MOUNTAIN VIEW NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER

39 FERNDALE APARTMENTS ROAD, PINEVILLE, KY 40977 (606) 337-7071
For profit - Corporation 115 Beds PRINCIPLE LONG TERM CARE Data: November 2025 3 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
14/100
#176 of 266 in KY
Last Inspection: July 2024

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

Overview

Mountain View Nursing and Rehabilitation Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns and a poor overall quality of care. Ranking #176 out of 266 facilities in Kentucky places it in the bottom half, and it is the second out of two options in Bell County, meaning families have limited choices for better care nearby. Although the facility shows an improving trend, reducing issues from 12 in 2019 to 7 in 2024, it still has a concerning total of 28 identified issues, including three that were critical and related to medication errors where residents did not receive their prescribed medications on time. Staffing is rated average, with a turnover of 54%, which is around the state average, but it does provide more RN coverage than 87% of Kentucky facilities, offering some assurance for residents' health monitoring. While there have been no fines recorded, the facility's history of medication administration errors raises important questions for families considering this option for their loved ones.

Trust Score
F
14/100
In Kentucky
#176/266
Bottom 34%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
12 → 7 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
✓ Good
Each resident gets 53 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Kentucky. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
Violations
⚠ Watch
28 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2019: 12 issues
2024: 7 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record

Facility shows strength in quality measures, 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: PRINCIPLE LONG TERM CARE

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 28 deficiencies on record

3 life-threatening
Jul 2024 7 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure accurate assessments for one of 29 sampled residents. The facility failed to document Resident...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure accurate assessments for one of 29 sampled residents. The facility failed to document Resident (R) 25's skin lesion identified on 10/07/2022 until the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/24/2024. Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Process, dated 10/2019, revealed the facility will use the most current version of the RAI Manual and follow guidelines therein as set forth by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services (CMS) for all RAI processes and completion of the MDS unless otherwise outlined in the manual. Further review revealed the facility will complete the RAI process according to state guidelines as applicable. Review of the MDS 3.0 RAI User's Manual Section M with an effective date of 10/2023 revealed the following steps for assessment: review the medical record, including skin care flow sheets or other skin tracking forms, nurses' notes, and pressure ulcer/injury risk assessments; speak with the treatment nurse and direct care staff on all shifts to confirm conclusions from the medical record review and observations of the resident; examine the resident and determine whether any ulcers, wounds, or skin problems are present. Review of R25's, Face Sheet, revealed the facility admitted the resident on 08/05/2020 with diagnoses of Alzheimer's Disease, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), and heart failure. Review of R25's MDS with an ARD of 05/24/2024 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of seven out of 15 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Review of R25's skin check dated 10/07/2022 revealed a documented raised lesion to the chest. Review of R25' s care plan dated 10/10/2022 revealed a focus of potential or actual skin integrity impairment related to skin lesions to chest. Further review revealed interventions that included treatment as ordered or per facility skin care protocol; observation daily/weekly; notification to nurse of changes or development of new skin impairment. Review of R25's Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for 10/2022 revealed treatment in place to chest lesion ordered 10/08/2022. Review of R25's Quarterly MDS assessment with an ARD of 10/10/2022 revealed Section M/Skin Conditions: Other Ulcers, Wounds, and Skin Problems marked as not present. Review of R25's TAR for 06/2023 revealed Hibiclens topical treatment in place for cutaneous chest abscess 06/26/2023 - 07/06/2023. Review of R25's, Lab Results Report, dated 07/09/2023 revealed a result of negative for a wound culture submitted on 07/07/2024. Review of R25's progress notes dated 12/22/2023 revealed documentation of several small, clustered lesions to the chest area. Lesions were described as raised, red, and circular with no drainage. Further review revealed a history of abscesses to this area. The Nurse Practitioner (NP) ordered treatment with antibiotics and Hibiclens topical solution. Review of R25's TAR for 12/2023 revealed Hibiclens topical treatment in place for chest abscess 12/23/2023 - 12/31/2023. Review of R25's Quarterly MDS assessment with an ARD of 12/26/2023 revealed Section M/Skin Conditions: Other Ulcers, Wounds, and Skin Problems marked as not present. Review of R25's progress note dated 03/21/2024 revealed resident received antibiotic for chest abscess. Review of R25's Quarterly MDS assessment with an ARD of 03/26/2024 revealed Section M/Skin Conditions: Other Ulcers, Wounds, and Skin Problems marked as not present. Observation on 07/15/2024 at 2:27 PM revealed R25 resting on her bed. State Survey Agency (SSA) surveyor observed a lesion approximately one and a half inches in diameter to R25's upper chest. Additional observation revealed the lesion was surrounded by four smaller scabbed areas In an interview on 07/15/2024 at 2:27 PM, R25 stated she did not know what the place was on her chest. She further stated the sore had been there forever but was getting better. In an interview with the MDS nurse on 07/18/2024 at 3:03PM, she stated, she obtained information for MDS assessments through interviews with residents, data collected from hospital documentation and facility charts. She stated she reviewed pressure ulcer flowsheets, Treatment Assessment Records (TARs), skin notes, and any other documentation that provided information related to skin. She further stated she visited most every area of a resident's medical record when collecting data for an MDS assessment. The MDS nurse stated in the past she had not participated in skin assessments, but a couple of months ago started rounds with the treatment nurse on skin assessment days. In a continued interview with the MDS nurse on 07/18/2024 at 3:44 PM, she stated from her recollection, R25's skin problem was intermittent rather than an ongoing issue. She further stated problems were not required on the MDS assessment unless they were ongoing, and resident received treatment. She stated everybody made mistakes and could not provide an answer without looking through the resident's records. Additionally, she stated she remembered she spoke with the Regional MDS Consultant, and they decided the wound failed to meet criteria under the section for other skin problems. She also stated it was not considered a problem unless the resident received treatment. In an interview with the Regional MDS Consultant on 07/18/2024 at 5:58PM, she stated the MDS was coded based on documentation at the time related to R25's skin problem. She further stated it would have had to be open at the time to include on section M for skin. The Regional MDS Consultant stated as far as she knew, they did not have a policy related to MDS and they utilized the RAI manual. In an interview on 07/19/2024 at 8:47 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) meetings were held every weekday morning and changes were discussed. The DON stated she did not really have a part in the MDS assessments. She further stated she thought the RAI manual was used and was not aware of a facility policy related to MDS assessments. In an interview with the facility Administrator on 07/19/2024 at 9:12 AM, she stated the facility had no specific MDS assessment policy. She further stated, the facility followed guidelines from the RAI manual for MDS assessments.
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 interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan within 48 hours for each resident that included instructions needed to ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan within 48 hours for each resident that included instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident (R) to meet professional standards of quality care for one of 29 residents sampled for care plans, R49. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Resident Care Plan, dated 11/13/2017, revealed the facility was to initiate a baseline care plan immediately upon admission by the admitting Registered Nurse (RN). Continued review revealed the baseline care plan was to include instructions needed to provide effective and resident-centered care for residents that met professional standards of care. Further review revealed the baseline care plan was to include the initial goals for the resident, physician orders, and other services to be administered for the resident in the first 48 hours. Review of the admission Record, located in the facility's clinical record for R49, revealed the facility admitted the resident on 06/27/2024, with diagnoses including end-stage renal failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and dysphagia (trouble swallowing). Review of R49's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 07/04/2024, revealed the facility assessed the resident with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 out of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Further review revealed the facility also assessed the resident as requiring dialysis. Continued review of the clinical record revealed no documented evidence of a baseline care plan for R49. Review of the facility's care plan for R49 revealed the first dates for documentation were on 07/01/2024 by social work areas and 07/02/2024 for nursing related areas. Observation and resident interview not conducted due to the resident being out of the facility on an approved leave of absence. In an interview on 07/19/2024 at 10:34 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) 7 stated she was the nurse responsible for R49's admission. She further stated she had not been aware she was responsible for initiating a baseline care plan for R49's and no one had ever shown her how to do that. In an interview on 07/18/2024 at 4:52 PM, the Staff Development Coordinator (SDC) stated the facility did not document the skills check-off for nurses on orientation that included initiating a baseline care plan. The SDC further stated however, she always did the newly hired nurse's first admission with them so they could see everything they needed to do. In an interview on 07/18/2024 at 4:39 PM, the Quality Improvement (QI) Nurse stated her process, for residents admitted on night shift, was to review their baseline care plans the next morning. She stated she did not know how the facility's process failed for initiating R49's baseline care plan within 48 hours as required. In an interview on 07/18/2024 at 4:01 PM, the MDS Nurse stated baseline care plans should be initiated within 48 hours of a resident's admission. She stated if she was in the building when a newly admitted resident arrived at the facility, she assisted the admitting nurse with assessments and documenting a baseline care plan. The MDS Nurse stated however, sometimes residents, including R49, were admitted late on the evening and in those cases, the process was for facility management to review the baseline care plans the next day. In an interview on 07/19/2024 at 8:31 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated the facility process for initiating a new residents' baseline care plan was for the admitting nurse to initiate a baseline care plan with interventions that addressed the resident's immediate needs. The DON stated those interventions (for a resident like R49) should include resident safety concerns, location of dialysis fistula or port and precautions related to the fistula, and monitoring for dialysis complications. She further stated she believed some management staff had been on vacation when R49 was admitted , leading to a process breakdown in checking for and ensuring R49's baseline care plan. In an interview on 07/19/2024 at 9:09 AM, the Administrator stated it was her expectation for the admitting nurse, or member of management team present for an admission, to enter a baseline care plan within 48 hours of a new resident's admission. She further stated she did not know how (the facility's) process had failed in the case of R49.
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

2. Review of R39's admission Record, revealed the facility admitted the resident on 03/15/2024, with diagnoses which included type 2 diabetes; and third degree burns to both lower extremities (BLE), g...

Read full inspector narrative →
2. Review of R39's admission Record, revealed the facility admitted the resident on 03/15/2024, with diagnoses which included type 2 diabetes; and third degree burns to both lower extremities (BLE), genitals, and buttocks. Review of R39's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 05/20/2024, revealed the facility assessed the resident to have a BIMS score of 15 out of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Further MDS review revealed the facility also assessed R39 to have burns (second or third degree) and to be receiving application of nonsurgical dressings. Review of R39's Care Plan, dated 03/29/2024, revealed the resident was not care planned for behaviors related to refusing care. Review of R39's Treatment Administration Record (TAR), dated 07/16/2024 revealed documentation noting the resident's wound care was not provided due to refusals from resident. Review of R39's, Nursing Note, dated 07/16/2024 revealed resident refused wound care to third degree burns. Further review revealed Treatment Registered Nurse (RN) 2 educated resident on potential risks of refusal and he verbalized understanding. On 07/18/2024 at 7:11 AM, the State Survey Agency (SSA) Surveyor attempted to observe R39's dressing change; however, the resident refused the dressing change. Treatment RN 2, who was to perform the dressing change, explained the risks versus benefits of dressing changes and informed R39 his burn wounds would heal faster if the dressings were changed daily; however, the resident still refused. In an interview with SRNA 8 on 07/18/2024 at 1:51 PM, she stated when residents refused care, she notified the nurse. She further stated she used resident care plans to determine the type of care a resident needed. SRNA 8 stated nurses updated the care plans when changes occurred. SRNA 8 stated the behavior tab of the care plan displayed recent or updated behaviors for residents, including refusals. In an interview with Treatment RN 2 on 07/17/2024 at 11:41 AM, she stated she typically performed R39's dressing changes early in the morning. She further stated R39 preferred the morning, and she tried to accommodate because that helped with compliance. Treatment RN 2 stated R39 refused care yesterday but allowed her to change his dressings today. In interview on 07/18/2024 at 7:11 AM, Treatment RN 2 stated she had only been working at the facility a few days, but she had noticed improvement in R39's burns since she started. In an interview with the MDS nurse on 07/18/2024 at 3:03 PM, she stated changes to care plans were addressed immediately. She further stated, when issues or concerns were discovered, they were addressed the following day in the morning meeting and changes were made as needed. Additionally, she stated morning meetings were Monday through Friday, so occurrences on a weekend were addressed first thing Monday morning. The MDS nurse stated the Quality Improvement (QI) RN and MDS RN were primarily responsible for care plan updates; however, floor nurses also made changes to care plans as needed. The MDS nurse state refusals of care were placed on care plans, and it was important for the care plan to be up to date and correct so the aides knew how to care for the residents. Attempt was made on 07/18/2024 at 3:14 PM to reach the former treatment nurse, Treatment RN 1. State Survey Agency (SSA) surveyor left a message for Treatment RN 1, but return call was not received. In an interview with the QI RN on 07/18/2024 at 4:02 PM, she stated meetings were held daily to look at changes that had occurred, and then care plans were updated to include those changes. She further stated refusals of care were behaviors that were added to care plans. The QI RN stated resident changes were ascertained by her and staff in numerous ways: examined resident charts, read progress notes, communicated with Nurse Practitioner (NP) and other staff, and looked at care guides. In a continued interview on 07/18/2024 at 4:13 PM, the MDS nurse stated it was her expectation for nurses to update care plans as needed. In an interview on 7/19/2024 at 8:47 AM with the DON, she stated floor nurses sometimes updated care plans, but the MDS nurse primarily made revisions. The DON stated care plans were updated with any change in condition or new orders. She further stated, if a resident exhibited a new behavior today, it was placed on the care plan as soon as possible. She clarified as soon as possible meant today or tomorrow. The DON stated care refusals should be on a care plan. She further stated it was important updates to care plans were made as soon as possible to protect the safety and well-being of residents. In an interview with the facility Administrator on 07/19/2024 at 9:12 AM, she stated it was her expectation all staff followed residents' care plans. She further stated it was her expectation updates to care plans were made at the time a change occurred. The Administrator stated if a new behavior with a resident occurred today, it would be added to the care plan within one day. She further stated if a resident chronically refused care, the behavior should be added to the care plan. The Administrator stated in order to provide proper care to residents, it was necessary to update care plans in a timely manner. Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, to include measurable objectives and timeframes as identified in the comprehensive assessment for two of 29 residents sampled for care planning, R10 and R39. 1. The facility failed to implement R10's care plan related to respiratory care, to include ensuring the resident's supplemental oxygen was running at the prescribed liters per minute. Observation on 07/17/2024, revealed R10's oxygen running at 2.5 liters per minute (LPM); however, the Physician's order was for the resident to receive her oxygen at 4 LPM. 2. In addition, the facility failed to add resident-centered interventions regarding R39's repeated refusals of his dressing changes for his wound. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Resident Care Plan dated 11/13/2017, revealed the facility was to develop and implement a multidisciplinary care plan based on the resident's comprehensive assessment. 1. Review of R10's admission Record, located in the facility's clinical record, revealed the facility admitted the resident on 09/10/2020, with diagnoses including cerebral palsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and obesity. Review of R10's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 07/08/2024, revealed the facility assessed the resident with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 13 out of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Further MDS review revealed the facility also assessed R10 to have received oxygen therapy while a resident. Review of R10's Care Plan dated 01/25/2021, revealed the facility care planned the resident as at risk for ineffective breathing and included interventions such as keeping the resident's head of bed elevated; checking the resident's oxygen saturations per facility protocol; and administering supplemental oxygen as ordered. Review of the Physician's order for R10 dated 11/16/2023, revealed an order for the resident to receive supplemental oxygen at 4 liters per minute (LPM) via nasal cannula. Observation on 07/15/2024 at 3:48 PM revealed R10's oxygen concentrator set to 2.5 LPM, not at the Physician ordered rate of 4 LPM. Additional observation on 07/17/2024 at 11:44 AM revealed R10's supplemental oxygen running at 2.5 liters per minute, which was again not at the ordered rate of 4 LPM. In an interview on 07/18/2024 at 1:49 PM, State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) 8 stated following the care plan was important so staff knew what each resident needed for their care. She further stated the SRNA's role with oxygen was only to assist and remind residents to keep their (nasal) cannula in their nose, not to monitor or adjust the flow of the oxygen. In an interview on 07/18/2024 at 4:52 PM, Registered Nurse (RN) 6 stated following the care plan was important so the resident received the care they needed. She stated it was not part of any facility protocol for nurses to check the supplemental oxygen flow rate every shift. In continued interview, she stated the only time a nurse would need to look at the flow meter on the oxygen concentrator was when they changed oxygen tubing, which occurred on Sunday nights. The RN stated she did not believe it was necessary to check the rate every day because no one would adjust the oxygen flow except when changing oxygen tubing. Per interview, RN 6 was not able to verify that staff followed R10's care plan as related to receiving oxygen as ordered, because she did not know how long the supplemental oxygen concentrator had been running at the incorrect rate. In an interview on 07/19/2024 at 8:31 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated following the care plan was important to promote resident safety and well-being. She stated the care plan intervention (for R10) to ensure supplemental oxygen was administered as ordered meant staff needed to check the resident was wearing the cannula. The DON stated the facility did not have a process in place to check the flow meters on the oxygen concentrators to ensure the resident was receiving the correct rate of supplemental oxygen. She additionally stated that was not a daily nursing task per the resident's TAR. In an interview on 07/19/2024 at 9:09 AM, the Administrator stated she expected nursing staff to follow residents' care plans. She stated she expected care plans to reflect residents' needs, such as making sure the resident was wearing their nasal cannula. In continued interview, the Administrator stated R10's care plan did not specify checking the flow meter on the oxygen tank, so staff might not have noticed it running at the wrong rate, unless the resident began complaining of shortness of breath.
CONCERN (D)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards for 1 of 3 residents (R) sampled for ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards for 1 of 3 residents (R) sampled for respiratory care (R10), out of the total sample of 29 residents. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Oxygen Therapy, dated 04/2013, revealed the facility's procedure for administering oxygen included adjusting the oxygen flow meter to the prescribed rate. Review of R10's admission Record, revealed the facility admitted the resident on 09/10/2020, with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), obesity with hypovolemia (low fluid/blood volume), and cerebral palsy. Review of the Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 07/08/2024 for R10, revealed the facility assessed the resident to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 13 out of 15. indicating the resident was cognitively intact. In addition, review revealed the facility assessed R10 to have received oxygen therapy while a resident. Review of R10's Care Plan, dated 01/25/2021, revealed the facility identified a problem of the resident being at risk for ineffective breathing. Further review revealed the interventions included keeping the head of the resident's bed elevated and administering supplemental oxygen as ordered. Review of the Physician's order for R10 dated 11/16/2023, revealed an order for the resident to receive supplemental oxygen at 4 liters per minute (LPM). Review of R10's Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for 07/2024 revealed orders for facility staff to check the resident's pulse and oxygen saturations (O2 sats) once per week. Further review revealed facility staff charted daily from 07/01/2024 through 07/18/2024, the hours the resident was on oxygen under the order, Oxygen flow is 4 L/min . nasal cannula. Observation on 07/15/2024 at 3:48 PM and on 07/17/2024 at 11:44 AM, revealed R10's oxygen concentrator set at 2.5 LPM (not the 4 LPM as ordered by the Physician). In interview on 07/17/2024 at 11:48 AM, with Registered Nurse (RN) 6, who was at R10's bedside, she stated the resident's oxygen concentrator was set to 2.5 liters per minute. Observation at the time of interview revealed RN 6 left R10's room without adjusting the oxygen flow meter to the 4 LPM as ordered by the Physician. In further interview on 07/17/2024 at 12:11 PM, RN 6 stated she did not know what R10's oxygen orders were. During the interview, RN 6 accessed R10's Physician's orders and stated the Physician ordered the resident's supplemental oxygen to run at 4 LPM. Observation, at the time of interview, revealed RN 6 went to R10's room, attempted to adjust the dial on the resident's oxygen flow meter. She stated however, the machine was malfunctioning because it would not turn above 2.5 LPM. Continued observation revealed RN 6 went to storage and brought in a different oxygen concentrator machine and adjusted the flow meter to 4 LPM (as ordered) and connected R10's oxygen tubing to the new oxygen concentrator. In an additional interview on 07/18/2024 at 4:52 PM, RN 6 stated the facility did not train nurses to check the residents' oxygen every day. She stated nurses charted R10's O2 sats and number of hours the resident used supplemental oxygen every shift; however, not the LPM the resident received. RN 6 stated the only time a nurse would routinely check a resident's oxygen flow meter was when they changed the oxygen tubing, which typically occurred on Sunday nights. The RN said other times a nurse would check the oxygen flow rate included if the resident was complaining of shortness of breath, or if the oxygen concentrator alarmed to indicate a malfunction. RN 6 further stated R10's oxygen concentrator had not alarmed to indicate it was not maintaining a flow above 2.5 LPM In an interview on 07/18/2024 at 10:08 AM, the Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) stated R10 required supplemental oxygen for treatment of the diagnosis of COPD and the hypovolemia related to obesity. The APRN further stated she expected nursing staff to check residents' oxygen equipment to ensure the equipment was delivering the oxygen flow rate as ordered. She said residents could have low oxygen saturations (if not on the correct flow rate). In an interview on 07/19/2024 at 8:31 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated her expectations for nursing staff caring for residents receiving supplemental oxygen was for staff to ensure the resident's nasal cannula stayed in their nose, assess for shortness of breath, and check the resident's O2 sats once per shift. She stated the facility did not have a process in place to ensure nurses checked residents' oxygen concentrators to see if they were running at the correct rate. In continued interview, the DON further stated she expected residents to receive their supplemental oxygen as ordered. She additionally stated residents could experience shortness of breath (if not on the ordered flow rate for oxygen). In an interview on 07/19/2024 at 9:09 AM, the Administrator stated she expected residents to receive oxygen as ordered. The Administrator further stated however, there was not an auditing process in place to ensure residents had oxygen running at the prescribed rate.
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 drugs and biologicals were labeled with residents' names. Observation of the four...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled with residents' names. Observation of the four (4) medication carts and two (2) medication refrigerators on 07/16/2024 at 2:08 PM and 2:13 PM and on 07/18/2024 at 4:36 PM, revealed three (3) of the four (4) carts contained unlabeled medications. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Storage, Version 09/2020, revealed medications were to be stored in the containers in which they were dispensed. Further policy review revealed under no circumstances should any person, other than the Pharmacist, be allowed to transfer medications from one container to another, except for immediate use. Observation on 07/16/2024 at 2:08 PM, revealed Medication Cart #2 contained a medication cup with one white pill in it. Per observation, the white pill was out of its package and the cup was labeled only with a resident's name, Resident (R) 32. Additional observation on 07/16/2024 at 2:13 PM, revealed Medication Cart #4 also had an unpackaged white pill located in a medication cup. Observation revealed the pill cup was not labeled with a resident's name and there was also a bottle of copper for R39 that was not labeled with his name; however, stored in the compartment with the resident's other medications. In an interview with Registered Nurse (RN) 1 on 07/16/2024 at 2:10 PM, she stated R32's medication (on Medication Cart #2) was opened and sitting in the medication cup because she had been unable to locate the resident to administer the medication. She stated when she did not find R32, she wrote his name on the medication cup containing the opened pill and placed it back into the section of Medication Cart #2 that contained the remainder of R32's unopened medications. RN 1 stated she should not have placed the opened pill in the cup back into the medication cart. She further stated she should have thrown the pill and cup away. In an interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 4 on 07/16/2024 at 2:13 PM, she stated the reason the bottle of copper (on Medication Cart #4) did not have R39's name on it was because the copper had not came from the pharmacy service the facility used, the Nurse Practitioner (NP) had purchased it from an outside source. LPN 4 stated she knew the supplement belonged to R39 because no one else in the facility took that medication. She further stated the unlabeled white pill in the medicine cup was for R5. The LPN said R5 was outside smoking when she went to give his belly pill. In addition, she stated she was not supposed to place unlabeled medications in the medication cart and was observed to immediately dispose of the pill in the red biohazard container on the medication cart. Observation on 7/18/2024 at 4:36 PM, revealed Medication Cart #3 had an insulin pen labeled only with the opened date. Further observation revealed the insulin pen was not labeled with a resident's name. In an interview with LPN 1 on 07/18/2024 at 4:36 PM, she stated because the insulin pen was not labeled with a resident's name it should be discarded as she did not know to which resident it belonged. The State Survey Agency (SSA) Surveyor attempted a telephonic (phone) interview with the Pharmacist covering the facility on 07/18/2024 at 3:10 PM, with no answer received and a message was left requesting a return phone call. However, no return phone call was ever received. In an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/19/2024 at 8:30 AM, she stated she expected anyone giving a medication, that could not be given at the time it was opened, to label the medication and place it in a secure area, such as the medication cart until they were able to give the medication. She stated the reason for labeling the medication was to prevent it being given to the incorrect resident and to make certain the medication was given at the appropriate time. The DON stated insulin pens were stored in the medication refrigerator until they were opened. She said upon opening an insulin pen, the person administering the medication, should label the pen with the resident's name and the date it was opened. The DON stated after being opened the insulin pen could be stored in the medication cart. When the SSA Surveyor asked the DON what should happen to insulin pens without a resident's name and opened date on them, she stated the pen should be thrown away. In an interview with the Facility Administrator on 07/19/2024 at 9:10 AM, she stated any medication not administered to a resident should be discarded immediately. The Administrator stated her expectation was for medications not to be set up in advance, but for the medications to be given immediately after they were opened. She further stated she was unsure of how the insulin pens were to be labeled and stored, but the pens should have a resident's name on them once they were opened.
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 interview, record review, review of the facility's local health department inspection, and review of the local health department's website, the facility failed to provide education to food ha...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview, record review, review of the facility's local health department inspection, and review of the local health department's website, the facility failed to provide education to food handlers related to safe food handling practice to enable the food handlers to effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service department. This deficient practice affected 53 residents receiving meals from the kitchen. The findings include: Review of the local health department's, Food Service Establishment Inspection Report, dated 08/17/2023, revealed the facility had been cited for areas of the kitchen floors needing cleaning; equipment needing cleaning; and three (3) overhead lights needing repair. Review of the local county health department's website, Environmental - Bell County Health Department (bellcohealthky.org), revealed an annual Food Handler Training Course for all employees who worked in the food service industry was required. Continued review revealed newly hired food service workers were to complete the food handlers online training course before beginning to work at their place of employment. Further review revealed the website noted the online Food Handler Training Course covered food safety laws and regulations and proper hygiene practices and food handling techniques. Review of the facility's dietary staffs' personnel records revealed three (3) of nine (9) dietary employees (Cook 2, Dietary Aide 1, and Dietary Aide 2) did not have a Food Handlers Card, nor documentation of having received ServSafe training, or the Clinical Dietary Manager (CDM) training. Observation on 07/15/2024 at 2:25 PM and 5:03 PM, revealed [NAME] 2 and Dietary Aide 1 were the only dietary staff members working in the kitchen area preparing and serving dinner. In an interview with [NAME] 2 on 07/15/2024 at 5:10 PM, she stated she did not have a Food Handlers Card. [NAME] 2 went on to say she and Dietary Aide 1 had both not been here (at the facility) but a couple of months. She further stated neither she or Dietary Aide 2 had done the training yet, but needed to do it. In a telephonic (phone) interview with the Dietary Manager on 07/17/2024 at 4:52 PM, she stated her cooks all had Food Handlers cards and/or ServSafe certifications. In an interview with Dietary Aide 2 on 07/18/2024 at 8:27 AM, she stated she had only worked at the facility two months and had not yet obtained her Food Handlers Card or ServSafe certification. In an additional phone interview with the Dietary Manager on 07/18/2024 at 10:27 AM, she stated a dietary worker had 30 days after starting work to obtain their Food Handlers Card. She stated the facility did not have a policy stating that requirement however, and she had never been told what action were to be taken for employees who did not comply within 30 days. The Dietary Manager expressed verbal agreement regarding a process failure and despite her asking [NAME] 2 to get her Food Handlers Card the [NAME] had not done so. She further stated [NAME] 2 continued to work at the facility. During interview with the Registered Dietician (RD) on 07/18/2024 at 10:53 AM, she stated her expectations for all dietary workers was for them to have a ServSafe or a Food Handlers certification. When the SSA Surveyor asked what should be done if a dietary staff member was working in the kitchen without one of those certifications, she stated the staff needed to be certified as soon as possible, within the week. The RD further stated her expectation was that there should always be someone with ServSafe, Food Handlers Card, or RDM certification working in the kitchen to provide supervision. When informed of the observation on 07/15/2024 at 2:25 PM and 5:03 PM, when [NAME] 2 and Dietary Aide 1 were the only dietary staff members working in the kitchen are preparing and serving dinner, the RD stated [NAME] 2 and Dietary Aide 1 needed to get their certification within the week. During interview with the Administrator on 07/19/2024 at 9:10 AM, she stated all dietary staff had 30 days to obtain their Food Handlers Card. The Administrator stated it was the duty of the Dietary Manager to follow up with new dietary staff to make sure their training was done in a timely manner. She stated she would not take the individual off the schedule if they did not do the training within the first 30 days of being hired, because there was always someone in the facility with a Food Handlers Card, ServSafe certification, or CDM. When the SSA Surveyor informed the Administrator of the observation on 07/15/2024 at 2:25 PM and 5:03 PM, when [NAME] 2 and Dietary Aide 1 were the only dietary staff working in the kitchen, the Administrator stated she would need to have better oversight of the kitchen staff in the future and ensure they received their certification before hire. The Administrator further stated dietary staff were trained on safe food handling and hand hygiene while on the job.
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 observation, interview, and review of the facility's policies, it was determined the facility failed to provide a safe sanitary environment for food production and appropriate trash storage a...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and review of the facility's policies, it was determined the facility failed to provide a safe sanitary environment for food production and appropriate trash storage and disposal, which affected 54 residents receiving their meals from the kitchen. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Cleaning Procedures-Garbage Cans, Buckets, and Disposals, dated 08/2013, revealed kitchen garbage cans were to have plastic liners and those liners were to be changed as needed and disposed of frequently in the outside dumpster. Review of the facility's policy titled, Preparation of Food, dated 08/2013 and revised on 02/09/2026, revealed the preparation of foods served to residents and personnel were the responsibility of the Food Service Manager. Further review revealed food was to be produced using sanitary guidelines and served according to established rules and regulations. Review of the facility's Cleaning Assignment Sheet for July of 2024, revealed it noted all garbage can were to be emptied twice daily and the bathroom garbage can was to be emptied nightly. Observation on 07/16/2024 at 11:35 AM, during lunch tray line setup, revealed a garbage can without a lid, overflowing with trash located in the kitchen area. The State Survey Agency (SSA) Surveyor observed Dietary Aide (DA) 2 roll the trash can without a lid, overfull with trash, past the area where [NAME] 1 was setting up the steam table for the lunch service. Observation on 07/18/2024 at 8:27 AM, revealed a trash can located in the dining room that had no lid on it. In interview with DA 2 at 8:27 AM on 07/18/2024, she stated the trash can in the dining room did not have a lid. When the SSA Surveyor asked DA 2 about the process for trash removal from the dining room and the kitchen, DA 2 stated all the trash cans in the kitchen were always to be covered by a lid. When asked by the SSA Surveyor, if trash cans in the kitchen were ever overflowing with so much trash no lid could be placed on them, she stated no. DA 2 stated the process was to take out the garbage before the trash can overflowed. She stated the large trash can from the dining room and from the kitchen were rolled out to the dumpster to empty. DA 2 said the three (3) small trash cans in the dining room were emptied into the large rolling trash can that had no lid also located in the dining room, prior to it being taken from the kitchen to the dumpster. In an interview with [NAME] 1 on 07/18/2024 at 8:35 AM, she said trash cans in the kitchen should be covered with a lid. She further stated when trash cans were full they were to be taken out to the dumpster to empty. In an interview with DA 3 on 07/18/2024 at 8:55 AM, the DA stated all trash cans in the kitchen and in the dining room had lids and those lids should be placed on them when trash was not being put in them. When the SSA Surveyor asked if the trash cans in the kitchen were ever overfilled and ran over or were so full the lid could not be placed back on them, DA 3 stated yes, that did occur. In an interview with the facility's Registered Dietician (RD) on 07/18/2024 at 10:53 AM, she said garbage cans in the kitchen needed to be covered with a lid. In an interview with the Facility Administrator on 07/19/2024 at 9:10 AM, she stated her expectation were that lids should be on garbage cans when they were not being directly used.
Sept 2019 12 deficiencies 3 IJ (2 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL (J)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Deficiency F0760 (Tag F0760)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. a. Review of the medical record for Resident #63 revealed the facility admitted the resident on 06/25/19 with diagnoses that ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. a. Review of the medical record for Resident #63 revealed the facility admitted the resident on 06/25/19 with diagnoses that included Seizure, Debility, Acute Renal Failure, and Hypertension. Review of the MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident had a BIMS score of eight (8), which indicated the resident was cognitively impaired but interviewable. Further review of the medical record for Resident #63 revealed Physician's Orders for Phenobarbital 64.8 milligrams (mg), one tablet by mouth twice daily for seizures. The medication was scheduled to be administered at 10:00 AM and 10:00 PM; and Depakote 500 mg, one tablet by mouth three (3) times per day, used to treat seizures, was scheduled for 10:00 AM, 2:00 PM, and 10:00 PM. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 08/26/19, revealed the medications had not been initialed as being administered for the 10:00 PM dose. Review of the schedule and time card documentation revealed Registered Nurse (RN) #1 was responsible for administering the resident's 10:00 PM medications on 08/26/19. Interview with Resident #63 on 09/12/19 at 10:57 AM revealed he/she had missed a nighttime dose of medication a few weeks ago. Resident #63 stated he/she did not know the name of the medicine, but it helps him/her sleep. The resident stated he/she was unsure of the nurse's name that worked that night. Continued interview revealed the resident did not tell anyone about it, but this (omitted medications) had occurred several times. b. Review of the medical record for Resident #9 revealed the facility admitted the resident on 05/30/19 with diagnoses that included Neurologic pain, Hypertension, Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and Heart failure. Review of the MDS dated [DATE], revealed the facility assessed the resident to have a BIMS score of 15, which indicated the resident was interviewable. Further review of the medical record for Resident #9 revealed a physician's order for Lopressor 12.5 mg, one tablet by mouth twice daily, used to treat high blood pressure, scheduled for 10:00 AM and 10:00 PM. Interview with Resident #9 on 09/11/19 at 1:55 PM revealed he/she had missed the scheduled nighttime medication a few weeks ago. The resident stated he/she did not recall the date, or who the nurse was working that evening. Review of the MAR revealed no documentation that the resident's Lopressor had been administered for the evening shift on 08/26/19. Review of the schedule and timecard revealed RN #1 was responsible for administering Resident #9's medications on 08/26/19. Phone interview with RN #1 on 09/10/19 at 2:10 PM revealed she had started working at the facility on 05/28/19. RN #1 stated she was hired as a weekend supervisor. The RN stated she spent four (4) days doing paperwork and watching videos. RN #1 indicated she was scheduled to work with another nurse during the second week she was employed. However, when she arrived at work the nurse she was scheduled with for orientation has resigned and she was asked to work the floor independently. RN #1 stated she was not familiar with the residents and did not know the routine for passing the medications. RN #1 further stated she was not aware that the facility has two (2) Medication Administration Records (MARs) on each unit, one for the medication aide to use and the other MAR for the nurse to use. RN #1 stated she had only made one medication error. Per the RN, she administered Resident #64 medication that belonged to Resident #66. The RN stated she had no additional training after the error and was just advised by the DON to follow the five (5) rights of medication administration. RN#1 stated she had not been observed by the DON or other administrative staff during a medication pass. RN #1 stated just human error when I made this mistake referencing the medication error. RN #1 denied that she failed to administer scheduled medications to Resident #9 and Resident #63. On 09/10/19 at 6:05 PM, interview with LPN #2 revealed she worked 6:00 PM to 6:00 AM on 08/26/19. Per LPN #2, RN #1 was working when she arrived and worked until 10:00 PM, at which time LPN #2 counted narcotics with RN #1. LPN #2 stated that RN #1 did not report any problems with residents refusing medication, or that any scheduled medications had not been administered. LPN #2 stated when she counted narcotics with RN #1, the count was correct. LPN #2 stated that during her morning medication pass she discovered that Resident #9's scheduled dose of Lopressor was not signed out as administered on 08/26/19 for the 10:00 PM dose. LPN #2 also stated Resident #63's 10:00 PM dose of Phenobarbital and Depakote had not been signed out as administered for 08/26/19 on the MAR, nor on the Controlled Drug Sheet. LPN #2 stated she notified the DON of this and the DON stated, I will look into this. The LPN stated the DON did not give her any directive regarding this matter and she was not advised of the outcome. LPN #2 stated when a medication was held or omitted the nurse should circle her initials and document a reason for the omission on the back of the MAR. LPN #2 stated that Resident #63 did not have any concerns or complaints. Per the LPN, she did not complete a medication error report for Resident #63 or Resident #9. Interview with the DON on 09/12/19 at 11:35 AM revealed the DON was not aware of any issues regarding missed or omitted medication. The DON was advised that on 08/26/19 Resident #9's and Resident #63's MARs indicated the 10:00 PM medications were not signed as being administered. The DON stated she was not aware of these errors. Continued interview revealed the DON acknowledged the doctor and family should have been notified and a medication error report completed. Per the DON, the expectation was that when a medication was omitted the nurse would circle her initials on the MAR and document a reason indicating why the medication was not given. The DON acknowledged that missing scheduled medications could have an adverse impact on the resident. She further stated she did not monitor the MAR or the Controlled Drug Count sheet to ensure medications were administered as ordered. The DON stated that RN #1 had no additional training on medication administration and medication errors. The DON stated she has not evaluated RN #1's ability to safely administer and document medication. Continued interview revealed she did not realize that all these problems were occurring. ***The facility alleged the following was implemented to remove the Immediate Jeopardy as of 09/19/19: 1. On 09/13/19, a Quality Improvement meeting was conducted after the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was communicated to the facility. The purpose was to develop an improvement plan to address the IJ deficiencies, and monitor guidelines to ensure compliance was maintained. This meeting was attended by the Administrator, Director of Nursing (DON), Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), Staff Development Coordinator (SDC), and an RN Nurse Consultant. 2. On 09/14/19, the facility's Medical Director was made aware of the Immediate Jeopardy and advised of the improvement plan, by the DON. He had no concerns or additions to the plan. 3. On 09/16/19, a follow-up QI meeting was conducted to review the progress on the 09/13/19 plan. A review of all items completed and the monitoring plan was completed. There were no additional recommendations at this time. Those in attendance were the Administrator, DON, ADON, RN Consultant, and Medical Director via phone. 4. Nurse #1 has not worked in the facility since 09/08/19, and is no longer employed by the facility effective 09/16/19. 5. On 09/16/19, Nurse #2 received education regarding physician notification, which included that the physician must be notified if there was a question of whether a resident had received their medication or had their blood sugar evaluated. 6. On 09/14/19, the ADON completed an audit of 100% of the in-house residents' August and September 2019 Medication Administration Records (MARs). This audit was to identify medications that were not documented as administered on the MAR and medications with multiple days of refusals. The findings included that over 50% of the MARs were missing documentation to support that medications had been administered. 7. On 09/14/19, the DON completed interviews with all residents with a BIMS score above eight (8), except one resident who was not feeling well. Residents were asked about concerns with how and when medications were administered. One resident stated he/she did not know why he/she received each medication and why medications were not consistently given at the same time each day. This resident was provided education, by the staff nurse, on his/her medications and the two (2) hour window for administering medications. On 09/15/19, the ADON completed an interview with the resident who was not feeling well on 09/14/19. The resident had no concerns with how and when medications were administered. 8. On 09/15/19, the ADON and SDC completed nursing assessments on all residents with a BIMS score of eight (8) or below. This assessment included Vital Signs and Lung and Bowel assessments. Two (2) residents were noted with a concern. One resident had an oxygen (O2) saturation of 82%, the MD was notified, and orders for oxygen at 2 Liters and chest x-ray were received. Oxygen was applied and his/her O2 saturation was 94%. One resident had an erratic pulse. The MD was notified and ordered a STAT EKG. The resident has a diagnosis of A-fib. Both residents were asymptomatic at the time. 9. On 09/13/19, the Staff Development Coordinator began education with all licensed nurses and Kentucky Medication Aides (KMAs) regarding the six (6) rights of medication administration. These included Right Resident, Right Medication, Right Dose, Right Time, Right Route, and Right Documentation. This education also included what to do if an order was not legible, or if a medication was unavailable. On 09/14/19, this education was continued by the Director of Nursing (DON), and will continue until all licensed nurses and KMAs have completed the education. No licensed nurse or KMA will work after 09/16/19, without completing this education. As of 09/18/19, 85% of the licensed nurses and KMAs have completed this education. Beginning 09/17/19 a posttest will be completed by all licensed nurses and KMAs. The quiz will cover both medication administration and physician notification and competency validation for licensed nurses and KMA will be determined by a written test. Any licensed nurse or KMA not completing the posttest by 09/18/19, will complete it prior to returning to the floor to work. Any licensed nurse or KMA not scoring 100% will receive additional education. On 09/14/19, the education was expanded to include additional medication administration information, including documentation of medications. Licensed nurses and KMAs completing the education on 09/13/19 were provided this additional education. This education was initiated by the Director of Nursing (DON), and will be continued by the DON, ADON, or SDC until all licensed nurses and KMAs have completed the education. No licensed nurse of KMA will work after 09/16/19, without completing this education. As of 09/18/19, 85% of the licensed nurses and KMAs have completed this education. Beginning 09/17/19, a posttest will be completed by all licensed nurses and KMAs. The quiz will cover both medication administration and physician notification and licensed nurses and KMAs will validate competency by a posttest. Any licensed nurse or KMA not completing the posttest by 09/18/19 will complete it prior to returning to the floor to work. Any licensed nurse or KMA not scoring 100% will receive additional education. 10. On 09/16/19, the attending physician was notified, in writing, by the Administrator of the medication omissions for Residents #3, #13, #19, #41, #42, #53, #72, and #86. No new orders were received. On 09/16/19, the attending physicians were notified that there were additional residents without documentation to support that medications had been administered as ordered. The notification was hand delivered, in writing, by the Administrator, and the attending physicians were made aware that the MARs were available for their review. 11. On 09/14/19, the DON initiated education regarding physician notification. This education included the attending physician must be notified anytime a medication was not given as ordered, unless a resident was refusing. If the resident was refusing medications routinely, the physician should be notified. a) This education will be continued by the DON, ADON, or SDC until all licensed nurses and KMAs have completed the education. No licensed nurse or KMA will work after 09/16/19, without completing this education. As of 09/18/19, 85% of the licensed nurses and KMAs have completed this education. b) Beginning on 09/17/19, a posttest will be completed by all licensed nurses and KMAs. The quiz will cover both medication administration and physician notification and competency validation for licensed nurses and KMA will be a posttest. Any licensed nurse or KMA not completing the posttest by 09/18/19 will complete it prior to returning to the floor to work. Any licensed nurse or KMA not scoring 100% will receive additional education. 12. After 09/16/19, no licensed nurse or Kentucky Medication Aide (KMA) will be allowed to leave at the end of their shift until their MAR has been audited by the DON, ADON, SDC, or MDS Nurse. The audit is to ensure all medications have the appropriate documentation completed with physician notification, as indicated. Any concerns regarding documentation of physician notification will be addressed at the time of the audit, and reported to the DON or Administrator for review in the morning Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) meeting. a) In addition, each off-going licensed Nurse or KMA will be asked to sign a statement at the end of their shift to ensure no resident has expressed concerns regarding their medication administration. This statement will include if any concerns were expressed and to whom the concern was reported to if one was expressed. Any resident concerns regarding medication administration will be reported to the DON or Administrator for review at the morning IDT meeting. b) This audit, and statement, will continue at every shift change until Jeopardy is abated and an acceptable Plan of Correction is in place. The results of these audits will be reviewed in the weekly QAPI/IDT meeting on Fridays, beginning 09/20/19. 13. On 09/14/19, an RN Nurse Consultant observed a medication pass with the DON and one with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). The purpose of this observation was to ensure the competency of the DON and ADON to administer medications. The CMS (The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid) Medication Administration Observation Care Path was used for these observations. These passes included insulin administration, the DON's medication pass included G-tube (gastrointestinal) administration. Both the DON and ADON completed the medication pass without concerns. On 09/14/19, an RN Nurse Consultant and the DON began medication administration observations with all licensed nurses and KMAs. The purpose of this observation was to ensure the competency of the licensed nurse or KMA to administer medications. Concerns were addressed with each licensed nurse or KMA at the time of the observation. As of 09/18/19, 85% of the licensed nurses and KMAs have a medication administration observation completed. 14. After 09/16/19, night shift, the DON, ADON or SDC will begin observing (auditing) all licensed nurses and KMAs administering medications daily. The purpose of the audit is to ensure the licensed nurse's or KMA's competency to administer medications. The CMS Medication Administration Observation Care Path will be used for these audits. These audits will take place on various shift and days of the week, including weekends. Any concerns will be addressed with the nurse at the time of the observation. Concerns regarding medication administration will be reported to the DON or Administrator for review at the morning IDT meeting. These observations will continue until Jeopardy is abated, then decrease to observation of half of the licensed nurses and KMAs administering medications daily until an acceptable Plan of Correction is in place. The results of these audits will be reviewed in the weekly QAPI/IDT meeting on Fridays, beginning 09/20/19. A record will be kept to track and offer opportunities to observe each licensed nurse and KMA with various types of medications, as permitted by their training, including oral, injections, G-tubes, eye drops, inhalers, crushed etc. 15. After 09/16/19, night shift, the DON, ADON, SDC, MDS Nurses, Social Services Director or Activities Director will begin interviewing six (6) random residents with a BIMS of nine (9) or above weekly to ensure they have no concerns related to when or how their medications are to be administered. Any concerns regarding medication administration will be reported to the DON or Administrator for review at the morning IDT meeting. These interviews will continue until Jeopardy is abated and an acceptable Plan of Correction is in place. The results of these audits will be reviewed in the weekly QAPI/IDT meeting on Fridays, beginning 09/20/19. 16. Beginning the week of 09/16/19, an RN Consultant will be at the facility to provide oversight of the implementation of the QI improvement plan addressing the Immediate Jeopardy. The RN Consultant visits will continue, at least three (3) days per week until Jeopardy is abated, and then at least weekly, until an acceptable Plan of Correction is in place. An RN Consultant may complete any audit in place of the assigned auditor. 17. A DON, ADON, SDC, or MDS Nurse from a sister facility may assist with monitoring, to include MAR audits, staff interviews, resident interviews, and medication administration observations, to ensure evidence is provided that they have successfully completed a medication administration audit in the past six (6) months. ****The State Survey Agency verified the facility implemented the following actions and that Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 09/19/19, as alleged by the facility: 1. Review of Minutes revealed a Quality Improvement (QI) meeting was conducted on 09/13/19 and the minutes were signed by the Administrator, Director of Nursing (DON), Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), Staff Development Coordinator (SDC) and a Registered Nurse (RN) Consultant. Interviews on 09/25/19 with the Administrator, at 10:30 AM, the DON at 10:05 AM, the ADON at 10:00 AM, and the SDC at 10:16 AM, revealed they had attended the QA meetings dated 09/13/19, 09/16/19, and 09/20/19. 2. A statement written by the Director of Nursing was presented detailing she had informed the Medical Director, on 09/14/19 of the Immediate Jeopardy and the current plan of correction. Interview with the DON, on 09/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed she had phoned the Medical Director on 09/14/19 and informed him what the Immediate Jeopardy was related to and the plan per the QA committee. 3. Review of QI meeting minutes revealed a meeting was held on 09/16/19 with documentation that the plan of correction would continue. The attendees included the Administrator, DON, SDC, RN Consultant, and ADON. Interview with the ADON on 09/25 19 at 10:00 AM, the DON at 10:05 AM, the SDC at 10:16 AM, the Administrator at 10:30 AM, and the RN Nurse Consultant at 9:16 AM revealed they all had attended the QI meetings and had signed the QI form. 4. Review of the Disciplinary Warning Notice for RN #1, dated 09/16/19 revealed the notice stated RN #1 was terminated effective immediately, and signed by the DON. The documentation revealed the RN refused to sign the notice. 5. Review of the Complete In-service Training Report, dated 09/16/19, for Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 revealed the education provided included training on notification of the physician when there was a question related to the administration of medication or whether or not a resident received a medication as ordered. The training also included specific verbage related to insulin administration and physician notification. Interview with LPN #1 on 09/25/19 at 4:50 PM, revealed she did receive training regarding physician notification on 09/16/19. She stated she was educated to notify the physician whenever a medication was not administered and that insulin could not be held without an order, if the resident's blood sugar was low. 6. Review of a statement signed by the ADON, dated 09/14/19, revealed that an audit of all residents' August and September 2019 Medication Administration Records (MAR) had been conducted. The review also included a copy of all MARs reviewed and highlighted areas that revealed discrepancy or incomplete documentation. Interview with the ADON, on 09/25/19 at 10:00 AM, revealed she conducted the MAR audits as stated and any concerns were addressed. 7. Review of documentation revealed a medication questionnaire was used for interviews of all residents with a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score above eight (8). All questionnaires were dated 09/14/19 and were signed by the DON. One (1) resident had declined the interview on 09/14/19; however, the ADON conducted the interview with the resident on 09/15/19. Interview with the DON on 09/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed she conducted the interviews on 09/14/19 and 09/15/19 for all residents with a BIMS score above eight (8). She also stated she had the opportunity to educate some of the residents who had concerns, which included Resident #43, Resident #25, and Resident #24. Interview with Resident #25, on 09/25/19 at 8:15 AM, revealed he/she had concerns with some medications, staff educated him/her, and he/she was satisfied with the explanation. Interview with Resident #24, on 09/25/19 at 8:20 AM, revealed the resident could not remember the discussion related to medications. Interview with Resident #43, on 09/25/19 at 8:25 AM, revealed he/she was educated, but stated he/she still got confused when some medicines had different names. 8. Review of assessment documentation revealed assessments for all resident with a BIMS of eight (8) or less were completed on 09/15/19 by the ADON or the SDC. Interview with the ADON on 09/25/19 at 10:00 AM, revealed an assessment was performed on all residents with a BIMS of eight (8) or lower. Physicians were contacted with all concerns and they were addressed. 9. Review of education documentation revealed staff were trained regarding the six (6) rights of medication administration. A sign in sheet was available with nurses and KMAs who attended on 09/13/19. There was documented evidence of continued education by the DON and the SDC. Each nurse and KMA employed by the facility was on a roster and was checked off as education was provided in each of the areas. Interview with the SDC, on 09/25/19 at 10:16 AM, revealed on 09/13/19 she immediately educated the nurses and KMAs on the six (6) rights of medication administration as well as documentation on the MAR. She stated that education would continue daily until all nurses and KMAs had received the education. She also stated no nurse or KMA would be permitted to work the floor to administer medications until all education was provided and had scored 100% on the posttest. Interview with the DON, on 09/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed she initiated education on 09/14/19 that included additional medication information and accurate documentation on the MAR. She stated the education had continued daily and no nurse or KMA was allowed to work and administer medications until they had received all the education provided and passed the posttest with a score of 100%. Interviews on 09/25/19 with KMA #3 at 8:10 AM, RN #2 at 8:30 AM, RN #4 at 8:45 AM, LPN #8 at 8:54 AM, LPN #5 at 9:00 AM, LPN #4 at 9:10 AM, LPN #13 at 10:40 AM and LPN #1 at 4:50 PM revealed they all had received training on the six (6) rights of medication administration and documentation on the MAR. A posttest was completed after the training. 10. Reviewed letters addressed to the physicians for Residents #3, #13, #19, #41, #42, #53, #72, and #86 related to omission of medications. Additional residents were added to the notifications as a result of the 09/14/19 audit. Each letter included the names of the specific residents under the care of that physician and the medications believed to have been omitted. Interview with the Administrator, on 09/25/19 at 10:30 AM, revealed he had hand delivered each of the letters to the physicians' offices. He further stated he had received no questions or concerns from the physicians. Interviews with Medical Doctor (MD) #4 on 09/25/19, at 9:24 AM and MD #3 at 11:06 AM, revealed both had received letters detailing the possible omission of medications on their residents and had no further concerns or questions 11. Review of the Allegation of Compliance information revealed training, dated 09/14/19, on physician notification was initiated by the DON. The information also included a sign in sheet of staff that attended and dated. All nurses and Kentucky Medication Aides (KMA) employed by the facility had documentation of when they were provided the education. This education had been provided on an ongoing basis since 09/14/19. Interview with the DON, on 09/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed she initiated education on physician notification on 09/14/19. She stated the training included the six (6) rights of medication administration, medication error process, and accurate documentation of the MAR. Interviews on 09/25/19 with KMA #3 at 8:10 AM, RN #2 at 8:30 AM, RN #4 at 8:45 AM, LPN #8 at 8:54 AM, LPN #5 at 9:00 AM, LPN #4 at 9:10 AM, LPN #13 at 10:40 AM and LPN #1 at 4:50 PM revealed they all had received training regarding notification of the physician anytime a medication was not administered as ordered. The interviews also revealed the staff had completed a posttest and had to make 100% to pass. Interview with the Staff Development Coordinator (SDC), on 09/25/19 at 10:16 AM, revealed she had been educating nurses and KMA's on physician notification related to medications. 12. (a) Review of the Allegation of Compliance evidence revealed audits of MARS, dated 09/16/19 to 09/24/19. These audits were performed at the end of each shift, by the DON, ADON, SDC, or MDS Nurse, for each nurse or KMA who had administered medications during the shift. The audit ensured all medications had the appropriate documentation with physician notification as indicated. The audit also contained a statement, signed by the nurse or KMA, as to whether or not a resident had voiced any concerns or complaints regarding their medications during the shift. Interviews on 09/25/19 with KMA #3 at 8:10 AM, RN #2 at 8:30 AM, RN #4 at 8:45 AM, LPN #8 at 8:54 AM, LPN #5 at 9:00 AM, LPN #4 at 9:10 AM, LPN #13 at 10:40 AM and LPN #1 at 4:50 PM revealed residents' MARs were audited at the end of the shift and each had to sign a statement related to any resident concerns about medications. (b) Review of the 09/20/19 QA/QI meeting revealed the every shift audits were completed and reviewed in the QA/QI meeting. Interview with the ADON on 09/25 19 at 10 AM, the DON at 10:05 AM, the SDC at 10:16 AM, the Administrator at 10:30 AM and the RN Nurse Consultant at 9:16 AM revealed they all had attended the QA meetings and had signed the QA form. 13. The AOC evidence revealed a check off form, CMS Medication Administration Observation Care Path, was used by the RN Nurse Consultant on 09/14/19, to ensure the competency of the DON and the ADON to administer medications. Interview with the DON, on 09/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed an RN Nurse Consultant performed her medication administration competency. 14. Review of the AOC evidence revealed observations of nurses and KMA's on a daily basis using the CMS Medication Administration Observation Care Path, dated from 09/14/19 up through 09/24/19. Interviews with KMA #3 on 09/25/19 at 8:10 AM, RN #4 at 8:45 AM, LPN #8 at 8:54 AM, LPN #5 at 9 AM, LPN #13 at 10:40 AM and LPN #1 at 4:50 PM revealed they had been observed daily, and sometimes multiple times a day, administering medications. 15. The AOC evidence revealed six (6) resident interviews, dated 09/18/19, and seven (7) resident interviews, dated 09/23/19 performed by one of the management team. The questionnaires were related to any medication concerns the residents may have. Interview with the ADON, on 09/25/19 at 10 AM, revealed no concerns had been voiced with resident interviews. She also stated the audits of and interview results were reviewed at the 09/20/19 QA meeting. Interview with the Administrator, on 09/25/19 at 10:30 AM, revealed during the QA meeting, dated 09/20/19, results of audits and competencies, and resident interviews were reviewed. These will continue to be monitored these on a weekly basis. 16. Interview with the RN Nurse Consultant on 09/25/19 at 9:16 AM, revealed since 09/13/19, she had been present in the facility every day except for 09/21/19 and 09/22/19. 17. Interview with the DON, on 09/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed a sister facility's DON and SDC had assisted the facility with audits during the week of 09/16/19. Based on interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy for medication administration it was determined the facility failed to ensure three (3) of twenty-two (22) sampled residents (Residents #9, #63, and #80) were free of significant medication errors. On 08/26/19, the facility failed to administer Lopressor (used to treat high blood pressure) to Resident #9 as ordered, and failed to administer Phenobarbital (used to treat seizures) and Depakote (used to treat seizures) to Resident #63 as ordered. The facility failed to obtain and administer the medication Diulo (a medication to help the kidneys remove fluid) to Resident #80 daily on 09/02/19-09/04/19. The resident was congested and voiced complaints of being short of breath due to edema and was treated at the facility. Refer to F726. The facility's failure to ensure residents were free from significant medications errors has caused or is likely to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to a resident. Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 09/13/19 and was determined to exist on 08/19/19 at 42 CFR 483.10 Resident Rights (F580-K), 42 CFR 483.35 Nursing Services (F726-K), and 42 CFR 483.45 Pharmacy Services (F760-J). The facility was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on 09/13/19. An acceptable Allegation of Compliance was received on 09/18/19, which alleged removal of the Immediate Jeopardy on 09/19/19. The State Survey Agency determined the Immediate Jeopardy was removed as alleged on 09/19/19, prior to exit on 09/25/19, which lowered the scope and severity to E level at 42 CFR 483.10 Resident Rights (F580) and 42 CFR 483.35 Nursing Services (F726) and to D level at 42 CFR 483.45 Pharmacy Services (F760) while the facility monitors the effectiveness of systemic changes and quality assurance activities. The findings include: Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 09/12/19 at 11:25 AM revealed the facility did not have a written policy for obtaining medications from the pharmacy, but the facility's procedure was for a copy of the Physician's Orders to be faxed to the pharmacy and the pharmacy to deliver the medications. Review of the Medication Administration policy, not dated, revealed, All medication errors shall be described in detail on a Medication Error Report which shall be filed with the Director of Nursing (DON). The facility's medication error report shall be completed in detail, making every possible effort to describe the discrepancy thoroughly; suggestion should be made as to how such discrepancy could be avoided in the future. A review of the medical record for Resident #80 revealed the facility admitted the reside[TRUNCATED]
CRITICAL (K)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy it was determined the facility failed to immediately notify the physician of omitted medications and/or medication errors for twelve (12) of twenty-two (22) sampled residents (Resident #3, #9, #13, #19, #28, #41, #42, #47, #63, #66, #72, and #86). Seven residents (Residents #3, #13, #19, #41, #42, #72, and #86), who were alert and oriented, all alleged they did not receive medications as ordered on the evening of 08/19/19. RN #1 was responsible for administering medications for these residents on 08/19/19. Although the residents' complaints were reported to administrative staff (DON and Administrator), the facility failed to report the medication errors to the residents' physicians. Resident #66 also reported that he/she did not receive his/her medications on the evening of 08/26/19. In addtion, RN #1 failed to administer three (3) residents (Residents #63, #47, and #9) their 10:00 PM medications on 08/26/19. Again, the facility failed to ensure the residents' physicians were notified of the medication errors. Resident #28 reported to at least three (3) facility staff members that staff had failed to administer his/her medications. RN #1 failed to administer the resident's pain medication on 08/25/19 and the medication error was reported to administrative staff (Assistant Director of Nursing and Director of Nursing); however, the facility failed to notify Resident #28's physician of the medication error. The facility's failure to immediately report the alleged omission of ordered medications for residents (Resident #3, #9, #13, #19, #28, #41, #42, #47, #63, #66, #72, and #86) has caused or is likely to cause serious harm, injury, impairment, or death to a resident. Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 09/13/19 and was determined to exist on 08/19/19 at 42 CFR 483.10 Resident Rights (F580-K), 42 CFR 483.35 Nursing Services (F726-K) and 42 CFR 483.45 Pharmacy Services (F760-J). The facility was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on 09/13/19. An acceptable Allegation of Compliance was received on 09/18/19, which alleged removal of the Immediate Jeopardy on 09/19/19. The State Survey Agency determined the Immediate Jeopardy was removed as alleged on 09/19/19, prior to exit on 09/25/19, which lowered the scope and severity to E level at 42 CFR 483.10 Resident Rights (F580) and 42 CFR 483.35 Nursing Services (F726) and to D level at 42 CFR 483.45 Pharmacy Services (F760) while the facility monitors the effectiveness of systemic changes and quality assurance activities. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy, Notification of Physician for Change in Resident's Condition, dated August 2012, revealed the facility was to notify the physician when a significant change in a resident's condition occurred with documentation contained in the medical record. Review of the Medication Administration policy, not dated, revealed, All medication errors shall be described in detail on a Medication Error Report which shall be filed with the Director of Nursing (DON). Continued review revealed the facility's medication error report shall be completed in detail, making every possible effort to describe the discrepancy thoroughly; suggestion should be made as to how such discrepancy could be avoided in the future. The attending physician shall be notified immediately of significant medication errors. 1. Seven residents (Residents #3, #13, #19, #41, #42, #72, and # 86), who were alert and oriented, all alleged they did not receive medications as ordered on the evening of 08/19/19. An interview on 09/10/19 at 12:14 PM with LPN #1 revealed RN #1 had helped with medication administration on the East Unit (short hall) on the evening of 08/19/19. Per LPN #1, the RN left sometime around 10:00 PM. The LPN stated that at around 9:30 PM, Resident #41 stated he/she was ready to take his/her medication for the night. When RN #1 was informed of this, she stated she had already administered the resident's medication. LPN #1 stated Resident #41 was told what the nurse had stated and the resident replied that he/she had not received the medication. Resident #42 then asked the LPN when he/she would receive the rest of his/her medication. Per LPN #1, Resident #42 stated he/she had only received one pill and the RN had informed him/her she did not have the right cart to give the rest of the resident's medication. The LPN further stated Resident #72 asked when someone was going to perform his/her finger stick blood sugar and that he/she felt funny. LPN #1 stated the MAR for Resident #72 revealed the finger stick blood sugar had been performed with a reading of 130. LPN #1 stated she checked the MARs of Residents #13 and #19 and discovered Resident #13's fingerstick blood sugar was also documented as 130 and Resident #19 had no finger stick blood sugar documented and the ordered Levemir (long-acting insulin) had not been administered. The LPN stated she did another finger stick blood sugar on Resident #13 and it was 297. LPN #1 stated she continued to review the MARs of the residents on the East short hall and discovered Residents #3 and #86 had no initials in the space on the MAR that would have indicated their evening medications were administered as ordered. Per the LPN, she notified the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), who was in the facility working on the [NAME] Unit, of all the allegations and MAR inaccuracies. Per the LPN, the DON was also made aware of the incidents by the ADON on 08/20/19 and she was told the DON had handled the situation. Interview with RN #1 on 09/13/19 at 3:39 PM, revealed she remembered it took a long time to complete the medication pass on 08/19/19 because she was not familiar with the hall. She further stated the two (2) book MAR system means you have to go back and forth. The RN also stated she did not remember ever being spoken to regarding allegations on 08/19/19. Interview with the DON on 09/10/19 at 3:07 PM, revealed she spoke to RN #1 the next day following the incidents on 08/19/19. She also stated she spoke to the residents on the hall and that no medication error forms were completed nor were the residents' physicians contacted. The DON stated she just did not think about doing that. Review of the Progress Notes for Residents #3, #13, #19, #41, #42, #72, and #86 for 08/19/19 and 08/20/19 did not reveal any documentation of physician notification regarding the residents' alleged medication omissions. Interview on 09/13/19 with MD (Medical Doctor) #1 at 3:00 PM and MD #2 at 3:05 PM revealed neither had been contacted related to medication errors involving their residents. The doctors stated they would expect to be notified of any resident medication errors. 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #66 revealed the facility admitted the resident on 08/09/19 with diagnoses that included Cerebral Infarction, Type 2 Diabetes, Peripheral Vascular Disease, and Chronic Kidney Disease. Review of the MDS dated [DATE] revealed the facility assessed the resident to have a BIMS score of 15, which indicated the resident was interviewable. Review of a Grievance filed by Resident #66 on 08/29/19 revealed the resident had reported to the Social Services Director that on 08/26/19, the nurse on duty did not give his/her medicine and failed to do a finger stick blood sugar and administer his/her insulin. Record review revealed Resident #66 was discharged from the facility on 09/04/19. Unsuccessful attempts were made to contact the resident by phone. Interview with the Social Services Director (SSD) on 09/13/19 at 2:37 PM revealed on 08/29/19, Resident #66 reported that he/she did not receive his/her medications on 08/26/19. The SSD stated she reported the medication error to the Administrator. Interview with the Administrator on 09/13/19 at 5:03 PM revealed he spoke with the Director of Nursing (DON) regarding the resident not receiving medication as ordered, and the DON assured him that she had taken care of the concern. However, an interview with the DON on 09/10/19 at 2:56 PM revealed Resident #66's physician should have been contacted related to the medication error with the resident's insulin, but she did not ensure the physician was notified. 3. Review of the medical record for Resident #63 revealed the facility admitted the resident on 06/25/19 with diagnoses that included Seizure, Debility, Acute Renal Failure, and Hypertension. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of eight (8), which indicates the resident was cognitively impaired, but interviewable. Further review of the medical record for Resident #63 revealed a Physician's Order for Phenobarbital (an anticonvulsant) 64.8 mg (milligrams), one tablet by mouth twice daily for Seizures, scheduled to be administered at 10:00 AM and 10:00 PM. Further review revealed an order for Depakote 500 mg, one tablet by mouth three times per day, used to treat Seizures, scheduled for 10:00 AM, 2:00 PM, and 10:00 PM. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 08/26/19 revealed the resident's 10:00 PM dose of Phenobarbital and Depakote had not been initialed as being administered. Interview with Resident #63 on 09/12/19 at 10:57 AM revealed the nurse on duty had failed to administer his/her scheduled medication at bedtime. However, the resident could not remember the exact date. Resident #63 stated the medication was to help him/her sleep and he/she had not slept at all that night. Continued interview with Resident #63 revealed the resident reported the omitted medications the following day, but he/she could not remember the nurse's name that he/she reported it to. On 09/10/19 at 6:05 PM, interview with LPN #2 revealed she worked 6:00 PM to 6:00 AM on 08/26/19. Per LPN #2, RN #1 was working when she arrived and worked until 10:00 PM, at which time LPN #2 counted narcotics with RN #1. LPN #2 stated that RN #1 did not report any problems with residents refusing medication, or that any scheduled medications had not been administered. LPN #2 stated Resident #63's 10:00 PM dose of Phenobarbital and Depakote had not been signed out as administered for 08/26/19 on the MAR, nor on the Controlled Drug Sheet. LPN #2 stated she notified the DON of this and the DON stated, I will look into this. Per the LPN, she did not call the resident's physician related to the medication error for Resident #63. 4. Review of the medical record for Resident #47 revealed the facility admitted the resident on 08/17/18 with diagnoses that included Arthritis, Alzheimer's disease, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease, and Hypothyroidism. Review of the MDS dated [DATE] revealed the facility assessed the resident to have a BIMS score of 99, which indicated the resident was not interviewable. Review of the medical record for Resident #47 revealed a Physician's Order dated 08/01/19 through 08/31/19 for Hydrocodone/APAP (controlled pain medication) tablet 5-325, one tablet by mouth twice daily. The medication was scheduled at 10:00 AM and 10:00 PM. However, review of the MAR dated 08/26/19 revealed the 10:00 PM dose was not signed out. In addition, review of the Controlled Substance Receipt/Count Sheet dated 08/26/19 revealed the 10:00 PM dosage of medication had not been administered to the resident on 08/26/19. On 09/10/19 at 6:05 PM, interview with LPN #2 revealed she worked 6:00 PM to 6:00 AM on 08/26/19. LPN #2 stated she received report from the offgoing nurse, RN #1, around 10:00 PM on 08/26/19. LPN #2 stated that RN #1 did not report any problems with residents refusing medication, or that any scheduled medications had not been administered. LPN #2 stated that during her morning medication pass she discovered that Resident #47's scheduled dose of Hydrocodone/APAP on 08/26/19 at 10:00 PM had not been signed as administered on the MAR or signed out on the Controlled Drug Sheet. LPN #2 stated she informed the DON of this when she arrived at the facility but failed to contact the physician of the medication error. 5. Review of the medical record for Resident #9 revealed the facility admitted the resident on 05/30/19 with diagnoses that included Neurologic pain, Hypertension, Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and Heart Failure. Review of the MDS dated [DATE], revealed the facility assessed the resident to have a BIMS score of 15, which indicated the resident was interviewable. Interview with Resident #9 on 09/11/19 at 1:55 PM revealed his/her scheduled nighttime medication was missed/omitted a few weeks ago. The resident stated he/she did not recall the date, or the nurse working. Resident #9 stated he/she did not sleep at all that night, and further stated that the medication was for my nerves. Review of the medical record for Resident #9 revealed an order for Hydrocodone/APAP 7.5-325, one tablet by mouth three times per day, scheduled for 10:00 AM, 4:00 PM, and 10:00 PM, and Xanax 0.25 mg, one tablet by mouth three times per day, scheduled for 10:00 AM, 4:00 PM, and 10:00 PM. Review of the MAR and the Controlled Substance Receipt/Count Sheet for 08/26/19 revealed the medications were not signed out for the 10:00 PM dose. On 09/10/19 at 6:05 PM, interview with LPN #2 revealed she worked 6:00 PM to 6:00 AM on 08/26/19. The LPN stated she received report from the offgoing nurse, RN #1, around 10:00 PM on 08/26/19. LPN #2 stated that RN #1 did not report any problems with residents refusing medication, or that any scheduled medications had not been administered. LPN #2 stated that during her morning medication pass she discovered that Resident #9's scheduled dose of Hydrocodone/APAP, Xanax, and Neurontin had not been signed out on the MAR or on the controlled drug sheet. LPN #2 stated she informed the DON of this when she arrived at the facility. Per the LPN, she had not contacted the resident's physician related to the medication error. Interview with the DON on 09/10/19 at 2:56 PM revealed she did not recall any reports that Resident #47 or Resident #9 had not received their scheduled medication. The DON stated when a medication error occurs, the resident's physician should be notified. 6. Medical record review for Resident #28 revealed the facility admitted the resident on 01/22/18 with diagnoses that included Pain, Shortness of Breath, Major Depression, and Sepsis. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was eight (8) indicating the resident was cognitively impaired, but was interviewable. Interview with Resident #28 on 09/10/19 at 12:23 PM revealed he/she missed his/her medication for several days; was unable to state the exact dates. Resident #28 stated he/she felt funny and didn't rest well and had pain because of not receiving his/her medication. Review of the medical record for Resident #28 revealed a Physician's Order for Hydrocodone/APAP 7.5/325, one (1) tablet by mouth twice daily. Review of the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed the medication was scheduled for 10:00 AM and 10:00 PM. Review of the MAR dated 08/25/19 revealed RN #1's initials were circled with no documented evidence indicating why the medication was not administered. Interview with Kentucky Medication Aide (KMA) #1 on 09/10/19 at 11:20 AM revealed Resident #28 reported that he/she did not receive his/her nighttime medication for three (3) days (unable to recall the date). KMA #1 stated she immediately reported the medication errors to LPN #2. Interview on 09/10/19 at 6:05 PM with LPN #2 revealed on 08/26/19, KMA #1 reported that Resident #28 had complained of not getting his/her medications for the past three (3) days. LPN #2 stated she reviewed Resident #28's MAR and discovered several areas that had not been initialed. The LPN stated she did notify the DON of the resident's complaint of missed medications when she discovered the error, but she was not directed by the DON to take any action. The resident's physician was not notified regarding the medication error. Interview with the SSD, who also is a KMA, on 09/13/19 at 2:37 PM revealed the SSD had worked on 08/25/19, on the 2 PM-10 PM shift as a KMA. The SSD was assigned to pass medication. The SSD stated that Resident #28 reported that he/she had not received his/her scheduled morning medication. The SSD stated she reviewed the Controlled Drug Sign Sheet and discovered the morning dose of Hydrocodone/APAP was not signed out. However, the scheduled 10:00 AM dose was signed out on the MAR indicating the medication had been administered. The SSD stated that RN #1 was assigned to pass the morning medicine on 08/25/19. She further stated that she questioned RN #1 about why the narcotic was not signed out on the controlled drug log. However, RN #1 did not respond to the question. The SSD stated that later in the shift she checked Resident #28's MAR again and the 08/25/19 10:00 AM dose of Hydrocodone/APAP had been circled, indicating not given. The SSD stated she reported the medication error to the DON. Further review revealed no documented evidence that Resident #28's physician was contacted related to the medication error. Interview with the DON on 09/10/19 at 2:56 PM revealed she did not recall anyone reporting that Resident #28's medications were omitted. The DON further reported the facility had no system in place to monitor residents' MARs for completion or to ensure the physician was notified when medications were not administered as ordered. ***The facility alleged the following was implemented to remove the Immediate Jeopardy as of 09/19/19: 1. On 09/13/19, a Quality Improvement meeting was conducted after the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was communicated to the facility. The purpose was to develop an improvement plan to address the IJ deficiencies, and monitor guidelines to ensure compliance was maintained. This meeting was attended by the Administrator, Director of Nursing (DON), Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), Staff Development Coordinator (SDC), and an RN Nurse Consultant. 2. On 09/14/19, the facility's Medical Director was made aware of the Immediate Jeopardy and advised of the improvement plan, by the DON. He had no concerns or additions to the plan. 3. On 09/16/19, a follow-up QI meeting was conducted to review the progress on the 09/13/19 plan. A review of all items completed and the monitoring plan was completed. There were no additional recommendations at this time. Those in attendance were the Administrator, DON, ADON, RN Consultant, and Medical Director via phone. 4. Nurse #1 has not worked in the facility since 09/08/19, and is no longer employed by the facility effective 09/16/19. 5. On 09/16/19, Nurse #2 received education regarding physician notification, which included that the physician must be notified if there was a question of whether a resident had received their medication or had their blood sugar evaluated. 6. On 09/14/19, the ADON completed an audit of 100% of the in-house residents' August and September 2019 Medication Administration Records (MARs). This audit was to identify medications that were not documented as administered on the MAR and medications with multiple days of refusals. The findings included that over 50% of the MARs were missing documentation to support that medications had been administered. 7. On 09/14/19, the DON completed interviews with all residents with a BIMS score above eight (8), except one resident who was not feeling well. Residents were asked about concerns with how and when medications were administered. One resident stated he/she did not know why he/she received each medication and why medications were not consistently given at the same time each day. This resident was provided education, by the staff nurse, on his/her medications and the two (2) hour window for administering medications. On 09/15/19, the ADON completed an interview with the resident who was not feeling well on 09/14/19. The resident had no concerns with how and when medications were administered. 8. On 09/15/19, the ADON and SDC completed nursing assessments on all residents with a BIMS score of eight (8) or below. This assessment included Vital Signs and Lung and Bowel assessments. Two (2) residents were noted with a concern. One resident had an oxygen (O2) saturation of 82%, the MD was notified, and orders for oxygen at 2 Liters and chest x-ray were received. Oxygen was applied and his/her O2 saturation was 94%. One resident had an erratic pulse. The MD was notified and ordered a STAT EKG. The resident has a diagnosis of A-fib. Both residents were asymptomatic at the time. 9. On 09/13/19, the Staff Development Coordinator began education with all licensed nurses and Kentucky Medication Aides (KMAs) regarding the six (6) rights of medication administration. These included Right Resident, Right Medication, Right Dose, Right Time, Right Route, and Right Documentation. This education also included what to do if an order was not legible, or if a medication was unavailable. On 09/14/19, this education was continued by the Director of Nursing (DON), and will continue until all licensed nurses and KMAs have completed the education. No licensed nurse or KMA will work after 09/16/19, without completing this education. As of 09/18/19, 85% of the licensed nurses and KMAs have completed this education. Beginning 09/17/19 a posttest will be completed by all licensed nurses and KMAs. The quiz will cover both medication administration and physician notification and competency validation for licensed nurses and KMA will be determined by a written test. Any licensed nurse or KMA not completing the posttest by 09/18/19, will complete it prior to returning to the floor to work. Any licensed nurse or KMA not scoring 100% will receive additional education. On 09/14/19, the education was expanded to include additional medication administration information, including documentation of medications. Licensed nurses and KMAs completing the education on 09/13/19 were provided this additional education. This education was initiated by the Director of Nursing (DON), and will be continued by the DON, ADON, or SDC until all licensed nurses and KMAs have completed the education. No licensed nurse of KMA will work after 09/16/19, without completing this education. As of 09/18/19, 85% of the licensed nurses and KMAs have completed this education. Beginning 09/17/19, a posttest will be completed by all licensed nurses and KMAs. The quiz will cover both medication administration and physician notification and licensed nurses and KMAs will validate competency by a posttest. Any licensed nurse or KMA not completing the posttest by 09/18/19 will complete it prior to returning to the floor to work. Any licensed nurse or KMA not scoring 100% will receive additional education. 10. On 09/16/19, the attending physician was notified, in writing, by the Administrator of the medication omissions for Residents #3, #13, #19, #41, #42, #53, #72, and #86. No new orders were received. On 09/16/19, the attending physicians were notified that there were additional residents without documentation to support that medications had been administered as ordered. The notification was hand delivered, in writing, by the Administrator, and the attending physicians were made aware that the MARs were available for their review. 11. On 09/14/19, the DON initiated education regarding physician notification. This education included the attending physician must be notified anytime a medication was not given as ordered, unless a resident was refusing. If the resident was refusing medications routinely, the physician should be notified. a) This education will be continued by the DON, ADON, or SDC until all licensed nurses and KMAs have completed the education. No licensed nurse or KMA will work after 09/16/19, without completing this education. As of 09/18/19, 85% of the licensed nurses and KMAs have completed this education. b) Beginning on 09/17/19, a posttest will be completed by all licensed nurses and KMAs. The quiz will cover both medication administration and physician notification and competency validation for licensed nurses and KMA will be a posttest. Any licensed nurse or KMA not completing the posttest by 09/18/19 will complete it prior to returning to the floor to work. Any licensed nurse or KMA not scoring 100% will receive additional education. 12. After 09/16/19, no licensed nurse or Kentucky Medication Aide (KMA) will be allowed to leave at the end of their shift until their MAR has been audited by the DON, ADON, SDC, or MDS Nurse. The audit is to ensure all medications have the appropriate documentation completed with physician notification, as indicated. Any concerns regarding documentation of physician notification will be addressed at the time of the audit, and reported to the DON or Administrator for review in the morning Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) meeting. a) In addition, each off-going licensed Nurse or KMA will be asked to sign a statement at the end of their shift to ensure no resident has expressed concerns regarding their medication administration. This statement will include if any concerns were expressed and to whom the concern was reported to if one was expressed. Any resident concerns regarding medication administration will be reported to the DON or Administrator for review at the morning IDT meeting. b) This audit, and statement, will continue at every shift change until Jeopardy is abated and an acceptable Plan of Correction is in place. The results of these audits will be reviewed in the weekly QAPI/IDT meeting on Fridays, beginning 09/20/19. 13. On 09/14/19, an RN Nurse Consultant observed a medication pass with the DON and one with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). The purpose of this observation was to ensure the competency of the DON and ADON to administer medications. The CMS (The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid) Medication Administration Observation Care Path was used for these observations. These passes included insulin administration, the DON's medication pass included G-tube (gastrointestinal) administration. Both the DON and ADON completed the medication pass without concerns. On 09/14/19, an RN Nurse Consultant and the DON began medication administration observations with all licensed nurses and KMAs. The purpose of this observation was to ensure the competency of the licensed nurse or KMA to administer medications. Concerns were addressed with each licensed nurse or KMA at the time of the observation. As of 09/18/19, 85% of the licensed nurses and KMAs have a medication administration observation completed. 14. After 09/16/19, night shift, the DON, ADON or SDC will begin observing (auditing) all licensed nurses and KMAs administering medications daily. The purpose of the audit is to ensure the licensed nurse's or KMA's competency to administer medications. The CMS Medication Administration Observation Care Path will be used for these audits. These audits will take place on various shift and days of the week, including weekends. Any concerns will be addressed with the nurse at the time of the observation. Concerns regarding medication administration will be reported to the DON or Administrator for review at the morning IDT meeting. These observations will continue until Jeopardy is abated, then decrease to observation of half of the licensed nurses and KMAs administering medications daily until an acceptable Plan of Correction is in place. The results of these audits will be reviewed in the weekly QAPI/IDT meeting on Fridays, beginning 09/20/19. A record will be kept to track and offer opportunities to observe each licensed nurse and KMA with various types of medications, as permitted by their training, including oral, injections, G-tubes, eye drops, inhalers, crushed etc. 15. After 09/16/19, night shift, the DON, ADON, SDC, MDS Nurses, Social Services Director or Activities Director will begin interviewing six (6) random residents with a BIMS of nine (9) or above weekly to ensure they have no concerns related to when or how their medications are to be administered. Any concerns regarding medication administration will be reported to the DON or Administrator for review at the morning IDT meeting. These interviews will continue until Jeopardy is abated and an acceptable Plan of Correction is in place. The results of these audits will be reviewed in the weekly QAPI/IDT meeting on Fridays, beginning 09/20/19. 16. Beginning the week of 09/16/19, an RN Consultant will be at the facility to provide oversight of the implementation of the QI improvement plan addressing the Immediate Jeopardy. The RN Consultant visits will continue, at least three (3) days per week until Jeopardy is abated, and then at least weekly, until an acceptable Plan of Correction is in place. An RN Consultant may complete any audit in place of the assigned auditor. 17. A DON, ADON, SDC, or MDS Nurse from a sister facility may assist with monitoring, to include MAR audits, staff interviews, resident interviews, and medication administration observations, to ensure evidence is provided that they have successfully completed a medication administration audit in the past six (6) months. ****The State Survey Agency verified the facility implemented the following actions and that Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 09/19/19, as alleged by the facility: 1. Review of Minutes revealed a Quality Improvement (QI) meeting was conducted on 09/13/19 and the minutes were signed by the Administrator, Director of Nursing (DON), Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), Staff Development Coordinator (SDC) and a Registered Nurse (RN) Consultant. Interviews on 09/25/19 with the Administrator, at 10:30 AM, the DON at 10:05 AM, the ADON at 10:00 AM, and the SDC at 10:16 AM, revealed they had attended the QA meetings dated 09/13/19, 09/16/19, and 09/20/19. 2. A statement written by the Director of Nursing was presented detailing she had informed the Medical Director, on 09/14/19 of the Immediate Jeopardy and the current plan of correction. Interview with the DON, on 09/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed she had phoned the Medical Director on 09/14/19 and informed him what the Immediate Jeopardy was related to and the plan per the QA committee. 3. Review of QI meeting minutes revealed a meeting was held on 09/16/19 with documentation that the plan of correction would continue. The attendees included the Administrator, DON, SDC, RN Consultant, and ADON. Interview with the ADON on 09/25 19 at 10:00 AM, the DON at 10:05 AM, the SDC at 10:16 AM, the Administrator at 10:30 AM, and the RN Nurse Consultant at 9:16 AM revealed they all had attended the QI meetings and had signed the QI form. 4. Review of the Disciplinary Warning Notice for RN #1, dated 09/16/19 revealed the notice stated RN #1 was terminated effective immediately, and signed by the DON. The documentation revealed the RN refused to sign the notice. 5. Review of the Complete In-service Training Report, dated 09/16/19, for Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 revealed the education provided included training on notification of the physician when there was a question related to the administration of medication or whether or not a resident received a medication as ordered. The training also included specific verbage related to insulin administration and physician notification. Interview with LPN #1 on 09/25/19 at 4:50 PM, revealed she did receive training regarding physician notification on 09/16/19. She stated she was educated to notify the physician whenever a medication was not administered and that insulin could not be held without an order, if the resident's blood sugar was low. 6. Review of a statement signed by the ADON, dated 09/14/19, revealed that an audit of all residents' August and September 2019 Medication Administration Records (MAR) had been conducted. The[TRUNCATED]
CRITICAL (K)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Deficiency F0726 (Tag F0726)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** ***The facility alleged the following was implemented to remove the Immediate Jeopardy as of 09/19/19: 1. On 09/13/19, a Quality...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** ***The facility alleged the following was implemented to remove the Immediate Jeopardy as of 09/19/19: 1. On 09/13/19, a Quality Improvement meeting was conducted after the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was communicated to the facility. The purpose was to develop an improvement plan to address the IJ deficiencies, and monitor guidelines to ensure compliance was maintained. This meeting was attended by the Administrator, Director of Nursing (DON), Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), Staff Development Coordinator (SDC), and an RN Nurse Consultant. 2. On 09/14/19, the facility's Medical Director was made aware of the Immediate Jeopardy and advised of the improvement plan, by the DON. He had no concerns or additions to the plan. 3. On 09/16/19, a follow-up QI meeting was conducted to review the progress on the 09/13/19 plan. A review of all items completed and the monitoring plan was completed. There were no additional recommendations at this time. Those in attendance were the Administrator, DON, ADON, RN Consultant, and Medical Director via phone. 4. Nurse #1 has not worked in the facility since 09/08/19, and is no longer employed by the facility effective 09/16/19. 5. On 09/16/19, Nurse #2 received education regarding physician notification, which included that the physician must be notified if there was a question of whether a resident had received their medication or had their blood sugar evaluated. 6. On 09/14/19, the ADON completed an audit of 100% of the in-house residents' August and September 2019 Medication Administration Records (MARs). This audit was to identify medications that were not documented as administered on the MAR and medications with multiple days of refusals. The findings included that over 50% of the MARs were missing documentation to support that medications had been administered. 7. On 09/14/19, the DON completed interviews with all residents with a BIMS score above eight (8), except one resident who was not feeling well. Residents were asked about concerns with how and when medications were administered. One resident stated he/she did not know why he/she received each medication and why medications were not consistently given at the same time each day. This resident was provided education, by the staff nurse, on his/her medications and the two (2) hour window for administering medications. On 09/15/19, the ADON completed an interview with the resident who was not feeling well on 09/14/19. The resident had no concerns with how and when medications were administered. 8. On 09/15/19, the ADON and SDC completed nursing assessments on all residents with a BIMS score of eight (8) or below. This assessment included Vital Signs and Lung and Bowel assessments. Two (2) residents were noted with a concern. One resident had an oxygen (O2) saturation of 82%, the MD was notified, and orders for oxygen at 2 Liters and chest x-ray were received. Oxygen was applied and his/her O2 saturation was 94%. One resident had an erratic pulse. The MD was notified and ordered a STAT EKG. The resident has a diagnosis of A-fib. Both residents were asymptomatic at the time. 9. On 09/13/19, the Staff Development Coordinator began education with all licensed nurses and Kentucky Medication Aides (KMAs) regarding the six (6) rights of medication administration. These included Right Resident, Right Medication, Right Dose, Right Time, Right Route, and Right Documentation. This education also included what to do if an order was not legible, or if a medication was unavailable. On 09/14/19, this education was continued by the Director of Nursing (DON), and will continue until all licensed nurses and KMAs have completed the education. No licensed nurse or KMA will work after 09/16/19, without completing this education. As of 09/18/19, 85% of the licensed nurses and KMAs have completed this education. Beginning 09/17/19 a posttest will be completed by all licensed nurses and KMAs. The quiz will cover both medication administration and physician notification and competency validation for licensed nurses and KMA will be determined by a written test. Any licensed nurse or KMA not completing the posttest by 09/18/19, will complete it prior to returning to the floor to work. Any licensed nurse or KMA not scoring 100% will receive additional education. On 09/14/19, the education was expanded to include additional medication administration information, including documentation of medications. Licensed nurses and KMAs completing the education on 09/13/19 were provided this additional education. This education was initiated by the Director of Nursing (DON), and will be continued by the DON, ADON, or SDC until all licensed nurses and KMAs have completed the education. No licensed nurse of KMA will work after 09/16/19, without completing this education. As of 09/18/19, 85% of the licensed nurses and KMAs have completed this education. Beginning 09/17/19, a posttest will be completed by all licensed nurses and KMAs. The quiz will cover both medication administration and physician notification and licensed nurses and KMAs will validate competency by a posttest. Any licensed nurse or KMA not completing the posttest by 09/18/19 will complete it prior to returning to the floor to work. Any licensed nurse or KMA not scoring 100% will receive additional education. 10. On 09/16/19, the attending physician was notified, in writing, by the Administrator of the medication omissions for Residents #3, #13, #19, #41, #42, #53, #72, and #86. No new orders were received. On 09/16/19, the attending physicians were notified that there were additional residents without documentation to support that medications had been administered as ordered. The notification was hand delivered, in writing, by the Administrator, and the attending physicians were made aware that the MARs were available for their review. 11. On 09/14/19, the DON initiated education regarding physician notification. This education included the attending physician must be notified anytime a medication was not given as ordered, unless a resident was refusing. If the resident was refusing medications routinely, the physician should be notified. a) This education will be continued by the DON, ADON, or SDC until all licensed nurses and KMAs have completed the education. No licensed nurse or KMA will work after 09/16/19, without completing this education. As of 09/18/19, 85% of the licensed nurses and KMAs have completed this education. b) Beginning on 09/17/19, a posttest will be completed by all licensed nurses and KMAs. The quiz will cover both medication administration and physician notification and competency validation for licensed nurses and KMA will be a posttest. Any licensed nurse or KMA not completing the posttest by 09/18/19 will complete it prior to returning to the floor to work. Any licensed nurse or KMA not scoring 100% will receive additional education. 12. After 09/16/19, no licensed nurse or Kentucky Medication Aide (KMA) will be allowed to leave at the end of their shift until their MAR has been audited by the DON, ADON, SDC, or MDS Nurse. The audit is to ensure all medications have the appropriate documentation completed with physician notification, as indicated. Any concerns regarding documentation of physician notification will be addressed at the time of the audit, and reported to the DON or Administrator for review in the morning Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) meeting. a) In addition, each off-going licensed Nurse or KMA will be asked to sign a statement at the end of their shift to ensure no resident has expressed concerns regarding their medication administration. This statement will include if any concerns were expressed and to whom the concern was reported to if one was expressed. Any resident concerns regarding medication administration will be reported to the DON or Administrator for review at the morning IDT meeting. b) This audit, and statement, will continue at every shift change until Jeopardy is abated and an acceptable Plan of Correction is in place. The results of these audits will be reviewed in the weekly QAPI/IDT meeting on Fridays, beginning 09/20/19. 13. On 09/14/19, an RN Nurse Consultant observed a medication pass with the DON and one with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). The purpose of this observation was to ensure the competency of the DON and ADON to administer medications. The CMS (The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid) Medication Administration Observation Care Path was used for these observations. These passes included insulin administration, the DON's medication pass included G-tube (gastrointestinal) administration. Both the DON and ADON completed the medication pass without concerns. On 09/14/19, an RN Nurse Consultant and the DON began medication administration observations with all licensed nurses and KMAs. The purpose of this observation was to ensure the competency of the licensed nurse or KMA to administer medications. Concerns were addressed with each licensed nurse or KMA at the time of the observation. As of 09/18/19, 85% of the licensed nurses and KMAs have a medication administration observation completed. 14. After 09/16/19, night shift, the DON, ADON or SDC will begin observing (auditing) all licensed nurses and KMAs administering medications daily. The purpose of the audit is to ensure the licensed nurse's or KMA's competency to administer medications. The CMS Medication Administration Observation Care Path will be used for these audits. These audits will take place on various shift and days of the week, including weekends. Any concerns will be addressed with the nurse at the time of the observation. Concerns regarding medication administration will be reported to the DON or Administrator for review at the morning IDT meeting. These observations will continue until Jeopardy is abated, then decrease to observation of half of the licensed nurses and KMAs administering medications daily until an acceptable Plan of Correction is in place. The results of these audits will be reviewed in the weekly QAPI/IDT meeting on Fridays, beginning 09/20/19. A record will be kept to track and offer opportunities to observe each licensed nurse and KMA with various types of medications, as permitted by their training, including oral, injections, G-tubes, eye drops, inhalers, crushed etc. 15. After 09/16/19, night shift, the DON, ADON, SDC, MDS Nurses, Social Services Director or Activities Director will begin interviewing six (6) random residents with a BIMS of nine (9) or above weekly to ensure they have no concerns related to when or how their medications are to be administered. Any concerns regarding medication administration will be reported to the DON or Administrator for review at the morning IDT meeting. These interviews will continue until Jeopardy is abated and an acceptable Plan of Correction is in place. The results of these audits will be reviewed in the weekly QAPI/IDT meeting on Fridays, beginning 09/20/19. 16. Beginning the week of 09/16/19, an RN Consultant will be at the facility to provide oversight of the implementation of the QI improvement plan addressing the Immediate Jeopardy. The RN Consultant visits will continue, at least three (3) days per week until Jeopardy is abated, and then at least weekly, until an acceptable Plan of Correction is in place. An RN Consultant may complete any audit in place of the assigned auditor. 17. A DON, ADON, SDC, or MDS Nurse from a sister facility may assist with monitoring, to include MAR audits, staff interviews, resident interviews, and medication administration observations, to ensure evidence is provided that they have successfully completed a medication administration audit in the past six (6) months. ****The State Survey Agency verified the facility implemented the following actions and that Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 09/19/19, as alleged by the facility: 1. Review of Minutes revealed a Quality Improvement (QI) meeting was conducted on 09/13/19 and the minutes were signed by the Administrator, Director of Nursing (DON), Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), Staff Development Coordinator (SDC) and a Registered Nurse (RN) Consultant. Interviews on 09/25/19 with the Administrator, at 10:30 AM, the DON at 10:05 AM, the ADON at 10:00 AM, and the SDC at 10:16 AM, revealed they had attended the QA meetings dated 09/13/19, 09/16/19, and 09/20/19. 2. A statement written by the Director of Nursing was presented detailing she had informed the Medical Director, on 09/14/19 of the Immediate Jeopardy and the current plan of correction. Interview with the DON, on 09/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed she had phoned the Medical Director on 09/14/19 and informed him what the Immediate Jeopardy was related to and the plan per the QA committee. 3. Review of QI meeting minutes revealed a meeting was held on 09/16/19 with documentation that the plan of correction would continue. The attendees included the Administrator, DON, SDC, RN Consultant, and ADON. Interview with the ADON on 09/25 19 at 10:00 AM, the DON at 10:05 AM, the SDC at 10:16 AM, the Administrator at 10:30 AM, and the RN Nurse Consultant at 9:16 AM revealed they all had attended the QI meetings and had signed the QI form. 4. Review of the Disciplinary Warning Notice for RN #1, dated 09/16/19 revealed the notice stated RN #1 was terminated effective immediately, and signed by the DON. The documentation revealed the RN refused to sign the notice. 5. Review of the Complete In-service Training Report, dated 09/16/19, for Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 revealed the education provided included training on notification of the physician when there was a question related to the administration of medication or whether or not a resident received a medication as ordered. The training also included specific verbage related to insulin administration and physician notification. Interview with LPN #1 on 09/25/19 at 4:50 PM, revealed she did receive training regarding physician notification on 09/16/19. She stated she was educated to notify the physician whenever a medication was not administered and that insulin could not be held without an order, if the resident's blood sugar was low. 6. Review of a statement signed by the ADON, dated 09/14/19, revealed that an audit of all residents' August and September 2019 Medication Administration Records (MAR) had been conducted. The review also included a copy of all MARs reviewed and highlighted areas that revealed discrepancy or incomplete documentation. Interview with the ADON, on 09/25/19 at 10:00 AM, revealed she conducted the MAR audits as stated and any concerns were addressed. 7. Review of documentation revealed a medication questionnaire was used for interviews of all residents with a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score above eight (8). All questionnaires were dated 09/14/19 and were signed by the DON. One (1) resident had declined the interview on 09/14/19; however, the ADON conducted the interview with the resident on 09/15/19. Interview with the DON on 09/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed she conducted the interviews on 09/14/19 and 09/15/19 for all residents with a BIMS score above eight (8). She also stated she had the opportunity to educate some of the residents who had concerns, which included Resident #43, Resident #25, and Resident #24. Interview with Resident #25, on 09/25/19 at 8:15 AM, revealed he/she had concerns with some medications, staff educated him/her, and he/she was satisfied with the explanation. Interview with Resident #24, on 09/25/19 at 8:20 AM, revealed the resident could not remember the discussion related to medications. Interview with Resident #43, on 09/25/19 at 8:25 AM, revealed he/she was educated, but stated he/she still got confused when some medicines had different names. 8. Review of assessment documentation revealed assessments for all resident with a BIMS of eight (8) or less were completed on 09/15/19 by the ADON or the SDC. Interview with the ADON on 09/25/19 at 10:00 AM, revealed an assessment was performed on all residents with a BIMS of eight (8) or lower. Physicians were contacted with all concerns and they were addressed. 9. Review of education documentation revealed staff were trained regarding the six (6) rights of medication administration. A sign in sheet was available with nurses and KMAs who attended on 09/13/19. There was documented evidence of continued education by the DON and the SDC. Each nurse and KMA employed by the facility was on a roster and was checked off as education was provided in each of the areas. Interview with the SDC, on 09/25/19 at 10:16 AM, revealed on 09/13/19 she immediately educated the nurses and KMAs on the six (6) rights of medication administration as well as documentation on the MAR. She stated that education would continue daily until all nurses and KMAs had received the education. She also stated no nurse or KMA would be permitted to work the floor to administer medications until all education was provided and had scored 100% on the posttest. Interview with the DON, on 09/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed she initiated education on 09/14/19 that included additional medication information and accurate documentation on the MAR. She stated the education had continued daily and no nurse or KMA was allowed to work and administer medications until they had received all the education provided and passed the posttest with a score of 100%. Interviews on 09/25/19 with KMA #3 at 8:10 AM, RN #2 at 8:30 AM, RN #4 at 8:45 AM, LPN #8 at 8:54 AM, LPN #5 at 9:00 AM, LPN #4 at 9:10 AM, LPN #13 at 10:40 AM and LPN #1 at 4:50 PM revealed they all had received training on the six (6) rights of medication administration and documentation on the MAR. A posttest was completed after the training. 10. Reviewed letters addressed to the physicians for Residents #3, #13, #19, #41, #42, #53, #72, and #86 related to omission of medications. Additional residents were added to the notifications as a result of the 09/14/19 audit. Each letter included the names of the specific residents under the care of that physician and the medications believed to have been omitted. Interview with the Administrator, on 09/25/19 at 10:30 AM, revealed he had hand delivered each of the letters to the physicians' offices. He further stated he had received no questions or concerns from the physicians. Interviews with Medical Doctor (MD) #4 on 09/25/19, at 9:24 AM and MD #3 at 11:06 AM, revealed both had received letters detailing the possible omission of medications on their residents and had no further concerns or questions 11. Review of the Allegation of Compliance information revealed training, dated 09/14/19, on physician notification was initiated by the DON. The information also included a sign in sheet of staff that attended and dated. All nurses and Kentucky Medication Aides (KMA) employed by the facility had documentation of when they were provided the education. This education had been provided on an ongoing basis since 09/14/19. Interview with the DON, on 09/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed she initiated education on physician notification on 09/14/19. She stated the training included the six (6) rights of medication administration, medication error process, and accurate documentation of the MAR. Interviews on 09/25/19 with KMA #3 at 8:10 AM, RN #2 at 8:30 AM, RN #4 at 8:45 AM, LPN #8 at 8:54 AM, LPN #5 at 9:00 AM, LPN #4 at 9:10 AM, LPN #13 at 10:40 AM and LPN #1 at 4:50 PM revealed they all had received training regarding notification of the physician anytime a medication was not administered as ordered. The interviews also revealed the staff had completed a posttest and had to make 100% to pass. Interview with the Staff Development Coordinator (SDC), on 09/25/19 at 10:16 AM, revealed she had been educating nurses and KMA's on physician notification related to medications. 12. (a) Review of the Allegation of Compliance evidence revealed audits of MARS, dated 09/16/19 to 09/24/19. These audits were performed at the end of each shift, by the DON, ADON, SDC, or MDS Nurse, for each nurse or KMA who had administered medications during the shift. The audit ensured all medications had the appropriate documentation with physician notification as indicated. The audit also contained a statement, signed by the nurse or KMA, as to whether or not a resident had voiced any concerns or complaints regarding their medications during the shift. Interviews on 09/25/19 with KMA #3 at 8:10 AM, RN #2 at 8:30 AM, RN #4 at 8:45 AM, LPN #8 at 8:54 AM, LPN #5 at 9:00 AM, LPN #4 at 9:10 AM, LPN #13 at 10:40 AM and LPN #1 at 4:50 PM revealed residents' MARs were audited at the end of the shift and each had to sign a statement related to any resident concerns about medications. (b) Review of the 09/20/19 QA/QI meeting revealed the every shift audits were completed and reviewed in the QA/QI meeting. Interview with the ADON on 09/25 19 at 10 AM, the DON at 10:05 AM, the SDC at 10:16 AM, the Administrator at 10:30 AM and the RN Nurse Consultant at 9:16 AM revealed they all had attended the QA meetings and had signed the QA form. 13. The AOC evidence revealed a check off form, CMS Medication Administration Observation Care Path, was used by the RN Nurse Consultant on 09/14/19, to ensure the competency of the DON and the ADON to administer medications. Interview with the DON, on 09/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed an RN Nurse Consultant performed her medication administration competency. 14. Review of the AOC evidence revealed observations of nurses and KMA's on a daily basis using the CMS Medication Administration Observation Care Path, dated from 09/14/19 up through 09/24/19. Interviews with KMA #3 on 09/25/19 at 8:10 AM, RN #4 at 8:45 AM, LPN #8 at 8:54 AM, LPN #5 at 9 AM, LPN #13 at 10:40 AM and LPN #1 at 4:50 PM revealed they had been observed daily, and sometimes multiple times a day, administering medications. 15. The AOC evidence revealed six (6) resident interviews, dated 09/18/19, and seven (7) resident interviews, dated 09/23/19 performed by one of the management team. The questionnaires were related to any medication concerns the residents may have. Interview with the ADON, on 09/25/19 at 10 AM, revealed no concerns had been voiced with resident interviews. She also stated the audits of and interview results were reviewed at the 09/20/19 QA meeting. Interview with the Administrator, on 09/25/19 at 10:30 AM, revealed during the QA meeting, dated 09/20/19, results of audits and competencies, and resident interviews were reviewed. These will continue to be monitored these on a weekly basis. 16. Interview with the RN Nurse Consultant on 09/25/19 at 9:16 AM, revealed since 09/13/19, she had been present in the facility every day except for 09/21/19 and 09/22/19. 17. Interview with the DON, on 09/25/19 at 10:05 AM, revealed a sister facility's DON and SDC had assisted the facility with audits during the week of 09/16/19. Based on interview, record review, and policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure nursing staff (Registered Nurse #1) had appropriate competencies and skills to safely administer medications to residents. The facility failed to evaluate the competency and skill level of Registered Nurse (RN) #1 when she was hired (05/28/19), during the orientation process, or after being notified of medication errors made by RN #1. On 07/07/19, RN #1 argued with Resident #10 that the resident did not have medication due when the resident requested scheduled medications. The RN was not aware that Medication Administration Records (MAR) for oral medications was kept in a different book, on a different medication cart, until another nurse explained the facility's process for administering medications. The incident was reported to the Director of Nursing (DON) and Administrator; however, no actions related to assessing RN #1's competency to give medication was completed. On the evening of 08/19/19, RN #1 was responsible for administering medications for seven (7) residents (Residents #3, #13, #19, #41, #42, #72, and #86). Even though RN #1 documented that Residents #13, #19, #41, #42, and #72's medications were administered, Residents #41, #42, and #72 reported that they did not receive medications. In addition, there was no documented evidence that Residents #3 and #86 received their evening medications on 08/19/19. The residents' complaints were reported to administrative staff (the DON and Administrator); however, no actions were taken to ensure the RN's competency. RN #1 failed to administer three (3) residents' (Residents #63, #47, and #9) 10:00 PM narcotic pain medication, antianxiety, and/or antiseizure medications on 08/26/19. In addition, RN #1 documented that Resident #66's blood sugar was obtained and insulin was administered. However, Resident #66 reported that he/she did not receive insulin and the RN did not check his/her blood sugar on the evening of 08/26/19. Again, the facility failed to ensure Nurse #1 was competent to administer medications. Further, Resident #28 reported that facility staff had failed to administer his/her medications. Staff determined that RN #1 failed to document that the resident's narcotic pain medication was administered on 08/25/19. Staff stated they reported the medication error to administrative staff (Assistant DON and DON); however, again, the facility did not evaluate RN #1's competency to administer medications. On an unknown date, Resident #77 reported to the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) that RN #1 attempted to administer an insulin injection. However, the resident did not have an order for Insulin. Resident #77 stopped the nurse from administering the medication and stated the DON was aware. However, the facility took no action to ensure RN #1 was competent to administer medications. In addition, on 09/10/19, RN #1 failed to administer medication to the right resident. RN #1 administered Klonopin (treats seizures) medication to Resident #64; this medication was not ordered for this resident, but was ordered for Resident #63. The facility's failure to ensure nursing staff had the appropriate competencies and skills to safely administer medications to residents has caused or is likely to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to a resident. Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 09/13/19 and was determined to exist on 08/19/19 at 42 CFR 483.10 Resident Rights (F580-K), 42 CFR 483.35 Nursing Services (F726-K), and 42 CFR 483.45 Pharmacy Services (F760-J). The facility was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on 09/13/19. An acceptable Allegation of Compliance was received on 09/18/19, which alleged removal of the Immediate Jeopardy on 09/19/19. The State Survey Agency determined the Immediate Jeopardy was removed as alleged on 09/19/19, prior to exit on 09/25/19, which lowered the scope and severity to E level at 42 CFR 483.10 Resident Rights (F580) and 42 CFR 483.35 Nursing Services (F726) and to D level at 42 CFR 483.45 Pharmacy Services (F760) while the facility monitors the effectiveness of systemic changes and quality assurance activities. The findings include: Review of the facility's Medication Administration policy, not dated, revealed, All medication errors shall be described in detail on a Medication Error Report which shall be filed with the Director of Nursing (DON). The facility's medication error report shall be completed in detail, making every possible effort to describe the discrepancy thoroughly; suggestion should be made as to how such discrepancy could be avoided in the future. Interview with the facility's former Administrator on 09/12/19 at 2:16 PM, revealed the facility did not have a written policy on orientation/competency for nursing staff. However, the facility's process was for new employees to be given a skills check-off list to complete during the orientation process. When the check-off list was completed, the employee was to give the check-off list back to the Staff Development Coordinator and the Staff Development Coordinator was responsible for taking it to the Personnel Department to file in the employee's personnel file. According to the interview, the Staff Development Coordinator that was at the facility when RN #1 had orientation was no longer employed at the facility. Review of the facility's new hire orientation packet revealed an RN orientation skills checklist that included medication preparations and medication administration documentation. The assessment included a staff competency checklist for licensed nurse orientation. Per the checklist, the preceptor would evaluate the skills of the licensed nurse and indicate the completion date and the observer's initials. Review of RN #1's personnel record revealed a hire date of 05/28/19. The file did not contain RN #1's competency checklist that should be completed for each new employee. The personnel file contained no work performance concerns or counseling. 1. Review of the medical record revealed the facility admitted Resident #10 on 03/27/15, with diagnoses that included Coronary Artery Disease, Heart Failure, Anxiety Disorder, ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction of unspecified site, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension, Pain-unspecified, and Unspecified Acquired Deformity of the Left Lower Leg. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Quarterly assessment dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15), which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The MDS also revealed the resident was independent for the tasks of bed mobility, transfer, and dressing and used a walker or wheelchair for mobility. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #10, dated 07/01/19 through 07/31/19, revealed the resident had the medication Hydrocodone with Acetaminophen (controlled narcotic pain medication) ordered to be administered four (4) times a day. The MAR also revealed the scheduled times of 6:00 AM, 12:00 PM, 6:00 PM, and 12:00 AM. Further review of the MAR revealed the resident had an order for a sleeping medication, Trazadone fifty (50) milligrams, which could be administered at hour of sleep (HS), if needed for insomnia. Interview with Resident #10 on 09/09/19 at 12:59 PM, revealed he/she had an issue on 07/07/19 regarding receiving his/her ordered medication at midnight. The resident stated, I asked for my pain pill and my sleeping pill and was told (by RN #1) that they were not ordered for me. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 on 09/10/19 at 6:26 PM, revealed she was alerted by a State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) on 07/07/19, regarding an incident between RN #1 and Resident #10. She stated the resident was upset because RN #10 stated he/she did not have the medications ordered that the resident had requested. The LPN stated she reviewed the MAR and discovered the resident did have the medications ordered and showed this to RN #1. She stated the RN had been reviewing the wrong MAR for the resident's medications. RN #1 was looking at the nurses MAR which did not have the oral medications Resident #10 had requested. LPN #2 stated after explaining that Medication Aides had a MAR with oral medications, RN #1 then realized that the resident did have medication to be administered, and was preparing to administer the medications to the resident when she returned to her unit. Interview with RN #1 on 09/10/19 at 2:15 PM, revealed Resident #10's medications were in two (2) separate medication books. RN #1 further stated the ADON did come to the facility that night, but she did not remember receiving any particular instructions or any training regarding residents' MARs after the incident. 2. According to an Interview with LPN #1, on 09/10/19 at 12:14 and 12:23 PM, seven (7) residents (Residents #3, #13, #19, #41, #42, #72, a[TRUNCATED]
CONCERN (D)

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to report an allegation of verbal abuse for one (1) of twenty-two (22 ) sampl...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to report an allegation of verbal abuse for one (1) of twenty-two (22 ) sampled residents (Resident #10) to the appropriate entities including the State Survey Agency within two (2) hours of becoming aware of the allegation. The facility received a report of verbal abuse on 07/07/19 at 1:00 AM from Resident #10 that he/she had been verbally abused by Registered Nurse (RN) #1. However, the facility failed to report the alleged abuse to the State Survey Agency until 9:17 AM on 07/08/19 (over 20 hours after the allegation was initially reported by the resident). The findings include: Review of the facility's policy, Abuse, Neglect, or Misappropriation of Resident Property Policy, dated 03/10/17, revealed all complaints of abuse, neglect, including injuries of unknown origin, or misappropriation of resident property will be reported in no longer than two (2) hours. Review of the medical record revealed the facility admitted Resident #10 on 03/27/15. The resident's diagnoses included Coronary Artery Disease, Heart Failure, Anxiety Disorder, ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction of unspecified site, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension, Pain-Unspecified, and Unspecified Acquired Deformity of Left Lower Leg. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Quarterly Assessment, dated 06/10/19, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15), which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The MDS also revealed the resident was independent with bed mobility, transfer, and dressing and used a walker or wheelchair for mobility. Interview with Resident #10 during the Resident Council meeting on 09/09/19 at 9:08 AM, revealed the resident had an argument with RN #1 regarding not receiving his/her scheduled medication. Resident #10 stated RN #1 told him/her to shut up and go to his/her room. The resident further stated he/she did not trust the RN and did not want her around. Review of the email notification, dated 07/08/19 at 9:17 AM, revealed notification of Resident #10 reporting a concern about RN #1 that stated she had not provided his/her medication as requested and she had told the resident to hush up. This email was addressed to multiple recipients, including the State Survey Agency. Review of the facility's investigation revealed a witness statement from the Director of Nursing (DON) dated 07/07/19. Further review of the DON's statement revealed during a phone interview on 07/07/19 at 2:00 AM, Resident #10 reported to the DON that RN #1 had told him/her to hush and go to bed. Review of the statement by the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), dated 07/06/19, revealed she received a phone call from Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2, at approximately 1:15 AM, that Resident #10 was requesting to speak to the ADON regarding RN #1 not giving his/her scheduled medication. Interview with the ADON on 09/10/19 at 3:37 PM revealed she was notified by LPN #2 early in the morning on 07/07/19 that Resident #10 had been told to hush or shut up by RN #1. She further stated the DON was informed of the incident and a phone interview was performed by the DON, with both RN #1 and Resident #10. Interview with the DON on 09/10/19 at 3:03 PM revealed she was made aware of the incident between Resident #10 and RN #1 by the ADON. She stated she understood the resident had been told by RN #1 to go to his/her room and be quiet. The DON stated the nurse should have been removed from the facility but this did not happen; instead, the RN was permitted to work through her shift. Interview with the Social Services Director on 09/11/19 at 11:39 AM, revealed Resident #10 came to her office on 07/08/19 and reported an issue about getting medications during the night on the weekend. The Social Services Director stated apparently RN #1 and the resident argued back and forth and the resident reported that RN #1 told him/her to hush up and that he/she was not going to get anything. Interview with the former Administrator on 09/12/19 at 2:04 PM, revealed the Social Services Director came to her office on Monday morning, 07/08/19, (could not remember time) and reported Resident #10's allegation. The former Administrator stated she understood the resident had been told by RN #1 to be quiet, hush up or shut up and to go to his/her room. The Administrator stated she verified with the resident and the resident stated he/she was told to shut up. Per the Administrator, at this point an investigation was initiated, the allegation was reported, and RN #1 was suspended pending the investigation.
CONCERN (D)

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

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

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 review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to pr...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to protect and prevent further abuse for one (1) of twenty-two (22) sampled residents (Resident #10). On 07/07/19, Resident #10 alleged verbal abuse from Registered Nurse (RN) #1 when she told the resident to shut up and go to his/her room. RN #1 was not removed from direct resident care and was permitted to continue to work until her shift was completed. Resident #10 slept on another unit, away from the RN. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy, Abuse, Neglect, or Misappropriation of Resident Property Policy, dated 03/10/17, revealed employees accused of being directly involved in allegations of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or misappropriation of property will be suspended immediately from duty pending the outcome of the investigation. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses of Coronary Artery Disease, Heart Failure, Anxiety Disorder, ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction of unspecified site, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension, Pain-unspecified, and Unspecified Acquired Deformity of Left Lower Leg. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Quarterly Assessment, dated 06/10/19, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15), which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The MDS also revealed the resident was independent with the tasks of bed mobility, transfer, and dressing, and used a walker or wheelchair for mobility. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #10, dated 07/01/19 through 07/31/19, revealed the resident had the medication Hydrocodone with Acetaminophen (pain medication) ordered to be administered four times a day. The MAR also revealed the scheduled times of 6:00 AM, 12 Noon, 6:00 PM, and 12 Midnight. Further review of the MAR revealed the resident had an order for a sleeping medication, Trazadone fifty (50) milligrams, which could be administered at hour of sleep (HS), if needed for insomnia. Review of the facility's investigation of the alleged incident on 07/06/19 revealed Resident #10 went to RN #1 and asked for his/her ordered pain medication (Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen) and sleeping pill. RN #1 reviewed the MAR and told the resident she did not see an order for any medications to be given that he/she was requesting. The investigation revealed the resident became upset and began to scream at the RN. Further review revealed the resident requested that the Director of Nursing (DON) or the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) be notified and that the resident wanted to speak with them. The ADON was notified and arrived at the facility at approximately 1:30 AM on 07/07/19. At 2:00 AM, the DON was notified by phone and was told by Resident #10 that RN #1 had told him/her to hush and go to his/her room. The investigation revealed the DON asked the resident if he/she was okay and the resident stated he/she was fine. RN #1 was not suspended until 07/08/19, when the alleged verbal abuse was reported to the former Administrator by the Social Services Director on the morning of 07/08/19. The allegation was unsubstantiated and the RN was permitted to return to work. Review of the facility's investigation, dated 07/08/19, revealed a statement authored by the DON that stated, on 07/07/19 at approximately 1:00 AM, she spoke to Resident #10, who stated he/she had an argument with RN #1 and the RN told him/her to hush and go to his/her room. Interview with RN #1 on 09/10/19 at 2:15 PM revealed Resident #10's medications were in two (2) separate medication books. RN #1 stated she probably did raise her voice to the resident and she did not recall everything she said. Further interview revealed RN #1 stated the ADON did come to the facility that night, but she did not remember receiving any particular instructions from her regarding the incident. Interview with State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #5 on 09/13/19 at 3:07 PM revealed she was not working the unit where Resident #10 resided on 07/07/19. She stated the resident came to her on that night stating RN #1 would not give him/her their pain pill. SRNA #5 stated she did not hear the alleged altercation, but the resident reported that the RN told him/her to shut up and go to bed. She stated that a little while later Resident #10 was asking for her (SRNA #5) again and she went over and discovered the resident was very upset. Per SRNA #5, she took the resident's blood pressure and could not remember the reading but it was high. She added that at this point she offered to take the resident outside to smoke and calm down. The SRNA stated this did help and she then asked the resident if he/she wanted to return to his/her room and the resident replied, not really. She stated at this point she offered him/her a room on her unit and the resident agreed to sleep on that unit for the night. Interview with LPN #2 on 09/10/19 at 6:26 PM revealed SRNA #5 had come to her during the early morning on 07/08/19, and stated that Resident #10 and RN #1 were into it. She stated she went over to the unit where Resident #10 resided and heard RN #10 say to the resident that she was not going to call the ADON and neither was she (meaning LPN #2). The LPN stated she then explained to RN #1 regarding the MAR and instructed her that Resident #10 did have an order for the requested medications. Per LPN #2, she called the ADON and relayed the information from the staff that RN #1 had told Resident #10 to shut up and go back to bed. She stated she also called and informed the DON of the situation. LPN #2 stated the ADON did interview her that night and she relayed what had happened. Interview with Resident #10 on 09/09/19 at 12:59 PM, revealed he/she had an issue on 07/07/19 regarding receiving ordered medication around midnight. The resident stated, I asked for my pain pill and my sleeping pill and was told (by RN #1) that they were not ordered for me. The resident added that the RN talked rough and made his/her blood pressure go up. The resident further stated during Resident Council Meeting on 09/09/19 at 9:08 AM, that he/she did not trust RN #1 and did not want her around. Interview with Resident #10 on 09/13/19 at 9:35 AM, revealed he/she chose to spend the night off of his/her residential unit, in another room, because he/she was afraid of what the RN would do to him/her. He/she further stated, My blood pressure got very high. Interview with the Social Services Director (SSD) on 09/11/19 at 11:39 AM revealed Resident #10 had come to her office on 07/08/19 and stated he/she had an issue getting medications at night during the weekend. She further stated that apparently RN #1 and the resident argued back and forth and the resident reported the RN told him/her to hush up, and that he/she was not going to get anything. Per the SSD, this was an allegation of abuse. The SSD said that according to policy it was to be reportedly immediately and the resident should be protected by removing the staff member involved. The SSD stated the staff member was not removed to her knowledge. Interview with the ADON on 09/10/19 at 3:37 PM revealed she was notified on 07/07/19 regarding the incident by LPN #2 and was asked to please come to the facility. The ADON stated she came to the facility at that time and spoke with LPN #2 and was informed RN #1 had allegedly told Resident #10 to hush or shut up. The ADON stated, My first thought was do I need to remove the nurse (RN #1). She stated she called the DON and requested that the DON interview Resident #10 and RN#1 over the phone and that she would be a witness. She further stated that during the interview between the DON and RN #1 the RN stated that she might have said hush but she did not think she said, shut up. The ADON stated the RN should have been removed from the facility at the time of the allegation. Interview with the DON on 09/10/19 at 3:03 PM, revealed she was called by the ADON on 07/07/19 at approximately 1:00 AM, because Resident #10 was mad because RN #1 would not give him/her their medication. The DON stated she understood the RN had told the resident to go to his/her room and be quiet. She then stated the nurse should have been removed from the facility; however, the RN was allowed to work through the shift. Interview with the former Administrator on 09/12/19 at 2:04 PM, revealed her last day as Administrator was on August 1, 2019. The Administrator stated on Monday morning, on 07/08/19, the Social Services Director (SSD) came to her and stated Resident #10 was upset over his/her medications. She further stated she started investigating this and discovered upon interviewing Resident #10, that he/she and RN #1 had gotten into a fuss over the medication. The former Administrator stated Resident #10 informed her that RN #1 told him/her to be quiet or hush and go to his/her room. She stated she then verified the statement and the resident stated, She told me to shut up. Per the Administrator, she contacted RN #1 and she was suspended pending the outcome of the investigation. She also stated that if she had been aware of the allegation of verbal abuse at the time of the incident the RN would have been sent home.
CONCERN (E)

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, record review, and interview, it was determined the facility failed to maintain a system of records to ensure the accurate reconciliation of controlled drugs. Nursing staff faile...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview, it was determined the facility failed to maintain a system of records to ensure the accurate reconciliation of controlled drugs. Nursing staff failed to document that narcotic counts were completed by two (2) nurses at shift change, 46 times between 08/21/19 and 09/10/19. The controlled medication count on 9/18/19 was inaccurate for one resident's (Resident #33) medication. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy entitled Controlled Substances, dated 10/11/15, revealed all controlled substances shall be counted at each shift change and reconciled to the declining inventory sheets by at least two (2) staff members who are authorized to administer medications, preferably the staff member taking charge and the staff member relinquishing charge of these controlled substances. Further review revealed a separate record shall be maintained on each controlled substance in the form of a declining inventory record. The inventory record shall be accurately maintained and shall include the quantity of the controlled substance currently on hand. Review of the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count Check for the six (6) medication carts on 09/10/19 revealed 46 occasions between 08/21/19 and 09/10/19 when only one nurse signed the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count Check sheet at shift change. Interview with RN #2, LPN #6, and LPN #7 on 09/10/19, following the shift change narcotic count revealed two (2) nurses are to do the count. They stated the nurse going off duty should review the narcotic book and the nurse coming on duty should do the narcotic count. Further interview revealed both nurses were to sign the Shift Change Narcotic Count sheet. Interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) on 09/10/19 at 3:46 PM revealed two (2) nurses or medication aides were to perform the change of shift narcotic count and both were to sign the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count sheet. The ADON reviewed one Shift Change Controlled Substance Count sheet from the East Unit and confirmed that 13 shift changes did not have two (2) signatures. Further interview with the ADON revealed the DON (Director of Nursing) reviews the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count sheets. Interview with the DON on 09/10/19 at 3:23 PM revealed two nurses or medication aides were to sign off on the Shift Change Narcotic Count. According to the interview, the DON reviews the Shift Change Narcotic Count sheets weekly. The DON reviewed one of the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count sheets from the East Unit and confirmed the sheet had multiple blanks, with no staff signatures. Further interview revealed that the DON reported she must have missed auditing the sheet. 2. Observation of the medication cart on the East Wing on 09/11/19 revealed a card of Alprazolam (controlled substance for anti-anxiety) 0.5 mg (milligrams) for Resident #33 with a count of 29 pills on the card. Review of the narcotic count sheet for the Alprazolam 0.5 mg for Resident #33 revealed the count should be 30 pills. Interview with LPN #8 revealed the narcotic count was completed at the beginning of the shift at 7 AM with LPN #7. According to the interview, LPN #8 counted the medication and LPN #7 reviewed the narcotic count sheet. Further interview revealed LPN #8 thought LPN #7 administered the medication during the night shift and failed to sign out the medication on the narcotic count sheet. LPN #7 was not available for interview. Interview with Resident #33 on 09/11/19 at 3:17 PM revealed the resident confirmed that he/she did receive a dose of Alprazolam the previous night around midnight. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed the last dose of Alprazolam 0.5 mg was documented as given on 09/04/19. Interview with the DON on 09/12/19 at 11:33 AM revealed the DON did a medication error report on the narcotic count that was incorrect on 09/10/19 involving Resident #33. According to the interview, LPN #7 did give the medication during the night shift and failed to sign out the medication.
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 facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with professional standards of ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with professional standards of practice in two (2) of two (2) medication storage rooms and during observation of the medication pass on 09/09/19. Observation of the facility's East and [NAME] medication rooms revealed expired medications available for resident use. Observation of the medication pass on 09/09/19 revealed a bottle of prescription nasal spray sitting on top of the medication cart and not under the direct physical supervision of a licensed nurse or medication aide. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Medication Storage, with a revision date of 11/01/17, revealed the medication cart shall be locked at all times, when not under the direct physical supervision of a licensed nurse or medication aide. The policy did not address expired medication. 1. Observation of the [NAME] Wing Medication Storage room on 09/09/19 at 8:40 AM revealed Flu vaccine (11 individual injections) with an expiration date of 03/28/19, Heparin flush individual dose vials (greater than 20 vials) with an expiration date of 12/30/18, Heparin flush vials (more than 20 vials) with an expiration date of 04/30/19, and 1,000 ml (milliliters) normal saline IV (intravenous) fluid bag with an expiration date of 08/19. Observation also revealed coagulation study blue top vacutainer blood tubes (17 tubes) with an expiration date of 03/04/19. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 on 09/09/19 at 8:45 AM revealed the nurses were responsible to check the medication storage room weekly for expired medications. The LPN stated all items in the medication storage room were available for resident use and should be checked often to ensure the medication and supplies had not expired. LPN #3 stated she was unsure when the medications and supplies were last checked for an expiration date. Per LPN #3, she was not aware of any type of documentation used when checking for expiration dates. LPN #3 stated she did not know why the items had not been checked for expiration dates. Observation of the East Wing Medication Storage room on 09/09/19 at 9:15 AM revealed Flu vaccine two (2) individual vials with an expiration date of 06/06/19, Flu vaccine two (2) individual vials with an expiration date of 04/29/19, and Flu vaccine ten (10) individual vials with an expiration date of 03/28/19. Interview with LPN #12 on 09/09/19 at 9:25 AM revealed the nurses were responsible to check the medication storage room for expired medications and supplies at least weekly. LPN #12 stated she was unsure of the last time the medication room had been checked for expired medications and supplies. The LPN stated each nurse should be checking the medication room. LPN #12 could not explain why the medication room contained expired medications. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 09/09/19 at 9:05 AM revealed the expectation was that the nurses would check the medication storage room weekly for expired items. The DON stated the facility had no system in place to ensure that the medication storage room was being checked weekly. 2. Observation of the medication pass on 09/09/19 at 8:24 AM revealed LPN #6 prepared medications for Resident #11, and took the medications into the resident's room and went behind the privacy curtain which was not within line of sight of the medication cart. Further observation revealed LPN #6 left a container of Fluticasone Propionate Nasal Spray sitting on top of the medication cart. The observation revealed LPN #6 checked the resident's blood pressure, administered the medications, and returned to the medication cart. Observation revealed LPN #6 prepared a dose of Clonidine for the resident and returned to the resident's room to administer the medication. Continued observation revealed the container of Fluticasone Propionate Nasal Spray remained on top of the cart. Further observation revealed LPN #6 returned to the medication cart, obtained the Fluticasone Propionate Nasal Spray, returned to the resident's room, and administered the nasal spray. Interview with LPN #6 on 09/09/19 at 8:31 AM revealed she should have taken the nasal spray into the resident's room or locked it up. Further interview revealed LPN #6 stated she usually took the nasal spray into the room; however, she got sidetracked and forgot to take it into the room. Interview with the DON on 09/12/19 at 11:33 AM revealed the LPN should have locked the nasal spray in the medication cart.
CONCERN (E)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation and interview, it was determined the facility failed to store, serve, and prepare food under sanitary conditions. During the initial tour of the kitchen, slices of pie were observ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, it was determined the facility failed to store, serve, and prepare food under sanitary conditions. During the initial tour of the kitchen, slices of pie were observed stored on a cart in the walk-in cooler, uncovered and not dated. During the lunch tray line observation, wrapped silverware was observed to be contaminated with food that could not be identified. In addition, staff was observed to transport an uncovered food tray to the [NAME] Wing at the supper meal on 09/08/19. The findings include: Interview with the Dietary Manager on 09/11/19 at 11:00 AM revealed the facility did not have a written policy for the storage of food in the coolers. However, it was the facility's procedure to store food items covered and dated, use clean silverware at meals, and to cover all trays that were being transported away from the dining room to resident rooms. 1. Observation of the walk-in cooler during the initial tour of the kitchen on 09/08/19 at 10:05 AM revealed slices of cream pie on saucers on a cart in the cooler. The pie was not covered or dated. Observation of the lunch tray line service on 09/08/19 at 11:41 AM revealed a tray was prepared with food and drinks. Silverware wrapped in a napkin that was contaminated with food was placed on the resident food tray and the tray was placed on the food cart for transport to the resident. Staff did not observe the contaminated dirty napkin. The Surveyor intervened and asked staff to remove the tray and identify the food particles on the dirty napkin. Dietary staff could not identify the food particles but noted the food on the napkin was not what was being served for lunch. Interview with the Dietary Aide on 09/11/19 at 1:35 PM revealed she was preparing the pie in a hurry, did not cover the pie, and placed the pie back in the walk-in cooler to keep the pie cold. In addition, the Dietary Aide stated she did not see the food contamination on the silverware and was not aware of the food contamination until asked for the tray to be removed from the cart. An interview with the Dietary Manager on 09/11/19 at 2:11 PM revealed residents' silverware should be clean and food items should be covered and dated when stored in the walk-in cooler. According to the Dietary Manager, she was in the kitchen daily Monday through Friday and as needed on weekends to monitor food service and she had not identified any problems. 2. Observation of the evening meal service on 09/08/19 at 5:30 PM revealed State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #1 transported a partially covered tray to a resident on the [NAME] Wing. Interview with SRNA #1 on 09/12/19 at 2:17 PM revealed he had been trained to cover food when transporting it from the dining area. SRNA #1 stated, I didn't notice that was uncovered when I brought it out; should have been covered. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #10 on 09/12/19 at 9:49 AM revealed staff should always cover the trays before leaving the dining room. Interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing on 09/10/19 at 4:04 PM revealed the expectation was that staff would cover the food tray completely prior to delivering the tray to a resident's room. Per the ADON, she does walking rounds during meal service and to monitor the staff. The ADON stated she had not identified any concerns with meal service. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 09/11/19 at 1:40 PM revealed she monitored nurse aides passing meal trays for residents but not every meal. The DON stated food leaving the dining room should be covered to protect the food from contamination. According to the DON, she had not identified any concerns with staff not covering food trays before the trays were transported to resident rooms.
CONCERN (E)

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

QAPI Program (Tag F0867)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interview, record review, and review of the facility policy it was determined the facility failed to have an effective performance improvement program which measured the success and tracked t...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview, record review, and review of the facility policy it was determined the facility failed to have an effective performance improvement program which measured the success and tracked the performance of implemented plans to ensure improvements are sustained in the facility. The State Agency received an acceptable Plan of Correction (POC) on 11/14/19 for previously cited deficiencies, with an exit date of 09/25/19. Per the POC, the facility conducted weekly audits to ensure the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count Check sheets included two (2) staff members' signatures (on-coming and off-going nurse and/or medication aide). During the revisit conducted on 11/20/19, review of the Shift-Change Controlled Substance Count Check sheets revealed nursing staff failed to document that narcotic counts were completed by two (2) staff members at shift change on six (6) occasions between 10/23/19 and 11/15/19. Interviews with staff revealed concerns had been identified with the audits; however, no actions had been taken to correct the identified concerns. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Plan, dated 11/28/18, revealed the facility was committed to providing the highest quality of care and services and would systemically monitor, analyze, and improve its performance. According to the policy, the QI program would put plans in place and would evaluate those plans to ensure identified concerns were resolved and would not reoccur. The State Agency received an acceptable Plan of Correction (POC) on 11/14/19 for previously cited deficiencies, which included tag F755 that was cited at E level. Review of the facility's POC revealed all nurses and medication aides had been trained by 10/18/19 related to the proper way to count and keep records for narcotics in the facility. The training also included the requirement of two (2) staff members' signatures to be present on the Shift-Change Controlled Substance Count Check sheets at each shift change. The POC stated ongoing weekly audits of the Shift-Change Controlled Substance Count Check sheets would be completed to ensure two (2) staff members' signatures were present on the sheets at shift change as required. Review of the POC also revealed if concerns were identified with the ongoing audits, those concerns would be addressed at that time with the nurse or medication aide, and the identified concerns would be reported to the DON. The POC also stated any concerns identified would be reviewed weekly for any trends and would also be discussed in the monthly Quality Assurance (QA) Committee. Review of the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count Check on the medication cart for the [NAME] Short Hall of the facility revealed three (3) occasions when only one (1) staff member signed the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count Sheet at shift change (10/23/19 at 10:00 PM, 10/29/19 at 10:00 PM, and the 6:00 AM count on 10/30/19). Further review of the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count Check sheets, for two (2) medication carts on the East Hall of the facility, revealed there were three (3) occasions when only one (1) staff member signed the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count Sheet at shift change (11/03/19 at 12:00 AM, 11/03/19 at 6:00 AM, and the 6:00 AM count on 11/15/19). Review of the Narcotic Review audit sheets completed by the DON, after the facility's alleged date of compliance of 10/19/19, revealed she had audited to ensure all signatures were present on the East and [NAME] medication carts and no concerns had been identified. Interview with the Staff Development Coordinator (SDC) on 11/20/19 at 12:00 PM revealed staff were trained that the signatures of two (2) nurses or medication aides were required to be present on the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count Check sheet at each shift change. She also stated she conducted weekly audits of the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count Check sheets, and had identified ongoing concerns because two (2) staff members had not signed the sheets, on the East and [NAME] nursing units, as required. The SDC stated she had reported the ongoing identified concerns to the DON and the Administrator, but acknowledged no actions had been taken to correct the problem. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 11/20/19 at 3:20 PM confirmed that two (2) staff members were required to sign the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count Check sheets at shift change. The DON stated the SDC had not reported any concerns related to her audits of shift change count sheets. However, she acknowledged that she (the DON) had identified concerns, and was aware that two (2) staff signatures were not on the Shift Change Controlled Substance Count Check sheets at times as required. Even though the DON was aware of the concerns, she had not reevaluated the sheets to ensure two (2) staff signatures were included on the count sheets, and had not taken any action to ensure the ongoing concerns were resolved in the facility, as outlined in the POC. Interview with the Administrator on 11/20/19 at 3:05 PM revealed he was responsible to ensure the POC submitted to the State Agency was implemented. He stated he was not aware of any concerns identified with audits conducted by the SDC or the DON; however, he stated he should have been notified of the concerns. He stated he ensured audits were completed by reviewing the audit forms completed by the DON, which indicated she had not identified any concerns.
CONCERN (E)

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0921)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation and interview, it was determined the facility failed to provide a sanitary homelike environment for residents. Observations of the lunch meal service in the dining room on 09/08/1...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, it was determined the facility failed to provide a sanitary homelike environment for residents. Observations of the lunch meal service in the dining room on 09/08/19 revealed the facility had two (2) separate dining services at different times for the lunch meal (A dining and B dining). Staff failed to clean the dining room tables between the A and B dining services. Observations revealed residents who ate at the B dining service were observed to sit and eat at tables contaminated with food spillage from the previous A dining service. The findings include: Interview with the Housekeeping Supervisor on 09/11/19 at 1:40 PM revealed the facility did not have a policy or procedure regarding cleaning the dining room between meals. According to the Housekeeping Supervisor, the dining room was cleaned three (3) times daily, after each meal service was completed. Observation of the B dining service on 09/08/19 at 12:04 PM at the lunch meal, revealed residents' lunch trays were placed on tables soiled with food spillage from the previous A dining service. Further interview with the Housekeeping Supervisor on 09/11/19 at 1:40 PM revealed housekeeping staff cleaned the dining room after each meal was completed. The Housekeeping Supervisor stated she was not aware tables were not being cleaned or wiped down between the A and B dining services. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 09/11/19 at 11:10 AM revealed she monitored the dining room during meal services, but not daily. According to the DON, Housekeeping cleaned the dining room after residents were finished eating. The DON stated she was not aware residents were eating at dirty tables that had not been cleaned between the A and B dining services.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0925 (Tag F0925)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program to ensure the facility was free of pests. Flies were observed in...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program to ensure the facility was free of pests. Flies were observed in the kitchen on initial tour, during the lunch meal, and during the supper meal on 09/08/19. An air curtain over the facility kitchen door to the outside was observed, but it was not functioning. There was no other means to prevent or control flies in the kitchen. The findings include: A review of the facility's pest control policy titled Pest Control, dated August 2013, revealed the contracted pest control company would treat the dietary department monthly. Observation of the kitchen on 09/08/19 at 10:05 AM revealed three (3) flies in the kitchen in contact with plates, plate covers, food surfaces, and counters. Observation during the lunch meal on 09/08/19 at 11:10 AM revealed three (3) flies in the kitchen in contact with plate covers, counters, trays, and drinking glasses. Observation of the kitchen during the tray line service on 09/08/19 at 4:55 PM revealed four (4) flies in the kitchen in contact with plate covers, drinking glasses, and counter surfaces. A review of the pest control invoices for July and August 2019 revealed no evidence of treatment for flies. An interview with the Dietary Manager on 09/11/19 at 11:00 AM revealed Maintenance was in charge of pest control. The Manager stated a company came to treat the facility (unknown date). However, according to the Dietary Manager, the air curtain had not worked for an unknown amount of time. An interview with the Maintenance Director on 09/11/19 at 11:45 AM revealed a contracted pest control company came to the facility and treated for pests, including flies, monthly. According to the Maintenance Director, the air curtain has not worked in three (3) years. Further interview revealed the kitchen door did have a storm door that was removed a few weeks ago because it was dragging the floor. The Maintenance Director stated they had looked at ordering a new motor for the air curtain in the kitchen but that had to be approved by Corporate. According to the Maintenance Director, if something was broken, a work order was filled out; however, there were no work orders completed on the air curtain. According to the Maintenance Director, he was not aware of any problems with flies so the air curtain was not replaced.
MINOR (B)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Deficiency F0806 (Tag F0806)

Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure seven (7) unsampled residents received or were offered appealing options (substitutes or alternates)...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure seven (7) unsampled residents received or were offered appealing options (substitutes or alternates) of similar nutritive value when the residents chose not to eat food that was initially served, or who had requested a different meal choice. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy for alternate menus and substitutes titled, Use and Storage of Leftovers, dated August 2013, revealed leftover foods were kept for residents who did not like items on the menu and according to the policy the leftover foods were cooled and stored for a period of seven days to offer as alternate food items. Observations on 09/08/19, of the lunch meal at 11:10 AM revealed chicken soup and cold cut and pimento cheese sandwiches were served for the alternate. Additional observation of the supper meal at 4:55 PM revealed cold cut sandwiches and vegetable soup were served as an alternate. Review of the facility's menu for 09/08/19 revealed the entree for lunch was maple glazed pork, cornbread dressing, steamed vegetables, a roll, and pie. No alternate menu items were listed for the lunch meal. A review of the supper menu revealed the entree was a soup of the day and turkey and cheese melt sandwich, sweet potato fries, beet salad, and Hawaiian fruit cup with no alternate items listed for the supper meal. A group interview conducted on 09/09/19 with seven (7) alert and oriented residents revealed the facility only offered soup and sandwiches for alternates. The group stated soup and sandwiches were served often at the facility and the residents were tired of only being offered soup and sandwiches as alternate foods. Interview with the [NAME] on 09/11/19 at 1:45 PM, revealed the facility did have alternates at times when there were leftovers, but soup and sandwiches were served frequently as an alternate menu item. Interview with the Dietary Manager on 09/11/19 at 11:00 AM, revealed the facility offered soup and sandwiches as a substitute or leftovers as an alternate. The Dietary Manager stated she was not aware of any food complaints regarding substitutes, or that the facility served soup and sandwiches as an alternate too often.
Jun 2018 9 deficiencies
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** 2. Review of the facility's policy/procedure titled, Dressings-Clean, revised 11/08/17, revealed clean gloves were required to b...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of the facility's policy/procedure titled, Dressings-Clean, revised 11/08/17, revealed clean gloves were required to be used when changing a dressing. Review of the medical record for Resident #87 revealed the facility readmitted the resident on 05/16/18, with diagnoses that included a Sacral (bottom) Pressure Ulcer, Atrial Fibrillation, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Adult Failure to Thrive, and Alzheimer's disease. Review of a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #87 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Score of zero (0), indicating the resident was severely cognitively impaired. Further review of the MDS revealed the resident had a Stage III pressure ulcer that was not present on the previous assessment. Review of Resident #87's Comprehensive Care Plan dated 03/30/18 revealed the facility identified the resident was at risk for pressure ulcers related to decreased mobility and weight loss, and developed an intervention for the resident to receive treatment as ordered. Review of the Physician's orders for Resident #87 revealed an order dated 06/01/18 for staff to treat the pressure ulcer to the sacrum by cleansing the area with normal saline, applying a wet-to-dry dressing, and covering with a padded dressing. Observation on 06/14/18 at 11:16 AM revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 provided treatment for Resident #87's sacral pressure ulcer. LPN #1 washed and sanitized her hands and applied a glove to her left hand. The LPN dropped the clean glove for the right hand onto the floor, picked up the glove from the floor, and applied the glove to her right hand. LPN #1 then proceeded to remove the old dressing from Resident #87's sacrum with a contaminated glove. Interview with LPN #1 on 06/14/18 at 6:05 PM, revealed she should not have used the glove after it fell on the floor. LPN #1 stated she should never use anything dropped on the floor to prevent the spread of infection. Interview with the Infection Control Nurse on 06/14/18 at 6:29 PM revealed if a glove was dropped on the floor it should be discarded and not used for resident care. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 06/14/18 at 6:50 PM revealed the DON also stated that if a glove was dropped on the floor it should not be used for resident care. The DON stated she randomly observed and monitored care and had not identified any concerns with wound treatment/care. Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure two (2) of twenty-five (25) sampled residents (Resident #36 and Resident #87) received care and treatment to prevent/treat pressure ulcers. Observations on 06/13/18 and 06/14/18 revealed the facility failed to provide hand rolls that Resident #36 and Resident #87 were required to have. In addition, the facility failed to ensure staff utilized clean gloves during a dressing change to a pressure ulcer on Resident #87's sacrum. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility's PRESSURE ULCER PREVENTION policy dated 04/01/18 revealed that Patients who have been assessed at moderate/high risk for pressure ulcer development may be placed on the following preventative program. This program includes nursing interventions that will begin after assessment and will continue until the patient is no longer at risk. It has been proven that the incidence of pressure ulcers can be dramatically reduced and/or prevented by implementing such a preventative program .Use positioning devices and protective devices as needed to protect susceptible areas from breakdown Review of Resident #36's medical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 01/09/17 with diagnoses that included Hypertension, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Heart Failure, and Cerebral Vascular Accident. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #36 was totally dependent and required the assistance of two (2) staff persons for transfers and bed mobility. The resident was assessed to have impaired range of motion to the upper extremities on one side. Continued review of the MDS assessment revealed the resident had three (3) Stage II pressure ulcers and was at risk for pressure ulcers. Review of a Wound Ulcer Flowsheet dated 04/07/18 revealed the resident had two (2) Stage II pressure ulcers to the resident's right palm and the pressure ulcers Occurred in-house. Review of the plan of care with a revision date of 04/27/18 revealed the facility identified the resident's risk of skin breakdown and revised the care plan for the Stage II pressures ulcers. Review of the Resident Care Guide revealed the facility developed an intervention to provide hand rolls/palm protectors for the resident. Resident #36 was observed on 06/13/18 at 11:12 AM in bed with the left hand closed in a fist position with no hand roll in place. On 06/13/18 at 5:03 PM, observation of the resident revealed the right hand was also closed in a fist position, and no hand roll was observed in use. Further observations of Resident #36 on 06/13/18 at 5:39 PM, 06/14/18 at 9:27 AM, and on 06/14/18 at 11:35 AM revealed hand rolls were not in use. On 06/14/18 at 10:11 AM, Resident #36's hands/skin were observed with the treatment nurse. The resident's left hand was contracted into a closed position and the treatment nurse could not open the resident's hand. Observation of the resident's right palm revealed a small scarred area was noted to the right palm. The treatment nurse stated the pressure ulcers to the resident's palm had recently healed and no pressure ulcers were observed to the resident's right palm. On 06/14/18 at 9:38 AM, an interview with State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #4 and SRNA #5 revealed they were caring for Resident #36 and routinely provided care for the resident. The SRNAs were unable to locate the hand rolls in the resident's room and stated that they may have been sent to Laundry. The SRNAs checked the resident's linen closet also and were unable to locate the hand rolls. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 on 06/14/18 at 10:35 AM, revealed the pressure ulcers to the resident's hand had recently healed. The LPN stated the resident developed the ulcers from tightening and loosening his/her hand/fist, and the resident required hand rolls to both hands to prevent further pressure ulcers. The LPN stated she monitored the implementation of resident care plans, but had not noticed that Resident #36 did not have the hand rolls in place. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 06/14/18 at 2:53 PM revealed nurses and SRNAs should monitor to ensure Resident #36 had hand rolls in place.
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** 2. Review of the medical record revealed the facility admitted Resident #57 to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Unspecif...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of the medical record revealed the facility admitted Resident #57 to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Unspecified Intellectual Disabilities, Retention of Urine, Neuromuscular Dysfunction of Bladder, Heart Failure, Liver Disease, and Bed Confinement Status. Review of the Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of five (5), which indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. The MDS also revealed the resident required extensive assistance of two (2) or more persons with the task of bed mobility, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. Further review of the MDS revealed the resident was always incontinent of bowels and had an indwelling urinary catheter. Observation of Resident #57 on 06/12/18 at 9:26 AM revealed a bedside drainage catheter bag in a dignity bag on the side of the bedframe. Observation of Resident #57 on 06/12/18 at 10:27 AM revealed the resident was up in a chair with clear yellow urine in the catheter tubing draining into the drainage bag on the side of the chair. Observation of catheter care for Resident #57 on 06/14/18 at 10:05 AM revealed State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #1 and SRNA #2 set up to perform catheter care on the resident. Prior to performing the catheter care, it was discovered the resident was incontinent of stool. SRNA #2 proceeded to clean the stool from the resident. After completing the care, SRNA #2 did not remove her gloves and perform hand hygiene, but proceeded to assist SRNA #1 with catheter care. SRNA #2 was observed to touch the labia and the urinary catheter tubing with the same gloves used to perform the stool incontinence care. Interview with SRNA #2 on 06/14/18 at 10:26 AM revealed when asked regarding when gloves should be changed during care, she replied that you should change after performing incontinence care. She further stated she realized she had not changed her gloves and performed hand hygiene and that she should have before proceeding to help with the catheter care. Interview with the Infection Control Nurse on 06/14/18 at 6:34 PM revealed that SRNAs are in-serviced on catheter care at least annually and that she randomly observes catheter care. She also stated she had not been aware of any issues with the performance of catheter care. Interview with the DON on 06/14/18 at 7:13 PM revealed the SRNA should have discarded the gloves, washed her hands, and donned clean gloves prior to assisting with the catheter care. Based on observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure care was provided appropriately for two (2) of twenty-five (25) sampled residents (Resident #57 and Resident #58). Observation and interview with Resident #58 on 06/12/18 revealed he had an indwelling catheter placed at the doctor's office on 06/01/18. Review of the record revealed no documentation regarding a catheter and interviews with facility staff revealed they were unaware that the resident had a catheter and therefore were not providing care for the catheter. Observations of catheter care for Resident #57 on 06/14/18 revealed staff provided fecal incontinence care and failed to change gloves and wash hands prior to providing care for Resident #57's indwelling catheter. The findings include: Review of the facility policy, Incontinence Care and Catheter Care, from the Nursing Policy Manual version August 2012, revealed that care would be provided as needed. The policy did not include infection control measures or use of personal protective equipment to be utilized when providing care. 1. Review of the record for Resident #58 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include hypertension, diabetes, seizure disorder, anxiety, and depression. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with a reference date of 05/03/18 revealed the resident did not have a catheter and was always continent of bowel and bladder. Further review of the MDS revealed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 15 indicating the resident was interviewable. Observation of Resident #58 on 06/12/18 at 12:20 PM revealed the resident was in bed and the end of a urine collection leg bag was observed under the resident's pant leg. Interview with Resident #58 on 06/12/18 at 2:27 PM revealed that the resident had an appointment with his/her physician approximately 12 days ago and the physician told the resident that his/her kidneys were not putting out. According to the interview, the physician ordered an indwelling catheter and the resident reported that he/she empties the catheter collection bag into a urinal. Further interview with Resident #58 on 06/14/18 at 11:50 AM revealed the indwelling catheter was put in place by the physician when the resident attended an appointment at the physician's office. The resident also stated that he/she cleans the catheter with soap and water. Record review of physician orders dated 06/01/18 revealed no order for a Foley catheter or for catheter care. Interview with LPN #5 on 06/14/18 at 9:37 AM revealed she was not aware that Resident #58 had an indwelling catheter. Interview on 06/14/18 at 2:26 PM with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed that the nursing staff were not aware that the resident had an indwelling catheter placed at the physician visit on 06/01/18. According to the interview, the usual practice is to ask the resident about the visit and to get any papers that the resident brings back from the physician's office. Further interview revealed that Resident #58 did not bring any papers from the physician's office to the faciltiy. According to interview, the staff were to perform a head to toe assessment on residents every seven (7) days. Further interview revealed that Resident #58 refused his/her last head to toe assessment. Record review revealed that Resident #58 refused his skin assessment after three attempts on 06/05/18. Further interview with the DON on 06/14/18 revealed that the facility did contact the physician (Urologist) that inserted the catheter and the physician did not want the catheter removed until the resident returned for a follow-up appointment in July.
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, interview, record review, and review of the facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to pro...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interview, record review, and review of the facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to provide appropriate care and services related to oxygen therapy for one (1) of twenty-five (25) sampled residents (Resident #42). Resident #42 was observed to be in activities on the morning of 06/12/18 with nasal cannula on and tubing connected to the oxygen tank, but the oxygen tank flow meter was set on zero (0). The findings include: Review of the facility's Oxygen Therapy Nursing Procedure Manual, dated April 2013, revealed the oxygen flow meter should be adjusted to the prescribed rate. Review of the medical record revealed the facility admitted Resident #42 on 05/04/12 with diagnoses of Unspecified Intellectual Disabilities, Major Depressive Disorder, Hypertension, Unspecified Osteoarthritis, Chronic Respiratory Failure, and Morbid Obesity with Alveolar Hypoventilation. Review of Resident #42's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of ten (10), which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS also revealed the resident was totally dependent on two (2) or more persons for transfers, and received oxygen therapy. Review of Resident #42's care plan, revised on 02/06/16, revealed the facility identified that the resident had an ineffective breathing pattern and developed an intervention to provide oxygen therapy as ordered. Review of Resident #42's physician orders revealed the resident had an order for oxygen at two (2) liters per minute (lpm). Review of Resident #42's oxygen saturation readings for the previous three (3) months revealed while on room air the resident's oxygen saturation level (SpO2) was 68-84% (normal SpO2 is 94-100%); however, when the resident was receiving oxygen at 2 lpm, the resident's SpO2 levels were 92-97%. Observation of Resident #42 on 06/12/18 at 10:12 AM revealed the resident was in a wheelchair in the dining room. The resident was wearing a nasal cannula for oxygen, but the resident's oxygen was not on. Observation of Resident #42 on 06/12/18 at 11:53 AM revealed the resident was in a wheelchair in the hallway. The resident stated the oxygen cannula was bothering him/her and staff assisted the resident to his/her room. The resident's oxygen was observed to be off at this time. Interview with an Activities staff member on 06/14/18 at 4:16 PM, revealed nursing staff transported Resident #42 to the dining room for an activity on the morning of 06/12/18. The staff member stated Activities staff checked oxygen tanks to ensure they are full, but had not identified that the resident's oxygen was not on. Interview with State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #3 on 06/14/18 at 7:07 PM revealed she assisted with transporting Resident #42 to Bingo on the morning of 06/12/18, but was not able to remember whether she set the flow meter on the oxygen tank. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 on 06/14/18 at 4:24 PM, revealed a nurse or a SRNA could set up a resident's oxygen for transport. LPN #1 stated the SRNA was required to set the flow meter on the tank to the same setting as the oxygen concentrator in the resident's room or find a nurse to clarify the oxygen setting. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 06/14/18 at 7:04 PM revealed Resident #42 decompensated quickly without oxygen and she frequently checked the resident's oxygen. She also stated nurses should check the resident's oxygen settings randomly to ensure the resident was receiving oxygen as ordered.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0700 (Tag F0700)

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 policy review, the facility failed to obtain informed consent for bed rail u...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to obtain informed consent for bed rail use for two (2) of twenty-five (25) residents (Resident #36 and Resident #59). In addition, the facility failed to ensure documentation of monitoring/supervision of resident bed rail use for Resident #36 and Resident #59. The findings include: Review of the SIDE RAIL GUIDELINES policy (version dated November 2013) revealed Side rails may be used to enhance resident mobility and transfer to and from the bed or as a restraining device to keep residents from voluntarily getting out of bed. 1. Review of Resident #36's clinical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 01/09/17 with diagnoses that included Hypertension, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Heart Failure, Cerebral Vascular Accident, and Seizure Disorder. Review of Resident #36's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was totally dependent and required the assistance of two (2) staff persons for bed mobility. The resident was assessed to have impaired range of motion to the upper extremities on one side. The MDS assessment listed that the resident had severely impaired cognitive skills with both long and short-term memory problems. Review of the plan of care for Resident #36, revised 04/27/18, revealed a care guide was included on the back of the resident's plan of care. The guide directed staff to PAD bed rails. Further review of the plan of care revealed the resident's mobility needs were addressed but the plan did not include direction on bed rail use. Review of Bed Rail Evaluation forms dated 01/10/18 and 04/10/18 for Resident #36 revealed the facility had assessed the resident to be totally dependent on staff for bed mobility. However, the evaluation also identified that the resident utilized bed rails which the facility documented were indicated and serve as an enabler to promote independence. The evaluation form did not include a consent from the resident or the resident's representative for bed rail use or staff direction for monitoring and supervising the use of bed rails for Resident #36. Observations of Resident #36 on 06/12/18 at 9:50 AM, 06/13/18 at 11:12 AM, 06/13/18 at 5:03 PM, 06/14/18 at 9:38 AM, 06/14/18 at 9:27 AM, 06/14/18 at 10:11 AM, and 06/14/18 at 11:35 AM, revealed the resident was observed in bed with padded half bed rails raised. Interview with State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #4 and SRNA #5 on 06/14/18 at 09:38 AM revealed Resident #36 required total staff assistance for bed mobility. The SRNAs stated that Resident #36 did not utilize the bed rails for bed mobility, and did not know why the resident had bed rails on the bed. Interview on 06/14/18 at 2:28 PM with LPN #1 revealed bed rail assessments were completed on residents when they were admitted to the facility, but no consent was obtained from the resident or the resident's representative to utilize bed rails. LPN #1 stated she periodically checked bed rails to ensure that they were not loose and fit correctly, but did not document the inspections or how residents utilizing bed rails were being monitored or supervised. 2. Review of the clinical record for Resident #59 revealed the facility admitted the resident on 10/26/17 with diagnoses that included Diabetes Mellitus, Major Depressive Disorder, Muscle Weakness, Alzheimer's Disease, and Anxiety Disorder. Review of Resident #59's MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 99 indicating the resident was not able to complete the interview. The facility assessed the resident to require extensive assistance of two (2) staff persons for bed mobility. Review of Resident #59's mobility plan of care dated 03/02/18 revealed the resident was totally dependent on two staff members for bed mobility. The plan included interventions dated 05/05/17 directing staff to raise the resident's left bed rail to aid the resident in turning him/herself in bed per their choice. However, the care plan also included a care guide dated 05/05/17 for staff to utilize which stated Resident #59 was to have no bed rails. Interview with LPN #1 on 06/14/18 at 2:28 PM revealed Resident #59 had utilized bed rails in the past to assist with turning/repositioning, but had become unable to reposition self and did not use the bed rails. The LPN stated she did not know why the resident had bed rails on the bed. Interview with SRNA #4 and SRNA #5 on 06/14/18 at 9:43 AM revealed Resident #59 required total care and could not use his/her bed rails to reposition self. Observations of Resident #59 on 06/12/18 at 9:52 AM, 06/12/18 at 1:50 PM, 06/12/18 at 2:58 PM, 06/12/18 at 4:15 PM, 06/12/18 at 5:12 PM, 06/13/18 at 11:14 AM, 06/13/18 at 5:42 PM, 06/14/18 at 9:30 AM, and 06/14/18 at 10:18 AM, revealed the resident was observed in bed with half bed rails raised. Interview on 06/14/18 at 2:53 PM with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed the staff nurse assessed residents upon admission to evaluate for the need of bed rails, and then bed rail assessments were completed quarterly on the resident. The DON stated staff made daily rounds in the facility which included observing bed rails. However, the DON stated the facility had no documentation of the monitioring. Interview with the Administrator on 06/14/18 at 4:28 PM revealed the facility had not obtained signed consent for bed rail use for any resident and the facility had no documented evidence that bed rail useage was being monitored.
CONCERN (D)

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure routine medication was acquired for one (1) of twenty-five (25) sampled residents. Resident #49 had a physician's order for Hydrocodone (narcotic pain medication)/APAP (acetaminophen) four times per day. The facility failed to obtain a prescription to refill the medication and Resident #49 did not receive any pain medication from 6:00 PM on 05/12/18 until 6:00 PM on 05/14/18. The findings include: Interview with the Administrator on 06/14/18 at 5:13 PM revealed that to ensure residents did not run out of narcotic medication, nurses were required to audit residents' medications on Monday. If the resident was going to run out of medication that week, the nurse was required to contact the resident's physician and obtain a prescription. Then, on Thursdays, the nurse was required to ensure the facility had received the prescription, and make arrangements for the prescription to be obtained from the resident's physician if the prescription had not been obtained. Observation of Resident #49 on 06/12/18 at 8:00 AM revealed the resident was in a wheelchair. Interview with the resident revealed the resident was concerned because he/she did not receive pain medication from 05/11/18 through 05/14/18. Observation revealed the resident had the dates marked on his/her calendar. Resident #49 stated he/she was supposed to receive Hydrocodone 10 mg/APAP 325 mg four times per day; however, the resident stated he/she received pain medication on 05/11/18 at 6:00 AM, and did not receive another dose until 05/14/18 at 6:00 PM. Resident #49 stated staff had administered Tylenol for pain, but it was not effective. Further interview with Resident #49 on 06/13/18 at 3:48 PM, revealed staff told the resident that he/she did not have any pain medication because the facility did not pick up the resident's prescription at the resident's physician's office prior to the office closing for the weekend on Thursday. The resident stated he/she did not get pain medication until after he/she told the Administrator about not having the medication on Monday, 05/14/18. Review of Resident #49's medical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 05/12/17, with diagnoses of Coronary Artery Disease, Hypertension, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Acquired Deformity of Left Leg, and Pain. Review of Resident #49's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the facility assessed the resident to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15), which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #49's physician orders for May 2018 revealed the resident had an order for Hydrocodone/APAP 10 mg/325 mg to be given four (4) times a day for pain. Review of Resident #49's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for May 2018 revealed the resident's Hydrocodone 10 mg/APAP 325 mg was required to be administered four (4) times daily at 6:00 AM, 12:00 PM, 6:00 PM, and 12:00 AM. However, the documentation revealed the resident's medication was not administered from 12:00 PM on 05/12/18 until 6:00 PM on 05/14/18. Further review revealed four (4) entries on the back of the MAR that the medication was not given because it was not available. Review of the Controlled Substance Count Sheet for Resident #49's Hydrocodone/APAP 10 mg/325 mg revealed on 05/12/18 at 6:00 AM, staff signed out the resident's last dose of medication. No further pain medication was signed out for the resident until 05/14/18 at 6:00 PM, after 120 Hydrocodone/APAP tablets were received from Walgreens pharmacy. Interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #1 on 06/14/18 at 9:37 AM revealed she faxed a request for a prescription refill for Hydrocodone to Resident #49's physician's office on Monday, 05/07/18. She stated when she returned to work on Friday, 05/12/18, the resident ran out of medication. She stated she called the resident's physician about the need for a prescription refill for the patient's Hydrocodone; however, the physician stated he had already written a prescription and was not available to write another one. Interview with the Admissions Coordinator on 06/14/18 at 5:45 PM revealed she attempted to pick up Resident #49's prescription on Thursday, 05/10/18, but the physician's office staff told her the prescription was not ready. She stated she asked the staff at the physician's office to please notify the facility as soon as the prescription was ready; however, no one ever notified the facility. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 06/13/18 at 4:45 PM revealed she was aware that Resident #49 ran out of pain medication on 05/12/18, and she contacted the resident's physician. She stated the physician told her the office was closed and the physician was out of town. The interview with the DON revealed she took no further action to ensure the resident received pain medication. A telephone interview conducted with the pharmacist on 06/14/18 at 3:14 PM revealed the pharmacy did not receive a prescription for Resident #49's Hydrocodone/APAP medication and the medication was not filled for the resident until 05/14/18.
CONCERN (D)

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

Antibiotic Stewardship (Tag F0881)

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 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 antibiotic stewardship program for one (1) of twenty-five (25) sampled residents (Resident #17). Review of Resident #17's physician's orders revealed a diagnosis dated 05/23/18 for Methylcillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aurous (MRSA) of the Vagina, and an order for Bactrim DS (antibiotic) to be administered twice daily for ten (10) days. Review of Resident #17's Medication Administration Records revealed the resident had completed the antibiotic therapy on 06/03/18 at 9:00 AM; however, review of the medical record revealed no evidence a repeat vaginal culture had been ordered or obtained to ensure the infection was adequately treated by the antibiotic ordered and no evidence of antibiotic monitoring as required. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Antimicrobial Stewardship, dated September 2014, revealed the facility would monitor antibiotic therapy that would include the evaluation and analysis of the prescribing of antibiotics without laboratory confirmation of a pathogen, appropriate use of antibiotics, duration of antibiotic therapy, and appropriate route of administration. Review of the medical record for Resident #17 revealed the facility had admitted the resident on 03/29/17, with diagnoses that included Right Mastectomy with a history of Breast Cancer, Alzheimer's Dementia, and Anxiety. Review of Resident #17's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had been assessed to have moderately impaired cognition, and was not interviewable. The MDS did not reveal any infections. Further review of the medical record revealed no evidence of antibiotic monitoring or infection control notes documented for Resident #17. Review of physician's orders for Resident #17 revealed an order dated 05/14/18 to obtain a culture outside of the vagina and within the vaginal orifice related to vaginal discharge. Review of laboratory reports for Resident #17 revealed a culture report dated 05/22/18, which stated the culture had heavy growth of MRSA in the vaginal culture. The physician's orders revealed an order dated 05/23/18 for Resident #17 to have Bactrim DS (antibiotic) administered twice daily for ten (10) days. Review of Resident #17's Medication Administration Records revealed the resident had completed the antibiotic therapy on 06/03/18 at 9:00 AM. There was no evidence in the record that the vaginal culture was repeated after the completion of the antibiotic to ensure the infection was properly treated. Interview conducted with the facility's Infection Control Nurse (ICN) on 06/14/18 at 6:08 PM revealed she had been covering night shifts due to a shortage of nurses on night shift and had gotten behind on her Infection Control monitoring. The ICN stated she was required to review all laboratory reports and review what antibiotics the resident had been on before, and review the culture and sensitivity reports to ensure the resident is on the correct antibiotic. The ICN stated she was required to document an infection control note and track the infection. The ICN stated she reviewed all laboratory reports daily as well as all orders daily. The ICN stated Resident #17 should have had a repeat culture and sensitivity of the vagina completed and she had not identified that the test had not been ordered or completed but she had been working night shift and had gotten behind on her reviews. The ICN revealed nobody has been completing her infection control paperwork and monitoring. The ICN stated she has only been scheduled one (1) week a month to complete her normal assignment and has been scheduled the other three (3) weeks on night shift working as a staff nurse on the floor. The ICN stated she has done this for approximately six (6) months. Interview conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 06/14/18 at 6:41 PM revealed both she and the ICN receive all the resident's laboratory and culture and sensitivity reports. The DON stated she tried to monitor infections when the ICN worked the floor as a staff nurse. The DON stated she monitored infections to see what type of infection the resident had and to ensure all laboratory reports had returned. The DON stated she did not complete any of the paperwork for the antibiotic stewardship program because she did not know what paperwork to fill out. The DON stated she had not documented any infection control notes.
CONCERN (E)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement the care plan for one (1) of twenty-five (2...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement the care plan for one (1) of twenty-five (25) sampled residents (Resident #36) related to pressure ulcer preventive interventions. The facility developed a care plan for Resident #36 that required staff to provide hand rolls to prevent pressure ulcers. However, observation of the resident on 06/13/18 and 06/14/18 revealed the facility failed to ensure the resident's care plan was implemented. The findings include: A review of the facility's Care Plan Policy and Protocol, revised September 2017, revealed the facility would develop a comprehensive care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's medical and nursing needs that were identified in the resident's comprehensive assessment. The policy stated the [NAME] (Resident Care Guide) would be utilized as a guide for nurse aides in providing care on a daily basis and was part of the resident's care plan. Review of Resident #36's medical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 01/09/17 with diagnoses that included Hypertension, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Heart Failure, and Cerebral Vascular Accident. Review of Resident #36's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was totally dependent and required the assistance of two (2) staff persons for transfers and bed mobility. The facility assessed the resident to have impaired range of motion to the upper extremities on one side and to be at risk for pressure ulcers. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #36 had three (3) Stage II pressure ulcers. Review of Resident #36's plan of care (revision date of 04/27/18) revealed the facility had addressed the resident's risk of skin breakdown and the Stage II pressures ulcers. Review of the Resident Care Guide revealed staff were required to provide hand rolls/palm protectors for the resident's hands. Interview on 06/14/18 at 1:53 PM with the MDS Coordinator revealed she revised Resident #36's care plan after the resident developed a pressure ulcer to the palm of the right hand. The MDS Coordinator stated hand rolls were added to the Care Guide and staff were required to keep hand rolls in the resident's hands. However, Resident #36 was observed without hand rolls in place to both hands on the following dates/times: 06/13/18 at 11:12 AM; 06/13/18 at 5:03 PM; 06/13/18 at 5:39 PM; 06/14/18 at 9:27 AM; 06/14/18 at 9:38 AM; 06/14/18 at 10:11 AM; and 06/14/18 at 11:35 AM. On 06/14/18 at 9:38 AM, an interview with State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #1 and SRNA #2 revealed they were caring for Resident #36 and routinely provided care for the resident. The SRNAs stated they were aware that Resident #36 required hand rolls in both hands, but had not seen the hand rolls today. The SRNAs were unable to locate the hand rolls in the resident's room or in the linen room. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 on 06/14/18 at 10:35 AM revealed the pressure ulcer to Resident #36's hand had recently healed, but the resident continued to require a hand roll to both hands to prevent pressure ulcers. The LPN stated she monitored the implementation of resident care plans, but had not identified that Resident #36 did not have hand rolls in place.
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #87 revealed the facility readmitted the resident on 05/16/18, with diagnoses that ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #87 revealed the facility readmitted the resident on 05/16/18, with diagnoses that included Pressure Ulcer of Sacral Region, Atrial Fibrillation, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Adult Failure to Thrive, and Alzheimer's Disease. Review of the Significant Change MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident had a BIMS score of zero (0) indicating the resident was severely cognitively impaired and therefore not interviewable. Review of Resident #87's Comprehensive Care Plan dated 03/30/18 revealed the resident was at risk for skin breakdown or pressure ulcers related to decreased mobility and weight loss and would receive treatment as ordered. Observation on 06/14/18 at 11:16 AM of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 performing treatment for Resident #87's Stage III pressure ulcer to the sacral region revealed LPN #1 cleaned the wound area with normal saline moistened gauze and applied normal saline moistened gauze to the wound bed and covered it with a dry pad. LPN #1 then removed her gloves, but did not wash and sanitize her hands, and then exited the resident's room. LPN #1 then started opening drawers of the treatment cart. LPN #1 then re-entered the resident's room, washed and sanitized her hands, and proceeded to complete the resident's wound care. Interview with LPN #1 on 06/14/18 at 6:05 PM revealed she should not have exited the room and opened drawers of the treatment cart without washing her hands. LPN #1 revealed she was nervous and forgot to wash her hands. LPN #1 revealed she had been trained to wash her hands any time she removes her gloves. Interview with LPN #2, the Infection Control Nurse, on 06/14/18 at 6:29 PM revealed LPN #1 should not have exited the resident's room and opened drawers of the treatment cart without washing her hands. LPN #2 revealed staff were trained that every time they remove their gloves they are required to wash their hands. LPN #2 further revealed she had not identified any concerns with staff not washing their hands. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 06/14/18 at 6:50 PM revealed staff should not touch the treatment cart before washing their hands. The DON further revealed staff were in-serviced on handwashing annually and as needed. The DON revealed she monitored handwashing by random spot checking. The DON also revealed she had not identified any concerns related to handwashing. Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to maintain an effective infection 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 four (4) of twenty-five (25) sampled residents (Residents #18, #33, #73, and #87). Observation of the lunch meal service on 06/12/18 at 11:14 AM in the main dining room, revealed staff were observed to deliver Resident #73's meal tray, the resident emptied the milk from the carton into a glass, and handed the carton back to the staff member who placed it on the counter in front of the coffee and not in the trash. The staff were then observed to deliver meal trays to Resident #18 and Resident #33 without washing/sanitizing their hands after handling the milk carton. Observation of wound care for Resident #87 on 06/14/18, revealed staff removed their gloves and returned to the treatment outside the resident's door without washing/sanitizing her hands. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Handwashing, undated, revealed staff were required to provide hand hygiene before and after any direct contact with a resident; before and after donning gloves; before performing any invasive procedures; before and after touching wounds; after touching inanimate sources that are likely to be contaminated with virulent or epidemiologically important microorganisms; and before and after toilet use. 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #73 revealed the facility admitted the resident on 03/19/10, with diagnoses that included Congestive Heart Failure, Hypertension, Hyperlipidemia, and Arthritis. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had been assessed to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of twelve (12) which indicated the resident had intact cognition and was interviewable. The MDS also revealed the resident had been assessed to be independent with eating and only required setup assistance. Review of Resident #73's comprehensive plan of care with a revision date of 05/18/18, revealed the resident was to receive setup assistance with meal service. Observation of meal service on 06/12/18 at 11:14 AM revealed the Director of Nursing (DON) was observed to set up Resident #73's lunch meal tray in the Main Dining Room. The resident was observed to squeeze his/her nectar-thickened milk and pour it in a glass. The resident handed the empty carton to the DON who then placed the milk carton on the counter. The DON was then observed to deliver and set up Resident #18 and Resident #33's lunch meal trays without washing/sanitizing her hands. Interview conducted with the DON on 06/14/18 at 6:56 PM revealed she should have thrown the milk carton away and washed/sanitized her hands after touching Resident #73's milk carton.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0909 (Tag F0909)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of inspection reports, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that regular inspections of all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of inspection reports, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that regular inspections of all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails were conducted to identify areas of possible entrapment risks. In addition, the facility failed to ensure mattresses purchased separately from the bed were compatible with the bed and bed rails for which they were being used. The findings include: Interview with the facility's Nurse Consultant on 06/14/18 at 1:37 PM revealed the facility did not have a policy related to inspecting beds for entrapment risk or bed maintenance. Observations on 06/12/18 at 9:37 AM and 12:30 PM,of the front hallway on the East Wing revealed seven (7) residents were observed to be in bed with half bed rails raised. Interview with the Housekeeping Supervisor on 06/14/18 at 2:44 PM revealed Housekeeping staff were responsible to order mattresses which fit the facility's standard bed size. However, the Housekeeping Supervisor stated the Housekeeping Department did not conduct any inspections of facility beds or provide maintenance to the beds. An interview with the Maintenance Director on 06/14/18 at 3:05 PM revealed no routine inspections of facility beds were performed related to ensuring the beds had no gaps or entrapment risks. The Maintenance Director stated he does not have a tool to measure gaps between the mattress and bed frame, and he would only inspect the beds if Nursing or Housekeeping reported a problem. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 06/14/18 at 2:53 PM revealed the Nursing Department did not perform any assessments of the bed/mattresses to ensure proper fit or identification of possible entrapment risks. Interview with the Administrator on 06/14/18 at 4:28 PM revealed the facility had no system in place to ensure new mattresses when placed on the bed were inspected for gaps or entrapment risks. In addition, the Administrator stated the facility also had no system to routinely monitor all beds in the facility with bed rails attached for gaps or entrapment risks.
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: 3 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 28 deficiencies on record, including 3 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • Grade F (14/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: This facility has 3 Immediate Jeopardy findings. Serious concerns require careful evaluation.

About This Facility

What is Mountain View's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns MOUNTAIN VIEW NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER 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 Mountain View Staffed?

CMS rates MOUNTAIN VIEW NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 54%, compared to the Kentucky average of 46%.

What Have Inspectors Found at Mountain View?

State health inspectors documented 28 deficiencies at MOUNTAIN VIEW NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER during 2018 to 2024. These included: 3 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 24 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Mountain View?

MOUNTAIN VIEW NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by PRINCIPLE LONG TERM CARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 115 certified beds and approximately 51 residents (about 44% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in PINEVILLE, Kentucky.

How Does Mountain View Compare to Other Kentucky Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Kentucky, MOUNTAIN VIEW NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER'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 (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Mountain View?

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

Is Mountain View Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, MOUNTAIN VIEW NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 3 Immediate Jeopardy citations (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 Mountain View Stick Around?

MOUNTAIN VIEW NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER 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 Mountain View Ever Fined?

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

Is Mountain View on Any Federal Watch List?

MOUNTAIN VIEW NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.