19 and R47's room had chipped paint on the wall. There were yellow/brown stains down the wall and onto the floor under the sink. A corner of the door threshold was crumbling and there was a debris pile in the floor. g. The wall in R38's room had paint that was coming off from where a wallpaper boarder had been painted over. The outside environment was visible around the heating/air conditioning unit. h. R35's room had a wall corner that was crumbling and there was a pile of debris in the floor. The shower for this room was missing six tiles, four of which were stacked to the side. The caulking around the sink was discolored brown and was peeling away from the sink. i. R7 and R22 had missing tile in the bathroom. j. The handrail outside of the Director of Nursing's (DON) office had a pile of dust/debris build up. The pile was still present at approximately 3:30pm on 02/21/2025. k. Food particles on the floor and on the tops of the tables in the dining room. Additional observations made on 02/21/2025 at approximately 3:15 PM revealed the following: l. R26's bathroom flooring around the base of the toilet was caked with in a reddish/brown substance. m. R33's room had chipped paint on the walls. The caulking around the sink was discolored brown and had a substance built up on it. n. Observation on 02/18/2025 at 11:05 AM revealed the toilet in the bathroom shared by R19, R47, R50, and R46 was not functioning or in good repair. The toilet was filled with a brown/yellow substance, and there was a strong odor indicative of feces and urine. There was also a yellow dried substance on the toilet seat, indicative of urine. The toilet seat was broken and was hanging sideways from the toilet. A plumber's snake and plunger with duct tape were present. On 02/20/2025 at 10:05 AM, the snake and plunger were gone, but the toilet was still filled with a brown/yellow substance which continued to smell strongly of feces and urine. In an interview on 02/20/2025 at 11:00 AM with Housekeeper (H) 1, she stated she is responsible for cleaning resident rooms daily. She cleans bathrooms every day and stated the shared bathroom of R19, R47, R50 and R46 has a problem of stopping up. H1 stated she had reported this to her housekeeping manager and thought she reported it to maintenance. In an interview on 02/20/2025 at 5:00 PM with the Maintenance Director, regarding the bathroom for R19, R47, R50, and R46, he stated, It's a brand-new toilet. We are having an issue with a resident continuously stopping up a toilet. The Maintenance Director added that he was trying to get another type of toilet that will help prevent that from happening, but it had not yet been ordered. The Maintenance Director stated that Currently it must be unstopped one to two times a day. It has gotten to the point that work orders are not being put in because I know I must check it every day. Regarding the condition of the walls, floors, and paint throughout the facility, he stated it was his preference to complete all repairs in one room before moving to another Further interview revealed that at this point, only one room had received all its necessary repairs. The Maintenance Director indicated that repairs needed to be made relative to the observed gouges in the walls, adding he had plans to place a vinyl material on the walls of the resident rooms to a height of approximately four to five feet from the floor. The Maintenance Director added that once funding was available, he planned to continue renovating room by room. However, until that time, nothing was being done to repair the walls/paint. He stated floor tiles were being purchased a few at a time to place in areas that were missing tile. The Maintenance Director added, They may not match when we get them, but it will be better than nothing. During an interview with the Environmental Services Director (ESD) on 02/21/2025 at 3:20 PM, she provided the Project and Deep Clean Calendars, stating that each room was scheduled for a monthly deep clean. Per the ESD, the monthly deep clean of each room consists of removing the curtains and washing them, cleaning the blinds, removing everything from the walls and cleaning the walls, cleaning under the furniture, and removing bedding and mattress from the bed frame for cleaning. During an interview on 02/21/2025 at approximately 5:00 PM, the Administrator stated his expectation was for the facility to create a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for the residents. Per the Administrator, this expectation included cleanliness as well as physical appearance.
Jan 2020 1 deficiency 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

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

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 have an effective system in place to ensure one (1) of two (2) sampled residents was provided adequate supervision (Resident #1). The facility assessed and care planned Resident #1 to be a high risk for elopement and a wanderguard was placed on the resident on 11/22/19. However, on 12/31/19 at approximately 4:00 PM, Resident #1 was able to exit the facility without staff's knowledge. Resident #1 was observed to be across the road from the facility on the sidewalk by a staff member that was leaving work. The resident crossed a busy highway, went into a convenience store, bought a lottery ticket, and walked approximately fifty (50) yards, then crossed back across the busy street. The resident was returned to the facility with no injuries noted. The facility's failure to have an effective system in place to provide adequate supervision to prevent an elopement, has caused or is likely to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to a resident. Immediate Jeopardy was determined to exist on 12/31/19 and the facility was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on 01/10/2020. The facility submitted an Allegation of Compliance (AoC) on 01/14/2020 alleging the Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 01/04/2020, prior to the State Survey Agency entering the building on 01/07/2020, indicating past noncompliance. The State Survey Agency (SSA) determined the facility had corrected the deficiency on 01/04/2020 prior to the SSA entering the building on 01/07/2020; resulting in the determination of Past Jeopardy. However, after supervisory review it was determined the facility was not in substantial compliance on 01/04/2020. Record review and interview revealed the first elopement drill was not held until 01/06/2020 and a Quality Assurance meeting had not been held since 12/31/19 to review the facility's monitoring to ensure compliance was achieved. Therefore, the State Survey Agency determined the Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 01/07/2020. The Scope and Severity was lowered to a D for CFR 483.25 Quality of Care at F689; while the facility develops and implements the Plan of Correction (PoC); and, the facility's Quality Assurance (QA) monitors the effectiveness of the systemic changes. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Accidents and Incidents dated September 2019 revealed the purpose of the Incident and Accident Process is to ensure the facility environment is as free from accident hazards over which the facility has control and that each resident receives adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent avoidable accidents according to regulatory guidelines. The facility's Administrator will ensure incidents are reported to the appropriate State agency in compliance with the State reporting criteria. Notification of physician and responsible party will be completed with any accident/incident. Incident/Accidents, including elopement, is investigated by the IDT and reported according to regulatory guidelines. Assessments and investigations are done in a systematic manner: Identifying hazards and risks, evaluating and analyzing hazards and risks, implementing interventions to reduce hazards and risks, and monitoring for effectiveness and modifying interventions when necessary. The resident's Care Plan and Certified Nurse Aide Kardex or Care Card is to be updated as interventions are implemented. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #1 on 11/22/19 with a diagnoses of Alzheimer's Dementia. Review of the Hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] and faxed to the facility on [DATE], revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of Atypical Chest Pain, Gastroesophageal reflux disease, Alzheimers Disease and Dementia. Per family his/her living conditions were poor. He/She lived by self and had a history of wandering out in the middle of the night due to confusion from Dementia. Resident was admitted several days ago for potential placement or assistance at home; however, he/she eloped from hospital. This resulted in police being called and the resident was found at home. Review of Resident #1's Elopement Evaluation dated 11/22/19 revealed he/she was assessed at a ten (10) which indicated the resident was a high risk for elopement. Further review revealed the resident had a history of wandering prior to admission, ambulated ad lib and was cognitively impaired. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/29/19, revealed the facility assessed Resident #1's cognition was severely impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three (3) which indicated the resident was not interviewable. Further review of the assessment in Section E Behavior, revealed the resident was assessed to have wandering behaviors that occurred one (1) of three (3) days. Review of the Activities of Daily Living functional status found the resident was independent with supervisory oversite. Review of Resident #1's Nursing Notes, dated 11/22/19 at the time of admission, revealed a wander guard was placed due to history of wandering prior to admission. Review of Resident #1's December 2019 Physician Orders revealed an order for Wanderguard and check placement and function every shift. Review of the Comprehensive Care Plan for Wandering/Elopement related to exit seeking behaviors, packing of belongings, and wandering behavior, dated 12/09/19, revealed goals that Resident #1 will wander in a safe environment, resident will not wander outside of the facility, resident will be redirected to a safer area, wandering episodes will decrease in ninety (90) days, and the resident will adjust and accept nursing placement. Further review revealed interventions to attempt to determine needs when speaking of leaving, attempt to distract, attempt to have resident complete crossword puzzles as will, distract with programs or general conversation, engage resident in group activities to decrease wandering, involve family/significant other in care planning, notify Medical Doctor of any change in resident's condition, redirect during wandering episode, and staff to be alert for hoarded food/drinks in room, remove as needed and offer snack/drink to replace ones removed. In addition, it was noted on the care plan the resident liked to read the Bible, eat snacks and converse with others and had a Wander guard bracelet. Review of Resident #1's Nursing Progress Note, dated 12/31/19 at 7:10 PM by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 revealed, at approximately 4:00 PM, the resident was noted outside of the facility by a staff member and was returned to the facility. The door alarm sounded with reentrance into facility. The resident was dressed appropriately for outside weather conditions and was placed on one on one watch with staff immediately following entrance to facility. There was no injury noted with visual examination. A full head to toe body audit was completed by signee with no new areas of concern noted at this time. No new bruising, discolorations, edema, open areas, or new areas were noted. Signee called Guardian and left voice mail. The MD was alerted and no new orders were received. Blood pressure was 138/76, Pulse 84, and Respirations 18, even and nonlabored. Temporal temperature was 97.3 and Oxygen saturation was 97% on room air. Review of the facility's Investigation Report dated, 01/02/2020, revealed based on resident and staff interviews, the resident was observed to be out of the Center, near the Dollar store by a staff member who was leaving the building after completing her shift. The staff member approached the resident and assisted the resident back into the building. The resident stated he/she left the Center to buy him/herself a lottery ticket. The investigation revealed the resident did in fact purchase a lottery ticket from the convenience store across the street from the facility. Upon returning to the facility, the resident was placed on 1:1 supervision. Resident assessment indicated no change in condition and no injuries noted. Further review revealed the facility determine the resident exited the building without staff's knowledge but were unable to determine through which door and how. According to website timeanddate.com, the temperature on 12/31/19 was 48 degrees Fahrenheit and sunny at 12 noon and 41 degrees Fahrenheit at 6:00 PM. Observation on 01/09/2020 at 1:50 PM by this surveyor and Administrator revealed Resident #1 walked approximately ninety-five (95) yards (verified by Administrator with range finder) to the convenient store, then walked approximately fifty (50) yards to where he/she was first seen by staff. The speed limit for the highway the resident crossed was thirty-five (35) miles per hour (mph). The road is historically busy since it is the main road to and from the county seat. Interview with the Human Resources employee, on 01/09/2020 at 1:43 PM revealed on 12/31/19 she left work around 3:55 PM. She stated she turned left out of parking lot and noted Resident #1 on the sidewalk across the road past the facility so she pulled into a parking lot of the gym and she then noted the resident had walked back across the road. She stated she also crossed the road and asked the resident to go with her back to the facility, and they both crossed the road again and she got the resident into her car and drove back to the facility. She revealed she text the Activities Director who met her at the door with the Assistant Director of Nursing and LPN #1. She further revealed she was glad she saw the resident and returned him/her back to facility. Interview with Activities Director on 01/09/2020 at 2:24 PM revealed she received a text from the Human Resources Employee at 4:10 PM and met them at the door. She stated when she opened the door, Resident #1 walked back into the facility, and the resident's wanderguard alarm sounded. She also revealed she had witnessed the resident walking the halls earlier on 12/31/19 prior to the elopement. Interview (Post Survey) with Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #5 on 01/15/2020 at 1:10 PM revealed she was caring for Resident #1 on 12/31/19, the day of the elopement. She stated she did not see the resident trying to leave facility but did see him/her going from the lobby back and forth to the room in a calm manner which was calmer than usual for the resident. She revealed the resident usually goes back and forth to call her family at the lobby nurses station. She stated she did not see resident with a coat on that day and the last time she saw him/her, he/she was around his/her doorway at 3:45 PM. She further revealed she did not remember hearing a wander guard alarm sound that day or hear an alarm sound when resident came back to building. She stated when the resident wanders, we redirect him/her with snacks and activities including word search books or puzzles. Interview with LPN #1 (who was assigned to Resident #1 on 12/31/19), on 01/10/2020 at 10:55 AM revealed she had noted Resident #1 walking up and down the halls on 12/31/19. She stated she did not remember the alarm going off that day around 3:45 PM to 4:00 PM; however, she was at the door when the resident returned and the wanderguard alarm sounded when he/she approached the door. Interview (Post Survey) with CNA #6 on 01/15/2020 at 1:20 PM revealed she was assigned to Resident #1's hall but not the resident. She stated she saw Resident #1 walking up and down hallway as usual but did not see him/her trying to get out of the facility. She revealed the resident was easily distracted by striking up a conversation with him/her and would sit for a while. She further revealed the resident liked word search books. She stated the last time she saw Resident #1 was at 3:20 PM when she clocked out and the resident was sitting on the couch in the lobby speaking with another resident. She further stated she did not hear any wander guard alarms go off that day. Interview with CNA #3 (not assigned to hall with resident) on 01/10/2020 at 4:55 PM revealed she worked on 12/31/19 and saw Resident #1 walking up and down the halls on that date. She also revealed she saw the resident at the lobby nurses station talking on the phone. She stated she did not hear the wanderguard alarm sound that date nor did she see the resident leave the building. She further revealed the resident was always visiting with other residents. Interview with Director of Culinary Services on 01/09/2020 at 3:30 PM revealed Resident #1 likes to visit in her office. She stated she had seen the resident in her coat and he/she told her he/she wanted to go to church outside of facility. She stated she heard the door alarm on 12/31/19 around noon, went to the side door where visitors come in and found Resident #1 trying to open the door. She revealed she directed the resident to back away from the door and then opened the door for visitors. She stated she was aware the resident's wanderguard alarm had not sounded and took the resident immediately to LPN #1 and tested the resident's wanderguard and found it was working; however, when the resident was taken to the outside door, the alarm did not sound. She stated the wanderguard was removed and replaced, and the new wanderguard bracelet was validated to be working properly. Further review of the resident's plan of care revealed on 12/31/19 an intervention was added that wander guard bracelet replaced. Interview with LPN #1 on 01/10/2020 at 10:55 AM revealed she remembered changing the resident's wanderguard bracelet that date. She stated it was around lunch time but unable to recall exact time. Interview with the Maintenance Supervisor on 01/09/2020 at 2:39 PM revealed he clocked out on 3:51 PM at the nurses station in the lobby and Resident #1 was on the phone at the nurses station with his/her coat and hat on. He stated the resident liked to move around and talk with people. He revealed the resident's wanderguard had been replaced earlier that day due to it not working at the outer doors and the replacement wanderguard was validated and worked properly. He stated there were wanderguard alarms on each outside egress to the facility, and he checks the doors daily and they have been working correctly. He further revealed on 12/31/19 he actually checked the doors three (3) times due to the resident's wanderguard not working. He revealed in his opinion, the door was probably opened by a visitor and the resident walked out the door. He believed the alarm sounded but no one checked to see if a resident was leaving. He revealed he could not prove that but since the alarms systems were working, that was his conclusion. Interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) on 01/09/2020 at 12:50 PM revealed when Resident #1 returned to the facility, the resident was dressed appropriately for outside with a coat and hat on. The ADON stated when the resident walked back into the building the resident's wanderguard alarmed. She revealed a head to toe assessment was completed with no new injuries identified. She further revealed the resident stated he/she was not aware he/she could not leave the facility and just wanted a lottery ticket. She stated a full facility head count was completed when the resident returned and all residents were accounted for. She also revealed the resident had a history of going to the doors and looking out and also goes into other resident's rooms to visit and talk. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 01/10/2020 at 2:10 PM revealed it was not determined what door the resident left from; however, when she interviewed the resident on 12/31/19 at 5:15 PM, the resident stated he/she went out the left upper side door and went to buy a lottery ticket. She stated the resident said, I went out with everyone else. The DON further revealed, if resident went out the front side door, then he/she took the drive to the road, and walked across the road to the convenience store across from facility. Interview with Resident #1's Guardian, on 01/09/2020 at 12:01 PM revealed the MD orders from the hospital were for the resident to go to a secured facility because of Dementia/Alzheimer's and the resident had wandered off from the hospital. She stated she was under the assumption the facility was secured. Interview with the Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) #1 on 01/10/2020 at 10:39 AM revealed she was not aware the resident had eloped from the hospital prior to admission and did not know the history of wandering off from home. She revealed this facility was not a memory care unit which appeared the resident required. Interview with the DON on 01/09/2020 at 3:47 PM revealed if she had known the resident was an elopement risk prior to the admission, she would have turned down the admission. She stated she was unaware the resident had eloped from the hospital prior to admission and admissions were usually an IDT decision if the resident had a history of elopement on the referral. Further review of Resident #1's record revealed the facility reassessed the resident's BIMS score on 12/31/19 and assessed Resident #1's cognition as moderately impaired with a BIMS score of nine (9) which indicated the resident was interviewable. Interview and observation with Resident #1 on 01/09/2020 at 12:15 PM revealed the resident had a sitter at bedside. When asked, the resident revealed he/she did not know they could not leave the facility. The resident revealed he/she liked to buy lottery tickets and would be sad if he/she could not buy them. Further interview with the resident on 01/10/2020 at 10:16 AM revealed he/she would not leave the facility unless someone took him/her. The resident stated they went out the door but did not recall which door or if alarm sounded or not. **The facility implemented the following actions to correct the deficient practice: 1. A complete head to toe assessment was conducted for Resident #1 including but not limited to a complete set of vital signs. This was completed by LPN #1 on 12/31/19. 2. A new Elopement Risk Assessment was completed on Resident #1 on 12/31/19 and 01/02/2020 by the MDS Coordinator. 3. Resident #1's Wanderguard was checked for function and placement by LPN #1 on 12/31/19. 4. The DON and LPN #1 notified Resident #1's MD and resident representative he/she exited the facility on 12/31/19. 5. Resident #1's Plan of Care and CNA Plan of Care was updated per DON/Licensed Nurse on 12/31/19. 6. The IDT team reviewed Resident #1's entire plan of care to determine if all interventions were in place per the plan of care on 12/31/19. 7. The DON completed interviews with all staff on duty at the time of the incident related to the whereabouts of Resident #1 and their response to the door alarm on 12/31/19. 8. A timeline was completed from 12/31/19 through 01/03/2020 by the DON and Social Services Director to determine when staff last saw Resident #1 and what he/she was doing at the time. 9. Documented in investigation what resident was wearing, what the temperature and weather conditions were outside and how long resident was outside facility. This was completed by DON, Administrator, Social Services Director, and LPN #1 on 12/31/19. 10. The revised care plan interventions for Resident #1 were communicated to the staff by LPN #1, DON, and Social Services Director on 12/31/19. 11. A complete head count of all current residents was completed by LPN #1 on 12/31/19 with all residents accounted for. 12. New Elopement Risk Assessments were completed for all current residents by the MDS Coordinator on 01/02/2020. 13. All residents with the risk for elopement were audited to determine that the following items were in place for each resident at risk: Wander guard order for placement check and function each shift and signed off appropriately, each resident at risk for elopement has a wander guard in place and not expired, each resident at risk for elopement has behavior monitoring for exit seeking behaviors and person centered non pharmacological interventions, and each resident at risk for elopement has a care plan for exit seeking/elopement risk that is current and reflects the residents' person-centered, non-pharmacological behavior interventions, wander guard, etc. This was completed by the DON, Administrator, Staff Development Coordinator (SDC), LPN #1, and Social Services Director (SSD). This was started on 12/31/19 and completed by 01/03/2020. 14. All Elopement Binders were audited to validate that all current residents at risk have a picture that accurately reflects the residents' current appearance and resident identification information. This was completed on 01/02/2020 by DON and SSD. 15. A Complete assessment of all exit doors to verify doors and door alarms were functioning appropriately was completed on 12/31/19 by the Maintenance Director. 16. The Door and Wanderguard alarm vendor was contacted to have system function verified. The contact was made by the Administrator on 01/01/2020 and system function completed on 01/02/2020 by vendor. 17. All staff was re-educated on the Elopement Process and response to all door alarms by the DON, Administrator, Staff Development Coordinator (SDC) and LPN #1 and education was completed on 01/03/2020. 18. The DON, SSD, SDC, LPN #1 and Administrator completed an elopement drill on each shift to evaluate staff response to the wander guard alarms on 12/31/19. 19. Maintenance completed an assessment of the alarms systems and doors to determine all were functioning as per manufacturer guidelines and audible to staff. This was assessed for completion by the Administrator on 01/02/2020. 20. A certified technician from a vendor checked functioning of exit doors/panels on 01/02/2020 and it was confirmed by the Administrator on 01/02/2020. 21. The DON added signs to exit doors on 12/31/19 to alert visitors/staff upon exiting and entering to not let anyone out without checking with staff. 22. The Administrator and/or Director of Nursing will complete an elopement drill on alternating shifts weekly times four (4) weeks, then monthly times two (2) months, and then at least quarterly moving forward. They will assess the staff response then provide additional education or guidance based on that response. This will be completed by the Administrator, DON and SSD and will be ongoing. 23. A summary of the monthly Elopement drills and door alarm checks will be submitted to the Quality Assurance Committee for further review and recommendations. This will be completed by the Administrator and/or the DON. 24. An Ad Hoc QAPI meeting was held with the Administrator, Director of Nursing, and Medical Director (include others as needed) to review the incident, action plan and findings. This was completed by Administrator, SSD, DON, and the Medical Director on 12/31/19. 25. A monthly QA meeting will be reviewed for current status of Action plan. This will be completed by Administrator, SSD, DON, and the Medical Director on 12/31/19. **The State Survey Agency validated the corrective action taken by the facility as follows: 1. Review of Resident #1's facility medical record dated 12/31/19 revealed a head to toe assessment with vital signs within normal limits was completed by LPN #1. 2. Review of Resident #1's medical record revealed an Elopement Risk Assessment completed on 12/31/19 by the MDS Coordinator. The elopement risk evaluation on 12/31/19 revealed a score of twenty (20) which was considered high risk for elopement. The elopement risk evaluation on 01/02/2020 by the MDS Coordinator revealed a score of thirty (30) which revealed a high risk for elopement. However, a revision was completed on that assessment by the MDS Coordinator and a score of fifty (50) was determined. 3. Review of Resident #1's December 2019 Treatment Administration Record revealed the wanderguard was checked for function and placement on 12/31/19 and every shift as ordered. Observation of Resident #1 on 01/10/2020 at 10:16 AM with one on one staff at bedside found resident laying in bed with Wanderguard Bracelet in place. At 10:55 AM on 01/10/2020, surveyor observed LPN #1 checking the wanderguard for function and the Wanderguard passed testing. 4. Review of Resident #1's Nurse's Notes revealed the resident's guardian and MD was notified on 12/31/19; however, a message was left for the guardian, and the facility did not speak with the guardian until 01/02/2020. This was completed by LPN #1 and the DON. Interview with LPN #1 on 01/10/2020 at 10:55 AM revealed she had left a message for the guardian and this was verified by phone conversation with the guardian on 01/09/2020 at 12:01 PM. 5. Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive and CNA care plan revealed they were updated on 12/31/19 by the DON and LPN #1. 6. Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive and CNA care plans revealed all interventions were in place per the care plan on 12/31/19. This was reviewed by the IDT team on 12/31/19. 7. Review of the Incident Report for the elopement, revealed all staff on duty at the time of the incident were interviewed about their response to door alarms and the resident's location. This was verified by the staff list for 12/31/19 and written statements of staff found in the incident notebook. These were completed by the Director of Nursing and the Administrator on 12/31/19. 8. Review of the elopement timeline of Resident #1 completed by the DON and Social Services Director, revealed it started on 12/31/19 and was completed on 01/03/2020. 9. Review of documented evidence in the elopement incident notebook compiled by the facility, revealed resident's clothing, temperature, weather conditions and approximate time the resident was outside of facility. This was completed by Director of Nursing, Social Services Director and Administrator on 12/31/19. 10. Review of staff education documentation related to Resident #1's revised care plans and interventions revealed all staff was educated on 12/31/19 by the Social Services Director, DON and LPN #1. Interviews on 01/10/2020 with LPN #1 at 3:54 PM, RN #1 at 4:35 PM, RN #2 at 4:40 PM, CNA #1 at 4:49 PM, CNA #2 at 4:58 PM, CNA #3 at 4:59 PM, and CNA #4 at 5:04 PM revealed they were educated on Resident #1's care plan revisions. 11. Review of documented evidence in the elopement notebook revealed a complete head count of all residents was conducted on 12/31/19 at 4:30 PM by LPN #1 with all residents accounted for. Interviews on 01/09/2020 with the DON at 3:47 PM; and on 01/10/2020 with LPN #1 at 3:54 PM, revealed they verified the head count in the facility of all residents on 12/31/19. 12. Record review for ten (10) residents revealed Elopement Risk Assessments were completed before 01/02/2020 by the Social Services Director (SSD). Interview and review of audit tool with the SSD on 01/10/2020 at 3:38 PM revealed Elopement Risk Assessments were completed. 13. Review of Resident #1 and #2's records revealed there was a Wander guard order for placement check and function each shift and signed off appropriately, a wander guard in place and not expired, had behavior monitoring for exit seeking behaviors and person centered non pharmacological interventions, and had a care plan for exit seeking/elopement risk that is current and reflects the residents' person-centered, non-pharmacological behavior interventions and wanderguard. Resident #1 and #2 were the only residents identified at risk for elopement. Review of the audit completed by the DON, MDS Coordinator and Social Services Director revealed the audit for the above information was completed on 01/02/2020. Interviews on 01/10/2020 with the DON at 11:15 AM, SSD at 1:15 PM, and MDS Coordinator at 2:20 PM revealed the audits were completed and the Wander Guard Bracelet had been checked for function and placement each shift. 14. Review of the facility's Elopement Binders revealed, they were audited on 01/02/2020 by the DON and Social Services Director to ensure all residents had pictures and identifying information. Interviews on 01/10/2020 with LPN #1 at 10:55 AM, DON at 11:15 AM, and SSD at 1:15 PM revealed the Elopement Binders had been updated. Review of the Elopement Binders at each nurse's station, revealed pictures and identifying information of the residents at risk for elopement were in the binder. 15. Review of Exit doors and wanderguard alarms audits revealed they were completed by the Maintenance Director on 12/31/19. Observation and interview with the Maintenance Director on 01/09/2020 at 11:38 AM revealed the Maintenance Director used the Wanderguard checker to ensure the doors worked properly. The doors locked down and alarm started sounding when he got within four to six feet of the door. 16. Review of Vender assessments dated 01/02/2020 revealed the Manufacturer of Door and Wanderguard alarm vendor came on site and verified the doors were working properly with no concerns. 17. Review of Education In-service records dated 12/31/19 and completed on 01/03/2020 revealed all employees were educated on the Elopement Process and response to door alarms, and following exit seeking interventions on care plans, by administrative staff which included the DON, Administrator and Staff Development Coordinator. Interviews on 01/09/2020 with Payroll at 1:43 PM, Activities Director 2:24 PM, Maintenance Director at 2:39 PM, ADON at 12:50 PM, Director of Culinary Services at 3:30 PM, and DON at 3:47 PM; and, interviews on 01/10/2020 with LPN #1 at 3:54 PM, RN #1 at 4:35 PM, RN #2 at 4:40 PM, CNA #1 at 4:49 PM, CNA #2 at 4:58 PM, CNA #3 at 4:59 PM, CNA #7 at 5:04 PM, Human Resources Director at 5:24 PM, and Medical Records Director at 5:29 PM revealed the staff was able to verbalize education. 18. Review of the Elopement Incident Notebook revealed Elopement drills were completed on all shifts starting on 12/31/19 through 01/01/2020 by the DON, Social Service Director, Administrator, and Staff Development Coordinator. Interviews on 01/09/2020 with Payroll at 1:43 PM, Activities Director 2:24 PM, Maintenance Director at 2:39 PM, ADON at 12:50 PM, Director of Culinary Services at 3:30 PM, and DON at 3:47 PM; and, interviews on 01/10/2020 with LPN #1 at 3:54 PM, RN #1 at 4:35 PM, RN #2 at 4:40 PM, CNA #1 at 4:49 PM, CNA #2 at 4:58 PM, CNA #3 at 4:59 PM, CNA #7 at 5:04 PM, Human Resources Director at 5:24 PM, and Medical Records Director at 5:29 PM revealed elopement drills were conducted. 19. Review of the alarm systems audits per the Maintenance Director revealed the audit was conducted on 12/31/19 with no concerns identified. Further review revealed the Administrator had verified the audits had been completed with notation the alarms were in correct working condition. The Administrator verified this with documentation in the elopement notebook. 20. Record review validated the certified technician checked functioning of doors/panels for proper functioning per documented evidence of vendor notation on 01/02/2020. 21. Observation on 01/09/2020 revealed there were signs on all exit doors to alert visitors/staff/vendors at exiting to not allow residents out of doors and to check with staff. 22. Review of the Elopement Drill documentation revealed the first weekly elopement drill was held on 01/06/2020 at 11:00 AM by the Administrator and DON. There were ten (10) staff involved. 23. Interview (Post Survey) with the Administrator on 01/20/2020 at 2:22 PM revealed summaries of the elopement drills would be completed monthly and reviewed by the QA committee. 24. Review of the Ad Hoc QAPI meeting minutes revealed the meeting was held on 12/31/19 with the Administrator, DON, and Medical Director. Interview with the DON on 01/09/2020 at 3:47 PM revealed she attended the QAPI meeting and the attendees reviewed the information gathered regarding the elopement. Interview with the Administr[TRUNCATED]
Nov 2018 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review and review of the facility policy and procedure, it was determined the facility failed to develop and implement a person-centered comprehensive care plan to meet each of the medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs identified on the resident's comprehensive assessment for one (1) of fourteen (14) sampled residents (Resident #26). Resident #26's was hospitalized on [DATE], 04/05/18, and 02/12/18 with diagnoses of Pneumonia, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), and Congestive Heart Failure (CHF). However, review of the Comprehensive Care Plan revealed the facility failed to revise the care plan to address the resident's Pneumonia, COPD and CHF. The findings include: Review of the facility policy, Comprehensive Care Plans Standard of Practice, last revised November 2017, revealed it is the practice of this facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs that are identified in the resident's comprehensive assessment. The facility will ensure residents who display or are diagnosed with Dementia receive the appropriate treatment and services to attain or maintain his or her highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #26 on 01/03/18 with diagnoses which included Unspecified Dementia Without Behavioral Disturbance, Cognitive Communication Deficit, Psychotic Disorder with Delusions, COPD, Congestive Heart Failure, Hypothyroidism, and Urinary Tract Infection (UTI). Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 08/14/18, revealed the facility assessed Resident #26's cognition as intact with a Brief Inventory of Mental Status (BIMS) score of ten (10) which indicated the resident was interviewable. Review of Resident #26's Nurses Notes revealed he/she was admitted to the hospital on the following dates; 02/12/18, 04/05/18, and 08/04/18, with Pneumonia, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), and Congestive Heart Failure (CHF). However, review of the Comprehensive Care Plan last revised 08/17/18, revealed the care plan was not revised to include a person centered care plan with individualized interventions to reflect how staff will meet the resident's care needs related to CHF, COPD, and Pneumonia to minimize the likelihood of re-hospitalization. In addition, staff failed to include measurable objectives, and timeframe's. Interview with the MDS Coordinator, on 11/01/18 at 2:30 PM, revealed the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) members are responsible to update care plans, and any discipline is able to update the care plan based on problem identified. The MDS Coordinator stated, We (staff) carry the care plan books to morning stand-up meetings and update care plans at that time. A resident with a diagnosis of CHF, COPD should have a care plan to reflect resident care needs which would normally be added; however, I failed to do so, I will update the resident care plan right now. Interview with Director of Nursing (DON), on 11/01/18 at 2:20 PM, revealed all Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) members are responsible to update care plans, and various disciplines are able to do so. The DON stated it is not necessarily indicated for a resident to have a care plan for diagnoses of CHF and/or COPD regardless of hospitalizations. The DON stated, care areas may be covered in Physician Orders carried out as well as other interventions to meet the resident care needs. Interview with Regional Clinical Nurse Consultant (RCNC), on 11/01/18 at 2:25 PM, revealed a resident may have a new diagnosis; however, she would expect the Physician Orders to reflect resident changes in condition with orders to provide care related to the resident's condition. The RCNC stated, I would expect staff to follow Physician Orders related to resident care needs, it's not necessary that the diagnoses have to be care planned if staff is following the doctor's orders related to the resident's care needs.
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.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 4 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • Grade D (48/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 48/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Christian Heights Nursing And Rehabilitation Cente's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns CHRISTIAN HEIGHTS NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTE an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered 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 Christian Heights Nursing And Rehabilitation Cente Staffed?

CMS rates CHRISTIAN HEIGHTS NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTE's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 54%, compared to the Kentucky average of 46%. RN turnover specifically is 78%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Christian Heights Nursing And Rehabilitation Cente?

State health inspectors documented 4 deficiencies at CHRISTIAN HEIGHTS NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTE during 2018 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 3 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 Christian Heights Nursing And Rehabilitation Cente?

CHRISTIAN HEIGHTS NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTE 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 BENJAMIN LANDA, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 60 certified beds and approximately 55 residents (about 92% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in PEMBROKE, Kentucky.

How Does Christian Heights Nursing And Rehabilitation Cente Compare to Other Kentucky Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Kentucky, CHRISTIAN HEIGHTS NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTE's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (54%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Christian Heights Nursing And Rehabilitation Cente?

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 Christian Heights Nursing And Rehabilitation Cente Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, CHRISTIAN HEIGHTS NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTE has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 2-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 Christian Heights Nursing And Rehabilitation Cente Stick Around?

CHRISTIAN HEIGHTS NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTE has a staff turnover rate of 54%, which is 8 percentage points above the Kentucky average of 46%. Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Christian Heights Nursing And Rehabilitation Cente Ever Fined?

CHRISTIAN HEIGHTS NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTE 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 Christian Heights Nursing And Rehabilitation Cente on Any Federal Watch List?

CHRISTIAN HEIGHTS NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTE 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.