Ferncrest Manor Living Center

14500 Haynes Blvd., New Orleans, LA 70128 (504) 246-1426
For profit - Limited Liability company 200 Beds Independent Data: November 2025 5 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
0/100
#200 of 264 in LA
Last Inspection: May 2025

Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.

Overview

Ferncrest Manor Living Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the care provided at this facility. Ranking #200 out of 264 nursing homes in Louisiana places it in the bottom half, while being #6 out of 11 in Orleans County means there are only a few local options that are better. The facility is showing some signs of improvement, with the number of issues decreasing from 22 in 2024 to 15 in 2025. However, staffing is a weakness, reflected by a poor rating of 1 out of 5 stars and a high turnover rate of 58%, which is above the state average. Additionally, the facility has incurred fines totaling $402,870, which is concerning as it is higher than 95% of Louisiana facilities, suggesting ongoing compliance problems. Although Ferncrest offers better RN coverage than 87% of state facilities, specific incidents are alarming. For example, there were failures to prevent resident abuse, including cases where staff with criminal convictions were allowed to work, and serious incidents of sexual and physical abuse between residents occurred without adequate protection measures. Overall, while there are some strengths in RN coverage, the facility faces significant challenges in safety and staffing that families should carefully consider.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Louisiana
#200/264
Bottom 25%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
22 → 15 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
58% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
✓ Good
$402,870 in fines. Lower than most Louisiana facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 15 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Louisiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
⚠ Watch
86 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Overall Rating
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Staff Levels
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Care Quality
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 22 issues
2025: 15 issues

The Good

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

Facility shows strength in fire safety.

The Bad

1-Star Overall Rating

Below Louisiana average (2.4)

Significant quality concerns identified by CMS

Staff Turnover: 58%

12pts above Louisiana avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Federal Fines: $402,870

Well above median ($33,413)

Significant penalties indicating serious issues

Staff turnover is elevated (58%)

10 points above Louisiana average of 48%

The Ugly 86 deficiencies on record

5 life-threatening 1 actual harm
Jun 2025 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0583 (Tag F0583)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's privacy during incontinence care for 1 (Resident #R4) of 4 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #R4) resident...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's privacy during incontinence care for 1 (Resident #R4) of 4 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #R4) residents observed for residents' rights. Findings: Observation on 06/24/2025 at 9:43AM revealed S3Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was providing incontinence care to Resident #R4 and did not announce that she was providing care to Resident #R4 when the surveyor knocked on the door to Resident #R4's room before entering. Further observation revealed Resident #R4's limbs and incontinence brief could be visualized from the doorway of Resident #R4's room. Further observation revealed that the privacy curtain in Resident #R4's room was not drawn to obstruct visualization of Resident #R4 from Resident #2 (Resident #R4's roommate) while S3CNA provided incontinence care to Resident #R4. In an interview on 06/24/2025 at 11:23AM, S2Dirctor of Nursing (DON) indicated S3CNA should have pulled Resident #R4's privacy curtain and/or provided privacy to Resident #R4 when she provided incontinence care to Resident #R4.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Tube Feeding (Tag F0693)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure: 1. A resident was positioned as ordered while receiving enteral feedings (a type of liquid nutritional supplement ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure: 1. A resident was positioned as ordered while receiving enteral feedings (a type of liquid nutritional supplement that is typically given through a tube directly inserted into the stomach) (Resident #2); 2. An enteral feeding administration set (tubing used to administer a resident's enteral feeding) for a resident's enteral feeding was changed every 24 hours per the facility policy and physician's order (Resident #2); and, 3. Only qualified staff placed a resident's enteral feeding on hold and/or restarted a resident's enteral feeding (Resident #R4). This deficient practice was identified for 2 (Resident #2, Resident #R4) of 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #R4) residents reviewed for enteral feeding maintenance. Findings: Review of the facility's Enteral Feedings-Safety Precautions, last revised on 10/01/2024 revealed, in part, Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) and Registered Nurses (RNs) were the personnel responsible for preparing, storing, and administering enteral feedings. Further review revealed the personnel would be trained, qualified, and competent in his/her own abilities. Further review revealed personnel should change a resident's enteral feeding administration sets at least every 24 hours. 1. Review of Resident #2's June 2025 physician's orders revealed, in part, an order dated 06/04/2025 for the head of Resident #2's bed to be elevated to 45 degrees at all times except during care. Observation on 06/23/2025 at 4:12PM revealed Resident #2's enteral feeding was infusing at 20 milliliters (ml) per hour (ml/hr), and the head of Resident #2's bed was elevated to 30 degrees. Observation on 06/23/2025 at 4:51PM revealed Resident #2's enteral feeding was infusing at 20 ml/hr, and the head of Resident #2's bed was elevated to 30 degrees. Observation on 06/24/2025 at 7:33AM revealed Resident #2's enteral feeding was infusing at 20 ml/hr, and the head of Resident #2's bed was elevated to 30 degrees. Observation on 06/24/2025 at 9:45AM revealed Resident #2's enteral feeding was infusing at 20 ml/hr, and the head of Resident #2's bed was elevated to 30 degrees. In an interview on 06/24/2025 at 11:23AM, S2Director of Nursing (DON) indicated the head of Resident #2's bed should have been elevated to 45 degrees as ordered. 2. Review of Resident #2's June 2025 physician's orders revealed, in part, an order dated 01/22/2025 for staff to change Resident #2's enteral feeding administration set (tubing) every day. Observation on 06/24/2025 at 11:20AM revealed the administration set for Resident #2's enteral feeding was dated as changed on 06/23/2024 at 12:00AM. Further observation revealed 400-500 ml of Resident #2's enteral feeding had already been infused. In an interview on 06/24/2025 at 11:22AM, S2DON confirmed Resident #2's enteral feeding administration set was dated 06/23/2025 at 12:00AM. S2DON further indicated enteral feeding administration sets should be changed every 24 hours. 3. Observation on 06/24/2025 at 9:43AM while S3Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was performing incontinence care to Resident #R4, the alarm to Resident #R4's enteral feeding pump (equipment used to administer a resident's enteral feeding at a set rate) was alarming. Further observation revealed a minute later, the alarm stopped. In an interview on 06/24/2025 at 9:44AM, S3CNA indicated the alarm to Resident #R4's enteral feeding pump was alarming because she had placed Resident #R4's enteral feeding on hold (stopped the infusion of the enteral feeding) while she was performing Resident #R4's incontinence care. S3CNA further indicated Resident #R4's enteral feeding pump had stopped alarming when S3CNA restarted the infusion of Resident #R4's enteral feeding. In an interview on 06/24/2025 at 11:22AM, S2DON indicated S3CNA should not be have placed Resident #R4's enteral feeding on hold or restarted Resident #R4's enteral feeding. In an interview on 06/24/2025 at 12:25PM, S1Administrator indicated it was not in a CNA's scope of practice to place a resident's enteral feeding on hold and/or restart a resident's enteral feeding.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interview and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain accurate records for 1 (Resident #2) of 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3) sampled residents reviewed for accurate documen...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain accurate records for 1 (Resident #2) of 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3) sampled residents reviewed for accurate documentation. Findings: Review of the facility's Charting and Documentation policy, last revised on 10/01/2024, revealed, in part, all services provided to a resident shall be documented in the resident's medical record. Review of Resident #2's June 2025 physician's orders revealed, in part, an active order dated 01/22/2025 for staff to check the residual amount of Resident #2's enteral feeding (a type of liquid nutritional supplement that is typically given through a tube directly inserted into the stomach) every 4 hours at 12:00AM, 4:00AM, 8:00AM, 12:00PM, 4:00PM, and 8:00PM. Further review revealed an active order dated 05/22/2025 for staff to administer Jevity 1.5 (an enteral feeding) to Resident #2 at a rate of 40 milliliters/hour (ml/hr) continuously. Further review revealed an additional active order dated 05/26/2025 for staff to administer Jevity 1.5 at a rate of 20 ml/hr continuously. Review of Resident #2's June 2025 electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) revealed, in part, no documented evidence Resident #2's enteral feeding residual was checked on 06/08/2025 at 12:00PM, 06/08/2025 at 4:00PM, 06/21/2025 at 8:00AM, and/or 06/22/2025 at 8:00AM. In an interview on 06/24/2025 at 11:23AM, S2Director of Nursing (DON) indicated there should not have been two different physician's orders for the rate of Resident #2's Jevity 1.5 enteral feedings. S2DON further indicated the facility's nurses should have documented when they checked Resident #2's enteral feeding residual in Resident #2's eMAR and had not.
May 2025 12 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0558 (Tag F0558)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure call lights were within reach for 2 (Resident #24, Resident #101) of 3 (Resident #24, Resident #64, Resident #101) ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure call lights were within reach for 2 (Resident #24, Resident #101) of 3 (Resident #24, Resident #64, Resident #101) sampled residents investigated for accommodation of needs. Findings: Review of the facility's Answering the Call Light policy dated 04/01/2021 with revised date of 10/01/2024 revealed, in part, it is the policy of the facility to ensure that the call light is accessible to the resident when in bed, from the toilet, from the shower or bathing facility and from the floor. Resident #24 Review of Resident #24's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/28/2025 revealed, in part, Resident #24 required substantial and/or maximal assistance for self-care from staff, partial/ moderate assistance for activities of daily living (ADL) from staff and was dependent on staff for transfers. Observation on 05/28/2025 at 11:55AM revealed Resident #24 was lying in bed. Further observation revealed Resident #24's call light was on the floor, at the head of the bed, and out of reach of Resident #24. In an interview on 05/28/2025 at 12:00PM, S17Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) confirmed Resident #24's call light was lying on the floor at the head of Resident #24's bed and was out of reach for Resident #24. S17LPN indicated it is the policy of the facility to ensure the call light is within reach of the resident. Resident #101 Review of Resident #101's Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/14/2025 revealed, in part, Resident #101 was dependent on staff for ADLs, transfers and mobility. Observation on 05/28/2025 at 11:47AM revealed Resident #101 was lying in bed and Resident #101's call light was clipped to the curtain, out of reach of Resident #101. In an interview on 05/28/2025 at 11:50AM, S18Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) confirmed Resident #101's call light was clipped to the curtain, not in reach and should have been within reach of Resident #101. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 4:09PM, S1Administrator indicated it is the facility's policy for call lights to be within reach at all times for all residents.
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 interview and record reviews the facility failed to ensure a resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment reflected the resident's accurate discharge status for 1 (Resident #111 ) of 3 (Resid...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record reviews the facility failed to ensure a resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment reflected the resident's accurate discharge status for 1 (Resident #111 ) of 3 (Resident #109, Resident #110, Resident #111 ) sampled residents investigated for closed records. Findings: Review of Resident #111's Discharge MDS with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 03/12/2025 revealed, in part, Resident #111 was discharged to a short term general hospital. Review of Resident #111 progress note dated 3/12/2025 revealed Resident #111 had a planned discharge to home. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 11:26AM, S11Registered Nurse (RN), MDS Coordinator confirmed Resident #111's discharge MDS with ARD of 03/12/2025 indicated Resident #11 was discharged to a short term general hospital and was incorrect. S11RN, MDS Coordinator indicated Resident #111 was discharged to home.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to administer a medication per a physician's orders for 1 (Resident ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to administer a medication per a physician's orders for 1 (Resident #91) of 5 (Resident #2, Resident #29, Resident #91, Resident #101, Resident #162) residents reviewed for unnecessary medication review. Findings: Review of the scope of Practice of Practical Nursing defined in Section 961 of Chapter 11, Louisiana Revised Statues revealed the licensed practical nurse must practice under the direction of, in part, a licensed physician. Review of Resident #91's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed, in part, Resident #91 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses, which included, cerebrovascular vasospasm and vasoconstriction; diabetes mellitus; essential (primary) hypertension; malignant melanoma of skin of breast; anxiety disorder, unspecified; morbid (severe) obesity due to excess calories; and major depressive disorder. Review of Resident #91's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 03/13/2025 revealed, in part, Resident #91 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated Resident #91 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #91's May 2025 physician's orders revealed, in part, an order to administer Resident #91 one alprazolam (a medication used to treat anxiety disorder) 0.5 milligrams (mg) tablet orally at bedtime. Review of Resident #91's May 2025 eMAR (electronic Medication Administration Record) revealed Resident #91's alprazolam was not administered on 05/19/2025 and 05/20/2025. Review of Resident #91's alprazolam 0.5 mg Individual Narcotic Record, revealed, in part, no documented evidence Resident #91 was administered alprazolam 0.5 mg on 05/19/2025, and an undated line of an administration of Resident #91's alprazolam 0.5 mg between 05/22/2025 and 05/25/2025. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 10:10AM, S3Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed Resident #91 was not administered alprazolam as ordered on 2 days between 05/19/2025 and 05/24/2025. S3DON further indicated the facility could not provide documented evidence that Resident #91's alprazolam 0.5mg was administered daily to Resident #91 as ordered. S3DON further indicated Resident #91's alprazolam 0.5 mg Individual Narcotic Record revealed Resident #91 was only administered 14 tablets of alprazolam 0.5 mg in the 16 day period from 05/13/2025 to 05/28/2025.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0727 (Tag F0727)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record reviews, the provider failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) worked at least 8 hours for 1 (04/19/2025) of 22 (04/19/2025, 04/20/2025, 04/26/2025, 04/27/2025, 05/03/202...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record reviews, the provider failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) worked at least 8 hours for 1 (04/19/2025) of 22 (04/19/2025, 04/20/2025, 04/26/2025, 04/27/2025, 05/03/2025, 05/04/2025, 05/10/2025, 05/11/2025, 05/12/2025, 05/13/2025, 05/14/2025, 05/15/2025, 05/16/2025, 05/17/2025, 05/18/2025, 05/19/2025, 05/20/2025, 05/21/2025, 05/22/2025, 05/23/2025, 05/24/2025, 05/25/2025) days reviewed for staffing requirements. Findings: Review of the facility's weekend Nursing/Ancillary Personnel Staffing Pattern Reporting Form, dated 04/19/2025 through 05/252/2025, signed as complete and accurate by S1Administrator on 05/27/2025 revealed, in part, one RN worked on 04/19/2025. Review of the facility's time sheets dated 04/19/2025 revealed, in part, S2Direcor of Nursing (DON) was the only RN with a time clock entry for 04/19/2025. Further review revealed, S2DON clocked in at 9:01AM and clocked out on 11:13AM. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 10:45AM, S2DON confirmed she was the only RN that worked on 04/19/2025. S2DON further indicated she was unable to provide any documented evidence she worked at least 8 hours on 04/19/2025. There was no documented evidence, and the provider was unable to present any documented evidence, an RN worked at least 8 hours as required on 04/19/2025. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 11:00AM, S1Administrator was presented with the above mentioned findings and could offer no explanation as to why an RN did not work at least 8 hours as required on 04/19/2025.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0838 (Tag F0838)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the facility assessment included specific nursing staffing needs for day, night, and weekend shifts. Findings: Review of the facili...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the facility assessment included specific nursing staffing needs for day, night, and weekend shifts. Findings: Review of the facility's facility assessment, last updated on 05/07/2025 revealed, in part, there was no documented evidence the facility assessment included specific staffing needs of its resident population for Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN) and Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA) for day, night, and weekend shifts. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 11:00AM, S1Administrator was presented with the above mentioned findings and could offer no explanation as to why the facility assessment did not include specific LPN and CNA staffing needs for day, night, and weekend shifts.
CONCERN (E)

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure: 1. The facility's dining room was kept in a clean/sanitary manner; and, 2. The facility's hallways were kept in a c...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure: 1. The facility's dining room was kept in a clean/sanitary manner; and, 2. The facility's hallways were kept in a clean/sanitary manner and in good repair for 3 (Hallway a, Hallway b, Hallway c) of 3 (Hallway a, Hallway b, Hallway c) hallways observed for physical environment. Findings: Review of the facility's Maintenance Service policy and procedure, with a revision date of 05/2024 revealed, in part, the functions of the facility's maintenance personnel included maintaining the building in good repair. Review of the facility's Environmental Services policy and procedure, with a revision date of 05/2024 revealed, in part, floors shall be maintained in clean, safe and sanitary manner. 1. Observation of the dining room on 05/27/2025 at 11:30AM revealed the following: - 16 windows had a total of 85 dead insects, between them, on the window sills; - five of the output air vents, on the ceiling above the area where the dining room tables were, had an unknown light gray substance surrounding them; and - 2 areas of wallpaper on the right side of the dining room wall leading from the entrance way, were peeling from the top of the wall, down the seam. Observation of the dining room on 05/29/2025 at 8:35AM revealed the following: - an unknown black/brown/gray particle build-up around the entrance way door jams; - a build-up of settled black/brown particles along an approximately 1 inch (in) ledge, located on the wall to the right near the entrance door, inside the dining room; - 1 dead insect and a severed tail, resembling the tail of a reptile, in 1 window sill located on the right wall leading from the entrance of the dining room; - five of the output air vents, on the ceiling above the area where the dining room tables were, had an unknown light gray substance surrounding them; and - 2 areas of wallpaper on the right side dining room wall leading from the entrance way, were peeling from the top of the wall, down the seam. In an interview on 05/29/2025 9:00AM, S7Housekeeping Supervisor/Dietary Manager confirmed the above observations and further indicated there should not be any dead insects or severed reptile tails in the window sills of the dining room or particle build up on the ledge inside the dining room door or around the dining room door jams. Observation of the dining room on 05/29/2025 at 12:10 PM revealed the following: - 1 dead insect and a severed tail, resembling the tail of a reptile, in 1 window sill located on the right wall leading from the entrance of the dining room; - five of the output air vents, on the ceiling above the area where the dining room tables were, had an unknown light gray substance surrounding them; and - 2 areas of wallpaper on the right side dining room wall leading from the entrance way, were peeling from the top of the wall, down the seam. In an interview on 05/29/2025 12:12 PM, S8Plant Operations Manager confirmed the above observations of the dining room. S8Plant Operations Manager further indicated the above findings did not present a clean homelike environment. 2. Observation of Hallway b on 05/27/2025 at 9:45AM revealed the following: - an accumulation of unknown black/brown/gray particles that began at Hallway b's front entry door jambs, continued along Hallway b's baseboards where they met the floor, surrounded the door jambs of the resident's rooms on Hallway b, and covered the lower portion of multiple resident's room doors on Hallway b; and - multiple areas of an unknown dried brown substance in a splatter and drip pattern on the walls of Hallway b; and - multiple areas of missing or damaged sheet rock on the walls throughout Hallway b. Observation of Hallway a on 05/28/2025 at 12:35PM revealed the following: - an accumulation of unknown black/brown/gray particles that began at Hallway a's front entry door jambs, continued along Hallway a's baseboards where they met the floor, surrounded the door jambs of the resident's rooms on Hallway a, and covered the lower one-sixth portion of multiple resident's room doors on Hallway a. Further observation revealed the above accumulation of black/brown/gray particles affected more than 50 percent (%) of the baseboards and 50% of the 36 resident's doors and door jambs located on Hallway a. - 5 areas of an unknown dried brown substance in a splatter and drip pattern on the walls of Hallway a; and - more than 50 areas of missing or damaged sheet rock on the walls throughout Hallway a. Observation of Hallway c on 05/28/25 at 4:30PM revealed the following: - an accumulation of unknown black/brown/gray particles that began at Hallway c's front entry door jambs, continued along Hallway c's baseboards where they met the floor, surrounded the door jambs of the resident's rooms on Hallway c, and covered the lower one-sixth portion of multiple resident's room doors on Hallway c. Further observation revealed the above accumulation of black/brown/gray particles affected more than 50% of the baseboards and 50% of the 35 resident's doors and door jambs located on Hallway c. - an unknown dried brown substance in a splatter and drip pattern on the 9 areas of the walls of Hallway c; and - more than 50 areas of missing or damaged sheet rock on the walls throughout Hallway c. Observation of Hallway b on 05/28/2025 at 4:36PM revealed the following: - an accumulation of unknown black/brown/gray particles that began at Hallway b's front entry door jambs, continued along Hallway b's baseboards where they met the floor, surrounded the door jambs of the resident's rooms on Hallway b, and covered the lower one-sixth portion of multiple resident's room doors on Hallway b. Further observation revealed the above accumulation of black/brown/gray particles affected more than 50% of the baseboards and 50% of the 29 resident's doors and door jambs located on Hallway b. - an unknown dried brown substance in a splatter and drip pattern on the 7 areas of the walls of Hallway b; and - 50 areas of missing or damaged sheet rock on the walls throughout Hallway b. Observation on 05/29/2025 at 9:00AM revealed the bottom of the metal exit door near the facility's dining room was rusted and cracked and had a scattered pattern of rust spots on the bottom one-half of the door. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 9:00AM, S7Housekeeping Supervisor/Dietary Manager confirmed the above observations of Hallway a, Hallway b and Hallway c's walls, baseboards, door jambs, and resident's doors. S7Housekeeping Supervisor/Dietary Manager further acknowledged the above mentioned areas were not maintained as required. S7Housekeeping Supervisor/Dietary Manager further confirmed it was the facility's housekeeping department's responsibility to clean floors, door jambs, baseboards and walls, and the facility's maintenance department's responsibility to repair sheet rock, walls, and handrails. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 9:10AM, S8Plant Operations Manager confirmed above observations of Hallway a, Hallway b and Hallway c's walls, baseboards, door jambs, and resident's doors and exit door near dining room. S8Plant Operations Manager acknowledged the door jambs, baseboards/floor junctions, resident's doors and hallway's walls should be clean and the sheetrock to Hallway a, Hallway b and Hallway c should have been repaired and was not. S8Plant Operations Manager acknowledged the above mentioned observations did not present a clean/homelike environment at present. S8Plant Operations Manager further acknowledged the building had a lot of needed maintenance repairs. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 10:36AM, S1Administrator acknowledged Hallway a, Hallway b and Hallway c's walls, baseboards, door jambs, and resident's doors should have been clean and the sheetrock to Hallway a, Hallway b and Hallway c should have been repaired and was not. S1Administrator further acknowledged the above mentioned observations did not present a clean/homelike environment at present.
CONCERN (E)

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

MDS Data Transmission (Tag F0640)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment was transmitted within the required timeframe after completion for 1 (Resident #69) of ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment was transmitted within the required timeframe after completion for 1 (Resident #69) of 1 (Resident #69) sampled resident reviewed for assessment transmission. Findings: Review of Resident #69's annual MDS Assessment Section Z - Assessment Administration revealed, in part, Resident #69's annual MDS Assessment was completed and electronically signed by the Registered Nurse (RN) Assessment Coordinator on 04/17/2025. Review of the Final Validation Report dated 05/29/2025 revealed, in part, Resident #69's annual MDS Assessment was not submitted to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) database until 05/29/2025. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 8:24AM, S11Registered Nurse (RN) indicated Resident #69's annual MDS Assessment was completed on 04/17/2025 but was not transmitted until 05/29/2025. S11RN further indicated that the assessment should have been transmitted within 7 days of the completion date but was not as required.
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 interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain a system to accurately reconcile controlled substances for 6 (Medication Cart a, Medication Cart b, Medication Cart c, Medicatio...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain a system to accurately reconcile controlled substances for 6 (Medication Cart a, Medication Cart b, Medication Cart c, Medication Cart d, Medication Cart e, Medication Cart f) of 6 (Medication Cart a, Medication Cart b, Medication Cart c, Medication Cart d, Medication Cart e, Medication Cart f) medication carts reviewed for the reconciliation documentation of controlled substances. Findings: Review of the facility's May 2025 Medication Cart a Narcotic Nurse Sign on/off log revealed, in part, there was no signature that indicated the off going nurse had reconciled Medication Cart a's controlled substances with the oncoming nurse on: - 05/01/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; and, - 05/22/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift. Further review revealed there was no signature that indicated the oncoming nurse had reconciled Medication Cart a's controlled substances with the off going nurse on 05/01/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift. Further review on 05/29/2025 at 1:57PM revealed S13Licensed Practical Nurse's (LPN) signature that indicated Medication Cart a's controlled medications had been reconciled by the off going nurse on 05/29/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of having a record of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in Medication Cart a for the above mentioned dates and/or times. Review of the facility's May 2025 Medication Cart b Narcotic Nurse Sign on/off log revealed, in part, there was no signature that indicated the off going nurse had reconciled Medication Cart b's controlled substances with the oncoming nurse on: - 05/13/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/14/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/18/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/27/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; and, - 05/29/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift. Further review revealed there was no signature that indicated the oncoming nurse had reconciled Medication Cart b's controlled substances with the off going nurse on: - 05/15/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/27/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; and, - 05/28/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of having a record of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in Medication Cart b for the above mentioned dates and/or times. Review of the facility's May 2025 Medication Cart c Narcotic Nurse Sign on/off log revealed, in part, there was not a signature of both the off going nurse and on oncoming nurse indicating the off going and oncoming nurses had reconciled Medication Cart c's controlled substances together on: - 05/01/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/01/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/02/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/02/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/03/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/03/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/04/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/04/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/05/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/05/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/06/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/06/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/07/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/07/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/08/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/08/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/09/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/09/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/10/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/10/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/11/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/11/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/12/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/12/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/13/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/14/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/14/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/15/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/15/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/16/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/16/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/17/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/17/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/18/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/18/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/19/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/19/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/20/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/20/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/21/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/21/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/22/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/22/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/23/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/23/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/24/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/24/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/25/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/25/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/26/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/26/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/27/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/28/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/28/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; and, - 05/29/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift. Further review revealed there was no signature that indicated Medication Cart c's controlled medications had been reconciled on: - 05/13/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; and, - 05/27/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift. Further review on 05/29/2025 at 1:45PM revealed a nurse's signature that indicated Medication Cart c's controlled medications had been reconciled on 05/29/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of having a record of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in Medication Cart c for the above mentioned dates and/or times. Review of the facility's May 2025 Medication Cart d Narcotic Nurse Sign on/off log revealed, in part, there was not a signature of both the off going nurse and on oncoming nurse indicating the off going and oncoming nurses had reconciled Medication Cart d's controlled substances together on: - 05/01/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/01/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/02/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/02/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/03/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/03/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/04/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/04/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/05/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/06/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/07/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/07/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/08/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/09/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/09/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/10/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/10/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/11/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/11/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/12/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/12/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/13/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/13/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/14/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/14/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/15/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/15/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/16/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/16/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/17/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/17/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/18/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/18/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/19/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/19/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/20/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/20/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/21/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/22/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/23/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/23/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/24/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/24/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/25/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/25/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/26/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/26/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/27/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/27/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/28/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/28/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; and, - 05/29/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift. Further review revealed there was no signature that indicated Medication Cart d's controlled medications had been reconciled on: - 05/05/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/06/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/08/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/21/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; and, - 05/22/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of having a record of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in Medication Cart d for the above mentioned dates and/or times. Review of the facility's May 2025 Medication Cart e Narcotic Nurse Sign on/off log revealed, in part, there was no signature that indicated the off going nurse had reconciled Medication Cart e's controlled substances with the oncoming nurse on: - 05/13/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/16/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/19/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/22/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/24/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/26/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/27/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/28/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/28/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; and, - 05/29/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift. Further review revealed there was no signature that indicated the oncoming nurse had reconciled Medication Cart e's controlled substances with the off going nurse on: - 05/01/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/13/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/18/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/23/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/27/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; and, - 05/28/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of having a record of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in Medication Cart e for the above mentioned dates and/or times. Review of the facility's May 2025 Medication Cart f Narcotic Nurse Sign on/off log revealed, in part, there was no signature that indicated the off going nurse had reconciled Medication Cart f's controlled substances with the oncoming nurse on: - 05/12/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/12/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/13/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/13/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/14/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/21/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/22/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/24/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; - 05/25/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/25/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift; and, - 05/27/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift. Further review revealed there was no signature that indicated the oncoming nurse had reconciled Medication Cart f's controlled substances with the off going nurse on: - 05/12/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/13/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/24/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; - 05/28/2025 for the 7:00PM to 7:00AM shift; and, - 05/29/2025 for the 7:00AM to 7:00PM shift. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of having a record of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in Medication Cart f for the above mentioned dates and/or times. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 1:40PM, S12LPN indicated the Medication Cart b Narcotic Nurse sign on/off log was not completed as required. S12LPN further indicated the off going and oncoming nurses should have reconciled the controlled medications at shift change together and each signed the Narcotic Nurse sign on/off log to verify the controlled substances count was accurate. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 1:48PM, S14LPN indicated she could not provide any documentation Medication Cart c and Medication Cart d's controlled substances were reconciled on the above mentioned shifts by the oncoming and off going nurses and should have been. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 1:57PM, S13LPN indicated she signed Medication Cart a's Narcotic Nurse sign on/off log as having performed the end of shift reconciliation of Medication Cart a's controlled substances at the beginning of her shift and should not have. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence to dispute the above mentioned deficient practice. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 2:00PM, S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the above mentioned Narcotic Nurse Sign on/off logs were not completed with a nurse's signature at the beginning and/or at the end of the nurse's shift as required and should have been. S2DON further indicated the nurses assigned to Medication Cart c and Medication Cart d did not use the facility's approved Narcotic Nurse sign on/off log for the reconciliation of Medication Cart c and Medication Cart d's controlled substances and should have.
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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure a nurse secured medications when unatteneded for 1 (Medication Cart b) of 6 (Medication Cart a, Medication Cart b, Medication Cart c, ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a nurse secured medications when unatteneded for 1 (Medication Cart b) of 6 (Medication Cart a, Medication Cart b, Medication Cart c, Medication Cart d, Medication Cart e, Medication Cart f) medication carts reviewed for medication storage. Findings: Observation on 05/27/2025 at 12:22PM, revealed Medication Cart b was left unlocked and unattended. Further observation revealed the following medications were present on the top of Medication Cart b and unsecured: 55 tablets of metoprolol tartrate (a medication used to treat high blood pressure and chest pain) 25 milligrams (mg) and two vials of Zosyn (a medication used to treat infections) 4.5 grams. Further observation revealed S16Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) (the nurse responsible for Medication Cart b) was sitting at the nursing desk with her back turned to Medication Cart b. Further observation revealed Medication Cart b was left unattended by S16 LPN for 10 minutes. In an interview on 05/27/2025 at 12:33PM, S16LPN acknowledged she should not have the above mentioned medications and Medication Cart b unattended with the medications unsecured without proper supervision. In an interview on 05/29/25 at 8:35AM, S3Director of Nursing (DON) indicated the above mentioned medications should not have been left on top of Medication Cart b and unattended by the nurse. S3DON further indicated Medication Cart b should have been locked when not supervised.
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, interview, and record review the facility failed to: 1. ensure food stored in the facility's walk in cooler was properly dated and labeled, 2. ensure the dishwasher temperature a...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to: 1. ensure food stored in the facility's walk in cooler was properly dated and labeled, 2. ensure the dishwasher temperature and sanitizer log was properly maintained. Findings: 1. Review of the facility's policy for Food Receiving and Storage, with a revision date of 05/2024 revealed, in part, refrigerated foods are covered, labeled, and dated. An initial kitchen observation on 05/27/2025 at 8:25AM revealed the following: - 1 container of cooked carrots in a container covered with saran wrap not dated, - 1 container of barbeque sauce covered with saran wrap not dated and, - 14 styrofoam containers of chicken noodle soup were not dated In an interview on 05/27/2025 at 8:28AM, S7Dietary Manager confirmed the above mentioned containers of food should have been labeled and dated but were not. 2. Review of the facility's policy titled Dishwashing Machine Use, with a revision date of 10/01/2024 revealed, in part, a supervisor will check the dishwashing machine for proper concentrations of sanitizer solution (measured as parts-per-million [ppm]) after filling the dishwashing machine. Concentrations will be recorded in an approved facility log. Further policy review revealed the operator will check temperatures using the machine gauge with each dishwashing machine cycle, and will record the results in a facility approved log. An observation on 05/29/25 at 8:13AM, revealed the facility's dishwashing water temperature/sanitizer record was last documented on 05/20/2025 under the column listed for lunch. Further review revealed there was no documentation that the water temperature or sanitizer was checked prior to dishwashing after dinner was served on 05/20/2025. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 8:26AM, S7Dietary Manager indicated the dishwashing temperature/sanitizer record should be documented on prior to dishwashing after breakfast, lunch, and dinner daily. S7Dietary Manager also confirmed the facility's dishwashing water temperature/sanitizer record was not documented from 05/20/2025 at lunch until 05/29/2025 at breakfast and it should have been. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 8:40AM, S1Administrator indicated, the dishwasher water temperature/sanitizer record should have been completed on 05/20/2025 prior to dishwashing after dinner through 05/29/2025 but was not.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0868 (Tag F0868)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure the Quality Assurance and Assessment (QAA) committee met...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure the Quality Assurance and Assessment (QAA) committee met at least quarterly; and 2. Ensure the designated Infection Preventionist participated in the quarterly QAA meeting. Findings: 1. Review of the facility's QAA meeting sign-in sheet revealed the most recent QAA committee meeting was held on 04/09/2025. Further review revealed the prior QAA committee meeting was held on 10/09/2024. There was no documentation of a QAA meeting being conducted during the 1st quarter of 2025 (January-March) and the facility did not present any documented evidence a QAA meeting was held for the period of Jan-[DATE]. 2. Review of the Quarterly QAA meeting minutes dated 04/09/2025 revealed the Infection Preventionist (IP) was not documented on the sign-in sheet as being in attendance at the meeting. In an interview on 05/28/2025 at 3:01PM, S3Director of Nursing (DON) indicated the Infection Preventionist did not attend the 04/09/2025 QAA meeting. S3DON further indicated the committee failed to meet during the 1st quarter of 2025 and should have as required.
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations, interviews, and records reviews, the facility failed to: 1. Store clean mop heads in the clean linen area of the facility's laundry room; 2. Store clean linen in a sanitary mann...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and records reviews, the facility failed to: 1. Store clean mop heads in the clean linen area of the facility's laundry room; 2. Store clean linen in a sanitary manner; and, 3. Ensure residents' suction canisters were changed on the scheduled change date for 2 (Resident #62, Resident #82) of 2 (Resident #62, Resident #82) sampled residents reviewed for infection control. Findings: 1. Observation on 05/27/2025 at 10:00AM revealed, the facility's clean mop heads were stored in an open container next to an open container of dirty mop heads, and adjacent to containers of dirty laundry in the facility's contaminated laundry area. In an interview on 05/27/2025 at 10:01AM, S9Housekeeper indicated the mop heads stored in the above mentioned open container in the facility's contaminated laundry area were clean and ready to be used. In an interview on 05/27/2025 at 10:03AM, S10Housekeeper indicated the clean mop heads were normally stored in the above mentioned open container next to the dirty mop heads in the facility's contaminated laundry area. In an interview on 05/27/2025 at 10:04AM, S7Housekeeping Supervisor/Dietary Manager (HS/DM) confirmed the clean mop heads were stored in an open container next to the dirty mop heads in the facility's contaminated laundry area and should not have been. Observation on 05/28/2025 at 9:30AM revealed, the facility's clean mop heads were stored in an open container next to an open container of dirty mop heads, and adjacent to containers of dirty laundry in the facility's contaminated laundry area. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 11:20AM, S1Administrator was presented with the above mentioned findings and could offer no explanation as to why the clean mop heads were stored in the facility's contaminated laundry area. 2. Review of the facility's Infection Control policy and procedure, dated 11/22/2022, revealed, in part, linens should be properly handled, stored, processed, and transported to prevent the spread of infection. Observation of the facility's Hallway b on 05/28/2025 at 9:37AM revealed a storage container of soiled linen covered with a resident gown next to an open cart of clean linen and supplies. In an interview on 05/28/2025 at 9:40AM, S15Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) confirmed the storage container on Hallway b covered with a resident gown contained contaminated dirty linen and was next to an open cart of clean linen. Observation of the facility's Hallway c on 05/28/2025 at 9:54AM revealed a storage container of contaminated linen covered with a sheet next to an open cart of clean linen and supplies. Observation of the facility's Hallway a on 05/28/2025 at 9:55AM revealed a storage container of contaminated linen covered with a sheet next to and touching an open cart of clean linen and supplies. In an interview on 05/28/2025 at 9:56AM, S12Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) indicated it was common practice for the facility's CNAs to place clean linen and contaminated linen next to each other while changing the residents' linen. S12LPN further indicated the contaminated linen should be covered with a lid and not stored next to the clean linen. In an interview on 05/28/2025 at 10:00AM, S7HS/DM confirmed clean linen should be covered with a lid at all times. S7HS/DM further confirmed clean linen should not be kept next to contaminated linen. In an interview on 05/29/2025 at 11:20AM, S1Administrator was presented with the above mentioned findings and could offer no explanation as to why clean linen was stored in an open cart next to contaminated linen in the hallways of the facility. 3. Review of the facility's undated suction canister change schedule revealed, in part, suction canisters are be changed on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. Observation on 05/27/2025 at 10:24AM revealed Resident #62's suction canister was dated 05/22/2025. Further observation revealed Resident #62's suction canister contained a white and yellow liquid. Observation on 05/28/2025 at 1:20PM revealed Resident #82's suction canister was dated 05/22/2025. Further observation revealed Resident #82's suction canister contained a white and yellow liquid. In an interview on 05/28/2025 at 1:25PM S4Respiratory Director (RD) indicated suction canisters should be changed on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays. S4RD further indicated that a suction canister dated 05/22/2025 should have been changed on 05/24/2025 and again on 05/26/2025 but was not.
Nov 2024 3 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews, interviews, facility document reviews, and facility policy reviews, it was determined that the facility failed to keep a resident free from staff physical and verbal abuse for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for abuse. This deficient practice resulted in an actual harm on 11/19/2024when Resident #1 was physically abused by S2Maintenance and sustained injuries to his right face and left hand, which resulted in pain. Findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program, last revised on 07/25/2023 revealed, in part, residents have the right to be free from verbal, mental, and physical abuse. Review of Resident #1's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed, in part, Resident #1 had diagnoses, which included, blindness to both eyes and a conduct disorder (a behavioral and emotional disorder that presented as repetitive, disruptive and violent behavior). Review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] revealed, in part, Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated Resident #1 was cognitively intact. Further review revealed Resident #1 used a wheelchair for mobility. Review of the facility's Incident/Accident report dated 11/19/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #1 was involved in a verbal and physical altercation with an employee. Further review revealed Resident #1 indicated that he was pushed by the employee and fell out of his wheelchair. Further review revealed a body audit was completed and Resident #1 had a pinpoint open area of the skin to the right side of his face and on the top of his left hand. Review of the facility's investigative report for physical abuse dated 11/21/2024 revealed, in part, on 11/19/2024 at 2:00 p.m., S1Administrator received a report of an altercation between S2Maintenance and Resident #1 which had occurred outside of the building in the smoking area. Further review revealed S2Maintenance stood up over Resident #1, who was sitting in a wheelchair, and started to point at him. Further review revealed S2Maintenance told Resident #1 to go dig up his dead mother and that Resident #1's girlfriend had a d*ck he had been sucking on. Further review revealed Resident #1 swung at S2Maintenance, and S2Maintenance attempted to block Resident #1's swings. Further review revealed Resident #1 flipped out of his wheelchair after he grabbed S2Maintenance's chains and both Resident #1 and S2Maintenance fell to the ground. Further review revealed the allegation of physical abuse was substantiated. Review of the facility's New Employee Request/Termination sheet dated 11/21/2024 revealed, in part, S2Maintenance was terminated on 11/20/2024 for a Code of Conduct violation, and was not eligible for re-hire. Review of the facility's Employee Disciplinary report dated 11/19/2024 revealed, in part, S2Maintenance failed to walk away from a situation that led to verbal abuse and physical abuse of a resident. Review of Resident #1's progress notes dated 11/19/2024 at 3:53PM revealed, in part, S5Director of Nursing (DON) was notified at approximately 2:00PM on 11/19/2024, an incident had occurred between Resident #1 and an employee. Further review revealed Resident #1 indicated he was pushed by the employee. Further review revealed a pinpoint open area was present to Resident #1's left hand and the right side of Resident #1's face. Review of Resident #1's progress notes dated 11/20/2024 at 3:54PM revealed, in part, on the morning of 11/20/2024, Resident #1's right eye was observed to be blood shot (eye redness from irritated or inflamed blood vessels on the surface of the white part of the eye) and slightly swollen. Further review revealed Resident #1 indicated his right eye was tender to the touch. Further review revealed Resident #1's left hand was observed to be swollen and Resident #1's left hand grip was not as strong as his right hand grip. Resident #1 further indicated his left hand hurt. Further review revealed the physician ordered a cool compress for five days to the right eye, twice a day for ten minutes, and the administration of one (1) drop of artificial tears to Resident #1 right eye, three times a day for seven days. In an interview on 11/22/2024 at 11:18AM, Resident #1 indicated he had a fight with S2Maintenance on 11/19/2024. Resident #1 further indicated S2Maintenance was speaking about his girlfriend and his mother in a derogatory manner. Resident #1 further indicated S2Maintenance hit him. Resident #1 further indicated he was having some swelling and tenderness to his left hand. In a telephone interview on 11/22/2024 at 11:48AM, S3Smoking Aide indicated on 11/19/2024, Resident #1 was outside in the smoking area and began to curse at S2Maintenance. S3Smoking Aide further indicated, as S2Maintenance was walking away from Resident #1, Resident #1 stated to S2Maintenance, I dare you to come closer. S3Smoking Aide further indicated that S2Maintenance should have walked away from Resident #1 when Resident #1 dared him to come closer. S3Smoking Aide further indicated S2Maintenance instead turned around and went back towards Resident #1. S3Smoking Aide also indicated both Resident #1 and S2Maintenance were talking about each other's family members in a derogatory manner, were using profanity, and were yelling at each other. S3Smoking Aide further indicated she told them Resident #1 and S3Maintenance to calm down and also left to go and get assistance. In an interview on 11/22/2024 at 12:02PM, S4Social Worker indicated while in her office, she looked out of her window and saw Resident #1 and S2Maintenace arguing with each other. S4Social Worker further indicated she heard S2Maintenance tell Resident #1 he could go dig his own mother out of the grave. S4Social Worker further indicated S2Maintenance told Resident #1 that his girlfriend was a man. S4Social Worker further indicated that both Resident #1 and S2Maintenance were calling each other a b*tch and telling each other f*ck you. S4Social Worker further indicated when she got closer to the smoking area, she saw S2Maintenance was standing over Resident #1 and pointing his finger in Resident #1's face. S4Social Worker further indicated Resident #1 swung and hit S2Maintenance's hat. S4Social Worker further indicated S2Maintenance then looked at her and told her that he (S2Maintenance) would be wrong if he hit Resident #1, while S2Maintenance made a punching arm gesture. S4Social Worker indicated she was unsure if S2Maintenance hit Resident #1. S4Social Worker further indicated Resident #1's right eye was redder than normal after the incident and Resident #1's left hand was swollen the next day. In an interview on 11/22/2024 on 12:45PM, S5DON indicated she was notified an incident had occurred on 11/19/2024 around 2:00 p.m. between Resident #1 and S2Maintenance. S5DON further indicated when interviewing Resident #1 after the above mentioned incident, Resident #1 indicated S2Mainteance had hit him and pushed him out of his wheelchair. S5DON further indicated Resident #1 also indicated that S2Maintence had told him his girlfriend was a man and had spoken about his mother. S5DON further indicated, during the post incident assessment, she noted a pinpoint open area of skin to the top of Resident #1's left hand and the right side of Resident #1's face. S5DON further indicated on 11/20/2024, she checked on Resident #1 and noted that his conjunctival sac (the small fluid filled space between the eyelid and the white part of the eye) to his right eye was swollen and his left hand was swollen. S5DON further indicated she asked Resident #1 if he was hit in the right eye, and Resident #1 indicated that he was hit in the right eye. S5DON further indicated Resident #1 indicated that he was so upset yesterday (11/19/2024) that he did not tell her anything about it. S5DON further confirmed what S2Maintenance said to Resident #1 in the above documented incident was verbal abuse. Review of the provider's surveillance footage from 11/19/2024 revealed, in part: -At 1:54:37PM, S2Maintenance walked up toward Resident #1, made a pointing hand gesture towards Resident #1's head, and continued to walk past Resident #1. Further observation revealed S3Smoking Aide was also present. -At 1:54:48PM, S2Maintenance stopped walking and turned around and started to speak to Resident #1. Further observation revealed Resident #1 then appeared to become agitated. -At 1:54:59PM, S2Maintenance walked briskly towards Resident #1 and then started to hover over Resident #1, who was sitting in a wheelchair, while speaking to Resident #1. -At 1:55:09PM, S2Maintenance pointed his finger very close to Resident #1's face. Further observation revealed Resident #1 and S2Maintenance appeared to be speaking in a loud manner to one another. - At 1:55:17PM, S2Maintenance closed the distance between himself and Resident #1 and S2Maintenance's head was hovering over Resident #1's shoulder. Further observation revealed, Resident #1 then swung his arm and hit S2Maintenance. -At 1:55:19PM, S2Maintenance continued to hover over Resident #1, appeared to be shouting at Resident #1, and pointed his finger in Resident #1's face. -At 1:55:33PM, Resident #1 again swung at S2Maintenance, but did not hit S2Maintenance -At 1:55:37PM, S2Maintenance began to walk away from Resident #1, but turned towards Resident #1 and appeared to be shouting. Further observation revealed S2Maintenace continued to hover over Resident #1, appeared to be shouting at Resident #1, and pointed his finger in Resident #1's face. -At 1:55:42PM, Resident #1 swung at S2Maintenace as S2Maintenance was turning around to walk away, but did not hit S2Maintenance. -At 1:55:45PM, S2Maintenance turned back towards Resident #1. Further observation revealed S2Maintenance appeared to be shouting at Resident #1 and was hovering over Resident #1. -At 1:55:53PM, S2Maintenance appeared to walk away from Resident #1, but then immediately turned around and started to speak to Resident #1. Further observation revealed S2Maintenance was hovering over Resident #1 and made pointing hand gestures towards Resident #1's shoulder and then face. -At 1:55:56PM, Resident #1 swung his left arm near S2Maintenance's head and then swung his left arm at S2Maintenance's right shoulder. Further observation revealed S2Maintenance appeared to hit Resident #1's arm away to prevent Resident #1 from striking him, and then grabbed Resident #1's left hand. -At 1:55:59PM, Resident #1 pulled his left hand out of S2Mainteance's grip and swung at S2Maintenance with his left hand. Further observation revealed S2Maintenance's then grabbed Resident #1's left hand and they appeared to struggle with each other, which resulted in Resident #1's left arm being extended back over his wheelchair and slightly behind his body. -At 1:56:05PM, Resident #1 appeared to place his cigarette in his mouth with his right hand, and then grabbed S2Maintenance with his right hand, which caused S2Maintenance to let go of Resident #1's left hand. Further observation revealed S2Maintenance immediately grabbed Resident #1's left hand as Resident #1 and S2Maintenance continued to struggle with each other. -At 1:56:18PM, an unknown object fell to the ground and S2Maintenance released Resident #1's hand and stepped back from Resident #1. Further observation revealed S2Maintenance continued to speak to Resident #1 and then stepped towards Resident #1. -At 1:56:25PM, S2Maintenance pointed his finger at the side of Resident #1's face and it appeared that S2Maintenance's finger made contact with Resident #1 face, as his head appeared to jerk back. Further observation revealed Resident #1 swung his left arm at S2Maintenance. Further observation revealed Resident #1 and S2Maintenance continued to argue with S2Maintenance walking away and coming back to hover over Resident #1 multiple times. -At 1:56:39PM, S2Maintenance pointed his finger at the side of Resident #1's face and it appeared that S2Maintenance's finger made contact with Resident #, as his head appeared to jerk back. Further observation revealed Resident #1 swung his left arm at S2Maintenance. -At 1:56:43PM, S2Maintenance put his hands out, with palms up, and motioned his fingers towards his own body as Resident #1 and S2Maintenance continued to appear to argue. Further observation revealed S2Maintenance continued to transition from walking away from Resident #1 to returning to hover over Resident #1. -At 1:57:08PM, Resident #1 appeared say something to S2Maintenance and S2Maintenance moved his face closer to Resident #1's face. Further observation revealed S2Maintenance then banged on his own chest with his hands and then pointed toward the ground. Further observation revealed S2Maintenance and Resident #1 appeared to continue to argue with S2Maintenance continuing to hover over Resident #1. -At 1:57:56PM, S4Social Worker walked into frame, and S2Maintenance then started to walk away from Resident #1, but returned and pointed his finger in Resident #1's face. -At 1:58:07PM, Resident #1 swung at S2Maintenance and appeared to hit him on the rim of his baseball cap. Further observation revealed S2Maintenace then turned towards S4Social Worker, and made a gesture with his closed fist towards Resident #1. Further observation revealed S2Maintenance then appeared to push his fist onto the side of Resident #1's face as evidenced by Resident #1's head pushing back. Further observation revealed Resident #1 and S2Maintenance continued to appear to be shouting at each other. -At 1:58:16PM, S2Maintenance pointed his finger into Resident #1's face and Resident #1 swung at S2Maintenance and grabbed S2Maintenance with his left hand. Further observation revealed S2Maintenance then tried to use his right arm to remove Resident #1's left hand from his person, and in the process, Resident #1 swung and hit S2Mainteance's right arm, causing S2Maintenance's right arm to knock back into Resident #1. Further observation revealed at this point, Resident #1 toppled over backwards in his wheelchair and hit the ground. In an interview on 11/22/2024 at 1:41PM, S1Administrator indicated he substantiated physical and verbal abuse had occurred for the above mentioned incident. S1Administrator further indicated Resident #1 was harmed by the above mentioned incident because Resident #1 had a scratch under his eye and was complaining of tenderness to the area of the scratch. In an interview on 11/25/2024 at 1:50PM, S4Social Worker indicated she called her supervisor to contact S5DON when she saw the above mentioned altercation between Resident #1 and S2Maintenance. S4Social Worker further indicated she was scared of getting hit if she got in the middle of Resident #1 and S2Maintenace because both were large men, and Resident #1 was swinging his arms, but could not see what he would have been hitting. In an interview on 11/25/2024 at 2:29PM, S5DON confirmed S2Maintenance made physical contact with Resident #1's head at 1:58:07PM on 11/19/2024 per the facility's surveillance video. S5DON further indicated Resident #1 was both physically and verbally harmed by the above mentioned incident.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interviews, facility document reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure an allegation of physical abuse was reported to the Louisiana Departmen...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews, facility document reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure an allegation of physical abuse was reported to the Louisiana Department of Health no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents investigated for abuse. Findings Included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Reporting, Abuse, Neglect, Misappropriation of Property, last revised on 07/25/2023 revealed, in part, the Director of Nursing, the Assistant Administrator, and/or the Administrator shall immediately notify the designated representatives through the State Incident Management System (SIMS) within 2 hours if an allegation involved physical abuse or resulted in bodily harm or injury. Review of the provider's investigative report for physical abuse dated 11/21/2024 revealed, in part, S1Administrator received a report an altercation between S2Maintenance and Resident #1 had occurred outside in the smoking area. Further review revealed S2Maintenance stood up over Resident #1, who was sitting in a wheelchair, and started to point at him. Further review revealed S2Maintenance told Resident #1 to go dig up his dead mother and Resident #1's girlfriend had a d*ck he had been sucking on. Further review revealed Resident #1 swung at S2Maintenance, and S2Maintenance attempted to block Resident #1's swings. Further review revealed Resident #1 flipped out of his wheelchair after he grabbed S2Maintenance's chains (jewelry) and both fell to the ground. Further review revealed the allegation of physical abuse was substantiated. Further review revealed the incident occurred on 11/19/2024 at 2:00PM and was reported to the Louisiana Department of Health on 11/20/2024 at 9:35AM. Review of Resident #1's progress notes dated 11/19/2024 at 3:53PM revealed, in part, S5Director of Nursing (DON) was notified at approximately 2:00PM an incident had occurred between Resident #1 and an employee. Further review revealed Resident #1 indicated he was pushed by the employee. Further review revealed a pinpoint open area was present to Resident #1's left hand and the right side of Resident #1's face. In an interview on 11/22/2024 on 12:45PM., S5DON indicated she was notified an incident had occurred on 11/19/2024 around 2:00PM between Resident #1 and S2Maintenance. S5DON further indicated when interviewing Resident #1 after the above mentioned incident, Resident #1 indicated S2Mainteance had hit him and pushed him out of his wheelchair. S5DON further indicated Resident #1 also indicated that S2Maintence had told him his girlfriend was a man and had spoken about his mother. S5DON further indicated, during the post incident assessment, she noted a pinpoint open area of skin to the top of Resident #1's left hand and the right side of Resident #1's face. In an interview on 11/22/2024 at 1:41PM, S1Administrator indicated that he did not report the above mentioned allegation of abuse until 11/20/2024 at 9:35AM and could offer no further explanation to dispute the deficient practice.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0949 (Tag F0949)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure staff members received beh...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure staff members received behavioral health training for 5 (S2Maintenance, S3Smoking Aide, S4Social Worker, S6Certified Nursing Assistant [CNA], and S7CNA) of 5 personnel records reviewed for required trainings. Findings Included: Review of the Facility's assessment dated [DATE] revealed, in part, the facility had 58 residents with Psychiatric Diagnoses and 14 residents required behavior management. Review of S2Maintenance's personnel record revealed, in part, no documented evidence, and the facility did not present any documented evidence, S2Maintenance received behavioral health training. Review of S3Smoking Aide's personnel record revealed, in part, no documented evidence, and the facility did not present any documented evidence, S3Smoking Aide received behavioral health training. Review of S4Social Worker's personnel record revealed, in part, no documented evidence, and the facility did not present any documented evidence, S4Social Worker received behavioral health training. Review of S6CNA's personnel record revealed, in part, no documented evidence, and the facility did not present any documented evidence, S6CNA received behavioral health training. Review of S7CNA's personnel record revealed, in part, no documented evidence, and the facility did not present any documented evidence, S7CNA received behavioral health training. In an interview on 11/25/2024 at 2:22PM, S5Director of Nursing indicated she did not have any documented evidence the above mentioned staff received behavioral health training.
Oct 2024 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure adequate respiratory staff were available to provide respi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure adequate respiratory staff were available to provide respiratory care and services as ordered for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) sampled residents reviewed for respiratory care. Findings: Review of the facility's undated policy and procedure titled, Ventilator Assessment / Monitoring, revealed, in part, complete physical and mechanical assessments should be made on the first ventilator round of both the resident and the ventilator. Further review revealed ventilator rounding was every 4 hours. Review of the Facility assessment dated [DATE] revealed, in part, the facility's Technology Dependent Unit (TDU) staff needs required 2 respiratory therapists (RT) per shift. Further review revealed, minimum staffing requirements included 2 RTs twenty-four hours a day, every day. Review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 09/05/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had diagnoses of cardiorespiratory conditions and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia. Further review revealed Resident #1 received tracheostomy care and invasive mechanical ventilation. Review of Resident #1's 10/2024 physician's orders revealed, in part, an order with a start date of 11/20/2023 for Resident #1 to receive tracheostomy care twice per day at 09:00 a.m. and 09:00 p.m. Further review revealed an order with a start date of 11/20/2023, for ventilator checks every 4 hours at 12:00 a.m., 4:00 a.m., 8:00 a.m., 12:00 p.m., 4:00 p.m., and 8:00 p.m. Review of the facility's time cards revealed, in part, on 08/31/2024, from 7:03 p.m. to 10:27 p.m., only S8RT was working in the facility. Further review revealed no documented evidence any other RT was working in the facility at the above mentioned time. Review of Resident #1's Ventilator Check Administration history dated 08/31/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #1's 8:00 p.m. ventilator check was performed at 6:06 p.m. by S9RT (the RT scheduled for the day shift). In an interview on 09/30/2024 at 12:15 p.m., S3Respiratory Director (RD) indicated on 08/31/2024 from 7:03 p.m. to 10:27 p.m. there was only one RT at the facility and there should have been 2 as per the facility assessment requirement. In an interview on 10/02/2024 at 12:45 p.m., S8RT indicated on 08/31/2024 while working the 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. shift he had not entered Resident #1's room to perform a ventilator check prior to Resident #1's ventilator alarming at 9:53 p.m. In an interview on 10/02/2024 at 2:15 p.m., S1Administrator confirmed the facility should have 2 respiratory therapists on duty in the TDU at all times. S1Administrator further indicated there was a period of several hours in the evening on 08/31/2024 when there was only 1 respiratory therapist on duty and should not have been.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0726 (Tag F0726)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure Nurse Staffing Agency (NSA) Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) were trained on tracheostomy (a surgical opening in the neck to al...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure Nurse Staffing Agency (NSA) Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) were trained on tracheostomy (a surgical opening in the neck to allow air to enter the lungs) and ventilator (a machine that moves air in and out of a person's lungs) safety prior to being assigned to the facility's Technology Dependent Unit (TDU) (unit at the facility that houses the tracheostomy and ventilator residents) for 2 (S6CNA and S7CNA) of 2 (S6CNA and S7CNA) NSA CNAs sampled for tracheostomy and ventilator competency. Findings: Review of the facility's nursing staff in-service records dated 02/22/2024 through 09/17/2024 revealed, in part, no documented evidence, and the facility could not provide any documented evidence, S6CNA and/or S7CNA were in-serviced on tracheostomy and ventilator safety. Review of the facility's staff assignment log dated 08/31/2024 revealed, in part, S6CNA and S7CNA were assigned to the [NAME] unit (TDU) during the 7:00 p.m - 7:00 a.m. shift. Review of S6CNA's NSA record revealed, in part, no documented evidence, and the facility could not provide any documented evidence, S6CNA was trained on tracheostomy and ventilator safety prior to being assigned to the TDU. Review of S7CNA's NSA record revealed, in part, no documented evidence, and the facility could not provide any documented evidence, S7CNA was trained on tracheostomy and ventilator safety prior to being assigned to the TDU. In an interview on 09/30/2024 at 12:30 p.m., S5Certified Nursing Assistant Supervisor indicated NSA CNAs did not receive training on tracheostomy and ventilator safety prior to being assigned to the TDU. In an interview on 09/30/2024 at 2:05 p.m., S3Respiratory Director indicated NSA CNAs were not given training or orientation by respiratory staff prior to caring for tracheostomy and/or ventilator residents. In an interview on 10/02/2024 at 12:16 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed NSA CNAs were not given training on tracheostomy and ventilator safety prior to being assigned to the TDU and should have. In an interview on 10/02/2024 at 2:30 p.m., S1Administrator indicated NSA CNAs assigned to the TDU should have been trained on tracheostomy and ventilator safety prior to caring for tracheostomy and ventilator residents.
May 2024 5 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to: 1.) Ensure a careplan with measureable interventi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to: 1.) Ensure a careplan with measureable interventions was developed for a resident receiving oral antibiotics and wound care for contact dermatitis for 1 (Resident #6) of 4 (Resident #6, Resident #51, Resident #474, and Resident #475) sampled residents reviewed for infection control; 2.) Ensure a careplan with measureable interventions was developed for a resident receiving hospice services for 1 (Resident #474) of 2 (Resident #12 and Resident #474) sampled residents reviewed for hospice services; and, 3.) Ensure a careplan with measureable interventions was developed for a resident with an indwelling urinary catheter for 1 (Resident #474) of 2 (Resident #92 and Resident #474) sampled residents reviewed for urinary catheters. Findings: Resident #6 Review of Resident #6's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Gastrostomy status (a surgical inserted tube in the stomach). Further review revealed, Resident #6 returned to the facility on [DATE] after an emergency room visit with a diagnosis of Contact Dermatitis. Review of Resident #6's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/12/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #6's Brief Interview for Mental Status Score (BIMS) was a 99 which indicated Resident #6 was rarely understood and unable to complete the interview. Review of the Resident #6's After Visit Summary dated 05/07/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #6 was discharged from the hospital with an order for Cephalexin (a medication used to treat infections) 250 milligrams(mg) in 5 milliliters (mL) suspension. Review of Resident #6's Wound Management Detail Report, dated 05/07/2024 , revealed, in part, Resident #6 had a 10 centimeter (cm) wide by 10 cm long left lower abdominal wound. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that a plan of care had been developed with measureable interventions to reflect Resident #6's change in condition after Resident #6 returned from the hospital on [DATE] with an order for oral antibiotics and a left lower abdominal wound. In an interview on 05/16/2024 at 2:00 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated Resident #6's care plan was not developed with measurable interventions to reflect Resident #6's change in condition after Resident #6 returned to the facility from the hospital on [DATE] with an order for oral antibiotics and a left lower abdominal wound and it should have been. Resident #474 Review of Resident #474's EMR revealed Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Respiratory failure, Gastrostomy status, and Tracheostomy status. Review of Resident #474's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 04/08/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #474's Brief Interview for Mental Status Score (BIMS) was a 99 which indicated Resident #474 was rarely understood and unable to complete the interview. Review of Resident #474's May 2024 Physicians Orders revealed, in part an order dated 04/10/2024 for Resident#474's catheter to be changed every month and as needed. Further review revealed an order dated 05/05/2024 for Resident #474 to admit to hospice services. Observation on 05/13/2024 at 11:47 a.m. revealed Resident #474 lying in bed with an indwelling urinary catheter in place. Observation on 05/14/2024 at 11:50 a.m. revealed Resident #474 lying in bed with an indwelling urinary catheter in place. Observation on 05/15/2024 at 3:00 p.m. revealed Resident #474 lying in bed with an indwelling urinary catheter in place. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that a plan of care had been developed with measureable interventions after Resident #474 was admitted to hospice services. Further review revealed, there was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that a plan of care had been developed with measureable interventions for Resident #474's indwelling urinary catheter. In an interview on 05/16/2024 at 2:00 p.m., S2DON stated Resident #474's care plan was not developed with measurable interventions upon her being admitted to hospice services and upon having received an indwelling urinary catheter it should have been.
CONCERN (D)

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to have a resident with clean and trimmed fingernails for 1 (Resident #...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to have a resident with clean and trimmed fingernails for 1 (Resident #74) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for activities of daily living care (Resident #50 and Resident #74) in a total sample of 41 residents. Findings: Review of Resident #74's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed, in part, Resident #74 was assessed as having a brief interview for mental status score as a 5 which indicated Resident #74 was severely impaired. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #74 required substantial/maximal assistance for shower/bathing. Observation on 05/13/2024 at 10:15 a.m., revealed Resident #74's fingernails had an unknown black substance below his fingernails and some fingernails were approximately 3/16 inches long or longer. Observation on 05/14/2024 at 11:11 p.m., revealed Resident #74's fingernails had an unknown black substance below his fingernails and some fingernails were approximately 3/16 inches long or longer. In an interview on 05/13/2024 at 11:18 a.m., S14Licensed Practical Nurse indicated after assessing Resident #74's fingernails some of his fingernails were too long and some had an unknown black substance under the fingernails which needed care. In an interview on 05/15/2024 at 1:52 p.m., S2Director of Nurses indicated Resident #74' fingernails should have been trimmed and cleaned. In an interview on 05/16/2024 at 10:00 a.m., S13Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) indicated Resident #74 had a bed bath every day for the month of May from 05/01/2024 to 05/15/2024 per Resident #74's Certified Nursing Assistant Flow Sheet but there was no documentation of nail care being performed. S13ADON further indicated nail care for Resident #74 should have been provided as needed.
CONCERN (D)

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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's indwelling urinary catheter (a...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's indwelling urinary catheter (a tube that is passed through the lower abdominal wall directly into the bladder to drain urine) was secure to prevent pulling for 1 (Resident #475) of 4 (Resident #6, Resident #51, Resident #474, and Resident #475) sampled residents reviewed for infection control. Findings: Review of Resident #475's electronic medical record revealed, in part, Resident #475 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #475's Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 04/29/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #475 was dependent on staff for toileting. Review of Resident #475's May 2024 Physicians Orders revealed, in part an order dated 02/26/2024 for staff to assure a securement device such as a Stat Lock (a device used to secure an indwelling urinary catheter to a residents lower extremity) with Resident #475's indwelling urinary catheter was in place to her lower extremity every shift. Review of Resident #475's Comprehensive Care Plan dated 05/24/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #475 had a indwelling urinary catheter and staff should avoid pulling on catheter tubing. Observation on 05/14/2024 at 9:45 a.m. revealed Resident #475's indwelling urinary catheter was lying under her left lower extremity without a securement device in place. Observation on 05/15/2024 at 9:27 a.m. revealed S9Wound Care Nurse Licensed Practical Nurse (WCLPN) entered Resident #475's room to provide wound care. Observation revealed Resident #475's foley catheter tubing lying under Resident #475's left leg. Observation revealed S16CNA proceeded to assist S9WCLPN perform wound care on Resident #475, turned Resident #475 on her left side, which caused Resident #475's catheter to be pulled taunt. Observation further revealed Resident #475's indwelling urinary catheter without a securement device in place. Observation on 05/15/2024 at 10:25 a.m. revealed, S10Registered Nurse entered Resident #475's room to provide catheter care. Observation further revealed Resident #475's indwelling urinary catheter without a securement device in place. In an interview on 05/15/2024 at 2:45 p.m., S13Infection Preventionist/Assistant Director of Nursing (IC/ADON) stated Resident #475 did not have a securement device in place for her indwelling urinary catheter and she should have. In an interview on 05/15/2024 at 3:30 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed further Resident #475 did not have a securement device in place to ensure her catheter tubing was not pulling and she should have.
CONCERN (E)

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's medication was available for use and administ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's medication was available for use and administered as ordered for 1 (Resident #6) of 1 (Resident #6) sampled residents reviewed for infection control. Findings: Review of Resident #6's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Gastrostomy status. Further review revealed, Resident #6 returned to the facility on [DATE] after an emergency room visit with a diagnosis of Contact Dermatitis. Review of Resident #6's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/12/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #6's Brief Interview for Mental Status Score (BIMS) was a 99 which indicated Resident #6 was rarely understood and unable to complete the interview. Review of the Resident #6's After Visit Summary dated 05/07/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #6 was discharged from the hospital with an order for Cephalexin (a medication used to treat infections) 250 milligrams(mg) in 5 milliliters (mL) suspension. Further review revealed, Resident #6 was to receive 10ml of Cephalexin per gastric tube three times a day for 7 days. Review of Resident #6's May 2024 Physician Orders, revealed, an order with a start date 05/08/2024 for Cephalexin suspension 250mg/5ml- administer 10ml by gastric tube three times a day. Further review revealed an end date of 05/15/2024. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that an order was obtained from the physician to hold Resident #6's Cephalexin. Record Review of Pharmacy Delivery Report for Resident #6 for 05/08/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #6's Cephalexin 250mh/5ml suspension was received on 05/08/2024 at 4:02 p.m. Review of Resident #6's Electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) revealed no documentation of administration of Cephalexin 250mh/5ml suspension on 05/08/2024 at 6:00am, 2:00 p.m., 10:00 p.m., 05/09/2024 at 06:00a a.m., and 05/11/2024 at 6:00 a.m. Review revealed on 05/08/2024 at 6:00 a.m. S19Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) documented Resident #6's Cephalexin was not administered due to the drug not being available. Review revealed on 05/08/2024 at 2:00 p.m. S20Registered Nurse (RN) documented Resident #6's Cephalexin was not administered due to the facility waiting on pharmacy delivery. Further review revealed on 05/08/2024 at 10:00 p.m. S21RN documented Resident #6's Cephalexin was not administered due to the drug not being available. In an interview on 05/16/2024 at 10:55 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the facility's emergency medication kit contained Cephalexin 250mg. S2DON further stated if Resident #6's Cephalexin could not be obtained by the pharmacy, Resident #6's physician should have been contacted for an order to change or hold the medication until it was received and he was not.
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** Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to: 1.) Ensure enhanced barrier precautions were imp...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to: 1.) Ensure enhanced barrier precautions were implemented for a resident with an indwelling device or wound for 5 (Resident #6, Resident #51, Resident #111, Resident #474 and Resident #475) of 5 (Resident #6, Resident #51, Resident #111, Resident #474 and Resident #475) residents reviewed for enhanced barrier precautions; 2.) Ensure resident care items were identified and contained. 3.) Ensure nursing staff removed their gloves and completed hand hygiene while performing gastrostomy dressing changes for 1 (S10Registered Nurse (RN) of 1 (S10RN) RNs and 1 (S17Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)) of 1 (S17LPN) LPNs observed for gastrostomy tube dressing changes; and, 4.) Ensure the wound care nurse properly contained and disposed of a residents visibly soiled dressing for 1 (S9Wound Care Nurse/ Licensed Practical Nurse (WCLPN) of 1 (S9Wound Care Nurse/ Licensed Practical Nurse (WCLPN) nurses observed for wound care. Findings: Review of the facility's Enhanced Barrier Precautions policy dated 04/01/2024 revealed, in part, enhanced barrier precautions were indicated for resident with wounds and/or indwelling medical devices regardless of MDRO colonization. The policy revealed enhanced barrier precaution signs were to be posted on the door or wall outside of the resident's room indicating the type of precautions and the personal protective equipment required. Further review of the policy revealed, gowns and gloves should be used during high contact resident care which included, but was not limited to, dressing, bathing/showering, transferring, providing hygiene, changing lines, device care or use, and/or wound care. Review of the facility's Handwashing/Hand Hygiene Policy dated 09/01/1994, with a revision date of March 2022, revealed in part, hand hygiene was indicated immediately before touching a resident, after contact with blood, body fluids, or contaminated surfaces, after touching a resident, after touching the resident's environment, before moving from work on a soiled body site to a clean body site on the same resident, immediately after glove removal. 1.) Resident #6 Review of Resident #6's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Gastrostomy status (a surgical inserted tube in the stomach). Observation on 05/13/2024 at 10:00 a.m. revealed Resident #6 had a gastrostomy tube in place. Further observation revealed no evidence of enhanced barrier precautions signage or personal protective equipment in Resident #6's room. Observation on 05/15/2024 at 11:10 a.m. S17Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) entered Resident #6's room to perform gastrostomy tube site care. Observation revealed S17LPN performed site care to Resident #6's gastrostomy tube site without putting on a gown. Observation on 05/15/2024 at 11:12 a.m. revealed S9Wound Care Nurse Licensed Practical Nurse (WCLPN) entered Resident #6's room to provide wound care. Observation revealed S9WCLPN performed wound care to Resident #6's wound without putting on a gown. In an interview on 05/16/2024 at 2:00 p.m. S17LPN confirmed she did not wear a gown when performing Resident #6's gastrostomy site care. S17LPN stated she was unaware Resident #6 was on enhanced barrier precautions. Resident #51 Review of Resident #51's EMR revealed, in part, Resident #51 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of gastrostomy status, tracheostomy status, acute respiratory failure. Review of Resident #51's Comprehensive Care Plan dated 06/13/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #51 had a suprapubic urinary catheter, gastrostomy tube, and multiple pressure ulcers. Observation on 05/14/2024 at 10:03 a.m. revealed Resident #51 had a suprapubic urinary catheter and a gastrostomy tube in place. Further observation revealed no evidence of enhanced barrier precautions signage or personal protective equipment in Resident #51's room. Observation on 05/15/2024 at 10:40 a.m. revealed S9Wound Care Nurse Licensed Practical Nurse (WCLPN) entered Resident #51's room to provide wound care. Observation revealed S9WCLPN performed wound care to Resident #51's wounds without putting on a gown. Observation on 05/15/2024 at 10:09 a.m. revealed, S10Registered Nurse (RN) performed Resident #51's indwelling urinary catheter care without wearing a gown. Resident #111 Review of Resident #111 electronic medical records (EHR) revealed, in part, Resident #111 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnosis of heart failure, chronic respiratory failure unspecified with hypoxia, tracheostomy status, and dependence on respirator (ventilator status). Review of Resident #111 quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 02/08/2024, revealed, in part, Resident #111 had brief interview of mental status (BIMS) of 15 which indicated Resident #111 was cognitively intact, had active diagnosis of tracheostomy status and dependency on respirator (ventilator status), and had a stage IV pressure ulcer; in which is full thickness tissue loss with exposed bone, tendon, or muscle. Observation on 05/13/2024 at 11:35 a.m., revealed no evidence of enhanced barrier precautions signage or personal protective equipment for Resident #111. Observation on 05/14/2024 at 9:35 a.m., revealed no evidence of enhanced barrier precautions signage or personal protective equipment for Resident #111. Observation on 05/14/2024 at 9:41 a.m. revealed S9Wound Care Nurse Licensed Practical Nurse (WCLPN) provided wound care to Resident #111's stage IV pressure ulcer with the assistance of S12Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) without using personal protective equipment. In an interview on 05/14/2024 at 9:41 a.m., S9WCLPN indicated Resident #111 received wound care daily to the stage IV ulcer on her sacrum. Observation on 05/15/2024 at 1:30 p.m. revealed Resident #111's door had no enhanced barrier precaution (EPB) signage. Further observation revealed, S18Respiratory Therapist (RT) performed tracheostomy care to Resident #111, without putting on a gown. Observation on 05/16/2024 at 11:00 a.m. revealed no evidence of EBP personal protective equipment near Resident #111's room. In an interview on 05/16/2024 at 12:35 p.m. S18RT confirmed she did not use a gown when she performed respiratory care on Resident #111 on 05/15/2024. In an interview on 05/16/2024 at 12:45 p.m. S9WCLPN, indicated she did not know anything about enhanced barrier protection. S9 WCLPN also indicated she had not had any training on enhanced barrier protection at the facility. S9WCLPN further confirmed she did not wear a gown when she performed wound care on Resident #111 on 05/14/2024. Resident #474 Review of Resident #474's EMR revealed Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of respiratory failure, gastrostomy status, and tracheostomy status. Review of Resident #474's May 2024 Physicians Orders revealed, in part an order dated 04/10/2024 for Resident#474's indwelling urinary catheter was to be changed every month and as needed. Observation on 05/13/2024 at 11:47 a.m. revealed Resident #474 lying in bed with an indwelling urinary catheter in place. Further observation revealed no evidence of enhanced barrier precautions signage or personal protective equipment in Resident #474's room. Observation on 05/14/2024 at 11:50 a.m. revealed Resident #474 lying in bed with an indwelling urinary catheter in place. Further observation revealed no evidence of enhanced barrier precautions signage or personal protective equipment in Resident #474's room. Observation on 05/15/2024 at 3:00 p.m. revealed Resident #474 lying in bed with an indwelling urinary catheter in place. Further observation revealed no evidence of enhanced barrier precautions signage or personal protective equipment in Resident #474's room. In an interview on 05/16/2024 at 2:00 p.m. S17LPN stated she was unaware Resident #474 was on enhanced barrier precautions. Resident #475 Review of Resident #475's electronic medical record revealed, in part, Resident #475 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #475's Comprehensive Care Plan with a completion date of 05/24/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #475 had an indwelling urinary catheter. Observation on 05/14/2024 at 9:45 a.m. revealed Resident #475 had an indwelling urinary catheter in place. Further observation revealed no evidence of enhanced barrier precautions signage or personal protective equipment in Resident #475's room. Observation on 05/15/2024 at 9:27 a.m. revealed S9Wound Care Nurse Licensed Practical Nurse (WCLPN) preformed Resident #475's wound care without wearing a gown. Observation on 05/15/2024 at 10:25 a.m. revealed, S10Registered Nurse (RN) performed Resident #475's indwelling urinary catheter care without wearing a gown. In an interview on 05/15/2024 at 3:45 p.m., S2Director of Nursing stated Resident #6, Resident #51, Resident #111, Resident #474 and Resident #475 should have had enhanced barrier precautions signage on their door and staff should have used personal protective equipment when performing care and they did not. 2.) Observation on 05/14/2024 at 11:05 a.m., room a revealed a plastic urinal on the hand rail and a plastic wash basin on the floor with no identified label and was not contained. In an interview on 05/14/2024 at 11:05 a.m., S15Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) confirmed the urinal and wash basin in room a was not labelled and was not contained and should have been. Observation on 05/15/2024 at 10:18 a.m. revealed in room a's bathroom was a plastic urinal on the hand rail and a plastic wash basin on the floor that was not identified and not contained. In an interview on 05/15/2024 at 1:50 p.m., S2DON indicated the urinal and wash basin should have been contained in a plastic bag with the resident's initials identified on these items. 3.) Observation on 05/15/2024 at 10:09 a.m. S10RN entered Resident #51's room to perform gastrostomy tube site care. Observation revealed S10RN removed Resident #51's visibly soiled drainage sponge, obtained a bottle of wound cleanser, applied wound cleanser to gastrostomy tube site, cleaned the gastrostomy tube site, and applied a new drainage sponge to the gastrostomy tube site without performing hand hygiene or changing gloves. Observation further revealed S10RN removed Resident #51's brief, obtained the above mentioned bottle of wound cleanser, applied wound cleanser to Resident #51's suprapubic urinary catheter site, cleaned the suprapubic urinary catheter site, and applied a new drainage sponge to the suprapubic urinary catheter site without performing hand hygiene or changing gloves Observation on 05/15/2024 at 10:25 a.m. S10RN entered Resident #475's room to perform gastrostomy tube site care. Observation revealed S10RN removed Resident #475's visibly soiled drainage sponge, obtained a bottle of wound cleanser, applied wound cleanser to gastrostomy tube site, cleaned the gastrostomy tube site, and applied a new drainage sponge to the gastrostomy tube site without performing hand hygiene or changing gloves. Observation on 05/15/2024 at 11:10 a.m. S17LPN entered Resident #6's room to perform gastrostomy tube site care. Observation revealed S17LPN removed Resident #6's visibly soiled drainage sponge, obtained a bottle of wound cleanser, applied wound cleanser to gastrostomy tube site, cleaned the gastrostomy tube site, and applied a new drainage sponge to the gastrostomy tube site without performing hand hygiene or changing gloves. In an interview on 05/15/2024 at 11:30 a.m., S10RN confirmed she did not perform hand hygiene during Resident #51's and Resident #475's gastrostomy tube site care and she should have. S10RN further confirmed she did not perform hand hygiene between performing gastrostomy site care on Resident #51 and changing Resident #51's Suprapubic urinary catheter drainage sponge. In an interview on 05/15/2024 at 11:32 a.m., S17LPN confirmed she did not perform hand hygiene during Resident #6's gastrostomy tube site care and she should have. In an interview on 05/15/2024 at 3:30 p.m., S2DON stated nursing staff should perform hand hygiene after touching a visibly soiled item, prior to touching a clean surface. 4.) Observation on 05/15/2024 at 10:40 a.m. S9WCLPN entered Resident #51's room to perform wound care to Resident #51's right foot. Observation revealed S9WCLPN removed Resident #51's visibly soiled drainage sponge and placed it directly onto his bed. In an interview on 05/15/2024 at 11:15 a.m., S9WCLPN confirmed she placed Resident #51's visibly soiled bandage directly onto his bed. In an interview on 05/15/2024 at 2:00 p.m., S2DON stated the above mentioned findings were against infection control practices and all soiled bandages should be contained.
May 2024 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Tube Feeding (Tag F0693)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure a residents gastrostomy tube (a tube inserted directl...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure a residents gastrostomy tube (a tube inserted directly into the abdomen to provide nutrition) site was cleaned as ordered by the physician for 2 (Resident #1 and R5) of 4 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, and R5) residents reviewed for gastrostomy site care. Findings: Resident #1 Review of Resident #1's Quarterly Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 03/28/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had a gastrostomy tube. Review of Resident #1's April 2024 physician's orders, in part, revealed an order with a start date of 03/10/2024 for cleanse gastrostomy site with wound cleanser, pat dry and cover with drain sponge every day and as needed. Review of Resident #1's Electronic Medication Administration Record (EMAR) revealed, in part, Resident #1' did not receive gastrostomy site care on 03/11/2024, 03/13/2024, 03/15/2024, 03/17/2024, 03/19/2024, 03/21/2024, 03/23/2024, 03/25/2024, 03/27/2024, 03/29/2024, 03/31/2024, 04/02/2024, 04/04/2024, 04/06/2024, 04/08/2024, 04/10/2024, 04/12/2024, and 04/16/2024. In an interview on 05/09/2024 at 12:10 p.m., S2Director of Nursing indicated Resident #1's gastrostomy tube site care order was entered incorrectly and Resident #1 did not receive gastrostomy tube site care daily as per physician orders. Resident #2. Record review revealed R5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a gastrostomy tube. Review of R5's April 2024 Electronic Medication Administration Record, conducted on 05/09/2024 at 1:13pm, revealed no documented evidence, and the facility did not present any documented evidence, R5 had an order for and/or received gastrostomy tube site care since admit on 05/06/2024. In an interview on 05/09/2024 at 12:10 p.m., S2DON indicated R5 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a gastrostomy tube. S2DON confirmed a standing order to receive gastrostomy site care was not implemented for R5 on admission and should have been.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0925 (Tag F0925)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an environment that was free from pests a...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an environment that was free from pests as evidence by: 1. Maggots were identified in a residents gastrostomy tube (a tube that is inserted into a person's stomach to provide nutrition) site; 2. A fly was observed on the gastrostomy tube of 1 (Resident #3) of 2 (Resident #2 and Resident #3) residents observed for gastrostomy tube site care; 3. A fly was observed in the facility's kitchen; 4. Flies were observed in the facility's dining room; and, 5. Flies were observed on a residents bed linens for 1 (R4) of 3 (Resident #2, Resident #3, and R4) resident rooms observed for pests. Findings: Review of the facility's Root Cause Analysis Template dated 04/24/2024 revealed, in part, the description of event was a resident's gastrostomy tube site was found to have maggots. Further review revealed there were flies in the building. 1. Review of Resident #1's nurse note dated 04/19/2024 at 9:36 p.m. revealed, in part, S3Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) initiated gastrostomy site care for Resident #1 and found Resident #1's gastrostomy site had a moderate amount of drainage and multiple maggots moved in and around the gastrostomy tube site. Further review Resident #1 was sent to the emergency room on [DATE] for evaluation. In an interview on 05/08/2024 at 8:08 a.m., S3LPN indicated she cared for Resident #1 on 4/19/2024 and when she attempted clean Resident #1's gastrostomy tube site she discovered live maggots on Resident #1's tissue where the gastrostomy tube entered the abdomen and around the gastrostomy tube site. S3LPN indicated the facility had flies in the building and it was an ongoing problem. Observation on 05/07/2024 at 10:30 a.m. revealed the facility's exit door located on Hall Z did not close properly. Further observation revealed there was an approximate ½ inch opening on the left side of the door which extended from the door handle to the bottom of the door. Further observation revealed daylight and the pavement on the outside of the exit door could be seen through the opening which was large enough for pests to enter the building. 2. Observation on 05/08/2024 at 10:50 a.m. revealed S4Registered Nurse cleaned Resident #3's gastromoty tube site. During observation a fly landed on Resident #3's gastrostomy tube near the gastrostomy tube insertion site. In an interview on 05/08/2024 at 10:50 a.m., S4Registered Nurse confirmed a fly landed on Resident #3's gastrostomy tube near the gastrostomy tube insertion site. 3. Observation on 05/08/2024 at 11:55 a.m. revealed a live fly on a sauté pot on a shelf in the kitchen. In an interview on 05/08/2024 at 11:55 a.m., S5Dietary manager acknowledged the live fly on a clean sauté pot on the shelf in the kitchen. 4. Observation of the facility's dining room on 05/08/2024 at 12:23 p.m. revealed 10 dead flies and 2 live flies on the dining room windowsills. 5. Observation on 05/08/2024 at 12:26 p.m. of R4's room revealed flies on R4's bed linen and pillow. In an interview on 05/08/2024 at 12:26 p.m., S2DON confirmed there were flies on R4's bed linen and pillow. In an interview on 05/08/2024 at 2:29 p.m., the facility's pest control provider stated he was not contacted by the facility to provide any extra services in the last month. In an interview on 05/09/2024 at 12:35 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) indicated the facility had an ongoing problem with flies. S2DON further stated the flies in the facility increased the risk for residents to get parasites (an organism that lives in or on another species). In an interview on 05/08/2024 at 2:34 p.m., S1Administrator indicated he noticed the opening in the exit door on hall Z before but he did not realize it was a concern until this morning. S1Administrator acknowledged the opening in the exit door on hall Z could have allowed insects/flies to enter the facility. S1Administrator indicated the facility did not contact the pest control provider to request extra pest control treatments.
Mar 2024 1 deficiency
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to ensure documentation was complete and accurate for residents' acti...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to ensure documentation was complete and accurate for residents' activities of daily living (ADLs) and residents' 2 hour rounding for 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) of 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) sampled residents. Findings: Resident #1 Review of Resident #1's face sheet revealed Resident #1 had diagnoses of cerebrovascular vasospasm and vasoconstriction (a narrowing of the arteries in the brain), unspecified convulsions (a medical condition where the body muscles contract and relax rapidly and repeatedly), and altered mental status. Review of Resident #1's care plan revealed Resident #1 was care planned to have an ADL deficit related to a cerebrovascular accident (stroke) and required intervention from staff to provide assistance with ADLs. Review of Resident #1's nurse's note dated 12/20/2023 at 7:42 a.m. revealed Resident #1 was transferred out of the facility to the hospital. Review of Resident #1's November 2023 ADL flowsheet revealed no documented evidence and the facility was unable to provide any documented evidence Resident #1's ADL assistance and every 2 hour rounding was documented: - from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on 11/01/2023, 11/02/2023, 11/04/2023, and 11/05/2023; - from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on 11/06/2023; and, - from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on 11/07/2023 through 11/30/2023. Review of Resident #1's December 2023 ADL flowsheet revealed no documented evidence and the facility was unable to provide any documented evidence Resident #1's ADL assistance and every 2 hour rounding was documented: - from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on 12/16/2023 through 12/19/2023; - from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on 12/06/2023, 12/12/2023, 12/13/2023, and 12/14/2023; and, - from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on 12/01/2023 through 12/03/2023, 12/07/2023, 12/11/2023, and 12/15/2023. Further review of Resident #1's December 2023 ADL flowsheet revealed documentation ADL assistance was provided and rounding was completed every 2 hours for Resident #1 on 12/20/2023 from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. In an interview on 03/26/2024 at 12:30 p.m., S1Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed Resident #1's November and December 2023 ADL flowsheet had missing documentation for Resident #1's ADL assistance and every 2 hour rounding. Resident #2 Review of Resident #2's face sheet revealed Resident #2 had diagnoses of muscle weakness, oral cancer, and lack of coordination. Review of Resident #2's care plan revealed Resident #2 was care planned for the potential for a decline in ADLs related to generalized weakness and fatigue due to oral cancer treatment. Further review of Resident #2's care plan revealed interventions for staff to assist Resident #2 with ADLs as needed. Review of Resident #2's February 2024 nurse's notes revealed Resident #2 was sent to the hospital on [DATE] at 10:56 p.m. and returned to the facility on [DATE] at 12:00 a.m. Review of Resident #2's February 2024 ADL flowsheet revealed documentation ADL assistance and every 2 hour rounding was completed for Resident #2 from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on 02/08/2024 and 02/09/2024. Resident #3 Review of Resident #3's face sheet revealed Resident #3 had diagnoses of traumatic brain injury with loss of consciousness and Parkinson's with dyskinesia (uncontrolled, involuntary movements of the face, arms, and legs). Review of Resident #3's care plan revealed Resident #3 required staff assistance with ADLs. Review of Resident #3's nurse's note dated 03/22/2024 at 8:09 p.m. revealed Resident #3 was readmitted to the facility from the hospital on [DATE] at 1:17 p.m. Review of Resident #3's March 2024 ADL flowsheet revealed no documented evidence and the facility was unable to provide any documented evidence Resident #1's ADL assistance and every 2 hour rounding was documented: -from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on 03/22/2024; and, -from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on 03/23/2024 through 03/27/2024. In an interview on 03/27/2024 at 1:51 p.m., S1DON confirmed ADL documentation was missing for Resident #1 and Resident #3. S1DON further confirmed ADL assistance and every 2 hour rounding was documented for Resident #1 and Resident #2 while the residents were hospitalized . S1DON stated all ADL assistance and every 2 hour rounding should be documented completely and accurately on all residents' ADL flowsheets. S1DON further stated she did not have a process in place to ensure facility staff documented ADL assistance and rounding.
Jan 2024 9 deficiencies 1 IJ
CRITICAL (J) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Deficiency F0678 (Tag F0678)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure direct care staff provided basic life support, including C...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure direct care staff provided basic life support, including Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation(CPR) per the facility's policy and procedure, to a resident requiring emergency care according to the resident's advance directive and physician's order for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 (Residents #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5) sampled residents. On [DATE], at approximately 11:48 p.m., an Immediate Jeopardy occurred for Resident #1 when the resident, who was a full code, did not receive CPR upon being found pulseless, breathless, and unresponsive. Review of Resident #1's Power of Attorney's (POA) video camera footage of Resident #1's room on [DATE] from 11:48 p.m. through [DATE] at 12:03 a.m. revealed S4RespiratoryTherapist (RT) and S5RegisteredNurse(RN) were present in Resident #1's room throughout his medical emergency and chest compressions were not initiated until [DATE] at 12:03 a.m. Resident #1 was transported to the hospital and was admitted . Hospital records, dated [DATE], revealed Computed Tomography (CT) findings of anoxic encephalopathy (a process that begins with the cessation of cerebral blood flow to brain tissue), and Emergency Department physician's impression was ischemic bowel related to post cardiac arrest hypo-perfusion (low blood flow). The resident did not regain consciousness, was removed from life support, and expired on [DATE] at 6:09 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy continued when S4RT and S5RN failed to take immediate action to ensure Resident #1's code status was acted on according to their advance directives, the physician's order, American Heart Association Guidelines, and the facility's policy and procedures. S1Administrator was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on [DATE] at 4:46 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on [DATE] at 6:59 p.m., as confirmed by onsite verification through observations, interviews, and record reviews. The facility implemented an acceptable Plan of Removal (POR) prior to survey exit. This deficient practice had the likelihood to cause more than minimum harm to the remaining 26 residents (Resident #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14, #15, #16, #17, #18, #19, #20, #21,#22, #23, #24, #25, and #26) who were in the care of S5RN and S4RT on Hall Z identified as residents with an advanced directive that indicated staff would need to provide basic life support. Findings: Review of the facility's Emergency Procedure- Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) policy revealed, in part, the chances of surviving sudden cardiac arrest may be increased if CPR is initiated immediately upon collapse. Review revealed, if an individual was found unresponsive, the resident should be briefly assessed for abnormal or absence of breathing. If sudden cardiac arrest was likely, CPR should be initiated. Review revealed, The facility's procedure for administering CPR incorporated the steps covered in the 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Career facility basic life support (BLS) training material. Further review revealed, the basic life support sequence of events was referred to as C-A-B (chest compressions, airway, and breathing). Review of 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Career facility BLS training manual revealed, in part, chest compressions should be started immediately. Review revealed, opening an airway and providing ventilation may cause significant delay. Review revealed, without effective chest compressions oxygen flow to the brain and the heart stops. Review of MedlinePlus.gov's online article CPR - Adult and Child after Onset of Puberty dated [DATE] revealed, in part, time is very important when an unconscious person is not breathing. Further review revealed, permanent brain damage begins after only 4 minutes without oxygen, and death can occur as soon as 4 to 6 minutes later. Review of Resident #1's medical record revealed, in part, an admission date of [DATE] with diagnoses that included: Acute Respiratory Failure, Hypoxia, and Tracheostomy Status. Review of Louisiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (LaPost) dated [DATE] revealed, in part, if Resident #1 was unresponsive, pulseless and was not breathing, CPR or an attempt at resuscitation should be performed. Further review revealed, Resident #1's financial and medical power of attorney (POA) signed and dated the form on [DATE]. Review of Resident #1's [DATE] physician orders revealed, in part, an order dated [DATE] for Code Status: Full Code. Review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of [DATE] revealed, in part, Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3 which indicated Resident #1 was severely cognitively impaired. Review revealed, Resident #1 had no behaviors of rejection of care, and was dependent with moderate to maximal assistance with activities of daily living. Further review revealed Resident #1 had an active diagnosis of Tracheostomy Status. Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Plan of Care with a Target Completion Date of [DATE] revealed, in part, Resident #1 was a full code. Further review of Resident #1's Plan of Care with a Target Completion Date of [DATE] revealed, in part, a Resident #1's tracheostomy tube and airway would be maintained. Review of Resident #1's Power of Attorney's (POA) video camera footage of Resident #1's room on [DATE] from approximately 11:48 p.m. through [DATE] at approximately 12:03 a.m. revealed, in part, Resident #1 lying supine with his tracheostomy (a device surgically inserted into the trachea to allow air to fill the lungs) lying on Resident #1's right side on top of his blanket. S4RT entered Resident #1's room, applied gloves, and attempted to replace Resident #1's tracheostomy into his stoma (an opening in the neck where the tracheostomy is inserted). After being unsuccessful, S4RT opened a new tracheostomy kit, inserted the tracheostomy into Resident #1's stoma, and secured the tracheostomy around Resident #1's neck. S4RT obtained an Ambubag (a hand held device used to provide positive pressure ventilation to residents who are not breathing) and began bagging (imitation of positive pressure ventilation to an individual with insufficient breathing) Resident #1. S4RT stopped bagging Resident #1, shook Resident #1, exited Resident #1's room, and returned with a pulse oximeter (a device used to measure oxygen saturation in the blood). S4RT placed the pulse oximeter on Resident #1's finger and then exited Resident #1's room, leaving Resident #1 alone. S5RN passed Resident #1's door and S4RT reentered Resident #1's room with a portable oxygen cylinder. S5RN then entered Resident #1's room, placed her hands on Resident #1's chest, immediately removed her hands from Resident #1's chest, and exited Resident #1's room. S4RT then connected the portable oxygen cylinder to the Ambubag. At this time, S26Certified Nursing Assistant was observed passing Resident #1's door. S4RT placed the Ambubag on Resident #1, and began bagging Resident #1. S4RT exited Resident #1's room again, leaving Resident #1 unattended. Review of Resident #1's Power of Attorney's (POA) video camera footage of Resident #1's room on [DATE] from 12:03 a.m. through [DATE] at approximately 12:10 a.m. revealed S4RT reentered Resident #1's room with S5RN, S26CNA, and S27CNA and S5RN started chest compressions. S5RN, S26CNA, and S27CNA alternated performing chest compressions until the fire department arrived. Further review revealed, the fire department entered Resident #1's room, immediately placed him on the floor, and began chest compressions. Review of Resident #1's nursing progress noted dated [DATE] at 11:49 p.m. written by S5RN revealed, in part, S5RN was called to Resident #1's room by S4RT. Further review revealed, Resident #1 was found unresponsive with no pulse, no respirations, and no blood pressure. Further review revealed, S4RT stated Resident #1 pulled out his tracheostomy tube, and S5RN initiated CPR and called 911. Further review revealed S5RN continued with CPR until the arrival of EMS on [DATE] at 12:15 a.m. when Resident #1 was transported to the hospital for evaluation and treatment. Review of Resident #1's respiratory progress note dated [DATE] at 12:48 a.m. written by S4RT revealed, in part, at 11:30 p.m. Resident #1 was found apneic (absence of breathing) and without a pulse with his tracheostomy tube completely pulled out. S4Respiratory Therapist inserted tracheostomy tube back in the trachea and began bagging Resident #1. The nurse called 911 and Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) helped with compressions. The firemen and emergency medical technicians (EMTs) arrived and performed machine compressions, gave epinephrine, and were able to regain a pulse back. Resident #1 was sent to the hospital. Review of Resident #1's hospital records revealed a computerized tomography (CT) scan dated [DATE] at 2:04 a.m. with results that read, concerning for anoxic encephalopathy (a process that begins with the cessation of cerebral blood flow to brain tissue). Review of Resident #1's emergency room records revealed a physician's note dated [DATE] at 2:25 a.m. that read suspected bowel ischemia (evaluated by gastrointestinal team) and related it to a post cardiac arrest hypoperfusion (lack of blood flow) state. Review of Resident #1's hospital physician progress note dated [DATE] at 1:13 p.m. revealed, the physician notified Resident #1's family of concerning findings on head CT which showed an anoxic brain injury. Review of Resident #1's hospital respiratory progress note dated [DATE] at 11:33 a.m. revealed, in part, Resident #1 was placed on comfort care and his ventilator was turned off at 11:00 a.m. Review of Resident #1's death certificate revealed, in part, an expiration date of [DATE] at 6:09 p.m. In an interview on [DATE] at 9:40 a.m., S5RN stated she was the nurse responsible for Resident #1 on [DATE] from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. S5RN stated after reviewing the above mentioned camera footage, on the night of [DATE], S5RN was notified by S4RT, that Resident #1 was pulseless and unresponsive. S5RN stated upon entering Resident #1's room, she instructed S4RT to initiate chest compressions. S5RN stated she did not start chest compressions on Resident #1 because her main priority was to call 911. S5RN stated the facility's protocol was to yell out for help and immediately start CPR. S5RN confirmed CPR should be performed on a hard surface or a CPR board should be used. S5RN confirmed chest compressions should have been started on Resident #1 immediately. S5RN further confirmed anyone in the facility can call 911 and her priority should have been Resident #1. In an interview on [DATE] at 10:13 a.m., S4RT stated he was the Respiratory Therapist caring for Resident #1 on [DATE] from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. S4RT stated after reviewing the above mentioned camera footage, when he entered Resident #1's room at approximately 11:48 p.m., Resident #1 was pulseless and breathless. S4RT stated he visualized Resident #1's tracheostomy tube was not in place and he immediately attempted to replace it. S4RT stated during the above mentioned time frame, he was doing the tasks he was capable of doing while he was by himself in Resident #1's room. S4RT further stated because he was the respiratory therapist, his main focus was Resident #1's airway. S4RT confirmed following the initial assessment of Resident #1, he should have immediately begun chest compressions and he did not. S4RT further confirmed he should not have left Resident #1 alone at any time. In an interview on [DATE] at 4:00 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated after reviewing the above mentioned video footage, S4RT and/or S5RN failed to perform chest compressions for Resident #1 for approximately 15 minutes. S2DON stated the above action by S4RT and S5RN was against the facility's policy and procedure for emergency procedures related to CPR, which was to begin chest compressions immediately. S2DON further stated S4RT and S5RN's actions left the remaining 26 residents on Hall Z who had an advanced directive status of full code at risk for serious injury, harm, or death. In an interview on [DATE] at 11:30 a.m., S1Adminstrator stated after reviewing the above mentioned video footage, S4RT and S5RN failed to perform chest compressions for Resident #1 for approximately 15 minutes. S1Adminstrator further stated the above actions by S4RT and S5RN were against the facility's policy and procedure for emergency procedures related to CPR, which was to begin chest compressions immediately.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's representative/power of attorney(POA) was immed...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's representative/power of attorney(POA) was immediately notified of a significant change in his medical condition for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, and Resident #5) sampled residents. Findings: Review of the facility's Notification of Changes policy, revealed, in part, a notification of change included a significant change in the resident's physical, mental, or psychological status, such as deterioration in health, mental, or psychological status, in life-threatening conditions or clinical conditions. Review of Resident #1's Power of Attorney's (POA) video camera footage of Resident #1's room on [DATE] from approximately 11:48 p.m. through [DATE] at approximately 12:03 a.m. revealed, in part, Resident #1 lying supine with his tracheostomy (a device surgically inserted into the trachea to allow air to fill the lungs) lying on Resident #1's right side on top of his blanket. S4RT entered Resident #1's room, applied gloves, and attempted to replace Resident #1's tracheostomy into his stoma (an opening in the neck where the tracheostomy is inserted). After being unsuccessful, S4RT opened a new tracheostomy kit, inserted the tracheostomy into Resident #1's stoma, and secured the tracheostomy around Resident #1's neck. S4RT obtained an Ambubag (a hand held device used to provide positive pressure ventilation to residents who are not breathing) and began bagging (imitation of positive pressure ventilation to an individual with insufficient breathing) Resident #1. S4RT stopped bagging Resident #1, shook Resident #1, exited Resident #1's room, and returned with a pulse oximeter (a device used to measure oxygen saturation in the blood). S4RT placed the pulse oximeter on Resident #1's finger and then exited Resident #1's room, leaving Resident #1 alone. S5RN passed Resident #1's door and S4RT reentered Resident #1's room with a portable oxygen cylinder. S5RN then entered Resident #1's room, placed her hands on Resident #1's chest, immediately removed her hands from Resident #1's chest, and exited Resident #1's room. S4RT then connected the portable oxygen cylinder to the Ambubag. At this time, S26Certified Nursing Assistant was observed passing Resident #1's door. S4RT placed the Ambubag on Resident #1, and began bagging Resident #1. S4RT exited Resident #1's room again, leaving Resident #1 unattended. Review of Resident #1's Power of Attorney's (POA) video camera footage of Resident #1's room on [DATE] from 12:03 a.m. through [DATE] at approximately 12:10 a.m. revealed S4RT reentered Resident #1's room with S5RN, S26CNA, and S27CNA and S5RN started chest compressions. S5RN, S26CNA, and S27CNA alternated performing chest compressions until the fire department arrived. Further review revealed, the fire department entered Resident #1's room, immediately placed him on the floor, and began chest compressions. Review of Resident #1's progress notes dated [DATE] through [DATE] revealed no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence Resident #1's POA was notified Resident #1 required CPR. In an in interview on [DATE] at 10:30 a.m., Resident #1's power of attorney (POA) stated on [DATE] at approximately 2:00 a.m., the facility called to notify her Resident #1 was sent to the hospital for removing his tracheostomy tube. Resident #1's POA stated after reviewing the above mentioned camera footage she visualized staff performing Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) on Resident #1. Resident #1's POA further stated the facility did not notify her of Resident #1's significant change in condition nor was she notified Resident #1 received CPR. In an interview on [DATE] at 9:40 a.m., S5RegisteredNurse(RN) stated she did not notify Resident #1's POA of Resident #1's significant change in condition after Resident #1 had a medical emergency on [DATE] which included Resident #1 receiving CPR, and she should have. In an interview on [DATE] at 1:30 p.m., S2Director of Nursing stated S5RN stated should have notified Resident #1's POA of Resident #1's significant change in condition that required him to receive CPR.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident remained free from neglect by failing to ensure staff made rounds/checked on a resident every two hours for a resident wh...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident remained free from neglect by failing to ensure staff made rounds/checked on a resident every two hours for a resident who was cognitively impaired, had an active tracheostomy status diagnosis, and who was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living. This deficient practice was identified for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, Resident #5) sampled residents. Findings: Review of the facility's Reporting Abuse, Neglect, Misappropriation of Property Policy, revised March 2023, revealed, in part, all residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of property as well as the fear of being abused or neglected. Further review revealed, in part, the Director of Nursing, Assistant Administrator, or Administrator should immediately notify the State Survey Agency within 2 hours after the allegation. Review of the facility's Reinsertion of Tracheostomy Tube policy revealed, in part, the respiratory care staff would be held responsible and accountable for maintenance of a resident's artificial airway. Review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 11/21/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3 which indicated Resident #1 was severely cognitively impaired. Review revealed, Resident #1 had no behaviors of rejection of care, and was dependent with moderate to maximal assistance with activities of daily living. Further review revealed Resident #1 had an active diagnosis of Tracheostomy Status. Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Plan of Care with a Target Completion Date of 02/14/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #1 was a full code. Further review of Resident #1's Plan of Care with a Target Completion Date of 02/15/2024 revealed, in part, a Resident #1's tracheostomy tube and airway would be maintained. Resident #1's care plan also revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility 11/14/2023 with wounds where staff, which identified respiratory and nursing staff, in part, were to turn and reposition Resident #1 frequently-at least every two hours. Review of Resident #1's Physician's Order Report for 12/11/2023 - 01/11/2024, with a start date of 11/30/2023, revealed in part that Resident #1 was to be repositioned every two hours. Review of Resident #1's Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) flow sheet revealed in part, that rounds were to be made on Resident #1 every two hours. Review of Resident #1's respiratory note written by S4Respiratory Therapist (RT) on 12/12/2023 at 9:30 p.m. revealed, in part, Resident #1 pulled out his tracheostomy tube, but S4RT was able to put it back in immediately with no ill effects on Resident #1. Review of Resident #1's Power of Attorney's (POA) video camera footage of Resident #1's room revealed on 12/15/2023 at 7:43 p.m., S4RT exited Resident #1's room and did not return until 11:48 p.m., at which time S4RT discovered Resident #1 with his tracheostomy tube removed and to be pulseless and breathless. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that any staff checked on and/or provided care to Resident #1 during the above mentioned time period. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 10:30 a.m., S19Director of Respiratory Therapy (DRT) stated the facility's policy and her expectation as the facility's Respiratory Director was for rounding to be performed by respiratory therapist at least every 2 hours on residents who had a history of removing their own tracheostomy tube. S19DRT further stated it was the respiratory therapy department's responsibility to ensure appropriate interventions were implemented to assist in the prevention of a resident removing their tracheostomy tube. S19DRT confirmed after reviewing the above mentioned video footage, S4RT neglected to check on Resident #1 at least every two hours and implement interventions to prevent Resident #1 from removing his tracheostomy tube. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 4:00 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated S5Registered Nurse (RN) and S26Certfied Nursing Assistant (CNA) were assigned to provide care for Resident #1 on 12/15/2023 from 7:00 p.m. through 7:00 a.m. The facility's policy was for nursing staff to check on residents at least every 2 hours. S2DON confirmed after reviewing the above mentioned video footage, S5RN and S26Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) neglected to check on and/or provide care for Resident #1 at least every two hours. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 9:40 a.m., S5Registered Nurse (RN) stated she was the nurse responsible for Resident #1 on 12/15/2023 from 7:00 p.m. through 12/16/2023 at 7:00 a.m. S5RN confirmed, after reviewing the above mentioned camera footage, she did not check on and/or provide care for Resident #1 from 12/15/2023 at 7:00 p.m. to 12/15/2023 at 11:48 p.m. when Resident #1 was found pulseless and breathless by S4RT. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 10:13 a.m., S4RT stated he was the RT responsible for Resident #1 on 12/15/2023 from 7:00 p.m. through 12/16/2023 at 7:00 a.m. S5RT confirmed, after reviewing the above mentioned camera footage, he did not increase his frequency of making rounds and/or implement any new interventions to assist in the prevention for Resident #1 after Resident #1 removed his trach on 12/12/2023 and he should have. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 11:30 a.m., S1Adminstrator confirmed after reviewing the above mentioned video footage, S4RT and S5RN neglected to check on and/or provide care for Resident #1 at least every two hours.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to report an allegation of neglect timely to the State Survey Agency and Certification Agency as required for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 (Resident #...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to report an allegation of neglect timely to the State Survey Agency and Certification Agency as required for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, and Resident #5) sampled residents. Findings: Review of the facility's Reporting Abuse, Neglect, Misappropriation of Property Policy, revised March 2023, revealed, in part, all residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of property as well as the fear of being abused or neglected. Further review revealed, in part, the Director of Nursing, Assistant Administrator, or Administrator should immediately notify the State Survey Agency within 2 hours after the allegation. Review of Resident #1's Power of Attorney's (POA) video camera footage of Resident #1's room revealed on 12/15/2023 at 7:43 p.m., S4RT exited Resident #1's room and did not return until 11:48 p.m., at which time S4RT discovered Resident #1 with his tracheostomy tube removed and to be pulseless and breathless. In an interview on 01/12/2024 at 4:00 p.m. S1Adminstrator confirmed after reviewing the above mentioned video footage, which confirmed Resident #1 had been neglected, a State Incident Management report should have been completed within 2 hours and it was not.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Tube Feeding (Tag F0693)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure tube feedings were administered as ordered for 1 (Resident #3) of 5 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3, Resi...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure tube feedings were administered as ordered for 1 (Resident #3) of 5 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3, Resident #4, and Resident #5 ) sampled residents. Findings: Review of Resident #3's MDS (Minimum Data Sheet) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 12/07/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3's was severely impaired and dependent on staff with eating. Review of Resident #3's January 2024 physician orders revealed, in part, an order with a start date of 11/30/2023 for Jevity 1.2 calorie (cal) (a tube feeding formula that provides complete and balanced nutrition) at 70 milliliters (ml)/hour (hr). Observation on 01/10/2024 at 10:06 a.m. revealed Resident #3 was receiving Jevity 1.5 cal tube feeding at 70 ml/hr via percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 10:23 a.m., S6Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated Resident #3 was receiving Jevity 1.5 cal tube feeding at 70ml/hr. Observation on 01/10/2024 at 1:10 p.m. revealed Resident #3 was receiving Jevity 1.5 cal tube feeding at 70 ml/hr via percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) Observation on 01/11/2024 at 12:16 p.m. revealed Resident #3 was receiving Jevity 1.5 cal tube feeding at 70 ml/hr via percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 5:12 p.m., S6LPN stated Resident #3 was receiving Jevity 1.5 cal at 70ml/hr. S6LPN further stated Resident #3 should have been receiving Jevity 1.2 cal at 70 ml/hr according to Resident #3's physician's order. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 5:38 p.m., S3Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed Resident #3 received Jevity 1.5 cal at 70 ml/hr. S3ADON stated Resident #3 should have received Jevity 1.2 cal at 70ml/hr per Resident #3's physician's order.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure 12 controlled drugs were accurately reconciled for 1 (Medication Cart y) of 2 (Medication Cart x and Medication Cart...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure 12 controlled drugs were accurately reconciled for 1 (Medication Cart y) of 2 (Medication Cart x and Medication Cart y,) medication carts observed for controlled drug reconciliation. Findings: Review of the facility's Controlled Substances Policy and Procedure revealed, in part, when a controlled substance was administered, the nurse administering the medication was responsible for recording: the name of the resident receiving the medication; the name, strength and dose of the medication; the time of the medication was administered; the method in which the medication was administered, the quantity of medication remaining; and the signature of the nurse administering the medication. Observation on 01/10/2024 at 5:58 a.m. of Medication Cart y revealed the following: - Resident #3's controlled medication cards had 2 tablets of Lacosamide (a controlled medication used to prevent and control seizures) 200 milligram (mg) and 49 tablets of Phenobarbital (a medication used to prevent and treat seizures) 97.2mg available; -Resident #6's controlled medication card had 8 tablets of Lacosamide 200 mg available; -Resident #10's controlled medication cards had 19 tablets of Tramadol Hydrochloride (HCL) (medication used to treat pain) 50mg available; -Resident #12's controlled medication card had 59 tablets of Clonazepam (a medication used to treat anxiety) 2mg available; - Resident #13's controlled medication card had 7 tablets of Clonazepam 1mg available; - Resident #14's controlled medication card had 0 tablets of Alprazolam (a medication used to treat anxiety) 0.25mg available; -Resident #27's controlled medication cards had 65 tablets of Oxycodone (a medication used to treat pain) HCL 5mg available, 23 tablets of Alprazolam 0.5mg available, and 16 tablets of Clonazepam 0.5mg available; and, - Resident #28's controlled medication cards had 28 tablets of Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen (APAP) (a controlled medication used to treat pain) 5-325 mg available and 15 tablets of Alprazolam 0.5mg available. Review of the Narcotic Record on Medication Cart y revealed the following: -Resident #3's Individual Narcotic Record had a remaining quantity of 3 Lacosamide 200 mg and 51 Phenobarbital tablets documented; - Resident #6's Individual Narcotic Record had a remaining quantity of 9 Lacosamide tablets documented; - Resident #10's Individual Narcotic Record had a remaining quantity of 20 Tramadol HCL tablets documented; - Resident #12's Individual Narcotic Record had a remaining quantity of 60 Clonazepam tablets documented; - Resident #13's Individual Narcotic Record had a remaining quantity of 8 Clonazepam tablets documented; - Resident #14's Individual Narcotic Record had a remaining quantity of 1 Alprazolam tablets documented; - Resident #27's Individual Narcotic Record had a remaining quantity of 64 Oxycodone tablets documented, 24 Alprazolam tablets documented, and 17 Clonazepam tablets documented; and, - Resident #28's Individual Narcotic Record had a remaining quantity of 29 Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen (APAP) tablets documented and 16 Alprazolam tablets documented. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 6:00 a.m., S8Registered Nurse confirmed the above mentioned resident's controlled medications were not accurately reconciled upon administration. S8RN stated she had administered the above mentioned controlled medications earlier in the shift, but she had not recorded the administration on the narcotic logs. S8RN further stated the controlled medications should have been reconciled at the time they were administered. In an interview on 01/12/2024 at 2:26 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the above mentioned controlled medications should have been signed out on the resident's Individual Narcotic Record at the time they were administered to the residents. S2DON stated the Individual Narcotic Record should accurately display the quantity of controlled medications available.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Unnecessary Medications (Tag F0759)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was not 5% or greater by having a medication error rate of 14.8%. This deficient practice...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was not 5% or greater by having a medication error rate of 14.8%. This deficient practice was identified for 1 [S6Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)] of 3 nurses (S6LPN, S7LPN, and S8Registered Nurse) who were observed during medication administration. Findings: Observation on 01/10/2024 at 10:05 a.m. revealed S6LPN administered Cetirizine (medication used to treat allergies) 10 milligrams (mg) 1 tablet per gastric tube, Sennosides (medication used to treat constipation) 8.6 mg 2 tablets per gastric tube, Iron 325 mg 1 tablet per gastric tube, and Refresh Lacri-Lube (medication used for dry, irritated eyes) 56.8-42.5% ointment 1 application to both eyes to Resident #3. Review of Resident #3's current physician orders revealed, in part, an order with a start date of 12/17/2023 for Loratadine (medication used to treat allergies) 10 mg via gastric tube daily. Further review revealed, an order with a start date of 01/05/2024 for Senna- S (medication used to treat constipation) 8.6 -50 mg 2 tablets via gastric tube twice daily. Further review revealed, an order with a start date of 12/04/2023 for Ferrous Sulfate (supplement used to treat low blood iron levels) 325 mg by mouth daily. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of an order for of an order for Refresh Lacri-Lube 56.8-42.5% ointment 1 application to both eyes and the facility did not provide any documented evidence. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 5:12 p.m., S6LPN stated she crushed Resident #3's ferrous sulfate and it should not have been crushed when she administered the medication on 01/10/2024. S6LPN also stated Sennosides 8.6 mg 2 tabs per gastric tube and Cetirizine 10 mg 1 tab per gastric tube were not the correct medications ordered when she administered the medications on 01/10/2024. S6LPN stated she was unable to locate a physician's order for Refresh Lacri-Lube 56.8-42.5% ointment 1 application to both eyes and should not have administered the ointment on 01/10/2024 without a physician's order. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 5:38 p.m., S3Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated ferrous sulfate should not have been crushed when administered to Resident #3 on 01/10/2024 since it was ordered by mouth. S3ADON also confirmed Sennosides 8.6 mg and Cetirizine 10 mg was not the medication ordered for Resident #3. S3ADON also stated Refresh Lacri-Lube 56.8-42.5% ointment should not have been administered without a physician order. There were 27 opportunities for medication administration with 4 medication errors which resulted in a 14.8% medication error rate.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0826 (Tag F0826)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

The facility failed to ensure Respiratory Therapist staff had completed annual respiratory therapy competencies completed for 10 (S9Respiratory Therapist, S10Respiratory Therapist, S11Respiratory Ther...

Read full inspector narrative →
The facility failed to ensure Respiratory Therapist staff had completed annual respiratory therapy competencies completed for 10 (S9Respiratory Therapist, S10Respiratory Therapist, S11Respiratory Therapist, S12Respiratory Therapist, S13Respiratory Therapist, S14Respiratory Therapist, S15Respiratory Therapist, S16Respiratory Therapist, S17Respiratory Therapist, S18Respiratory Therapist) of 11 (S4Respiratory Therapist, S9Respiratory Therapist, S10Respiratory Therapist, S11Respiratory Therapist, S12Respiratory Therapist, S13Respiratory Therapist, S14Respiratory Therapist, S15Respiratory Therapist, S16Respiratory Therapist, S17Respiratory Therapist, S18Respiratory Therapist) Respiratory Therapist files reviewed. Findings: Review of the facility's training and competency records revealed, S9Respiratory Therapist had annual respiratory therapy competencies completed on 12/11/2022. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that respiratory therapy competencies was completed for the year 2023. Review of the facility's training and competency records revealed, S10Respiratory Therapist had annual respiratory therapy competencies completed on 12/05/2022. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that respiratory therapy competencies was completed for the year 2023. Review of the facility's training and competency records revealed, S11Respiratory Therapist had annual respiratory therapy competencies completed on 12/06/2022. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that respiratory therapy competencies was completed for the year 2023. Review of the facility's training and competency records revealed, S12Respiratory Therapist had annual respiratory therapy competencies completed on 12/08/2022. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that respiratory therapy competencies was completed for the year 2023. Review of the facility's training and competency records revealed, S13Respiratory Therapist had annual respiratory therapy competencies completed on 12/02/2022. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that respiratory therapy competencies was completed for the year 2023. Review of the facility's training and competency records revealed, S14Respiratory Therapist had annual respiratory therapy competencies completed on 12/01/2022. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that respiratory therapy competencies was completed for the year 2023. Review of the facility's training and competency records revealed, S15Respiratory Therapist had annual respiratory therapy competencies completed on 11/30/2022. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that respiratory therapy competencies was completed for the year 2023. Review of the facility's training and competency records revealed, S16Respiratory Therapist had annual respiratory therapy competencies completed on 11/30/2022. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that respiratory therapy competencies was completed for the year 2023 Review of the facility's training and competency records revealed, S17Respiratory Therapist had annual respiratory therapy competencies completed on 11/30/2022. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that respiratory therapy competencies was completed for the year 2023. Review of the facility's training and competency records revealed, S18Respiratory Therapist had annual respiratory therapy competencies completed on 11/30/2022. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that respiratory therapy competencies was completed for the year 2023. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 12:39 p.m., S19Director of Respiratory Therapy stated all respiratory therapy staff should have had annual competencies for the year of 2023. She acknowledged that she did not complete the annual competencies due for 11/2023 and 12/2023 for the above mentioned respiratory staff.
CONCERN (F) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Staffing Data (Tag F0851)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to electronically submit payroll information for direct care staffing as required. Findings: Review of the facility's Payroll Based Journal (...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to electronically submit payroll information for direct care staffing as required. Findings: Review of the facility's Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data Report [NAME] Report 1705D Fiscal Year (FY) Quarter 4 2023 (July 1 - September 30) revealed, in part, the facility failed to submit staffing data for Quarter 4. In an interview on 01/09/2024 at 3:30 p.m., S20Human Resources stated she was unable to produce documented evidence the facility had submitted the PBJ Staffing Data for FY Quarter 4 2023 (July 1 - September 30). In an interview on 01/12/2024 at 2:50 p.m., S1Administrator stated the facility's PBJ Staffing Data was not submitted for FY Quarter 4 2023.
Oct 2023 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to: 1) Ensure an order was obtained and/or clarified if a compression device to a resident's legs was to be applied or not with ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to: 1) Ensure an order was obtained and/or clarified if a compression device to a resident's legs was to be applied or not with a resident's physician (Resident #3); 2) Ensure nursing staff monitored and/or assessed a resident's compression device (Resident #3); and, 3) Ensure a physician's order for a medication was implemented in a timely manner (Resident #3). This deficient practice was identified for 1 (Resident #3) of 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) sampled residents reviewed for quality of care. Findings: Review of Resident #3's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/07/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #2 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated Resident #3's cognition was intact. Further review revealed, in part, Resident #3 had a diagnosis of lymphedema (swelling caused by circulatory blockage), end stage renal disease (ESRD), and dependent on renal dialysis. 1. Review of Resident #3's care plan revealed, in part, Resident #3 had impaired skin integrity related to lymphedema with an intervention for staff assistance with application of compression/tubular wraps. Observation on 10/02/2023 at 1:00 p.m. revealed a compression wrap positioned around Resident #3's right foot. In an interview on 10/02/2023 at 2:55 p.m., Resident #3 stated he puts the compression/tubular wrap on by himself every day, and the nursing staff did not monitor the wrap or assist him with the application. Resident #3 further indicated it was very difficult to get on by himself. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 2:00 p.m., S6Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) stated she cared for Resident #3 on a regular basis and Resident #3 always wore a compression/tubular wrap on either his left or right foot. S6CNA stated sometimes Resident #3 would ask for staff assistance to apply the compression/tubular wrap. Review of Resident #3's August 2023 through October 2023 Physician's Orders revealed, in part, there was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that a physician's order was obtained for the use of a compression device. Further review revealed there was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence the nursing staff was monitoring and/or assessed Resident #3's use of a compression device. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 11:59 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged Resident #3's use and self-application of the compression/tubular wrap was not assessed by nursing and it should have been. S2DON stated the use of a compression device required a physician's order which would indicate monitoring, application, removal of and skin assessments. S2DON stated a physician's order for the use of the compression/tubular wrap was not obtained for Resident #3 and it should have been. 2. Review of Resident #3's dialysis center Physician's Order sheet dated 09/27/2023 revealed, in part, an order to increase Renvela (a medication used to treat high levels of phosphorus in the blood) 800 milligrams (mg) to 3 tablets with meals and 2 tablets with snacks. Further review of the physician's order sheet revealed S7Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) signed that the above mentioned order was noted on 09/29/2023. Record review of Resident #3's October 2023 Physician's Orders revealed, in part, the above mentioned medication order was not implemented by S7LPN until 10/01/2023. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 4:10 p.m., S2DON stated Resident #3's order to increase Renvela was not implemented in a timely manner and it should have been.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0698 (Tag F0698)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure a resident's physician orders for medication administration was coordinated with a resident's dialysis schedule and the resident's ph...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure a resident's physician orders for medication administration was coordinated with a resident's dialysis schedule and the resident's physician (Resident #2). This deficient practice was identified for 1 (Resident #2) of 2 (Resident #2 and Resident #3) sampled residents reviewed for dialysis. Findings: Review of Resident #2's October 2023 Physician's Orders revealed, in part, Resident #2 was to receive dialysis every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday due to end stage renal disease. Review of Resident #2's August 2023 through October 03, 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed, in part, the following medications were not administered at 9:00 a.m. because Resident #2 was unavailable and/or at dialysis on the following dates: 1) Allopurinol (a medication used to treat pain and inflammatory disease) 100 milligram (mg) 1 tablet once a day on: 08/03/2023, 08/07/2023, 08/19/2023, 08/26/2023, 09/02/2023, 09/09/2023, 09/16/2023, 09/23/2023, and 10/03/2023; 2) Aspirin (a medication used to prevent heart attacks and strokes) 81 mg 1 tablet once a day on: 08/03/2023, 08/07/2023, 08/19/2023, 08/26/2023, 09/02/2023, 09/09/2023, 09/16/2023, 09/23/2023, and 09/25/2023; and 10/03/2023; 3) Azelastine drops 0.05% (a medication used to treat itching of the eye) 1 drop in eye on: 08/03/2023, 08/07/2023, 08/19/2023, 08/26/2023, 09/02/2023, 09/09/2023, 09/16/2023, 09/23/2023, and 10/03/2023; 4) Cholecalciferol (a medication used to treat vitamin D deficiency in patients with chronic kidney disease) 25 microgram (mcg) 1 capsule once a day on: 08/03/2023, 08/19/2023, 08/26/2023, 09/02/2023, 09/09/2023, 09/16/2023, 09/23/2023, and 10/03/2023; 5) Fluticasone Propionate (a medication used to treat nasal symptoms) 50 mcg 1 spray once a day on 08/03/2023, 08/19/2023, 08/26/2023, 09/02/2023, 09/09/2023, 09/16/2023, 09/23/2023, and 10/03/2023; 6) Reno Caps (a vitamin supplement for treatment of renal disease) 1 mg capsule once a day on 08/03/2023, 08/19/2023, 08/26/2023, 09/02/2023, 09/09/2023, 09/16/2023, 09/23/2023, and 10/03/2023; and, 7) B Complex- Vitamin B12 (a vitamin B supplement used to treat depression) 1 capsule once a day on 08/03/2023, 08/19/2023, 08/26/2023, 09/02/2023, 09/09/2023, 09/16/2023, 09/23/2023, and 10/03/2023. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 9:45 a.m., S4LPN stated Resident #2 was currently at dialysis; therefore, would not receive her medications this morning. Review of Resident #2's progress notes for August 2023 through October 2023 revealed, in part, no documented evidence and the facility did not produce any documented evidence that the facility coordinated Resident #2's medication with Resident #2's dialysis schedule. In an interview on 10/03/2023 at 4:15 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated Resident #2 goes to the dialysis center at 6:00 a.m. and returns to the facility around 10:00 a.m. on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. S2DON confirmed the nursing staff did not administer Resident #2 her above mentioned medications scheduled for 9:00 a.m. on the above mentioned dates. S2DON stated the administration times for the above mentioned medications should have been moved to 10:00 a.m. to meet Resident #2's dialysis needs.
Sept 2023 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0692 (Tag F0692)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to: 1) Ensure a resident received a therapeutic diet as ordered for 1 (Resident #1) of 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) sampled residents rev...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to: 1) Ensure a resident received a therapeutic diet as ordered for 1 (Resident #1) of 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) sampled residents reviewed for weight loss; 2) Ensure a resident's meal intake was documented for each meal for 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) of 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) sampled residents reviewed for weight loss; 3) Ensure a resident's dietary recommendation was implemented for 1 (Resident #2) of 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) sampled residents reviewed for weight loss; and, 4) Ensure a resident's weight was monitored weekly per physician orders for 1 (Resident #1) of 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) sampled residents reviewed for weight loss. Findings: Resident #1 Review of the facility's Weight and Height Measurement policy revealed, in part, staff are to obtain an accurate weight of each resident to assess nutritional and hydration status and to identify a significant change in condition. Further review revealed residents are to be weighed on admission and monthly unless otherwise ordered by the physician to monitor the resident's condition. Review of Resident #1's face sheet revealed, in part, a primary diagnosis of malignant neoplasm of oropharynx (cancer that forms in the middle section of the throat). Review of Resident #1's care plan revealed, in part, Resident #1 had a history of weight loss and the potential for altered nutrition related to a diagnosis of oral cancer. Further review revealed Resident #1 received radiation (a cancer treatment that uses high doses of energy to kill cancer cells that can cause difficulty swallowing and a sore throat) and required a gastrostomy tube (a tube inserted through the belly that brings nutrition directly into the stomach) to meet his nutritional needs. Review of Resident #1's physician orders for September 2023 revealed, in part, the following orders: 1) Diet: Full liquid which had a start date of 08/01/2023 and an end date of 09/07/2023; 2) Osmolite 1.5 Cal (liquid nutritional supplement) 475 milliliters for breakfast and dinner per gastrostomy tube which had a start date of 08/07/2023 and no end date; 3) Osmolite 1.5 Cal 237 milliliters for lunch per gastrostomy tube with a start date of 08/07/2023 and no end date; 4) Weekly weight on Fridays which had a start date of 08/07/2023 and no end date; 5) Diet: NPO (nothing by mouth) which had a start date of 09/07/2023; and 6) Weekly weight on Monday which had start date 09/14/2023 and no end date. Review of the facility's Communication Form for Non-Emergency dated 08/14/2023 revealed, in part, the nursing section indicated Resident #1 had an oncology follow up appointment and returned with recommendations for 6 cans of Osmolite 1.5 Cal 237 milliliters daily. Further review revealed Resident #1's nurse practitioner approved the order on 08/15/2023 and the form was signed by S2Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) on 08/16/2023. Record review revealed no evidence and the facility did not present any evidence Resident #1's order for 6 cans of Osmolite 1.5 Cal 237 milliliters approved by the physician on 08/15/2023 was implemented. Review of Resident #1's CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) Flow Sheet for August and September of 2023 revealed, in part, from 08/07/2023 through 09/07/2023 the staff documented TF (tube fed) for each meal and did not indicate a percentage of meal intake for Resident #1's full liquid diet. In an interview on 09/20/2023 at 2:37 p.m., S5CNA Supervisor stated when Resident #1 received a liquid diet he was served orange juice, apple juice, fruit slushies, and different broths. Record review revealed no evidence and the facility did not present any evidence Resident #1's meal percentage intake was documented for his full liquid diet from 08/07/2023 through 09/07/2023. Review of Resident #1's Electronic Medication Administration Record (EMAR) for August and September 2023 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had two separate orders for a weekly weight to be obtained. Further review revealed starting on 08/07/2023 a weekly weight should be obtained for Resident #1 every Friday and starting on 09/14/2023 a weekly weight should be obtained for Resident #1 every Monday. Additional review revealed Resident #1's weekly weight was not documented on his August and September 2023 EMAR. Record review revealed no evidence and the facility did not present any evidence Resident #1's weekly weight was obtained on Monday's and/or Friday's as ordered. In an interview on 09/20/2023 p.m., S1DON stated S2LPN did not implement Resident #1's order to increase nutritional supplement to 6 cans daily and she should have. S1DON further stated when Resident #1 received a liquid diet the nurse aides did not document the percentage of meal intake for Resident #1's meal intake each meal and they should have. S1DON confirmed a weekly weight was not documented for Resident #1 for the months of August and September 2023 and it should have been. Resident #2 Review of Resident #2's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Day) of 08/07/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #2 had weight loss of 5% in the last month or weight loss of 10% in the last 6 months, and was not on physician prescribed weight loss plan. Review of Resident #2's care plan revealed, in part, Resident #2 had a pureed NCS (no concentrated sweets) diet. Further review revealed, Resident #1 was to receive a dietary consult as needed and staff were to monitor meal consumption and document. Review of Resident #2's progress note dated 08/07/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #2 experienced weight loss in the last 3 months and Resident #2 could benefit from a double portion diet to avoid further weight loss. Review of Resident #2's Physician Order Report for September 2023, revealed, in part, Resident #2 had an order for pureed NCS diet with a start date of 08/05/2022. Further review revealed an order for dietary recommendations may be followed as recommended with a start date of 12/10/2017. Review of Resident #2's meal ticket dated 09/20/2023 revealed, in part, no documented evidence Resident #2 received double portions. In an interview on 09/20/2023 at 1:08 p.m., S3Dietary Supervisor stated he completed a dietary assessment for Resident #2's on 08/07/2022. S3Dietary Supervisor further stated after assessing Resident #2's weight loss he recommend Resident #2 have double portions each meal. S3Dietary Supervisor stated he documented his recommendation in a dietary note, however; he did not communicate his recommendation to nursing. S3Dietary Supervisor stated he did not change Resident #2's dietary ticket to include double portions at that time, but he verbally educated the dietary staff members to give Resident #2 double portions on her plate each meal. In an interview on 09/20/2023 at 1:15 p.m., S4Dietary [NAME] stated she prepared Resident #2's meal trays regularly, but did not serve her double portions. S4Dietary [NAME] further stated if a resident should be served double portions it would have been indicated on the resident's meal ticket. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence Resident #2 received double portions per the dietary recommendation on 08/07/2023. Review of Resident #2's CNA Flow Sheet for August and September of 2023 revealed, in part, Resident #2's percentage of meal intake was not documented on 08/28/2023, 09/09/2023, 09/10/2023, 09/11/2023, 09/16/2023, and 09/17/2023. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence Resident #2's meal percentage intake was documented on the above mentioned dates. In an interview on 09/20/2023 at 4:38 p.m., S1DON stated S4Dietary [NAME] did not communicate Resident #2's dietary recommendation with nursing as he should have. S1DON stated Resident #2's diet order and diet ticket was not changed to double portions and it should have been. S1DON confirmed the nurse aides did not document Resident #2's percentage of meal intake for the above mentioned dates and they should have.
Jul 2023 20 deficiencies 4 IJ (2 facility-wide)
CRITICAL (K)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews; the facility failed to protect residents' right to be free from abuse for...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews; the facility failed to protect residents' right to be free from abuse for 3 (Resident #8, Resident #27, and Resident #104) of 7 (Resident #8, Resident #21, Resident #27, Resident #82, Resident #83, Resident #100, and Resident #104) residents investigated for abuse. The facility failed to protect: 1. Resident #27 from sexual and psychosocial abuse by Resident #100; 2. Resident #104 from sexual abuse by Resident #100; and 3. Resident #8 from physical abuse by Resident #21. This deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation on 06/01/2023 at 12:50 p.m. when Resident #100, a cognitively impaired resident, lifted Resident #27's shirt and attempted to put his face to Resident #27's breast causing Resident #27 to have increased anxiety when anyone enters her room. The Immediate Jeopardy situation continued for the following: on 07/13/2023, S5LPN witnessed Resident #100 pucker his lips and attempt to kiss Resident #27 and on 07/17/2023, S6Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) witnessed Resident #100 sexually abuse Resident #104 by attempting to touch Resident #104's genital area. S1Administrator was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on 07/19/2023 at 12:45 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 07/22/2023 at 12:21 p.m., after it was determined through observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility implemented an acceptable Plan of Removal, prior to the survey exit, which included in part; notifying residents responsible parties, in-service staff on reporting sexually inappropriate behavior to management immediately upon witnessing. Began abuse training with staff on identifying and preventing abuse with Staff unable to work until they had been in-serviced on reporting sexually inappropriate behavior and abuse training. Resident #100 was placed 1:1 supervision with S24Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), due to the potential to cause harm to other residents until Resident #100 was sent to hospital for psych evaluation and treatment due to sexually inappropriate behavior. The deficient practice had the potential to cause serious harm or injury to all 109 residents identified on the facility's Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, CMS-672. Findings: Review of the facility's Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation policy, revised March 2023, revealed, in part, resident have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property and exploitation. This includes but is not limited to freedom from corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion, verbal, mental, sexual or physical abuse, and physical or chemical restraint not required to treat the resident's symptoms. Resident #27 Review of the facility's incident report list dated 2023 revealed, in part, no incident report for Resident #27. Review of the facility's Statewide Incident Management System report dated 06/01/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #100 went into Resident #27's room and placed his tongue into her mouth. Resident #100 was trying to touch Resident #27 but unsuccessful. Further review revealed a follow-up was conducted with three female residents on the unit and there was no evidence of any previous incidents with Resident #100. The appropriate amount of staff was on the unit at the time of the incident, 2 nurses and 4 CNAS. The police were not notified as Resident #27 requested not to do so. S2Director of Nursing (DON) would follow-up with the nursing staff on Resident #100's behaviors for 3 months. Review of Resident #27's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/12/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #27 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7, which indicated Resident #27 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of Resident #27's progress note dated 06/01/2023 at 1:33 p.m. revealed, in part, S2DON was notified at 12:50 p.m. that a male resident was found in Resident #27's room, Resident #27 stated the male resident kissed her and attempted to touch her pointing to her vaginal area, provider was notified. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 9:37 a.m. revealed as surveyor entered Resident #27's room Resident #27 began to ask who is here, why are you here? In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 9:37 a.m., Resident #27 stated a man entered her room several weeks ago, fondled my breast. Resident #27 stated she started waving her arms while yelling I don't want that, stop and then he went away. Resident #27 further stated she now becomes anxious when anyone enters her room. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 2:00 p.m., S56Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated Resident #27 voiced being scared of a man who entered her room and touched her. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 3:09 p.m., S4Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) stated she entered Resident #27's room and saw Resident #100 had lifted Resident #27's shirt trying to put his mouth on her breast. S4CNA further stated Resident #27 began to fight him by trying to push him away with her arms. S4CNA stated she removed Resident #100 from Resident #27's room. S4CNA further stated she reported the incident to S40LPN. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 9:40 a.m., S39Social Worker stated on 06/01/2023 she was notified that Resident #100 kissed and attempted to touch Resident #27. S39Social Worker stated since the incident, Resident #27 was scared and nervous. S39Social Worker stated when staff entered Resident #27's room she would immediately ask Who was present in her room and why they were entering her room? S39Social Worker stated after the incident when Resident #100 kissed Resident #27, staff were educated to knock and identify self and why they are entering Resident #27's room and to close the door upon exiting the room. S39Social Worker stated staff should report any inappropriate sexual behaviors to social services. S39Social Worker stated when these behaviors occur immediate action should be taken. S39Social Worker stated she was not aware of Resident #100 touching Resident #104 and immediate action should have been taken. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 11:25 a.m., S40LPN stated on 06/01/2023 S4CNA reported she witnessed Resident #100 attempting to touch Resident #27's breast with his mouth. Observation on 07/20/2023 at 9:37 a.m. revealed as surveyor entered Resident #27's room Resident #27 began to ask who is here, why are you here? In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 12:04 p.m., S39Social Worker stated she did not complete any follow-up assessments with Resident #27 after the incident that occurred on 06/01/2023 with Resident #100. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 12:20 p.m., S2DON stated she spoke with Resident #27 on several occasions to assess Resident #27's emotional state. S2DON stated she did not have any documentation of follow-up assessments completed for Resident #27 after the incident of sexual abuse that occurred on 06/01/2023 with Resident #100. S2DON further stated she did not have any documentation of staff education completed following the incident that occurred on 06/01/2023 when Resident #100 placed his tongue into Resident #27's mouth. Observation on 07/22/2023 at 11:00 a.m. revealed as surveyor entered Resident #27's room Resident #27 began to ask who is here, why are you here? Resident #100 Review of Resident #100's MDS with an ARD of 04/13/2023 revealed, in part, a BIMS was not conducted because Resident #100 was rarely or never understood. Review of Resident #100's progress note dated 06/01/2023 at 12:30 p.m., revealed, in part, Resident #100 was displaying inappropriate behavior with residents and staff by touching them in sexual ways, kissing, and wandering into female resident's rooms. Review of Resident #100's progress note dated 07/13/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #100 displayed inappropriate behaviors the entire shift by touching female staff members and puckering his lips wanting to kiss Resident #27. Review of Resident #100's progress notes dated 07/13/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #100 was able to propel himself via wheelchair throughout the facility. Review of Resident #100's care plan last updated on 05/15/2023 revealed, in part, no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that a plan of care was developed with goals and/or interventions related to Resident #100's sexually inappropriate behaviors after the above mentioned 06/01/2023 incident or after Resident #100's above mentioned behaviors on 07/13/2023. Review of Resident #100's July 2023 physician's orders revealed, an order with a start date of 06/13/2023, to monitor Resident #100 for inappropriate behaviors every two hours and document any inappropriate behaviors noted. Review of Resident #100's June 2023 electronic medication administration record (eMAR) revealed, in part, no documentation that behaviors were monitored at 12:00 a.m. on 06/15/2023, 06/19/2023, 06/24/2023, 06/28/2023; 2:00 a.m. on 06/16/2023; 4:00 a.m. on 06/16/2023; 6:00 a.m. on 06/16/2023 and 06/27/2023; 8:00 a.m. on 06/14/2023 and 06/18/2023; 10:00 a.m. on 06/16/2023 and 06/22/2023; 12:00 p.m. on 06/16/2023, 06/22/2023, and 06/26/2023; 2:00 p.m. on 06/13/2023; 4:00 p.m. on 06/13/2023; and 6:00 p.m. on 06/13/2023 and 06/16/2023. Review of Resident #100's July 2023 eMAR revealed, in part, no documentation that Resident #100's inappropriate behaviors were monitored at 12:00 a.m. on 07/02/2023, 07/03/2023, 07/06/2023, 07/07/2023, 07/11/2023, 07/15/2023, 07/16/2023, 07/17/2023, 2:00 a.m. on 07/18/2023, 6:00 a.m. on 07/05/2023 and 07/14/2023, 8:00 a.m. on 07/14/2023, and 6:00 p.m. on 07/02/2023. Review of Resident #100's June and July 2023 eMAR revealed in part, Resident #100 displayed inappropriate sexual behaviors on the night shift 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on 06/20/2023, and displayed inappropriate behaviors on 07/11/2023 at 12:00 p.m There was no documented evidence, and the facility did not present any documented evidence of supporting documentation of the facility acting upon Resident #100's inappropriate behaviors displayed on 06/20/2023 and 07/11/2023. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 4:00 p.m., S48LPN stated Resident #100 was monitored every two hours for inappropriate behaviors due to a previous incident with Resident #27. S48LPN further stated Resident #100 should have one on one supervision by staff. In an interview 07/18/2023 at 4:22 p.m., S53CNA stated she was unaware Resident #100 had inappropriately touched Resident #27. S53CNA was unaware that he was supposed to be monitored for inappropriate behaviors In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 5:50 p.m., S2DON stated Resident #100 was the perpetrator in an incident of sexual abuse on 06/01/2023 with Resident #27. S2DON stated since Resident #100's return to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #100 should have been monitored by staff every hour for inappropriate sexual behavior. S2DON further stated staff had not reported Resident #100 had displayed sexually inappropriate behavior or had any additional instances of sexual abuse. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 9:13 a.m., S45Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated Resident #100 can move around the facility freely. S45ADON stated staff did not report any sexually inappropriate behavior from Resident #100 since his return from the psychiatric hospital on [DATE]. S45ADON stated Resident #100 should have been monitored every 2 hours for sexually inappropriate behaviors. S45ADON stated Resident #100 was monitored because of an incident where he tried to kiss Resident #27 and touched her breasts. S45ADON stated all staff that worked with Resident #100 should have been aware that Resident #100 had to be monitored for sexually inappropriate behaviors. S45ADON further stated Resident #100 needed one on one monitoring in order to keep other residents free from sexual abuse. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 9:57 a.m., S2DON stated Resident #100's care plan should have been updated when Resident #100 first displayed inappropriate sexual behaviors. S2DON stated Resident #100's care plan should have been updated with each inappropriate sexual behavior. S2DON stated Resident #100's eMAR should have documentation every 2 hours of Resident #100's sexually inappropriate behaviors. S2DON further stated blank documentation indicates the monitoring was not done. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 10:13 a.m., S1Administrator stated when Resident #100 displayed inappropriate sexual behaviors, Resident #100 should have been placed on 1 on 1 supervision, Resident #100's physician should have been contacted, and a discharge/transfer plan should have been started. S1Administrator stated Resident #100 had the potential to have inappropriate sexual behaviors with other residents when not on 1 on 1 supervision and residents were not safe. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 9:10 a.m., S5LPN stated Resident #100 was known for trying to touch staff. S5LPN stated Resident #100 had to be monitored due to trying to touch other residents inappropriately. S5LPN stated that her nursing note on 07/13/2023 was in regards to Resident #100 trying to get close to Resident #82 puckering his lips at her. S5LPN stated that neither Resident #82 nor Resident #100 had the mental capacity to consent to sexual behavior. S5LPN stated Resident #100 can roll himself backwards in his wheelchair to get off of the unit to go smoke by himself. S5LPN stated she monitored Resident #100 every two hours while he was on unit for inappropriate behaviors. S5LPN further stated that she had not reported the sexually inappropriate behaviors to S45ADON or S2DON. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 10:46 a.m., S47LPN stated Resident #100 tried to kiss other residents, especially Resident #82. S47LPN stated her documentation of inappropriate behaviors on 06/20/2023 was in regards to Resident #100 puckering at Resident #82, trying to get close to her, and having to be separated. S47LPN further stated that she had not informed S45ADON or S2DON of Resident #100's behavior. Resident #104 Review of Resident #104's MDS with an ARD of 06/22/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #104 had a BIMS of 14, which indicated Resident #104 was cognitively intact. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 1:45 p.m., Resident #104 stated Resident #100 tried to grab her private area on 07/17/2023. Resident #104 further stated she told Resident #100 to stop touching her. Resident #104 stated S6CNA was present when Resident #100 tried to grab her private area. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 2:53 p.m., S6CNA stated on 07/17/2023 she witnessed Resident #104 sitting in her wheelchair by the desk when Resident #100 rolled his wheelchair by Resident #104 and attempted to touch Resident #104. S6CNA further stated Resident #104 told Resident #100 to stop touching her. S6CNA stated she then instructed Resident #100 to move away from Resident #104. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 9:57 a.m., S2DON stated Resident #104 informed her this morning that Resident #100 attempted to touch her in between her legs on Monday 07/17/2023 and staff was present when it happened. S2DON stated the staff that were present when Resident #100 attempted to touch Resident #104, should have notified her immediately. S2DON stated Resident #100 should have been placed on 1 on 1 supervision and Resident #100's physician should have been notified. S2DON stated because she was not informed of Resident #100 touching Resident #104, Resident #100 was not placed on 1 on 1 supervision and Resident #100 was able to continue to have inappropriate sexual behaviors toward and with female residents. Resident #21 Review of Resident #21's MDS with an ARD of 05/11/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #21 had a BIMS score of 12 which indicated Resident #21 had moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #21's Care Plan initiated on 04/29/2021 revealed, in part, Resident #21 exhibited abnormal behaviors which included cursing staff and playing with her feces with interventions initiated on 05/20/2021 to include: approach resident in a calm and non-judging manor, notify physician and family of behaviors, attempt to divert attention during outburst, remove Resident #21 from area of agitation, attempt to find causes of agitation, psychiatric evaluation as needed, and smile and talk with Resident #21 when approaching and/or giving care. Further review of Resident #21's Care Plan initiated on 04/01/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #21 entered Resident #8's room and began hitting Resident #8 while Resident #8 was in his bed. Resident #21 was removed from Resident #8's room and staff redirected her behavior. New orders given to send to emergency room for psych evaluation. Further review of Resident #21's Care Plan revealed no documentation of new goals or interventions Resident #21's return to the facility from an admissions to a psychiatric facility on 08/18/2022 and 04/01/2023. Review of Resident #21's progress notes revealed, in part, an entry dated 08/18/2022 at 11:00 a.m., read Resident #21 was observed in another resident's room destroying their personal property and throwing the bed mattress on the floor. Review of Resident #21's progress notes revealed an additional entry date of 04/01/2023 at 8:19 a.m. entered by S57LPN which read, Resident #21 up in wheelchair observed going toward Resident #8's door way fussing. S57LPN walked and closed the door to avoid confrontation. Further review of Resident #21's progress notes revealed an additional entry dated 04/01/2023 at 12:38 p.m. entered by S57LPN which read, monitoring Resident #21's activity on the unit. Resident #21 complained that Resident #8 was a devil and trying to attack her mind. Further review revealed, in part, an additional entry dated 04/01/2023 at 3:15 p.m. entered by S57LPN which read, called to Resident #8's room where Resident #21 was seen hitting Resident #8 while he was in his bed. Nurse rolled Resident #21 to her room. Resident #21 was angry and stated she does not like to be lied too. Resident #21 said when she is mad she would hurt someone. Review of a Statewide Incident Management Systems report dated 04/03/2023 revealed, in part, on 04/01/2023 at 2:00 p.m., S61CNA witnessed Resident #21 enter Resident #8's room and punch Resident #8 in his arm and side of chest. Resident #21 was removed from room immediately and placed under one-on-one supervision. The Nurse Practitioner, responsible party and S2DON were immediately notified. Interviews were conducted by S1Administrator. Resident #8 was assessed and no redness, bruising or swelling noted. Resident #8 stated he felt safe and did not have any complaints at that time. Resident #8 could not give a description of why the incident occurred. Further review revealed Resident #21 was removed from Resident #8's presence and returned to her room while Resident #8 was assessed and medical doctor and nurse practitioner were notified. Orders were given for Resident #21 to be sent out for a psych evaluation at the emergency department and she left the faciity on [DATE] for psych evaluation. Further review revealed upon Resident #21's return to the facility more frequent nursing rounds would be scheduled, and a care plan for Resident #21 would be completed on her behaviors. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 2:40 p.m., Resident #21 stated she gets angry with Resident #8 at times and she had hit him in the past. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 2:50 p.m., S3LPN stated she had observed Resident #21 fuss and curse at Resident #8 and other residents. S3LPN further stated Resident #21 had previously went into Resident #8's room and pulled the mattress for Resident #8's bed on the floor. S3LPN also stated Resident #21 threw Resident #8's personal items on the floor because she was angry with him. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 3:05 p.m., S57LPN stated on 04/01/2023 at 3:15 p.m., Resident #21 was angry with Resident #8 and hit him. S57LPN further stated the CNA who witnessed Resident #21 hitting Resident #8 removed Resident #21 from Resident #8's room and brought Resident #21 to her room. S57LPN stated she notified S2DON and the physician of the occurrence. S57LPN stated the physician ordered Resident #21 for a psychiatric consult. S57LPN further stated Resident #21 was visually supervised by staff until she left the facility for a psych consult at the emergency department on 04/01/2023 at 4:53 p.m. S57LPN stated Resident #21 was admitted for psychiatric treatment following that occurrence. In interview on 07/21/2023 at 3:00 p.m., S3LPN stated when Resident #21 returned to the facility from her psych admission, no new approaches or interventions such as, increased supervision, were ordered. In an interview on 07/25/2023 at 11:30 a.m., S2DON confirmed Resident #21 physically abused Resident #8 on 04/01/2023. S2DON further confirmed new interventions were not put into place after new episodes of abusive behaviors on 08/18/2022 and 04/01/2023. S2DON further stated Resident #21's care plan should have included new interventions after each new abusive behavior episode. In an interview on 07/25/2023 at 11:50 a.m., S63Owner confirmed Resident #100 sexually abused Resident #27 on 06/01/2023. S63Owner further stated once Resident #100 returned to the facility, there should have been a plan in place for monitoring of Resident #100's inappropriate sexual behaviors and if inappropriate behaviors were noted, S2DON and S1Administrator should have been notified of Resident #100's sexually inappropriate behaviors. S63Owner confirmed all residents were at risk for sexual abuse.
CRITICAL (K)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure staff identified and supervised resident...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure staff identified and supervised residents (Resident #24, Resident #80, Resident #83, and Resident #85), who displayed unsafe smoking habits, as unsafe smokers; and, 2. Ensure residents, who displayed unsafe smoking habits, did not have access to smoking materials and/or cigarettes was not in their possession for 4 (Resident #24, Resident #80, Resident #83, and Resident #85) of 4 (Resident #24, Resident #80, Resident #83, and Resident #85) smokers reviewed for safe smoking. The facility documented 16 residents who were smokers. The deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation for Resident #80 on 07/17/2023 at 10:10 a.m. when Resident #80, a resident who previously displayed unsafe smoking habits, was sitting in his wheelchair in the designated smoking area smoking a cigarette without supervision of staff and without a smoker's apron in place. Resident #80 was observed smoking a cigarette with visible ashes noted falling on Resident #80's shirt, shorts, and hoyer pad. The Immediate Jeopardy situation continued for the following: On 07/17/2023 at 10:12 a.m. when Resident #83 was smoking a lit cigarette with ashes falling onto her shirt and right arm. Resident #83's geri chair was observed with black ash marks to the right armrest and ashes noted to the foot rest. On 07/17/2023 at 10:19 a.m., Resident #24, a visually impaired resident, was smoking a lit cigarette outside without supervision of staff and without a smoker's apron in place. Resident #24 was observed with a lit cigarette in his hand with visible ashes noted on Resident #24's right upper leg. On 07/18/2023 at 11:01 a.m., Resident #85 put Resident #80's cigarette to his mouth, used his orange lighter to light the cigarette, then gave the cigarette back to Resident #80. S1Administrator was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on 07/18/2023 at 4:30 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 07/20/2023 at 4:09 p.m., after it was determined through observations, interviews, and record reviews that the facility implemented an acceptable Plan of Removal, prior to the survey exit, which included in part: *All residents who smoke were reassessed for smoking safety. Smoking assessments will be done on admit, quarterly and as needed. *All staff were in-serviced on the smoking policy,(a copy of the policy given to all staff), at risk residents, smoking times for unsafe residents and what to do with non-compliant residents, to ensure all smoking materials are not left with unsafe smokers and to report to management immediately. No resident is allowed to smoke after 8pm. Staff were not allowed to work their next assigned shift until they have been in-serviced on the above. *The facility assigned a staff member in place to monitor residents while smoking in the east court yard (assigned smoking area) to ensure that the residents smoking are safe until 8:00 p.m. *Care plans were updated to reflect if the resident was safe or unsafe while smoking and update as needed. *S2DON/designee will monitor compliance of interventions of unsafe smokers randomly at least once a day x 4 weeks beginning 07/19/2023 until 08/20/2023. Random checks of smoker's rooms to ensure no lighters are available 3 times a week for 4 weeks. Families notified that no resident is allowed to have a lighter and that the facility will provide lighters. *A meeting was held with all 16 residents that smoke to inform them of the smoking hours (7:00 a.m.-8:00 p.m.), smoking policy, and educate them on the possibilities of infection with sharing cigarettes. Findings: Review of the facility's Smoking and Lighters Policy and Procedure revealed, in part Smoking is not permitted in the resident's room. If resident is caught smoking in a non-designated area, the social worker will counsel the resident on risks and safety factors. Lighters, matches, or other items that ignite a fire are not allowed in resident rooms. Any such items found in a resident's room will be confiscated. Residents who are deemed safe to smoke will be allowed to keep their cigarettes in their room. Residents who need assistance to smoke will be required to leave their cigarettes at the station with their nurse. The facility's employees on Nurse's Station g and Nurse's Station f will be supplied with lighters purchased by the facility. Any resident who would like to go smoke in the designated smoking area must retain one of these employees to go outside with them and light their cigarette. Review of the facility's smoking list revealed Resident #24, Resident #80, Resident #83, and Resident #85 were smokers. In an interview on 07/17/2023 at 9:38 a.m., S1Adminstrator stated all the smokers in the facility are safe smokers. 1.) Resident #80 Review of Resident #80's face sheet revealed, in part, Resident #80 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis that included: Tobacco abuse counseling and Nicotine Dependence. Review of Resident #80's Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 05/15/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #80's Brief Interview for Mental Status Score was 6 which indicated Resident #80 had severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #80's Comprehensive Care Plan, with a start date of 03/31/2023, revealed, in part, Resident #80 would be free from complications and/or injury from smoking. Review revealed interventions that included: Resident #80 and/or Resident #80's family were to provide Resident #80's cigarettes and lighters, smoking assessments were to be done upon admission to the facility, quarterly, and as needed, staff are to remind/encourage resident to only smoke in designated smoking area, assure that resident is properly dressed for weather conditions when outside in smoking area, encourage resident not to spend extended time in smoking area related to excessive heat or cold, assure/encourage resident to be well hydrated when spending time in smoking area, assist resident to smoking area, encourage resident to stay out of direct sunlight, and provide a smoking jacket as needed. Review revealed an additional intervention was added on 05/18/2023 to include staff were to make rounds every hour while in smoking area and as needed. Further review revealed Resident #80's care plan was last reviewed and/or revised on 05/22/2023 at 11:01 a.m. by S7Careplan Nurse. Review of Resident #80's nurses' notes revealed, in part, a nurse's note with a date of 07/13/2023 and time of 5:55 p.m. written by S7LPN which stated Resident #80 was noted smoking in his room. Further review revealed Resident #80's mother was notified by her answering machine and the social services department would be notified. Review of Resident #80's electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) revealed no evidence of documentation of one hour monitoring of Resident #80. Review of Resident #80's Activities of Daily Living (ADL) documentation revealed no evidence of documentation of one hour monitoring of Resident #80. Review of Resident #80's current Physician Orders revealed an order with a start date of 01/15/2023 that read Resident #80 was to be up out of bed in his wheelchair daily and he was to be brought outside. Review of Resident #80's Safe Smoking Assessment Form with a completion date of 05/15/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #80 was safe to smoke unsupervised. Review revealed incomplete questions that consisted of- The resident requires 1:1 supervision while smoking, the resident requires a fire proof smoking apron while smoking, and all smoking material will be kept at the nurse's station. Further review revealed staff were to round on Resident #80 every hour and as needed. Review of Resident #80's medical record revealed no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of a Safe Smoking Assessment completed after Resident #80 was observed smoking in his room on 07/13/2023. Review of Resident #80's Social Services Notes revealed no documented evidence of counseling or education provided to Resident #80 after Resident #80 was observed smoking in his room on 07/13/2023. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 10:10 a.m. revealed, Resident #80 gave Resident #83 a cigarette. Further observation revealed Resident #83 lit Resident #80's cigarette with her lighter and Resident #80 began smoking a lit cigarette in his wheelchair with cigarette ashes falling onto his shirt, blue hoyer pad, and khaki shorts. In an interview on 07/17/2023 at 10:13 a.m., Resident #80 stated he smoked cigarettes on a daily basis. Resident #80 stated he does not wear an apron, he does not need staff to supervise him when he smokes, and he keeps his own smoking materials. Resident #80 stated he is also able to keep his own lighter, but if he does not have his lighter he will get a light from Resident #83 or other residents on the smoking patio. Resident #80 further stated he got caught smoking a lit cigarette in his room last week, but the facility told him he can still keep his smoking material. In an interview on 07/17/2023 at 10:20 a.m., Resident #83 stated her and Resident #80 smoke every day together in the designated smoking area. Resident #83 stated Resident #80 has his own cigarettes and lighter. Resident #83 stated if Resident #80 does not have his lighter, she would light his cigarette for him. Resident #83 stated Resident #80 does not have to be supervised by staff when smoking or wear a smoking apron. Resident #83 stated staff does not have to supervise any of the smokers. Resident #83 stated when any of the residents smoke, they are usually by their self. In an interview on 07/17/2023 at 11:30 a.m., S10CNA stated Resident #80 goes outside and smoked frequently in the designated smoking area. S10CNA stated Resident #80 does not require supervision when he smokes and he was allowed to keep his smoking material. S10CNA stated Resident #80 needed assistance to the smoking area, but once he was outside he liked to sit outside, smoke, and socialize with other residents. In an interview on 07/17/2023 at 12:38 p.m., S3LPN stated she had multiple smokers on her hall. S3LPN stated Resident #40, Resident #61, Resident #68, Resident #73, Resident #80, Resident #83, and Resident #85 were all smokers and were allowed to keep their smoking materials. S3LPN stated when Resident #80 needed his cigarette lit, he would go outside and get another resident to light his cigarette. S3LPN stated Resident #80 did not require supervision when smoking nor did he require a smoking apron when smoking because he was not an unsafe smoker. In an interview on 07/17/2023 at 1:21 p.m., S11CNA stated she had been working at the facility about 2 weeks and the facility had not informed her of any residents on her hall that were unsafe smokers or that needed to be supervised when smoking. S11CNA stated Resident #80 kept his smoking material on his person and he smoked multiple cigarettes throughout the day. S11CNA stated Resident #80 goes outside with Resident #83 and Resident #85 to smoke. S11CNA stated Resident #80 can smoke unsupervised and does not require a smoking apron because he is not an unsafe smoker to her knowledge. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 3:30 p.m., revealed Resident #80 lying in his bed with a green pack of [NAME] cigarettes on his bedside table. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 2:00 p.m., S58CNA stated Resident #80 was a safe smoker. S58CNA stated Resident #80 could go outside without supervision and smoke. S58CNA stated Resident #80 had never had any incidents that warranted him being an unsafe smoker. S58CNA further stated Resident #80 had to be assisted outside by staff to the designated smoking area, but once Resident #80 was outside he could smoke unsupervised. In an interview on 07/17/2023 at 3:32 p.m., Resident #80 stated he kept his packs of cigarettes in his two drawer dresser next to his bed. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 3:34 p.m. revealed, Resident #80 had two packs of green [NAME] cigarettes in the two drawer dresser located next to his bed. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 10:00 a.m., S3LPN stated she was the nurse for Resident #80 when he was observed smoking in his room. S3LPN stated she removed a lit cigarette and a lighter from Resident #80's possession, but she allowed him to keep his smoking materials in his possession because she assumed without a lighter, Resident #80 could not smoke in his room. S3LPN further stated she notified Resident #80's mother and S2DON. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 11:01 a.m. revealed, Resident #80 gave Resident #85 a cigarette. Observation revealed Resident #85 put Resident #80's cigarette to his mouth, used his orange lighter to light the cigarette, then gave the cigarette back to Resident #80. Observation revealed Resident #80 began to smoke the lit cigarette dropping ashes onto his shirt. Observation revealed circular piles of gray ash noted on Resident #80's pink fleece blanket lying on his lap and his blue hoyer pad. Further observation revealed a green pack of [NAME] cigarettes with two cigarettes in the pack lying in the crease of Resident #80's left arm. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 11:05 a.m., S64Housekeeper stated the facility does not have a smoking aide. S64Housekeeper stated the residents in the facility do not require supervision when smoking. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 11:18 a.m., S60SSD stated she did not counsel Resident #80, file an incident report, notify the DON or Administrator, or educate any staff after she was notified Resident #80 was smoking in his room. S60SSD stated she should have counseled Resident #80 and notified S2DON or S1Administrator of the incident. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 1:18 p.m., S7Careplan Nurse stated she was responsible for performing smoking assessments and updating careplans for residents who smoke. S7Careplan stated when she completed Resident #80's smoking assessment, she interviewed the CNA that was assigned to Resident #80 that day. S7Careplan Nurse further stated any questions the CNA was not able to answer, she would ask Resident #80. S7Careplan Nurse stated she did not visualize Resident #80 smoke when she completed his smoking assessment. S7Careplan Nurse stated a resident should be deemed an unsafe smoker if they drop ashes on themselves while smoking, if they attempt to smoke in area that was not a designated smoking area, if they cannot dispose of their ashes properly, and/or if the resident has had any accidents/incidents while smoking. S7Careplan Nurse stated she was not informed Resident #80 was observed smoking in his room so a smoking assessment was not completed. S7Careplan Nurse further stated Resident #80 should have had a smoking assessment done on 07/13/2023 when Resident #80 was observed smoking in his room, Resident #80 should have been care planned to be an unsafe smoker, and Resident #80 should not have been allowed to have smoking materials at any time. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 2:30 p.m., S39Social Worker stated she was not informed of the incident that occurred on 07/13/2023 when Resident #80 was observed smoking in his room. S39Social Worker stated Resident #80 should have had a one on one counseling, S2DON and S1Administrator should have been notified, and a plan to ensure safe smoking should have been implemented. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 2:38 p.m., S2DON stated she was notified today that Resident #80 was caught smoking in his room on 07/13/2023. S2DON stated Resident #80 should have been reassessed after that incident, his careplan should have been updated, and the interdisciplinary team should have been notified following the incident and they were not. S2DON confirmed Resident #80 was in possession of his smoking material and he should not have been allowed to keep his smoking material, he should have been made an unsafe smoker, and all of the facility's staff should have been educated and they were not. 2.) Resident #83 Review of Resident #83's face sheet revealed, in part, Resident #83 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis that included: Bipolar Disorder, Schizophrenia, Cocaine Abuse, Altered Mental Status, and Major Depressive Disorder Review of Resident #83's Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 06/05/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #83's Brief Interview for Mental Status Score was 14 which indicated Resident #83 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #83's Comprehensive Care Plan, with a start date of 03/13/2023, and a revision date of 06/05/2023, revealed, in part, Resident #83 would be free from complications and/or injury from smoking. Review revealed interventions that included: Resident #83 and/or Resident #83's family were to provide Resident #83's cigarettes and lighters, smoking assessments were to be done upon admission to the facility, quarterly, and as needed, staff are to remind/encourage resident to only smoke in designated smoking area, assure that resident was properly dressed for weather conditions when outside in smoking area, encourage resident not to spend extended time in smoking area related to excessive heat or cold, assure/encourage resident to be well hydrated when spending time in smoking area, assist resident to smoking area, encourage resident to stay out of direct sunlight, and provide a smoking jacket as needed. Review revealed an additional intervention was added on 05/18/2023 to include staff were to make rounds every hour while in smoking area and as needed. Review of Resident #83's Safe Smoking Assessment Form, with an original completion date of 02/01/2022 and a reassessment date of 06/05/2023, revealed, in part, Resident #83 was unable to light her smoking material independently, Resident #83 was unable to dispose of ashes appropriately, and Resident #83 was unsafe to smoke unsupervised. Review of Resident #83's electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) revealed no evidence of documentation of one hour monitoring of Resident #83. Review of Resident #83's Activities of Daily Living (ADL) documentation revealed no evidence of documentation of one hour monitoring of Resident #83. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 10:12 a.m. revealed, Resident #83 lit Resident #80's cigarette with her lighter. Observation revealed Resident #83 then lit her cigarette and began to smoke with ashes falling to her shirt and right arm. Observation further revealed Resident #83's right gerichair arm with black marks and visible burn marks. Observation further revealed ash noted to the foot rest on Resident #83's gerichair. In an interview on 07/17/2023 at 10:12 a.m., Resident #83 stated that she was allowed to smoke without staff supervision. Resident #83 stated she was allowed to keep her own cigarettes and lighter. Resident #83 stated the marks noted to the right arm of her gerichair were from when she used her gerichair to tap her ashes off of her cigarette because she cannot reach the ashtray. Resident #83 further stated she assisted other residents that come outside with lighting their cigarettes, if they do not have a lighter. Resident #83 stated Resident #24, Resident #80, and herself are allowed to smoke unsupervised. Resident #83 stated to her knowledge none of the residents who smoke have to be supervised and staff only come into the smoking area if they smoke. Resident #83 stated she did not use a smoking apron and she had never seen Resident #24 or Resident #80 use a smoking apron. In an interview on 07/17/2023 at 1:30 p.m., S11Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) stated she has been working at the facility about 2 weeks and the facility has not informed her or educated her on any residents on her hall that were unsafe smokers or that needed to be supervised while smoking. S11CNA stated Resident #83 has to be put in her geri-chair and brought outside. S11CNA stated she kept her smoking material on her person and she smoked throughout the day. S11CNA stated Resident #83 could smoke unsupervised and does not require a smoking apron. S11CNA further stated Resident #83 was not an unsafe smoker to her knowledge. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 9:20 a.m. revealed, Resident #83 outside smoking a lit cigarette with ashes falling onto her left arm. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 11:05 a.m., revealed Resident #83 smoking a lit cigarette. Further observation revealed Resident #83 scraped the lit cigarette across the right arm of her gerichair to discard her ash. Observation further revealed ash dropping onto Resident #83's right leg and inside of the right side of Resident #83's gerichair. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 1:20 p.m., S7Careplan Nurse stated she was responsible for performing Resident #83's smoking assessments and updating Resident #83's smoking careplan. S7Careplan Nurse further stated Resident #83 could not dispose of ashes properly upon assessment and should have been an unsafe smoker. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 2:40 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed Resident #83's right arm on her gerichair had ash and burn marks. S2DON confirmed Resident #83 was using the right arm of her gerichair to extinguish her lit cigarette. S2DON stated Resident #83 should have been deemed an unsafe smoker on 06/05/2023 when her re-assessment was completed. S2DON stated Resident #83 should not have been allowed to smoke unsupervised at any time and she should have had a smoking apron in place when smoking. S2DON further stated Resident #83 should not be allowed to have a lighter on her person at any time. 3.) Resident #24 Review of Resident #24's face sheet revealed, in part, Resident #24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: blindness of both eyes. Review of Resident #24's Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 06/05/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #24's Brief Interview for Mental Status Score was 15 which indicated Resident #24 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #24's Comprehensive Care Plan revealed, in part, a category of safe smoking with a start date of 09/10/2020. Further review revealed interventions that included: the staff should interview Resident #24 to assure the safety of smoking, monitor Resident #24's room for indication of smoking such as burn marks, cigarette butts, burned matches, educate Resident #24 on smoking safely, inform Resident #24's family of any problems with smoking noncompliance with facility's smoking safety protocol, provide a smoking vest if needed for Resident #24's safety, and the family and/or Resident #24 was to provide their cigarettes and lighters. Review of Resident #24's physician orders for June and July 2023 revealed no documentation of Resident #24 being monitored while smoking. Review of the facility's smoking list revealed Resident #24 was a smoker. Review of Resident #24's electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) for June and July 2023 revealed no documentation of Resident #24 being monitored while smoking. Review of Resident #24's Activities of Daily Living record for July 2023 revealed no documentation of Resident #24 being monitored while smoking. Review of Resident #24's Assessment for Safe Smoking with a date of completion of 06/05/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #24 was safe to smoke unsupervised. Review of this assessment revealed Resident #24's visions was impaired, but he was able to smoke safely. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 10:19 a.m. revealed, Resident #24 smoking a lit cigarette outside without supervision of staff and without a smoker's apron in place. Observation revealed Resident #24 had a lit cigarette in his hand with visible ashes noted on Resident #24's right upper leg. In an interview on 07/17/2023 at 10:19 a.m., Resident #24 stated that he is blind in both eyes. Resident #24 stated he was allowed to smoke without staff supervision. Resident #24 further stated he was allowed to keep his cigarettes and lighter at all times. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 9:20 a.m. revealed, Resident #24 sitting outside in his wheelchair in the designated smoking area without staff present. Further observation revealed, Resident #24 with a small pile of ashes on his right upper thigh and left mid-thigh. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 10:45 a.m. revealed, Resident #24 sitting outside in his wheelchair smoking a lit cigarette in the designated smoking area without staff present. Observation revealed, Resident #24 had a small piece of ash noted to his left upper thigh. Further observation revealed ashes scattered on his right and left thigh. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 11:33 a.m., S28CNA stated Resident #24 could smoke without staff supervision. S28CNA stated that she was unaware if Resident #24's cigarettes needed to be kept on the nurse's medication cart. S28CNA further stated that she was unaware of the facility's process on notifying the staff of resident's smoking status. S28CNA stated she used her best judgment to determine if a resident should be supervised based off of their cognitive status and their mobility needs. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 11:44 a.m., S62LPN stated she was unaware that unsafe smoker's smoking material should be kept on the nursing cart. S62LPN stated she does not know the facility's process for identifying if a resident was a safe or unsafe smoker. S62LPN further stated she was unaware of the process for a resident's smoking assessment. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 12:30 p.m., Resident #24 stated he was currently in possession of his lighter and his cigarettes. Resident #24 further stated that he kept his cigarettes in his pocket. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 1:06 p.m., S62LPN stated she was unaware of Resident #24's smoking status. S62LPN stated that she had witnessed Resident #24 borrow cigarettes from other residents, but she had never seen him with some of his own smoking material. S62LPN further stated if a resident was smoking in their room, holding a cigarette close to their person, falling asleep while smoking, if ashes are falling onto their clothing while smoking, or if burn holes were noted to the resident's clothing, then the resident should be considered an unsafe smoker. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 1:10 p.m., S2DON stated Resident #24 was an unsafe smoker due to dropping ash on himself. S2DON further stated Resident #24 should have staff supervision when smoking. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 1:11 p.m., S1Administrator stated Resident #24 was an unsafe smoker due to dropping ash on himself. S1Administrator further stated Resident #24 should be monitored when smoking due to displaying unsafe behaviors. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 8:27 a.m., S7CarePlan Nurse stated she interviews the nursing staff and the CNA staff to obtain information to complete safe smoking assessments. S7CarePlan Nurse further stated that she does not go outside to observe residents smoking directly because she has a problem with her lungs and the smoke irritates them. S7CarePlan Nurse stated she used the window in the center of the building to assess residents who are smokers. Observation on 07/19/2023 at 8:50 a.m., surveyor walked the distance from the above indicated window to the area Resident #24 has been observed smoking and it was approximately 125 feet. 4.) Resident #85 Review of Resident #85's face sheet revealed, in part, Resident #85 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: Nicotine Dependence Review of Resident #85's Minimal Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 06/12/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #85's Brief Interview for Mental status Score was 15 which indicated Resident #85 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #85's Comprehensive Care Plan, revealed, in part, Resident #85 would be free from complications and/or injury from smoking. Review revealed interventions that included: Resident #85 and/or Resident #85's family were to provide Resident #85's cigarettes and lighters, smoking assessments were to be done upon admission to the facility, quarterly, and as needed, staff are to remind/encourage resident to only smoke in designated smoking area, assure that resident is properly dressed for weather conditions when outside in smoking area, and provide a smoking jacket as needed. Review of Resident #85's physician orders revealed no documentation for smoking or one hour monitoring. Review of Resident #85's electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) revealed no evidence of documentation of one hour monitoring of Resident #85. Review of Resident #85's Activities of Daily Living (ADL) documentation revealed no evidence of documentation of one hour monitoring of Resident #85. Review of Resident #85's Safe Smoking assessment dated [DATE] revealed, in part, resident was safe to smoke unsupervised at this time. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 11:01 a.m. revealed, Resident #80 gave Resident #85 a cigarette. Observation revealed Resident #85 put Resident #80's cigarette to his mouth, used his orange lighter to light the cigarette, then gave the cigarette back to Resident #80. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 8:27 a.m., S7Careplan Nurse stated she interviewed Resident #85's nurse and CNAs in order to get information regarding Resident #85's smoking habits to completed his safe smoking assessment. S7Careplan Nurse further stated she would also view Resident #85 and additional residents through the window in the center of the building to assess residents who smoke.S7Careplan Nurse stated she was unsure if she could see exactly how residents were disposing of ashes from the window in the center of the building. Observation on 07/19/2023 at 8:50 a.m., surveyor walked the distance from the above indicated window to the area Resident #85 has been observed smoking and it was approximately 125 feet. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 11:45 a.m., S1Administrator stated Resident #24. Resident #80, Resident #83, and Resident #85 should not have been allowed to smoke without staff supervision. S1Adminstrator further stated Resident #80 should have been deemed an unsafe smoker after he was caught smoking in his room, he should have been provided direct supervision when he was smoking, and his smoking material should have been removed from his person following the incident. S1Adminstrator stated Resident #83 should have been deemed an unsafe smoker after she was visualized during her assessment disposing of ashes improperly. S1Administrator stated S60SSD should have notified him or S2DON following the incident, and Resident #80 should have been reassessed immediately. S1Adminstrator further stated Resident #24 and Resident #85 should have staff supervision when smoking and Resident #24 should have a smoking apron on at all times.
CRITICAL (L)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Abuse Prevention Policies (Tag F0607)

Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents

⚠️ Facility-wide issue

Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to implement their abuse policies and procedures to prevent resident abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of prop...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to implement their abuse policies and procedures to prevent resident abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of property by failing to: 1. Ensure staff who had convictions that barred employment were not allowed to work in the facility for 1 (S32Laundry) staff; 2. Ensure staff who had charges that barred employment with no final disposition were not allowed to work in the facility for 2 (S13CNA and S14Housekeeper) staff; 3 Ensure staff who worked in the facility had a completed criminal background check prior to hiring for 7 (S6CNA, S15Dietary Cook, S29CNA, S31CNA, S33Housekeeper, S34Housekeeper, and S35Housekeeper) staff and, 4. Ensure staff who worked in the facility had a completed National Sex Offender registry check prior to hire for 23 (S6CNA, S11CNA, S13CNA, S14Housekeeper, S15Dietary Cook, S16Laundry, S17Laundry, S18Housekeeper, S19Dietary Aide, S20CNA, S22CNA, S23Housekeeper, S24CNA, S25CNA, S26Transportation, S27Housekeeper, S29CNA S30CNA, S31CNA, S32Laundry, S33Housekeeper, S34Housekeeper, and S35Housekeeper) of 27 (S6CNA, S11CNA, S12Housekeeper, S13CNA, S14Housekeeper, S15Dietary Cook, S16Laundry, S17Laundry, S18Housekeeper, S19Dietary Aide, S20CNA, S21Housekeeper, S22CNA, S23Housekeeper, S24CNA, S25CNA, S26Transportation, S27Housekeeper, S28CNA, S29CNA S30CNA, S31CNA, S32Laundry, S33Housekeeper, S34Housekeeper, S35Housekeeper, and S36CNA) employee personnel files reviewed. This deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation on 05/01/2023 at 7:14 a.m. when the facility failed to screen all employees and allowed staff who had convictions that barred employment, staff with no final dispositions on charges, staff with no criminal background check and staff with no National Sex Offender registry check access to all 109 vulnerable residents placing them at risk for abuse/neglect/exploitation/misappropriation of property in and around the entire facility. The deficient practice had the likelihood to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to all 109 residents identified on the facility's Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, CMS-672. S1Administrator was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on 07/21/2023 at 12:40 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 07/25/2023 at 1:14 p.m. after it was determined through observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility implemented an acceptable Plan of Removal prior to the survey exit which included in part: developing and implementing policies and procedures for screening employees that ensured all 109 residents were free from potential abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of property; auditing employing files; completing background checks; and termination of 6 employees with convictions that barred employment. Findings: Review of Louisiana R.S. (revised statute) 40:1203.3 revealed, in part, no employer shall hire non-licensed person when the results of a criminal history check reveal that non-licensed person has been convicted of any of the following offenses: distribution or possession with the intent to distribute controlled dangerous substances as listed in Schedules I through V of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Act. Further review revealed, the felony offense involving theft, pursuant to R.S. 14:67, or theft of assets of an aged person or person with a disability, pursuant to R.S. 14:67.21 in excess of five hundred dollars or in any case in which the offender has been previously convicted of theft, pursuant to R.S. 14:67, or theft of assets of an aged person or person with a disability, pursuant to R.S. 14:67.21, regardless of the value of the instant theft. Further review revealed, if the results of a criminal history check reveal that a non-licensed person had been convicted of any of the offenses listed, the employer shall immediately terminate the person's employment. Review of the facility's Risk Areas for Fraud and Abuse policy revealed, in part, the facility would have policies and procedure in place to prevent abuse, neglect, exploitation or misappropriation of resident property. Further review revealed, in part, individuals would not be employed who had been found guilty of abuse, neglect, exploitation or misappropriation of resident property. Review of the facility's policy regarding the Seven Components of Abuse Prevention revealed, in part the facility will screen employees to determine if potential or current employees had records or abuse. Further review revealed, no documentation of any procedures for completing state approved criminal background checks or National Sex Offender registry checks, and how the results of a state approved criminal background checks or National Sex Offender registry checks would affect the hiring process. Review of the facility's Coordinating and Implementing Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Policies and Procedures revealed, in part, policies were in place that prevented resident abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of resident property. Further review revealed that the facility would have policies that address employee screening as part of abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation prevention. Review of the facility's Hiring Policy and Procedure revealed, in part, all employees will be screened and references obtained. Further review revealed, all applicants will be subject to employment investigations into their work backgrounds, their personal references, and verification of criminal record shall be conducted. Further review revealed, no documentation of any procedures for completing state approved criminal background checks or National Sex Offender registry checks, and how the results of a state approved criminal background checks or National Sex Offender registry checks would affect the hiring process. Review of the facility's Employee Conduct and Work Rules policy revealed, in part, conviction of a crime, whether following a trial or a plea of guilty, that indicated unfitness for the job or a risk to the safety or well-being of the residents, will result in corrective action up to and including termination. Review of the facility's Background Screening Investigations Policy and Procedure revealed, in part, background and criminal checks are to be initiated for non-licensed employees prior to the first day of work and that non-licensed employees were allowed to begin working until their results were received. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 11:00 a.m., S37Human Resources Director (HR) stated approved criminal background checks were submitted on hire for all staff. S37HR further stated on occasion, the state approved criminal background check company required fingerprints for newly hired employees, and the state approved criminal background checks for newly hired employees sometimes took 30 to 45 days to be completed. S37HR further stated that the Louisiana state law allowed the facility to allow newly hired employees to work in the facility until their criminal background checks were received as long as the request for the criminal background checks were submitted to the state agency within 72 hours of hire. S37HR also stated newly hired employees that were allowed to work without a state approved criminal background check would be fired immediately if the employee's criminal background check listed a conviction that barred employment. 1. S32Laundry Review of S32Laundry's employee record revealed, in part, S32Laundry was hired on 06/07/2023, and a state approved criminal background check report was not completed until 06/27/2023. Further review of S32Laundry's background check revealed, in part, S32Laundry had two convictions of theft between $100 and $500, which barred employment. Further review revealed the facility allowed S32 Laundry to work multiple shifts for 26 days. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 3:39 p.m., S37HR stated S32Laundry's criminal background check revealed he was guilty of two thefts between $100 and $500, which were convictions that barred employment. S37HR further stated that S32Laundry's employment at the facility should have been terminated when facility received S32Laundry's state approved criminal background check report on 06/27/2023. S37HR also stated S32Laundry should not have been allowed to continue to work at the facility putting the facilities residents under unnecessary risk In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 9:44 p.m., S43Housekeeping Supervisor stated that facility's residents were put under unnecessary risk due to S32Laundry working in the facility with charges that barred employment. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 10:13 a.m., S1Administrator stated S32Laundry's state approved criminal background check had convictions that barred employment, and that S32Laundry should have been terminated as soon as their state approved criminal background check report came in, but was not. S1Administrator further stated that allowing an employee with charges that barred employment to work in the facility put all residents at a risk for abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of property. 2. S13CNA Review of S13CNA's employee record revealed, in part, S13CNA was hired on 05/17/2023 with no state approved criminal background check completed until 06/15/2023.The background check revealed S13CNA had a charge of Manufacturing, Distribution, or Possession of a Scheduled I; Possession Marijuana with no final disposition. Review of S13CNA's timecard revealed S13CNA was allowed to work 12-hour shifts with all 109 vulnerable residents' for 34 days. S14 Housekeeper Review of S14Houskeeper's employee record revealed, in part, S14Housekeeper was hired on 05/01/2023 with no state approved criminal background check until 06/02/2023. The background check revealed S14Housekeeper had three charges of misdemeanor with no disposition noted. Review of S14Houskeeper's Time Card Report revealed, in part, S14Houskeeper was allowed to work throughout the facility as a porter for 49 days working multiple shifts and times exposing all 109 residents to risk. In an interview on 7/20/2023 at 3:39 p.m., S37HR confirmed S13CNA and S14Housekeeper had charges that barred employment, and the facility had no final disposition of the charges. S37HR further stated, she was not aware that S14Housekeeper's three charges of misdemeanor theft would have barred him from employment if no disposition was available. S37HR further stated that S13CNA and S14Housekeeper should not have worked in the facility with no final disposition of charges that barred employment. S37HR further stated that because S13CNA's and S14 Housekeeper's employment continued at the facility, the facility's residents were put under unnecessary risk for abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of property. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 10:13 a.m., S1Administrator stated S13CNA and S14Houskeeper had charges that if convicted, barred employment on their state approved criminal background check reports with no final disposition of the charges. S1Administrator further stated S13CNA and S14Houskeeper should have been terminated as soon as their state approved criminal background check report came in, but were not. S1Administrator further stated that allowing employees with charges that if convicted would bar employment on their state approved criminal background check with no final disposition noted to work in the facility, put residents at potential risk for abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of property. 3. The following 7 employees were allowed to work throughout the facility with all 109 residents with no state approved criminal background check completed prior to hire as follows: S6CNA was allowed to work 12 hour shifts throughout the facility for 10 days from 06/29/2023 to 07/21/2023. S15Dietary [NAME] was allowed to work in the facility's kitchen on multiple times of the day for 10 days from 07/13/2023 to 07/21/2023. S29CNA was allowed to work 12 hour shifts throughout the facility for 14 days from 06/26/2023 to 07/21/2023. S31CNA was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 20 days from 06/27/2023 to 07/21/2023 S33Houskeeper was allowed to work 8 hour shifts throughout the facility for 12 days from 07/03/2023 to 07/21/2023. S34Houskeeper was allowed to work 8 hour shifts throughout the facility for 12 days from 06/30/2023 to 07/21/2023. S35Houskeeper was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 22 days from 06/20/2023 to 07/21/2023. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 11:57 a.m., S37HR stated that she did not have completed background checks on S6CNA, S15Dietary Cook, S29CNA, S31CNA, S33Housekeeper, S34Housekeeper, and S35Housekeeper. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 8:44 a.m., S2DON stated allowing employees to work in the facility without a completed state approved criminal background check could potentially put the facility's residents in jeopardy of abuse. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 9:44 a.m., S43Housekeeping Supervisor stated allowing S33Housekeeper, S34Housekeeper, and S35Houskeeper to work in the facility without having their state approved criminal background checks completed put the facility's residents at risk. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 9:53 a.m., S44Dietary Manager stated that because S15Dietary [NAME] did not have a state approved criminal background check completed, he put the facility's residents under an unnecessary risk for abuse. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 10:08 a.m., S37HR stated that employees working in the facility without completed state approved criminal background checks put residents at risk for abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of property. S37HR further stated when prospective employees are not screened properly before hire, the facility does not know if the prospective employees have a criminal history, and that puts the facility's residents at risk. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 10:13 a.m., S1Administratior stated the facility's residents were not adequately protected due to staff being allowed to work in the facility without a completed approved criminal background check. 4. The following 23 employees were allowed to work throughout the facility with all 109 residents without a completed National Sex Offender registry check. S6CNA was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 10 days from 06/29/2023 to 07/21/2023. S11CNA was allowed to work on multiple day shifts throughout the facility for 7 days from 07/11/2023 to 07/21/2023. S13CNA was allowed to work multiple day shifts throughout the facility of 34 days from 05/17/2023 to 07/21/2023. S14Housekeeper was allowed to work on multiple shifts throughout the facility for 56 days from 05/01/2023 to 07/21/2023. S15Dietary [NAME] was allowed to work in the facilities kitchen on multiple times of the day for 7 days from 07/13/2023 to 07/21/2023. S16Laundry was allowed to work on multiple shifts with access to all residents for 41 days from 05/31/2023 to 07/21/2023. S17Laundry was allowed to work on multiple shifts with access to all residents for 15 days from 06/20/2023 to 07/21/2023. S18Houskeeper was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 39 days from 05/16/2023 to 07/21/2023. S19Dietary Aide was allowed to work multiple shifts in the facility's kitchen for 12 days from 07/03/2023 to 07/21/2023. S20CNA was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 16 days from 07/07/2023 to 07/21/2023. S22CNA was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 34 days from 05/21/2023 to 07/21/2023. S23Houskeeper was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 28 days from 05/30/2023 to 07/21/2023. S24CNA was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 32 days from 05/17/2023 to 07/21/2023. S25CNA was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 49 days from 06/02/2023 to 07/21/2023. S26CNA was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 30 days from 05/02/2023 to 07/21/2023. S27Housekeeper was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 42 days from 05/16/2023 to 07/21/2023. S29CNA was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 14 days from 06/26/2023 to 07/21/2023. S30CNA was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 31 days from 06/07/2023 to 07/21/2023. S31CNA was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 20 days from 06/27/2023 to 07/21/2023. S32Laundry was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 28 days from 06/07/2023 to 07/21/2023. S33Housekeeper was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 11 days from 07/03/2023 to 07/21/2023. S34Housekeeper was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 12 days from 06/30/2023 to 07/21/2023. S35Housekeeper was allowed to work multiple shifts throughout the facility for 24 days from 06/20/2023 to 07/21/2023 In an interview on 7/20/2023 at 3:39 p.m., S37HR stated allowing employees without a national sex offender registry check work in the facility put the facility's residents at risk for harm, and that employees without a national sex offender registry check, should not be working in the facility. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 8:44 p.m., S2DON stated it was important for the facility to run National Sex Offender Registry checks on all employees prior to hire. S2DON further stated if the facility was not aware of what employees had been convicted of, the facility did not know what the employees could potentially do the facility's residents. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 9:43 a.m., S49Assistant Administrator stated she was unsure if any employee employed by the facility had been checked against the National Sex Offender Registry due to a problem with the facility's contracted state approved background check agency. S49Assistant Administrator further stated she spoke to the facility's contracted state approved background check agency, and S49Assistant Administrator confirmed that the state approved background check agency was not performing National Sex Offender Registry checks on employees as part of their criminal background check. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 10:13 a.m., S1Administrator stated the facility was not following the Abuse Prevention policies during the hiring process. S1Administrator further stated the facility's screening process was not adequate to protect residents in the facility. S1Administratior stated 37HR was not aware national sex offender registry checks were not being completed on the facility's employee's before they were hired and allowed to work in the facility, and S37HR should have ensured the National Sex Offender Registry was assessed for all staff. S1Administrator further stated that because facility was not screening new employees correctly before allowing them to work in the facility, the facility's residents were put at risk for abuse, neglect and exploitation.
CRITICAL (L)

Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation

Administration (Tag F0835)

Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents

⚠️ Facility-wide issue

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to be administered in a manner that enabled its resources to be used effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to be administered in a manner that enabled its resources to be used effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being by failing to: 1. Ensure a system was in place for staff to identify residents as unsafe smokers,supervise residents who displayed unsafe smoking habits, and ensure smoking material and/or cigarettes were not in resident possession (Resident #24, and Resident #80, Resident #83. Resident #85); and, 2. Ensure all residents were free from resident to resident sexual and physical abuse; and 3. Develop and implement policies and procedures for screening employees to prevent resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of property. This lack of Administrative oversight resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy that could affect the lives and well-being of all residents residing in the facility and the likelihood to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to all 109 residents identified on the facility's Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, CMS-672. S1Administrator was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on 07/21/2023 at 12:40 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 07/25/2023 at 2:15 p.m. after it was determined through observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility implemented an acceptable Plan of Removal prior to the survey exit which included, in part: S63Owner will be overseeing S1Administrator and the facility department heads in the implementation of the interventions put into place to ensure they are enforced for unsafe smokers. S63Owner will observe the smoking area and check the list of unsafe smoking residents weekly. S63Owner held an in-service that began on 07/24/2023 with department heads that covered new implementations, which included unsafe smoker's lists and how to protect residents from unsafe smoking habits. S63Owner will meet with S1Administrator weekly for 3 months until 10/21/2023 to review the facility's policy and procedures, including unsafe smoking and smoking policies. S1Administrator and S63Owner will be reviewing that every perspective employee's references and background checks are completed before hire for the next 6 months. S1Administrator will periodically review new employee files quarterly for reference checks and background checks thereafter. S1Administrator in-serviced all staff on the new abuse policy. S63Owner, S37Human Resources, S49Assistant Administrator, and all facility department heads were in serviced on the new hiring policy. Facility will not allow any perspective employees to work in the facility until background checks and reference checks are completed and free of any convictions that barred employment. The Facility will be contracted with a new state approved background check company that will be able to produce reports more quickly. S63Owner stated she will maintain oversight for Administration and Administrative Staff. Findings: Cross-Reference Findings at F-689 In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 11:45 a.m., S1Administrator stated Resident #24. Resident #80, Resident #83, and Resident #85 should not have been allowed to smoke without staff supervision. S1Adminstrator further stated Resident #80 should have been deemed an unsafe smoker after he was caught smoking in his room, he should have been provided direct supervision when he was smoking, and his smoking material should have been removed from his person following the incident. S1Adminstrator stated Resident #83 should have been deemed an unsafe smoker after she was visualized during her assessment disposing of ashes improperly. S1Administrator stated S60SSD should have notified him or S2DON following the incident, and Resident #80 should have been reassessed immediately. S1Adminstrator further stated Resident #24 and Resident #85 should have staff supervision when smoking and Resident #24 should have a smoking apron on at all times. Cross-Reference Findings at F-600 In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 10:13 a.m., S1Administrator stated when Resident #100 displayed inappropriate sexual behaviors, Resident #100 should have been placed on 1 on 1 supervision, Resident #100's physician should have been contacted, and a discharge/transfer plan should have been started. S1Administrator stated Resident #100 had the potential to have inappropriate sexual behaviors with other residents when not on 1 on 1 supervision and residents were not safe. In an interview on 07/25/2023 at 11:30 a.m., S2DON confirmed Resident #21 physically abused Resident #8 on 04/01/2023. S2DON further confirmed new interventions were not put into place after new episodes of abusive behaviors on 08/18/2022 and 04/01/2023. S2DON further stated Resident #21's care plan should have included new interventions after each new abusive behavior episode. In an interview on 07/25/2023 at 11:50 a.m., S63Owner confirmed Resident #100 sexually abused Resident #27 on 06/01/2023. S63Owner further stated once Resident #100 returned to the facility, there should have been a plan in place for monitoring of Resident #100's inappropriate sexual behaviors and if inappropriate behaviors were noted, S2DON and S1Administrator should have been notified of Resident #100's sexually inappropriate behaviors. S63Owner confirmed all residents were at risk for sexual abuse. Cross-Reference Findings at F-607 In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 9:43 a.m., S49Assistant Administrator stated she was unsure if any employee employed by the facility had been checked against the National Sex Offender Registry due to a problem with the facility's contracted state approved background check agency. S49Assistant Administrator further stated she spoke to the facility's contracted state approved background check agency, and S49Assistant Administrator confirmed that the state approved background check agency was not performing National Sex Offender Registry checks on employees as part of their criminal background check. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 10:13 a.m., S1Administrator stated the facility was not following the Abuse Prevention policies during the hiring process. S1Administrator further stated the facility's screening process was not adequate to protect residents in the facility. S1Administratior stated 37HR was not aware national sex offender registry checks were not being completed on the facility's employees before they were hired and allowed to work in the facility, and S37HR should have ensured the National Sex Offender Registry was assessed for all staff. S1Administrator further stated that because facility was not screening new employees correctly before allowing them to work in the facility, the facility's residents were put at risk for abuse, neglect and exploitation.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0578 (Tag F0578)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's medical record documentation was...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's medical record documentation was consistent with the resident's advance directive choices for 2 (Resident #30 and Resident #46) of 2 (Resident #30 and Resident #46) sampled residents investigated for advance directives. Findings: Review of facility's Advanced Directive Policy and Procedure last revised on [DATE] revealed, in part, the Louisiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (LaPOST) is a legal document the facility will utilize in order to fulfill the resident's wishes to have life sustaining procedures withheld or withdrawn. Resident #30 Review of Resident #30's Louisiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (LaPOST) revealed, in part, DNR/Do Not Attempt Resuscitation was selected to be the treatment provided to Resident #30 in the event of cardiopulmonary arrest. Further review revealed Resident #30's LaPOST was signed on [DATE] by the physician and Resident #30's responsible party. Review of Resident #30's face sheet revealed, in part, documentation of Resident #30's advance directive as Full Code. Review of Resident #30's Continuity of Care Document revealed Resident #30's advance directive of Full Code. Review of Resident #30's care plan revealed, in part, Resident #30's Advance Directive care plan category was documented as Do not resuscitate/Do not hospitalize. Review of Resident #30's [DATE] Physician Order Record revealed, in part, no documented evidence of a physician's order for Resident #30's code status or advance directive choices. In an interview on [DATE] at 10:13 a.m., S8Licensed Practical Nurse stated as of [DATE] Resident #30 was a DNR because a new LaPOST document had been completed. Observation on [DATE] at 10:15 a.m. revealed a bright orange Full Code sticker present on Resident #30's medical chart. In an interview on [DATE] at 10:25 a.m., S39Social Worker stated she assisted in obtaining Resident #30's new LaPOST document on [DATE], but S39Social Worker was not responsible for ensuring Resident #30's physician's order was changed. In an interview on [DATE] at 10:33 a.m., S38Admissions Director confirmed Resident #30's LaPOST document signed on [DATE] by Resident #30's physician and responsible party revealed Do Not Resuscitate was chosen for Resident #30. S38Admissions Director further confirmed the Resident #30's chart displayed a bright orange Full Code sticker and Resident #30's physician's orders had Full Code printed next to Resident #30's name. S38Admissions Director stated if the LaPOST and other documents in the medical record were conflicting, there was the potential for the wrong advance directive to be carried out in the event of a cardiopulmonary arrest. Resident #46 Review of Resident #46's Physician Orders dated [DATE] revealed, in part, Resident #46 had an order to admit to Traditions Hospice with a terminal diagnosis of anoxic brain injury and respiratory failure, and an order for do not resuscitate (DNR). Review of Resident #46's indicated Resident #46 had an order for DNR/do not attempt resuscitation (allow natural death) signed by the physician and dated on [DATE]. Review of Resident #46's [DATE] Physician Orders revealed, in part, an active order for Code Status: Full with a start date of [DATE]. In an interview on [DATE] at 11:55 a.m., Resident #46's daughter confirmed it was the families and Resident #46's wish to have DNR orders. In an interview on [DATE] at 2:55 p.m., S48Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated to determine a residents code status he would first check the computer and then the resident's chart to review the LaPOST to ensure they matched. S8LPN was presented with Resident #46's LaPOST with an order for DNR signed and dated for [DATE], and Residents #46's [DATE] Physician Orders with an active order for Code Status: Full code with an onset date of [DATE] and asked to review both orders. S48LPN was then asked which order he would follow for Resident #46 since the code status orders did not match. S8LPN stated he would perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) because otherwise Resident #46 may die and death was final. In an interview on [DATE] at 5:10 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated that Resident #46's active orders for Full Code were incorrect and should have been changed on [DATE] when Resident #46 admitted to hospice services with a new order for DNR. S2DON stated she understood S48LPN's thought process when he stated he would perform CPR; however, performing CPR would go against Resident #46's wishes and physician orders and CPR should not be performed.
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to report alleged violation of abuse timely to the State Survey Agency and Certification Agency as required for 1(Resident #104) of 7(Resident...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to report alleged violation of abuse timely to the State Survey Agency and Certification Agency as required for 1(Resident #104) of 7(Resident #8, Resident #21, Resident #27, Resident #82, Resident #83, Resident #100, and Resident #104) sample residents reviewed for abuse. Findings: Review of the facility's Reporting Abuse, Neglect, Misappropriation of Property Policy, revised March 2023, revealed, in part, all residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of property as well as the fear of being abused or neglected. Further review revealed, in part, any employee who witnesses or is informed of an incident of abuse must report the incident at the time of the incident or when the employee is informed of the incident, the employee or person witnessing the incident must verbally notify the Director of Nurses (DON), Assistant Administrator, or Administrator immediately. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 1:45 p.m., Resident #104 stated Resident #100 tried to grab her private area on 07/17/2023 and she told Resident #100 to stop touching her. Resident #104 also stated S6Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was present and told Resident #100 to move away. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 2:53 p.m., S6CNA stated on 07/17/2023 she saw Resident #104 sitting in her wheelchair by the nurse's station when Resident #100 rolled his wheelchair by Resident #104 and attempted to touch Resident #104 between her legs. S6CNA further stated Resident #104 told Resident #100 to stop touching her between her legs. S6CNA stated, she told Resident #100 to move away from Resident #104. In an interview on 07/22/2023 at 10:30 a.m., S2DON stated the staff who witnessed Resident #100 attempting to touch Resident #104 between her legs should have reported the situation to the nurse and the nurse should have reported the incident to the DON or Administrator, who would have started a State Incident Management Report, and an investigation of the incident. S2DON confirmed the incident with Resident #100 attempting to touch Resident #104 on 07/17/2023 was not reported by staff, no investigation was completed, and no State Incident Management System report was completed.
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an alleged incident of resident to resident sexual abuse was...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an alleged incident of resident to resident sexual abuse was thoroughly investigated for 1 (Resident #104) of 7 (Resident #8, Resident #21, Resident #27, Resident #82, Resident #83, Resident #100, and Resident #104) sample residents reviewed for abuse. Findings: Review of the facility's Reporting Abuse, Neglect, Misappropriation of Property Policy, revised March 2023, revealed, in part, all resident have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of property as well as the fear of being abused or neglected. Further review revealed, in part, any employee who witnesses or is informed of an incident of abuse must report the incident in accordance with the following procedure: 1. At the time of the incident or when the employee is informed of the incident, the employee or person witnessing the incident must verbally notify the Director of Nurses (DON), Assistant Administrator, or Administrator immediately. 2. The DON, Assistant Administrator, or Administrator shall immediately notify the designated representatives through SIMS. This action must be done within 2 hours after the allegation if the allegation involves abuse or results in bodily harm or injury. 3. The DON, Assistant Administrator, or Administrator shall immediately notify the responsible person of the resident and document such notification attempt. 4. Within twenty four (24) hours of incident, a written description of all facts pertaining to exactly what happened must be submitted by each person or persons witnessing the incident to the manager submitting the claim. 5. The DON or Assistant Administrator shall begin to investigate the matter immediately and must submit findings to the Administrator no later than 4 working days after incident. Review of the facility's Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program revealed, in part, the resident abuse, neglect and exploitation prevention program consists of a facility-wide commitment and resource allocation to support the following objectives: 1. Protect residents from abuse, neglect, exploitation or misappropriation of property by anyone; and 2. Identify and investigate all possible incidents of abuse, neglect, mistreatment, or misappropriation of resident property. Review of Resident #104's medical record revealed Resident #104 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, in part, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and cerebral infarction. Review of Resident #104's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/22/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #104 had a BIMS of 14, which indicated Resident #104 was cognitively intact. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 1:45 p.m., Resident #104 stated Resident #100 tried to grab her private area on 07/17/2023 and she told Resident #100 to stop touching her and S6 Certified Nursing Assistant (CAN) was present, and S6CNA told Resident #100 to move away. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 2:53 p.m., S6CNA stated on 07/17/2023 she saw Resident #104 sitting in her wheelchair by the desk when Resident #100 rolled his wheelchair by Resident #104 trying to touch Resident #104 between her legs. S6CNA further stated Resident #104 told Resident #100 to stop touching her between her legs. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 9:57 a.m., S2DON stated Resident #104 informed her this morning that Resident #100 attempted to touch her in between her legs on Monday, 07/17/2023 and staff was present when it happened. S2DON stated the staff present when Resident #100 attempted to touch Resident #104 between the legs should have notified the DON and Resident #100 should have been placed on 1 on 1 supervision. S2DON also stated Resident #100's physician should have been notified. S2DON stated because she was not informed of Resident #100 touching Resident #104, Resident #100 was not placed on 1 on 1 supervision and Resident #100 was able to continue to have inappropriate sexual behaviors toward and with female residents. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 10:13 a.m., S1Administrator stated he was not informed of Resident #100 touching Resident #104 on 07/17/2023 and an investigation was not completed on the allegation of abuse since he was not aware of the incident.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0637 (Tag F0637)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assess...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment was completed within 14 days of a resident beginning hospice services for 1 (Resident #105) of 3 (Resident #1, Resident #74, and Resident #105) sampled residents investigated for hospitalization. Findings: Review of the facility's Interpretation and Implementation of the Comprehensive Assessments and the Care Delivery Process Policy revealed, in part, the facility is to complete the Minimum Data Set within 14 days after it is determined that the resident has had a significant change in physical or mental condition. Review of Resident #105's Physician Orders dated 06/23/2023 revealed, in part, an order to admit to hospice related to diagnosis of sepsis and anoxic brain injury. Review of Resident #105's record revealed no Significant Change in Status assessment was completed within 14 days after hospice admission on [DATE]. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 10:30 a.m., S41Minimum Data Set (MDS) Nurse stated she did not complete a significant change in status assessment for Resident #105 within 14 days of his hospice admission on [DATE] and she should have.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0808 (Tag F0808)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to serve diets as per physician's order for 2 (Resident #20 and Resident #33) of 5 (Resident #8, Resident #12, Resident #20, Resi...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to serve diets as per physician's order for 2 (Resident #20 and Resident #33) of 5 (Resident #8, Resident #12, Resident #20, Resident #33, and Resident #51) residents sampled for dining. Review of Resident #20's meal ticket revealed, in part, an order for a regular, no added salt, diet. Review of Resident #33's meal ticket revealed, in part, an order for a low fat/low cholesterol mechanical soft diet. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 11:51 a.m. revealed, Resident #33 had a meal ticket on her meal tray with Resident #20's name on it, and a regular consistency meal of red beans, sausage, and rice present on the plate. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 11:54 a.m. revealed that Resident #20, had a meal ticket on her meal tray with Resident #33's name on it, and a mechanical soft consistency meal of red beans and rice present on the plate. In an interview on 07/17/2023 at 11:57 a.m., S45ADON confirmed that Resident #20 and Resident #33 were given the incorrect trays and ordered diets. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 11:57 a.m. revealed S45ADON attempt to feed Resident #33 from Resident #20's tray. In an interview on 07/17/2023 at 11:57 a.m., S45ADON stated that she should not have kept feeding Resident #33 the regular consistency food because Resident #33 required a mechanical soft consistency diet. Interview on 07/18/2023 at 11:48 a.m., S9Certified Nursing Assistant Supervisor stated that Resident #33 and Resident #20 should not have received each other's meal trays, as they had different ordered diets.
CONCERN (E)

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to: 1.) Ensure a resident had clean equipment for 3 (Resident #30, Resident #56, and Resident #91) of 8 (Resident #30, Resident #31, Resident ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to: 1.) Ensure a resident had clean equipment for 3 (Resident #30, Resident #56, and Resident #91) of 8 (Resident #30, Resident #31, Resident #37, Resident #56, Resident #62, Resident #91, Resident #95, and Resident #106) residents observed with enteral feeding pumps; and, 2.) Ensure residents had a clean shower room for 1 (Shower Room i) of 6 (Shower Room h, Shower Room i, Shower Room j, Shower Room k, Shower Room l, and Shower Room m) shower rooms observed. Findings: 1. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 10:34 a.m. revealed a dried light brown substance was present on Resident #91's enteral feeding pump and down Resident #91's enteral feeding pump pole. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 10:43 a.m. revealed a dried light brown substance was present down Resident #30's enteral feeding pump pole. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 2:26 p.m. revealed a dried light brown substance was present on Resident #91's enteral feeding pump and down Resident #91's enteral feeding pump pole. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 2:27 p.m. revealed a dried light brown substance was present on Resident #30's enteral feeding pump and down Resident #30's enteral feeding pump pole. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 2:28 p.m. revealed a dried light brown substance was present on Resident #56's enteral feeding pump pole. Observation on 07/19/2023 at 3:46 p.m. revealed a dried light brown substance was present on Resident #91's enteral feeding pump and down Resident #91's enteral feeding pump pole. Observation on 07/19/2023 at 3:47 p.m. revealed a dried light brown substance was present on Resident #30's enteral feeding pump and down Resident #30's enteral feeding pump pole. Observation on 07/19/2023 at 3:49 p.m. revealed a dried light brown substance was present on Resident #56's enteral feeding pump pole. Observation on 07/21/2023 at 9:12 a.m. revealed a dried light brown substance was present on Resident #91's enteral feeding pump and down Resident #91's enteral feeding pump pole. Observation on 07/21/2023 at 9:13 a.m. revealed a dried light brown substance was present on Resident #30's enteral feeding pump and down Resident #30's enteral feeding pump pole. Observation on 07/21/2023 at 9:14 a.m. revealed a dried light brown substance was present on Resident #56's enteral feeding pump pole. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 9:16 a.m., S42Housekeeper stated it was the nursing department's responsibility to clean resident equipment in resident rooms. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 9:23 a.m., S59Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated it was nursing's responsibility to ensure resident equipment was clean. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 9:43 a.m., S43Housekeeping Supervisor stated it was nursing's responsibility to clean resident equipment. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 2:20 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the above mentioned enteral feeding pumps and enteral feeding poles were unsanitary. S2DON further stated the above mentioned resident equipment should have been cleaned. 2. Observation on 07/24/2023 at 10:20 a.m. revealed a baseball size piece of a brown flattened unknown substance at entrance door Shower Room i. Further observation of Shower Room i revealed the left shower stall had brown scattered splatters of an unknown substance present on the white porcelain tiles. In an interview on 07/24/2023 at 10:28 a.m., S42Housekeeper and stated she was responsible for cleaning Shower Room i. In an interview on 07/24/2023 at 10:50 a.m., S8LPN agreed the left shower stall in Shower Room i was dirty with small brown scattered splatters of an unknown substance. In an interview on 07/24/2023 at 10:52 a.m., S50Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) stated she agreed the left shower stall in Shower Room i was dirty. In an interview on 07/24/2023 at 10:55 a.m., S1Administrator confirmed the left shower stall in Shower Room i was dirty and it needed to be cleaned.
CONCERN (E)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) was completed accurately for 8 (Resident #1, Resident #13, Resident #27, Resident ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) was completed accurately for 8 (Resident #1, Resident #13, Resident #27, Resident #30, Resident #48, Resident #56, Resident #83, and Resident #101) of 28 (Resident #1, Resident #8, Resident #13, Resident #19, Resident #21, Resident #24, Resident #27, Resident #30, Resident #31, Resident #37, Resident #48, Resident #55, Resident #56, Resident #74, Resident #80, Resident #82, Resident #83, Resident #85, Resident #91, Resident #96, Resident #100, Resident #101, Resident #104, Resident #105, Resident #109, Resident #110, Resident #311, and Resident #461) sampled residents. Findings: Resident #1 Review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/15/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had no falls since admission. Review of the facility's fall list 2023 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had falls on 02/14/2023, 02/22/2023, 04/21/2023, 06/04/2023, and 06/19/2023. Review of Resident #1's care plan revealed, in part, a care plan was developed for potential for falls. Further review revealed falls noted on 02/22/2023, 06/04/2023, and 06/19/2023. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 9:50 a.m., S41Minimum Data Set Nurse confirmed Resident #1's MDS with an ARD of 06/15/2023 did not have accurate fall history information documented. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 10:18 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed Resident #1's MDS with an ARD of 06/15/2023 did not reflect the falls Resident #1 had on 02/14/2023, 02/22/2023, 04/21/2023, 06/04/2023, and 06/19/2023. Resident #13 Review of Resident #13's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/25/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #13 received antipsychotic medications on 6 of 7 days during the assessment reference period and schizophrenia was not documented as an active diagnosis for Resident #13. Review of Resident #13's Active Problems List revealed, in part, a diagnosis of Schizophrenia with an onset date of 10/11/2010. Review of Resident #13's May 2023 Physician Orders revealed, in part, an order with a start date of 05/04/2023 for Zyprexa 5mg (a medication used to treat mental disorders) daily at bedtime. Review of Resident #13's care plan revealed, in part, Resident #13 had the potential for cognition deficits and an impaired thought process related to a diagnosis of Schizophrenia. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 4:15p.m., S41Minimum Data Set Nurse stated Resident #13's MDS with an ARD of 05/25/2023 was documented incorrectly and that Resident #13's MDS should have been coded to reflect an active diagnosis of Schizophrenia. Resident #27 Review of Resident #27's MDS with an ARD of 06/12/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #27 had adequate vision. Review of Resident #27's care plan revealed, in part, a care plan that was developed for potential for injury related to visual deficits. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 9:00 a.m., S41Minimum Data Set Nurse stated Resident #27 had impaired vision. S41Minimum Data Set Nurse further confirmed the MDS with an ARD of 06/12/2023 indicated adequate vision which was incorrect. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 10:30 a.m., S2DON confirmed Resident #27 had impaired vision. S2DON further confirmed Resident #27's MDS with an ARD of 06/12/2023 was inaccurate with the vision documented as adequate. Resident #30 Review of Resident #30's Louisiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (LaPOST) revealed, in part, the document was signed on 06/13/2023. Review of Resident #30's MDS with an ARD of 06/22/2023 revealed Resident #30 was documented to not have a LaPOST completed. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 10:16 a.m., S41MDS Nurse confirmed Resident #30 had a LaPOST document signed on 06/13/2023, and the MDS that was completed on 06/22/2023 was not coded appropriately to reflect Resident #30's LaPOST. Resident #48 Review of Resident #48's progress note dated 04/19/2023 revealed, in part Resident #48 had a fall while trying to get a blanket out of the closet. Review of Resident #48's progress note dated 04/25/2022 revealed, in part, Resident #48 had a fracture of the neck of femur. Review of Resident #48's record revealed, in part no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of a fall except on 04/19/2023. Review of Resident #48's Entry MDS with an ARD of 05/02/2022 revealed, in part, Resident #48 had a fall with a major injury. Review of Resident #48's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 08/01/2022 revealed, in part, Resident #48 had a fall with a major injury. Review of Resident #48's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 10/31/2022 revealed, in part, Resident #48 had a fall with a major injury. Review of Resident #48's Annual MDS with an ARD of 01/30/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #48 had a fall with a major injury. Review of Resident #48's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 05/01/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #48 had a fall with a major injury. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 2:12 p.m., S41Minimum Data Set Nurse stated she coded Resident #48 had a fall with a major injury on all of Resident #48's MDSs from 08/01/2022 until 5/01/2023, and she should not have. Resident #56 Review of Resident #56's July 2023 Physician Order Report revealed, in part, a physician's order for the following: -18 French indwelling suprapubic (a surgically created connection between the urinary bladder and the skin used to drain urine from the bladder) catheter in place with a start date of 01/03/2023; and, -Change suprapubic catheter monthly with a start date of 04/25/2023. Review of Resident #56's care plan revealed, in part, Resident #56 was care planned for the potential for infection related to a suprapubic catheter. Further review revealed Resident #56's suprapubic catheter care plan had a start date of 04/05/2022. Review of Resident #56's MDS with an ARD of 05/25/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #56 did not have an indwelling catheter or any other urinary appliance documented. Further review revealed Resident #56's urinary continence was documented as 9, which indicated urinary continence was not rated because Resident #56 had a catheter, urinary ostomy or no urine output for the entire 7 days of the lookback period. In an interview on 07/21/23 at 11:55 a.m., S41MDS Nurse confirmed Resident #56 had a suprapubic catheter, and Resident #56's 05/25/2023 MDS was coded incorrectly. Resident #83 Review of Resident #83's medical record, revealed in part, a diagnosis of Cerebrovascular vasospasm and vasoconstriction. Review of Resident #83's Physician Orders for July 2023 revealed, in part, an order for an Coumadin (a medication to prevent blood clots) 5 milligram (mg.) once a day on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Further review revealed, an additional physicians order for Coumadin 4 mg once a day on Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday, and Sunday. Review of Resident #83's Electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) for May and June of 2023 revealed, in part, Coumadin 5 mg once a day on Monday, Wednesday and Friday and Coumadin 4 mg once a day on Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday, and Sunday was administered as ordered except on Wednesday 06/07/2023 due to Resident #83's refusal. Review of Resident #83's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/05/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #83 received 0 days of anticoagulant medications. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 9:31 a.m. S41Minimum Data Set Nurse stated Resident #83 received 5 days of anticoagulants and the MDS with the ARD on 06/05/2023 should have been coded to reflect it and it was not. Resident #101 Review of Resident #101's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/11/2023 revealed, in part, no falls since admission/entry or reentry or Prior assessment. Review of Resident #101's care plan revealed, in part, a problem for falls. Further review revealed documentation of falls without injury on 02/08/2023 and 02/24/2023. Review of facility's fall list revealed, Resident #101 had a fall on 02/06/2023. Review of Resident #101's nurses notes revealed, in part, documentation of falls on 02/08/2023 and 02/24/2023. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 1:10 p.m., S41Minimum Data Set Nurse stated Resident #101's MDS with an ARD of 05/11/2023 should have reflected that Resident #101 had falls since admission.
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 observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to: 1. Ensure a resident's care plan was revised after...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to: 1. Ensure a resident's care plan was revised after falling incidents for 1 (Resident #1) of 1 (Resident #1) sampled residents investigated for falls; and, 2. Ensure a resident's catheter care plan was implemented for 1 (Resident #56) of 2 (Resident #56 and Resident #105) sampled residents investigated for urinary catheters. 3. Ensure a resident's care plan was revised after two separate admissions to a psychiatric facility due to abusive behavior for 1 (Resident #21) of 5 (Resident #8, Resident #21, Resident #27, Resident #82, and Resident #104) investigated for abuse. Findings: 1. Review of Resident #1's medical record revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, in part, hypertension, dysphagia, muscle weakness, epilepsy, and unspecified atrial fibrillation. Review of the facility's Fall List 2023 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had falls on 02/14/2023, 02/22/2023, 04/21/2023, 06/04/2023, and 06/19/2023. Review of Resident #1's care plan revealed, in part, care plan developed for potential for falls with fall noted on 01/26/2023, 02/14/2023, 02/20/2023, 02/22/2023, 04/21/2023, 06/04/2023, and 06/19/2023 with approaches to include send to hospital for an evaluation s/p fall (updated 06/04/2023), increase rounds to every hour (updated 04/21/2023), send out to for evaluation (updated on 02/22/2023), ice pack per order and administer pain medication as ordered (updated 02/20/2023), increase rounds and educate resident on importance of calling for assistance (updated 02/14/2023), monitor for changes and notify physician (updated on 01/26/2023), observe for unsteady gait, encourage rest periods. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 9:16 a.m., S45Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated Resident #1 was instructed to use call light for assistance, bed rail, and wheelchair to prevent falls. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 9:50 a.m., S41Minimum Data Set Nurse (MDS Nurse) stated fall care plans should be updated with new interventions immediately after each fall. S41MDS Nurse stated Resident #1's care plan was not updated immediately after the fall on 07/19/2023 and 07/15/2023. S41MDS Nurse also stated Resident #1's care plan did not have appropriate interventions after Resident #1's fall on 06/04/2023. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 10:18 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed Resident #1's care plan was not revised with new interventions after the fall on 07/19/2023, 07/15/2023, 06/04/2023, and 02/22/2023. 2. Review of Resident #56's record revealed, in part, a diagnosis of urinary tract infection. Review of Resident #56's July 2023 physician's orders revealed, in part, an order to clean Resident #56's catheter daily with soap and water. Review of Resident #56's care plan revealed, in part, Resident #56 was care planned for the potential for infection related to Resident #56's suprapubic catheter with interventions to include catheter care every shift. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 11:48 a.m., S41MDS Nurse, stated there was no documented evidence catheter care was completed daily on Resident #56. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 1:19 p.m., S59Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) confirmed Resident #56 had an order for daily catheter care with soap and water. S59LPN stated she was unable to find any documented evidence catheter care was provided to Resident #56 daily. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 1:23 p.m., S50Certified Nursing Assistant stated she did not chart Resident #56's catheter care anywhere in Resident #56's record. Review of Resident #56's medical record revealed, in part, no documented evidence and the facility was unable to provide any documented evidence Resident #56 was provided daily catheter care. In an interview on 07/22/2023 at 11:12 a.m., S45Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed Resident #56 had a physician's order for catheter care daily. S45ADON further confirmed there was no documented evidence Resident #56 was provided catheter care daily. S45ADON stated without catheter care documentation, the facility had no way to ensure catheter care was provided to Resident #56. 3. Review of Resident #21's record revealed, in part, an admit date of 07/19/2019 with diagnoses of other vascular syndromes of the brain in cerebrovascular disease, altered mental status, and bipolar disorder. Review of Resident #21's Annual Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 05/11/2023 revealed, in part, a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 which indicates moderate cognitive impairment and no evidence of an acute change in mental status. Review of Resident #21's care plan revealed, in part, a problem with a start date of 04/29/2021 of behavioral symptoms, resident was exhibiting abnormal behaviors- cursing staff and playing with her feces; and a problem with a start date of 04/01/2023 -Resident #21 entered another resident's room (Resident #8 with a BIMS of 8, moderately cognitively impaired) and was witnessed by staff hitting Resident #8 while in bed. Resident #21 was removed from Resident #8's room and staff redirected her behavior. New orders given to send to emergency room for psych evaluation. Approaches with a start date of 05/20/2021 consisted of the following: - Approach resident in a calm, non-judging manner; - Explain to resident that behaviors are not acceptable; - Notify MD/family of behaviors; - Attempt to divert attention during outburst; - Remove resident from area of agitation; - Attempt to find causes of agitation; - Psych evaluation as needed; - Smile at resident when approaching and/or giving care, and talk to resident when giving care. Further review of Resident #21's care plan revealed a problem of behavioral symptoms-coordinating services between facility and outside services. Approaches with at start date of 05/20/2021 consisted of the following: - Anticipate all needs - Anticipate decline in resident's condition, behaviors, etc.; - Social services will coordinate setting up appropriate services prior to admission; - Medical records will assist with setting up transportation; - Nursing will ensure that any orders, medication changes, etc. are communicated to the primary care doctor; - Nursing will notify outside services of any changes in resident's status, orders, etc. Further review of Resident #21's care plan revealed no new approaches were put into place after Resident #21's return to the facility from admissions to a psychiatric facility on 08/18/2022 and 04/01/2023. Review of Resident #21's progress notes revealed, in part, an entry dated 08/18/2022 stated Resident #21 was observed in another resident's room destroying their personal property and throwing the bed mattress on the floor. Review of Resident #21's progress notes dated 04/01/2023 entered by S57License Practical Nurse (LPN) stated Resident #21 up in wheelchair observed going toward Resident #8 door way fussing. S57LPN walked and closed the door to avoid confrontation. Further review revealed an entry dated 04/01/2023 entered by S57LPN stating: monitoring resident activity on the unit. Resident #21 complained Resident #8 was a devil and was trying to attack her mind. Further review revealed another entry dated 04/01/2023 entered by S57LPN stating: Called to Resident #8 room, and Resident #21 was seen by a S61Certified Nursing Assistant(CNA) hitting Resident #8 while he was in his bed. Nurse rolled Resident #21 to her room. Resident #21 was angry and stated she does not like to be lied to. Resident #21 stated when she is mad she will hurt someone. In interview on 07/21/2023 at 3:00 p.m., S3LPN stated when Resident #21 returned to the facility from her psych admission and there no new approaches/interventions were ordered. In an interview on 07/25/2023 at 11:30 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed new interventions were not put into place after new episodes of abusive behaviors on 08/18/2022 and 04/01/2023. S2DON further stated Resident #21's care plan should have included new interventions after each new abusive behavior episode.
CONCERN (E)

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

Tube Feeding (Tag F0693)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to administer a resident's enteral flush (a flush of water that is administered through a tube through a person's abdomen and i...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to administer a resident's enteral flush (a flush of water that is administered through a tube through a person's abdomen and into their stomach) per the physician orders for 1 (Resident #31) of 2 (Resident #31 and Resident #37) residents investigated for tube feeding. Findings: Review of Resident #31's physician orders dated July 2023 revealed, in part, flush the percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube (used to receive nutrition directly into the stomach) with 150 ml (milliliter) every 6 hours and as needed. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 8:32 a.m. revealed Resident #31's water flush on Resident #31's PEG tube feeding pump was set for 150 ml of water flush every four hours. Observation on 07/19/2023 at 8:07 a.m. revealed Resident #31's water flush on Resident #31's PEG tube feeding pump was set for 150 ml of water flush every four hours. Observation on 07/20/2023 at 12:53 p.m. revealed Resident #31's water flush on Resident #31's PEG tube feeding pump was set for 150 ml of water flush every four hours. Observation on 07/21/2023 at 8:36 a.m. revealed Resident #31's water flush on Resident #31's PEG tube feeding pump was set for 150 ml of water flush every four hours. Observation on 07/22/2023 at 9:30 a.m. revealed Resident #31's water flush on Resident #31's PEG tube feeding pump was set for 150 ml of water flush every four hours. Observation on 07/23/2023 at 9:00 a.m. revealed Resident #31's water flush on Resident #31's PEG tube feeding pump was set for 150 ml of water flush every four hours. Observation on 07/24/2023 at 9:00 a.m. revealed Resident #31's water flush on Resident #31's PEG tube feeding pump was set for 150 ml of water flush every four hours. In an interview on 07/24/2023 at 9:11 a.m., S8Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated that the programming of Resident #31's PEG tube feeding pump should be checked when the bag for the tube feeding was changed. S8LPN further confirmed that the rate for the water flush on Resident #31's PEG tube feeding pump was set for 150 ml of water flush every four hours instead of every six hours as ordered. In an interview on 07/24/2023 at 10:00 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated that nurses should be checking the programing of the PEG tube feeding pump when hanging the new bag of tube feeding. S2DON further stated if Resident #31's feeding pump was running at 150 ml every 4 hours, it should not have been, because it did not match the order of 150 ml water flush every four hours in Resident #31's electronic medical record.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0698 (Tag F0698)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review, interview, and observation, the facility failed to ensure a resident (Resident #96) who required dialysis: 1. Had fluid intake monitored and documented as ordered: 2. Had their...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, interview, and observation, the facility failed to ensure a resident (Resident #96) who required dialysis: 1. Had fluid intake monitored and documented as ordered: 2. Had their dialysis access site assessed every shift: and 3. Had vital signs assessed and documented, including the blood pressure in the arm where the access site was not located, obtain weights, and communicate resident's status information with the dialysis facility prior to and post dialysis. This deficient practice was identified for 1 (Resident #96) of 1 (Resident #96) sampled resident investigated for dialysis services in a total investigative sample of 28. Findings: Review of Resident #96's record revealed, in part, an admit date of 03/02/2023 with diagnoses, in part, of End Stage Renal Disease. Review of Resident #96's Quarterly Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 06/08/2023 revealed, in part, Section C-Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 13 (cognitive), and Section O- received dialysis. Review of Resident #96's 06/18/2023 - 07/18/2023 Physician's orders revealed, in part, hemodialysis (HD) Monday, Wednesday, and Friday (MWF) at 11:00 a.m. Further review revealed a 1500 milliliter (ml) per day fluid restriction. Review of Resident #96's Care Plan revealed, in part, a problem with a start date of 03/02/2023 of dialysis, fluid volume excess related to End Stage Renal Disease. Approaches included encourage fluid restriction as ordered, monitor progress with dialysis unit, and monitor the arteriovenous (AV) graft to right arm. Review of Resident #96's medication administration record revealed, in part, no documentation of AV site monitoring. Review of Resident #96's record revealed, in part, no documented evidence of fluid intake monitoring. Further review revealed no documented evidence of monitoring AV site for patency. Review of the facility's Hemodialysis Policy revealed, in part, Basic Responsibility for Licensed Nurse to include monitor bruit (a whooshing sound monitored with a stethoscope at the AV site) and thrill (a vibration caused by blood flowing through an AV graft) for patency. Review of Resident #96's dialysis communication binder revealed no documentation from the facility before leaving for dialysis for the following days: 03/29/2023, 03/31/2023, 04/03/2023, 04/07/2023, 04/17/2023, 04/24/2023, 04/28/2023, 05/10/2023, 05/24/2023, 06/12/2023, 07/10/2023, 07/12/2023, and 07/14/2023. Further review revealed no communication documentation between the facility and the dialysis facility for the following dates: 03/27/2023, 04/05/2023, 04/10/2023, 05/19/2023, and 06/09/2023. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 9:15 a.m., Resident #96 stated if he wanted more water he would ask the staff and his water pitcher was filled. Resident #96 further stated no one ever informed him he had to limit how much he drank. Resident #96 further stated a nurse had never listened to his arm with a stethoscope. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 1:30 p.m., S3License Practical Nurse (LPN) stated she does not check for bruits and thrills. S3LPN further stated she does not monitor Resident #96's fluid intake. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 9:31 a.m., S57LPN stated she did not monitor and did not document monitoring for bruits and thrills. S57LPN further stated Resident #96 was not on a fluid restriction. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 9:42 p.m., S58Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) stated Resident #96 had a water pitcher by his bed and she filled it once or twice a shift. S58CNA further stated at the end of the shift she would tell the nurse how many water pitchers he drank and how many glasses of fluid Resident #96 consumed at meals. S58CNA further stated she did not know Resident #96 was on a fluid restriction. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 11:00 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated there was no documented evidence and she could not present documented evidence of fluid intake monitoring and AV shunt monitoring for patency for Resident #96. S2DON further stated dialysis communication logs should have been completed before dialysis appointments for each dialysis visit.
CONCERN (E)

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

Staffing Information (Tag F0732)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure nursing staffing data was posted daily in a public area at the beginning of each shift. Findings: Observation on 07/17/2023 at 11:00 a....

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure nursing staffing data was posted daily in a public area at the beginning of each shift. Findings: Observation on 07/17/2023 at 11:00 a.m. revealed there was no visible nursing staff information posted in a public area. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 2:00 p.m. revealed there was no visible nursing staff information posted in a public area. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 9:50 a.m. revealed there was no visible nursing staff information posted in a public area. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 4:55 p.m. revealed there was no visible nursing staff information posted in a public area. Observation on 07/18/2023 at 9:15 a.m. revealed there was no visible nursing staff information posted in a public area. Observation on 07/19/2023 at 9:30 a.m. revealed there was no visible nursing staff information posted in a public area. Observation on 07/19/2023 at 8:30 a.m. revealed there was no visible nursing staff information posted in a public area. Observation on 07/20/2023 at 9:26 a.m. revealed there was no visible nursing staff information posted in a public area. Observation on 07/21/2023 at 2:42 p.m. revealed there was no visible nursing staff information posted in a public area. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 9:30 a.m., S1Administrator stated he was not aware the nurse staffing information was supposed to be posted daily in a public area and should include the facility's name, date, census number, number of licensed and unlicensed staff and actual hours worked as per the regulation, and confirmed the required nurse staffing information was not posted.
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 record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain accurate reconciliation records of controlled medications for: 1. 1 (Resident #25) resident who received controll...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain accurate reconciliation records of controlled medications for: 1. 1 (Resident #25) resident who received controlled medications and 2. 1 (Medication Cart z) of 3 (Medication Cart x, Medication Cart y, Medication Cart z) medication carts observed for controlled substance reconciliation. Findings: Review of the facility's Controlled Substances Policy revealed, in part, controlled substances are reconciled upon receipt, administration, disposition, and at the end of each shift. Further review revealed, in part, the nurse administering the medication is responsible for recording: the name of the resident receiving the medication, the name of the medication, the strength and dose of the medication, the time of administration, the method of administration, the quantity of the medication remaining, and the signature of nurse administering the medication. Review revealed, in part, the nurse coming on duty and the nurse going off duty should count the controlled medications at the end of each shift and determine the count together. 1. Review of the medication reconciliation binder for Medication cart y on 07/20/2023 at 11:45 a.m. revealed Resident #25's medication card for Ultram (medication used to relieve pain) 50 milligrams (mg) had 4 pills and the individual narcotic record count was 5 pills. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 11:48 a.m., S8Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated she failed to sign out the medication on the individual narcotic record when it was administered and confirmed Resident #25's medication card for Ultram 50 mg did not match the individual narcotic record. 2. Review of Medication cart z's controlled substance binder on 07/20/2023 at 11:52 a.m. revealed, in part, the narcotic nurse sign on/off log for Medication cart z dated July 2023 and May 2023 was missing signatures at shift change on 07/19/2023, 05/28/2023, 05/27/2023, 05/26/2023, 05/25/2023, 05/23/2023, 05/20/2023, 05/19/2023, 05/18/2023, 05/17/2023, 05/16/2023, 05/15/2023, 05/14/2023, 05/13/2023, 05/11/2023, 05/06/2023, 05/05/2023, 05/03/2023, 05/02/2023, and 05/01/2023. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 11:55 a.m., S45Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated the narcotic nurse sign on/off log for Medication cart z should have been signed by the nurse coming on shift and the nurse going off shift once the narcotic count is completed. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 3:02 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated the narcotic count should be completed at every shift change, and the narcotic log sheet should have been signed by the nurse coming on shift and the nurse going off shift once the narcotic count is completed. S2DON confirmed the narcotic nurse sign on/off log for Medication cart z dated July 2023 and May 2023 was missing signatures at shift change on 07/19/2023, 05/28/2023, 05/27/2023, 05/26/2023, 05/25/2023, 05/23/2023, 05/20/2023, 05/19/2023, 05/18/2023, 05/17/2023, 05/16/2023, 05/15/2023, 05/14/2023, 05/13/2023, 05/11/2023, 05/06/2023, 05/05/2023, 05/03/2023, 05/02/2023, and 05/01/2023.
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 record reviews, observations, and interviews the facility failed to ensure: 1. Expired medications were not available for administration to residents for 1 (Medication Room a) of 2 (Medicati...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews the facility failed to ensure: 1. Expired medications were not available for administration to residents for 1 (Medication Room a) of 2 (Medication Room a and Medication Room n) medication storage rooms observed; 2. Medications were stored in a locked compartment and not available to unauthorized staff or residents to access for 1 (Resident #312) of 4 (Resident #66, Resident #75, Resident #311, Resident #312) residents reviewed for medication administration. Findings: Review of the facility's Storage of Medication Policy revealed, in part, discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or biologicals are to be returned to the dispensing pharmacy or destroyed. Additionally, the policy revealed all drugs and biologicals used in the facility are to be stored in locked compartments and permit only persons authorized to prepare and administer medications to have access to locked medications. 1. Observation on 07/20/2023 at 11:59 a.m. revealed Medication Room a contained 22 boxes of colon cancer test cards with an expiration date of 04/2023. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 12:00 p.m., S45Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated the 22 boxes of colon cancer test cards expired on 04/2023. 2. Observation on 07/19/2023 at 8:40 a.m. revealed, in part, S8Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) placed one Amoxicillin (an antibiotic medication) 875-125milligram tablet and one Lexapro (a medication used for depression) 20mg tablet in a medication cup for Resident #312. Observation revealed S8LPN left both tablets in the medication cup on top of Medication Cart n unattended and walked down the hall to retrieve additional medication. Further observation revealed, S8LPN returned to Medication Cart n at 8:41 a.m. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 8:42 a.m., S8LPN confirmed she left the Amoxicillin tablet and the Lexapro tablet for Resident #312 inside a medication cup on top of Medication Cart n unattended. S8LPN stated medication should never be left unattended. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 9:55 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated S8LPN should not have left Resident #312's medication unattended on top of the medication cart for unauthorized staff or residents to access.
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 observations and interviews the facility failed to store food in a sanitary manner and follow proper sanitization and food handling practices as evidenced by: 1. opened containers that were ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to store food in a sanitary manner and follow proper sanitization and food handling practices as evidenced by: 1. opened containers that were unlabeled and undated; 2. improper storage of employee liquid beverages; 3. handled scoops and styrofoam cup stored in bulk items; 4. having expired chemical sanitization testing strips available for use; and, 5. failing to maintain chemical sanitization testing logs. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 109 residents that received meals prepared by the kitchen according to the Resident Census and Condition Forms (CMS-672). Findings: Observation on 07/17/2023 at 9:15 a.m. the facility's dry storage room accompanied by S44Dietary Supervisor, revealed in part, bulk items on a shelf available for use: -one-half full 22 quart container of flour with a plastic hand scoop lying submerged in the bucket of flour; -a plastic hand scoop lying submerged in the bucket of sugar; and, -a Styrofoam bowl lying submerged in the bucket of white rice. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 9:20 a.m. the facility's walk-in refrigerator revealed the following items: -opened 32 ounce chopped garlic container with no open date; -container of opened flour with no date; -5pounds (lbs) cottage cheese with an expiration date of 06/19/2023; -one gallon of sweet relish with an expiration date of 06/2023; and, -one opened container of sour cream with no open date. Observation on 07/20/2023 at 10:00 a.m. the facility's dry storage room accompanied by S44Dietary revealed in part, bulk items on a shelf for use: -one-half full 22 quart container of flour with a handled scoop submerged in flour; and, -one-half full 22 qt. container of rice with a Styrofoam cup submerged in white rice. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 10:02 a.m., S44Dietary Supervisor stated all food items stored in the facility's dry storage room should not have had the hand scoop or the Styrofoam cup stored in the bulk food items. In an interview on 07/20/2023 at 10:03 a.m., S44Dietary Supervisor stated and confirmed all food items stored in the facility's refrigerator cooler should be dated after opening. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 9:23 a.m. of the facility's freezer revealed the following items: -20 ounce white cherry PowerAde opened and undated; -Clear Fruit Island Breeze 16 ounce opened and undated; -Beef meatloaf in a plastic bag with no open date; -Beef fajita meat in a plastic bag with no open date; -Spring water bottles; -Orange popsicle; and, -Red popsicle. In an interview on 07/17/2023 at 9:43 a.m., S44Dietary Supervisor stated and confirmed all of the above stated items in the facility's freezer should have had an open date. S44Dietary Supervisor further confirmed the above stated spring water bottles, one 16.9 ounce Clear Fruit Island Breeze bottle, orange popsicle and red popsicle were employee items and should not have been in the facility's kitchen refrigerator or freezer. Observation on 07/24/2023 at 9:45 a.m. revealed chlorine test strips with an expiration date of 11/01/2022. In an interview on 07/24/2023 at 9:46 a.m., S44Dietary Supervisor stated and confirmed he does not have chemical sanitization test strip reading logs for chlorine nor quaternary chemical testing. In an interview on 07/24/2023 at 9:47 a.m., S44Dietary Supervisor stated and confirmed he was using expired testing strips until the new order arrives with an expected delivery date of 07/26/2023.
CONCERN (E)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review, observations, and interview, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program by: 1. Failing to ensure hand hygiene was maintained during dining serv...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, observations, and interview, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program by: 1. Failing to ensure hand hygiene was maintained during dining services; 2. Failing to ensure hand hygiene was maintained identified for 4 (Resident #75, Resident #66, Resident #311 and Resident #312) of 4 (Resident #75, Resident #66, Resident #311 and Resident #312) observed during medication administration; 3. Failing to ensure hand hygiene was maintained while performing wound care identified for 1 (Resident #91) of 1 (Resident #91) resident; and, 4. Failing to develop and implement a policy and procedure for the surveillance of Legionella and other opportunistic water pathogens. Findings: #1 Review of the facility's Infection Control Policy and Procedure revealed, in part, washing hands as promptly and thoroughly as possible between resident contacts and after contact with blood, body fluids, secretions, excretions, and equipment or articles contaminated by them, is an important component of infection control. Review of the facility's Handwashing Policy and Procedure revealed, in part, personnel shall wash their hand between handling of individual residents and before contact about the face and mouth of residents. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 11:36 a.m. revealed, S51CNA removed Resident #76's lunch tray from the cart without performing hand hygiene, entered Resident #76's room with a lunch tray, touched Resident #76's bed handle to adjust the bed, touched Resident #76's bedside table with her ungloved hands, and exited Resident 76's room without performing hand hygiene. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 11:39 a.m. revealed, S10CNA removed Resident #87's lunch tray from the cart without performing hand hygiene, entered Resident # 87's room with a lunch tray, removed the straw paper from Resident #87's straw, placed the straw into Resident #87's drink with her ungloved hands, and exited Resident #87's room without performing hand hygiene. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 11:41 a.m. revealed, S10CNA removed Resident #62's lunch tray from the cart without performing hand hygiene, entered Resident # 62's room with a lunch tray, removed the straw paper from the straw with an ungloved hand, placed the straw into Resident #62's drink, opened Resident #62's utensils, and exited Resident #62's room without performing hand hygiene. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 11:43 a.m. revealed, S10CNA removed Resident #72's lunch tray from the cart without performing hand hygiene, entered Resident # 72's room with a lunch tray, removed the straw paper from the straw with an ungloved hand, placed the straw into Resident #72's drink, opened Resident #72's utensils, and exited Resident #72's room without performing hand hygiene. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 11:45 a.m. revealed, S10CNA removed Resident #102's lunch tray from the cart without performing hand hygiene, entered Resident # 102's room with a lunch tray, removed the straw paper from the straw with an ungloved hand, placed the straw into Resident #102's drink, and exited Resident #102's room without performing hand hygiene. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 11:47 a.m. revealed, S10CNA removed Resident #22's lunch tray from the cart without performing hand hygiene, entered Resident # 22's room with a lunch tray and placed it on the bedside table, adjusted Resident #22's bed with the bed remote, removed the straw paper from Resident #22's straw with an ungloved hand, placed the straw into Resident #22's drink, and exited Resident #22's room without performing hand hygiene. Observation on 07/17/2023 at 11:49 a.m. revealed, S10CNA removed Resident #94's lunch tray from the cart without performing hand hygiene, entered Resident # 94's room with a lunch tray and placed it on the bedside table, assisted Resident #94 up in the bed, removed the straw paper from Resident #94's straw with an ungloved hand, placed the straw into Resident #94's drink, and exited Resident #94's room without performing hand hygiene. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 10:14 a.m., S10CNA stated that she should wash her hands before passing out trays and setting up a meal tray for Resident #22, Resident #62, Resident #72, Resident #87, Resident #94, and Resident #102 who eat in their room. S10CNA stated that she should have performed hand hygiene after she touched personal items in Resident #22, Resident #62, Resident #72, Resident #87, Resident #94, and Resident #102's rooms, and when exiting the above resident's rooms. S10CNA confirmed she did not perform hand hygiene while distributing lunch trays to residents. In an interview on 07/18/2023 at 3:20 p.m., S9Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Supervisor stated S10CNA and S51CNA should have washed their hands before and after touching personal items in Resident #22, Resident #62, Resident #72, Resident #87, Resident #94, and Resident #102's rooms such as straws, bed remote, and bedside table. S9CNA Supervisor stated S10CNA and S51CNA should have performed hand hygiene when having contact with a resident. S9CNA Supervisor confirmed staff should have performed hand hygiene when exiting a resident's room and before touching another resident's lunch tray. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 9:56 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated S10CNA and S51CNA should have performed hand hygiene before and after they touched personal items in a resident's room when distributing lunch trays to residents. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 9:20 a.m., S1Administrator confirmed the S10CNA and S51CNA should have washed their hands or used hand sanitizer before and after they touched personal items in a resident's room when distributing lunch trays to residents. #2 Observation on 07/19/2023 at 8:15 a.m. revealed, S8Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) touched the surface of the medication cart, computer keyboard, medication cart drawer, and Resident #75's medication cards with her ungloved left hand. Observation revealed, S8LPN did not perform hand hygiene, removed a tablet from Resident #75's medication card, placed the tablet directly into her unwashed and ungloved left hand, and then placed the tablet into a medication cup. Observation revealed, S8LPN repeated the above mentioned process with an additional 5 tablets and placed each tablet into her unwashed and ungloved left hand, and then placed each tablet into the medication cup. Observation revealed, S8LPN administered all 6 tablets in the medication cup to Resident #75. Further observation revealed, Resident #75 consumed all 6 tablets. Observation on 07/19/2023 at 8:24 a.m. revealed, S8LPN touched the medication cart drawers, a medication bottle, and Resident #66's medication cards with her ungloved left hand. Observation revealed, S8LPN did not perform hand hygiene, removed a tablet from Resident #66's medication card, placed the tablet directly into her unwashed and ungloved left hand, and placed the tablet into a medication cup. Observation revealed, S8LPN repeated the above mentioned process with an additional 5 tablets and placed each tablet into her unwashed and ungloved left hand, and then placed each tablet into the medication cup. Observation revealed, S8LPN removed the 7th tablet from Resident #66's medication card, placed the 7th tablet directly into her unwashed and ungloved left hand, dropped the 7th tablet onto the surface of the medication cart, picked up the 7th tablet with her unwashed and ungloved left hand, and then placed the 7th tablet into the medication cup containing the previously prepared 6 tablets. Observation revealed, S8LPN administered all 7 tablets in the medication cup to Resident #66. Further observation revealed, Resident #66 consumed all 7 tablets. Observation on 07/19/2023 at 8:27 a.m. revealed, S8LPN touched the surface of the medication cart, Resident #311's insulin pin and medication cards with her ungloved left hand. Observation revealed, S8LPN did not perform hand hygiene, removed a tablet from Resident #311's medication card, placed the tablet directly into her unwashed and ungloved left hand, and then placed the tablet into a medication cup. Observation revealed, S8LPN repeated the above mentioned process with an additional 5 tablets and placed each tablet into her unwashed and ungloved left hand, and then placed each tablet into the medication cup. Observation revealed, S8LPN administered all 6 tablets in the medication cup to Resident #311. Further observation revealed, Resident #311 consumed all 6 tablets. Observation on 07/19/2023 at 8:39 a.m. revealed, S8LPN touched the surface of the medication cart, a binder, and Resident #312's medication cards. Observation revealed, S8LPN did not perform hand hygiene, removed a tablet from Resident #312's medication card, placed the tablet directly into her unwashed and ungloved left hand, and then placed the tablet into a medication cup. Observation revealed, S8LPN repeated the above mentioned process with an additional 5 tablets and placed each tablet into her unwashed and ungloved left hand, and then placed each tablet into the medication cup. Observation revealed, S8LPN administered all 6 tablets in the medication cup to Resident #312. Further observation revealed, Resident #312 consumed all 6 tablets. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 8:50 a.m., S8LPN confirmed she touched the above mentioned items and did not perform hand hygiene before she placed Resident #75, #66, #311, #312 tablets directly into her left hand and then into the medication cups. S8LPN further stated she should have placed the tablets directly into the medication cup. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 9:55 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed S8LPN should not have administered medications to Resident #75, #66, #311, and #312 after she touched the surface of the medication cart and other items on the medication cart and placed the tablets into her hand. S2DON stated S8LPN should have placed the tablets directly from the medication card into the medication cup. S2DON further stated S8LPN should have replaced Resident #66's 7th tablet after she dropped the tablet onto the medication cart. #3 Review of the facility's Wound Care policy and procedure revealed, in part, after removing the resident's wound dressing, the staff must take off their gloves, complete hand hygiene, and apply new gloves. Observation on 07/21/2023 at 3:05 p.m. revealed S40Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) entered Resident #91's room, washed his hands, and donned gloves to provide wound care to Resident #91. Observation further revealed at 3:16 p.m., S40LPN opened Resident #91's diaper, which was soiled with yellow stool. S40LPN then removed Resident #91's soiled sacral dressing and cleaned the stool from Resident #91's perineum. Observation then revealed S40LPN removed his gloves, did not complete hand hygiene, applied another pair of gloves, and provided wound care to Resident #91's sacral pressure ulcer. In an interview on 07/21/2023 at 3:26 p.m., S40LPN confirmed he did not complete hand hygiene after he removed Resident #91's soiled sacral dressing and cleaned Resident #91's soiled perineum and prior to completing Resident #91's wound care. S40LPN stated he should have washed his hands between the two procedures. In an interview 07/22/2023 at 1:36 p.m., S2Director of Nursing stated S40LPN should have washed his hands after removing Resident #91's soiled dressing and cleaning Resident #91's soiled perineum and prior to providing Resident #91's wound care. #4 Review of the facility's policies and procedures revealed no documented evidence of a plan for surveillance of legionella or other water pathogens. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 2:00 p.m., S1Administrator stated he was not aware the facility should be monitoring or have a plan for Legionella or other water pathogens. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 4:54 p.m., S49Assistant Administrator and S52Maintenance stated they were not aware the facility should be monitoring or have a plan for Legionella or other water pathogens. S52Maintenance further stated he does not test the facility's water sources for Legionella or other water pathogens. In an interview on 07/19/2023 at 4:55 p.m., S49Assistant Administrator stated she did not have a policy and procedure for Legionella or other water pathogens.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0940 (Tag F0940)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and interview the facility failed to maintain documented evidence of an effective training program for all new and existing staff. This deficient practice was identified for 5 (...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to maintain documented evidence of an effective training program for all new and existing staff. This deficient practice was identified for 5 (S10Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), S25CNA, S53CNA, S54CNA, and S55CNA) of 5 personnel records review for training requirements. Findings: Review of S10Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)'s personnel record revealed a hire date of 07/02/2022. Further review of S10CNA's personnel record revealed no documented evidence S10CNA received training related to the following topics: communication, resident's rights, facility responsibilities, dementia management, abuse prevention, quality assurance and performance improvement, infection prevention and control, compliance/ethics, and behavioral health. Review of S25CNA's personnel record revealed a hire date of 06/02/2023. Further review of S25CNA's personnel record revealed no documented evidence S25CNA received training related to the following topics: communication, resident's rights, facility responsibilities, dementia management, abuse prevention, quality assurance and performance improvement, infection prevention and control, compliance/ethics, and behavioral health. Review of S53CNA's personnel record revealed a hire date of 05/05/2023. Further review of S53CNA's personnel record revealed no documented evidence S53CNA received training related to the following topics: communication, resident's rights, facility responsibilities, dementia management, abuse prevention, quality assurance and performance improvement, infection prevention and control, compliance/ethics, and behavioral health. Review of S54CNA's personnel record revealed a hire date of 02/20/2023. Further review of S54CNA's personnel record revealed no documented evidence S54CNA received training related to the following topics: communication, resident's rights, facility responsibilities, dementia management, abuse prevention, quality assurance and performance improvement, infection prevention and control, compliance/ethics, and behavioral health. Review of S55CNA's personnel record revealed a hire date of 05/05/2023. Further review of S55CNA's personnel record revealed no documented evidence S55CNA received training related to the following topics: communication, resident's rights, facility responsibilities, dementia management, abuse prevention, quality assurance and performance improvement, infection prevention and control, compliance/ethics, and behavioral health. In an interview on 07/24/2023 at 2:33 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated all staff should have received training related to dementia care. S2DON stated S10CNA, S53CNA, and S55CNA's certificate of completion did not have the name of the approved dementia course used nor the hours of dementia course documented, and should have. In an interview on 07/24/2023 at 2:34 p.m., S2DON stated there was no documented evidence and the facility presented no documented evidence S10CNA, S25CNA completed the required training on the above topics. In an interview on 07/24/2023 at 2:55 p.m., S1Administrator stated S10CNA, S53CNA, and S55CNA's certificate of completion did not have the name of the approved dementia course used nor the hours of dementia course documented, and should have. In an interview on 07/24/2023 at 2:56 p.m., S1Administrator stated required training related to topics of communication, resident rights, ethics, infection control and behavioral health were not documented in the personnel records for S10CNA, S25CNA, S53CNA, S54CNA and S55CNA and staff should have received those training requirements. S1Administrator presented no documented evidence S10CNA, S25CNA, S53CNA, S54CNA, and S55CNA completed the required training on the above mentioned topics.
May 2023 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to notify the resident's physician and the resident's re...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to notify the resident's physician and the resident's representative of the presence of white larvae inside a resident's pressure ulcer. This deficient practice was identified for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, and Resident #5) out of a [NAME] of 16 residents who had pressures ulcers as listed on the Resident Census and Conditions of Residents (Form CMS-672). Findings: Review of Resident #1's medical record revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of, in part, Sepsis, Hemiplegia, Tracheostomy status, and Sacral Pressure Ulcer. Review of Resident #1's Minimum Date Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/04/2023 revealed, in part, Section C- No Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) was completed related to resident rarely or never understood. Review of Section M- one unstageable pressure ulcer that was present on admit. Observation on 05/22/2023 at 10:46am revealed S3Treatment Nurse removed the existing wound dressing to Resident #1's left heel. Further observation revealed there were white wormlike insects inside the bottom of Resident #1's left heel pressure ulcer. In an interview on 05/22/2023 at 10:47am, when asked if the wormlike insects were supposed to be inside of Resident #1's left heel wound, and S3Treatment Nurse further states this was the first time seeing the wormlike insects on Resident #1's left heel wound. In an interview on 05/22/2023 at 3:29pm, S3Treatment Nurse stated she did not report that Resident #1's left heel wound had wormlike insects present to Resident #1's physician and resident representative immediately, and should have. In interview on 05/23/2023 at 11:03am, S1DON stated that the presence of wormlike insects should not have been inside Resident #1's left heel pressure ulcer, and S3Treatment Nurse should have been reported to nursing staff. S2DON stated S3Treatment Nurse did not notify Resident #1's representative, and physician immediately of Resident #1's change in condition.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review, interview, and observation, the facility failed to: 1. Perform an initial skin assessment upon entry to the facility; 2. Maintain proper hand hygiene while performing wound car...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, interview, and observation, the facility failed to: 1. Perform an initial skin assessment upon entry to the facility; 2. Maintain proper hand hygiene while performing wound care treatments; 3. Maintain documentation of weekly skin assessments; and, 4. Maintain documentation of resident's skin/wound treatments as ordered. This deficient practice was identified for 4 (Resident #1, Resident #3, Resident #4, and Resident#5) of 5 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, and Resident #5) out of a total of 16 residents who had pressures ulcers as listed on the Resident Census and Conditions of Residents (Form CMS-672). Findings: Review of the facility's Policy and Procedure for Wound Care revealed, in part, put on exam glove. Loosen tape and remove dressing. Pull glove over dressing and discard into appropriate receptacle. Wash and dry hands thoroughly. Dress wound. Pick up sponge with paper and apply directly to area. [NAME] with tape with initials, time and date and apply to dressing. Discard disposable items into designated container, remove gloves and wash and dry hand thoroughly. Resident #1 Review of Resident #1's medical record revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis of, in part, Sepsis, Hemiplegia, Tracheostomy status, and Sacral Pressure Ulcer. Review of Resident #1's Care Plan with a goal date of 07/21/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had impaired skin integrity related to hemiplegia and limited mobility with interventions to provide treatment per treatment team, weekly skin assessments and notify nurse, physician, and family of breakdown, weekly wound documentation and notify nurse, physician, and responsible party if worsening complications or new skin breakdowns. Review of Resident #1's April 2023 and May 2023 Physician's Orders revealed, in part, order to apply moisture barrier ointment/cream every shift and as needed with a start date of 04/21/2023. Review of an order dated 05/17/23 for Resident#1's left heel, back, and sacrum pressure to cleanse with normal saline, apply Anasept solution soaked gauze and cover with foam dressing and change dressing 3 times a week and prn soiled/loose. Further review revealed an order dated 05/17/2023 for left lateral leg, right ankle, and left ankle to cleanse with normal saline, pat dry, apply betadine to periwound, apply triad cream to wound bed and cover with foam dressing 3 times a week. Review of Resident #1's medical record revealed there was no documented evidence that a skin assessment was completed for Resident #1 upon entry into the facility. Review of Resident #1's Medication Administration Record dated 04/2023 and 05/2023 revealed, in part, there was no documentation that weekly skin assessments were performed 05/05/2023, 05/12/2023, and 05/19/2023. There was no documented evidence that wound treatments were performed from 04/21/2023 through 05/16/2023. Observation on 05/22/2023 at 10:46 a.m. revealed S3Treatment nurse performed wound care to Resident #1's left heel pressure ulcer, left ankle pressure, right ankle pressure and sacral pressure ulcer. Observation revealed S3Treatment Nurse did not change her gloves after she removed the existing dressing, and she did not wash her hands or apply new gloves prior to performing a dressing change to Resident #1's multiple pressure ulcers. In an interview on 05/23/2023 at 10:38a.m., S3Treatment Nurse states if a resident is admitted to the facility on the weekend then she would assess the resident's skin condition on the following Monday. In interview on 05/23/2023 at 11:03a.m., S1Director of Nursing (DON) stated the floor nurses should assess resident's skin assessment upon admission and entry into the facility. S1DON also stated that there should be documentation of those assessments. In an interview on 05/23/2023 at 11:25a.m., S2Assistant Director of Nursing stated that there was no documentation that a skin assessment was completed for Resident #1 on 04/21/2023, and there should have been documentation of a skin assessments. Resident #3 Review of Resident #3's medical record revealed, in part, Resident #3 had Right lateral dorsal foot wounds with blisters and eschar formation due to a chronic skin disease. Review of Resident #3's May 2023 Physician orders revealed, in part, an order for weekly skin assessment and to cleanse right foot with normal saline, pat dry, apply betadine, apply triad to wound bed and apply foam dressing; change dressing every Monday, Wednesday and Friday and as needed for soiled, loose dressing Review of Resident #3's Care Plan revealed, in part, impaired skin integrity related to reduced mobility and blisters to right foot. Further review revealed interventions, in part, skin assessment weekly. Review of Resident #3's Braden Scale Weekly Skin assessment from 03/01/2023-05/22/2023 revealed no documentation of weekly skin assessment for March 2023, 04/04/2023, 04/25/2023, 05/02/2023 and 05/09/2023. Observation on 05/22/2023 at 11:46 a.m. revealed S3Treatment Nurse performed treatment to Resident #3 wound to Right dorsal foot. S3Treatment Nurse did not date dressing when completed. In an interview on 05/22/2023 at 11:50 a.m., S3Treatment Nurse indicated she does not date her dressings due to the dressings are scheduled for Monday, Wednesday, and Friday and S3Treatment nurse provides treatment on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Resident #4 Review of Resident #4's medical record revealed, in part, Stage 4 pressure ulcer to sacrum area identified on 03/21/2023. Review of Resident #4's May 2023 physician orders revealed, in part, cleanse sacrum with normal saline, apply anasept soaked gauze, cover with foam dressing, and change dressing three times a week on Monday, Wednesday and Friday and needed for soiled loose dressing. Review of Resident #4s Care plan revealed, in part, potential for alteration in skin integrity related to history of wound to sacrum and history of osteomyelitis with update on 03/21/2023 indicated wound care notified of open area to buttocks. Further review revealed interventions, in part, weekly skin assessments. Review of Resident #4's April and May 2023 Medication Administration Record revealed, in part, no documentation for treatment to sacrum ulcer completed for Friday, April 14, 2023, Monday, April 17, 2023, Wednesday, April 19, 2023 and Friday April 21, 2023. Review of Resident #4's Braden Scale Weekly Skin Assessment revealed weekly skin assessments not performed on 03/07/2023, 03/14/2023, 03/21/2023, 04/25/2023, 05/02/2023 and 05/09/2023. Observation on 05/22/2023 at 3:30 p.m., S3Treatment Nurse performed treatment to Resident #4's sacral wound. S3Treatment nurse used her gloved hands to assist S4Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) with Resident #4's incontinence care. S3Treatment Nurse cleansed stool off of Resident #4 with a wipe. S3Treatment Nurse proceeded with same gloves on to cleanse sacral wound with normal saline and 4 x 4 Gauze and then prepared soaked Gauze for packing without changing gloves. S3Treatment Nurse placed Soak Gauze and foam dressing on Resident #4's sacral wound without changing gloves or dating dressing. In an interview on 05/23/2023 at 10:38 a.m., S3Treatment Nurse confirmed she should have changed her gloves when performing treatment on Resident #4 on 05/22/2023, should have changed her gloves after assisting CNA with cleaning loose stool off Resident #4, after cleansing the wound on Resident #4 with normal saline and gauze, before preparing soak gauze and applying foam dressing to Resident #4 sacrum wound. S3Treatment Nurse indicated she does not date dressings because she was the one who changed them every Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Resident #5 Review of Resident #5's surgical consult forms revealed, in part the following: On 05/03/2023 there was no documentation for an assessment of Resident #5's pressure ulcer to the sacrum. On 05/17/2023 there was no documentation for an assessment of Resident #5's pressure ulcer to the sacrum; and, Review of Resident #5's Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated April 2023 revealed, in part, wound care treatment for the sacrum was to clean with Normal Saline, Betadine to peri wound, apply Collagen Powder and Santyl or Medihoney then apply Calcium Alginate to wound bed, foam adhesive pad outermost three times a week. Further review of Resident #5's record revealed there was no documented evidence of nurses' initials that wound care treatment was completed for 04/07/2023, 04/10/2023, and 04/14/2023. In an interview on 05/23/2023 at 10:45 a.m., S3Treatment Nurse stated that Resident #5 had a Stage 4 pressure ulcer to the Sacrum. S3Treatment Nurse stated the wound care physician does a weekly assessment of the pressure ulcers on Wednesdays of every week. In an interview on 05/23/2023 at 11:05 a.m., S3Treatment Nurse stated that Resident #5 was not seen by wound care physician on 05/17/2023 and on 05/03/2023 because Resident #5 refused wound care treatment, but she had no documentation to support the refusal. S3RN Treatment Nurse stated she does not have weekly assessments of the sacrum wound when the wound care physician did not see Resident #5 on 5/17/2023 and 05/03/2023. In an interview on 05/23/2023 at 11:34 a.m., S2Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated that if the wound care physician did not measure or stage the wounds weekly then facility's staff should be doing it weekly. In an interview on 05/23/2023 at 12:13 p.m., S1DON confirmed there was no documented weekly wound care assessment 05/17/2023 and 05/03/2023. In an interview on 05/23/2023 at 12:45 p.m., S1DON confirmed the 04/2023 MAR used for wound care order treatment documentation was not being documented on for the above dates.
Mar 2023 9 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0557 (Tag F0557)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record reviews, observation, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure privacy was maintained for 1 (Resident #3) of 4 (Resident #1, #2, #3, and #4) sampled residents observed for inconti...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews, observation, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure privacy was maintained for 1 (Resident #3) of 4 (Resident #1, #2, #3, and #4) sampled residents observed for incontinent care. This deficient practice had the potential to affect any of the 66 residents that require assistance with toileting as noted on the Resident Census and Conditions of Residents Form, CMS-672. Findings: Review of the facility's Resident Rights Policy revealed, in part, each resident should have privacy during toileting, bathing, and other activities of personal hygiene. Review of Resident #3's Minimal Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 03/06/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 was totally dependent on staff for toileting. Observation on 03/21/2023 at 11:55 a.m. revealed S9Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) entered Resident #3's room to provide incontinence care and failed to close the door and/or pull privacy curtain. Observation further revealed S9CNA removed Resident #3's brief and made Resident #3's genital area visible from the hallway. Observation also revealed at the time of Resident #3's exposure, S4Wound Care Nurse, S7Plant Operations, S5Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), and one surveyor were present directly outside of Resident #3's room. Resident #3's genital area remained exposed until 11:56 a.m. when S5LPN noted Resident #3's genitals were visible from the hallway and closed Resident #3's door. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 12:13 p.m., S9CNA confirmed she did not close Resident #3's door or pull the curtain to provide privacy during incontinence care. S9CNA further confirmed all residents should be provided privacy during incontinence care. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 12:15 p.m., S5LPN stated she closed Resident #3's door because her genital area was exposed to the hallway. S5LPN further stated Resident #3's privacy was not maintained. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 1:17 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed S9CNA did not provide Resident #3 privacy during incontinence care. S2DON stated all residents should be provided privacy when incontinence care is being provided.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to protect the residents rights to be free from resident to resident physical abuse for 2 (Resident #4 and Resident R6) of 5 (Resident #1, R...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to protect the residents rights to be free from resident to resident physical abuse for 2 (Resident #4 and Resident R6) of 5 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, and Resident #5) sampled residents reviewed for incidents and accidents. Findings: Review of the facility's Reporting Abuse, Neglect, and Misappropriation of Property policy, revised May 2020, revealed, in part, all residents have the right to be free from abuse. Review of the facility's March 2023 incident log revealed, in part, Resident #4 and Resident R6 had an incident that occurred on 03/06/2023. Review of Resident #4's Incident/Accident Report revealed, in part, on 03/06/2023 at 1:15 p.m., Resident #4 scratched Resident R6 and then Resident R6 slapped Resident #4's face in the activity room. Further review revealed, in part, redness was noted to Resident #4's left ear. Review of Resident #4's medical record revealed, in part, diagnoses of generalized anxiety disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and severe intellectual disabilities. Review of Resident #4's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/30/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #4 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 00, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #4's Care Plan revealed, in part, Resident #4 was care planned for the potential for mood and/or behavior disturbances related diagnoses of mental retardation and bipolar disorder. Further review revealed Resident #4 scratched another resident on 03/06/2023. Review of Resident R6's Incident/Accident Report revealed, in part, on 03/06/2023 at 1:15 p.m., Resident R6 was scratched by Resident #4 on Resident R6's left forearm with no open wound or injury. Review of Resident R6's record revealed, in part, diagnoses of pervasive developmental disorder, cognitive communication deficit, autistic disorder, and bipolar disorder. Review of Resident R6's MDS with an ARD of 12/29/2022 revealed, in part, Resident R6 had a BIMS of 10, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident R6's Care Plan revealed, in part, Resident R6's care plan for behavioral symptoms was revised on 03/07/2023 to include Resident R6's physical altercation with another resident. In an interview on 03/20/2023 at 2:20 p.m., S11Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated S13Activities informed her of the altercation between Resident #4 and Resident R6, which happened on 03/06/2023 in the activity room. S11LPN stated she was told Resident #4 had scratched Resident R6, and then Resident R6 had slapped Resident #4. In an interview on 03/20/2023 at 2:30 p.m., S12Activities stated Resident #4 willfully scratched Resident R6, and Resident R6 willfully slapped Resident #4. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 11:03 a.m., S13Activities Director stated she was in activities when she witnessed Resident #4 scratch Resident R6 on the arm. S13Activities Director further stated Resident R6 then hit Resident #4 in the head. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 1:29 p.m., S2DON confirmed Resident #4 scratching Resident R6 and Resident R6 slapping Resident #4 was resident to resident physical abuse. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 1:49 p.m., S1Administrator stated he was informed that Resident #4 had scratched Resident R6 then Resident R6 hit Resident #4. S1Administrator confirmed the situation was resident to resident abuse.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an incident of resident to resident abuse was reported to the state agency no later than 2 hours after the incident happened for 2...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an incident of resident to resident abuse was reported to the state agency no later than 2 hours after the incident happened for 2 (Resident #4 and Resident R6) of 5 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, and Resident #5) sampled residents reviewed for incidents and accidents Findings: Review of the facility's Reporting Abuse, Neglect, and Misappropriation of Property procedure, revised May 2020, revealed, in part, once an employee witnesses an incident of abuse, the witness must immediately notify the Director of Nurses (DON), Assistant Administrator, or Administrator. Further review revealed the DON, Assistant Administrator, or Administrator shall immediately notify the designated representatives through State Incident Management System (SIMS), and this action must be done within 2 hours after the allegation if the allegation involves abuse or results in bodily harm or injury. The facility's procedure also revealed when the occurrence is a resident to resident incident and one or both residents have a diagnosis of a cognitive disorder, the incident does not need to be reported to SIMS. Review also revealed resident to resident incidents without injuries or with non-serious injuries do not need to be reported to SIMS. Review of the facility's March 2023 incident log revealed, in part, Resident #4 and Resident R6 had an incident that occurred on 03/06/2023. Review of Resident #4's Incident/Accident Report revealed, in part, on 03/06/2023 at 1:15 p.m., Resident #4 scratched Resident R6 and then Resident R6 slapped Resident #4's face in the activity room. Further review revealed, in part, redness was noted to Resident #4's left ear. Review of Resident #4's medical record revealed, in part, diagnoses of generalized anxiety disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and severe intellectual disabilities. Review of Resident #4's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/30/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #4 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 00, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #4's Care Plan revealed, in part, Resident #4 was care planned for the potential for mood and/or behavior disturbances related diagnoses of mental retardation and bipolar disorder. Further review revealed Resident #4 scratched another resident on 03/06/2023. Review of Resident R6's Incident/Accident Report revealed, in part, on 03/06/2023 at 1:15 p.m., Resident R6 was scratched by Resident #4 on Resident R6's left forearm with no open wound or injury. Review of Resident R6's record revealed, in part, diagnoses of pervasive developmental disorder, cognitive communication deficit, autistic disorder, and bipolar disorder. Review of Resident R6's MDS with an ARD of 12/29/2022 revealed, in part, Resident R6 had a BIMS of 10, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident R6's Care Plan revealed, in part, Resident R6's care plan for behavioral symptoms was revised on 03/07/2023 to include Resident R6's physical altercation with another resident. In an interview on 03/20/2023 at 2:30 p.m., S12Activities stated Resident #4 willfully scratched Resident R6, and Resident R6 willfully slapped Resident #4. Review of the facility's SIMS reports from 11/01/2022 through 03/20/2023 revealed, in part, no SIMS reports filed involving Resident #4 or Resident R6. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of a SIMS report filed involving Resident #4 or Resident R6. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 12:52 p.m., S2DON stated S1Administrator informed her a SIMS did not need to be completed for the above mentioned resident to resident abuse because both Resident #4 and Resident R6 had cognitive diagnoses. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 1:29 p.m., S2DON stated both Resident #4 and Resident R6 had willful intent when the incident occurred, and S2DON identified the incident as resident to resident abuse. S2DON stated a SIMS should have been completed. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 1:49 p.m., S1Administrator stated he was informed that Resident #4 had willfully scratched Resident R6 and Resident R6 had willfully hit Resident #4. S1Administrator confirmed the situation was resident to resident abuse. S1Administrator stated he was unaware an altercation between residents with willful intent, regardless of their diagnoses, needed to be reported to SIMS.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an incident of resident to resident abuse was thoroughly investigated for 2 (Resident #4 and Resident R6) of 5 (Resident #1, Residen...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an incident of resident to resident abuse was thoroughly investigated for 2 (Resident #4 and Resident R6) of 5 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, and Resident #5) sampled residents reviewed for incidents and accidents. Findings: Review of the facility's Reporting Abuse, Neglect, and Misappropriation of Property procedure, revised May 2020, revealed, in part, following an incident involving abuse and within 24 hours, a written description of all facts pertaining to exactly what happened during the incident must be submitted by each person or persons witnessing the incident to the manager submitting the claim. Further review revealed the Director of Nurses or Assistant Administrator shall begin to investigate the matter immediately and must submit their findings to the Administrator no later than 4 working days after the incident. The procedure further revealed the Administrator will review all information available and make a decision as to verification of alleged violation(s). Review also revealed within 2 working days of the investigation report being completed, the DON will put the complete written report of the incident into the resident's file. Review of the facility's March 2023 incident log revealed, in part, Resident #4 and Resident R6 had an incident that occurred on 03/06/2023. Review of Resident #4's Incident/Accident Report revealed, in part, on 03/06/2023 at 1:15 p.m., Resident #4 scratched Resident R6 and then Resident R6 slapped Resident #4's face in the activity room. Further review revealed, in part, redness was noted to Resident #4's left ear. Review of Resident #4's medical record revealed, in part, diagnoses of generalized anxiety disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and severe intellectual disabilities. Review of Resident #4's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/30/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #4 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 00, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #4's Care Plan revealed, in part, Resident #4 was care planned for the potential for mood and/or behavior disturbances related diagnoses of mental retardation and bipolar disorder. Further review revealed Resident #4 scratched another resident on 03/06/2023. Review of Resident #4's record revealed, in part, no documented evidence of a completed investigation report for the resident to resident abuse incident with Resident R6 that occurred on 03/06/2023. Review of Resident R6's Incident/Accident Report revealed, in part, on 03/06/2023 at 1:15 p.m., Resident R6 was scratched by Resident #4 on Resident R6's left forearm with no open wound or injury. Review of Resident R6's record revealed, in part, diagnoses of pervasive developmental disorder, cognitive communication deficit, autistic disorder, and bipolar disorder. Review of Resident R6's MDS with an ARD of 12/29/2022 revealed, in part, Resident R6 had a BIMS of 10, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident R6's Care Plan revealed, in part, Resident R6's care plan for behavioral symptoms was revised on 03/07/2023 to include Resident R6's physical altercation with another resident. Review of Resident R6's record revealed, in part, no documented evidence of a completed investigation report for the resident to resident abuse incident with Resident #4 that occurred on 03/06/2023. In an interview on 03/20/2023 at 2:30 p.m., S12Activities stated she witnessed Resident #4 willfully scratch Resident R6 and Resident R6 willfully slap Resident #4. S12Activities further stated she was never interviewed or asked to give a statement regarding the resident to resident altercation that occurred on 03/06/2023 In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 12:52 p.m., S2DON stated there was not a thorough investigation completed following the resident to resident altercation that occurred between Resident #4 and Resident R6 on 03/06/2023. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 1:29 p.m., S2DON identified Resident #4 and Resident R6's incident as resident to resident abuse, and S2DON confirmed a thorough investigation should have been conducted following the incident. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 1:49 p.m., S1Administrator stated he was informed that Resident #4 had willfully scratched Resident R6 and then Resident R6 willfully hit Resident #4. S1Administrator confirmed the situation was resident to resident abuse, but the only documented investigation on Resident #4 and Resident R6's incident was two incident reports. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not provide any documented evidence that a thorough investigation was completed for the resident to resident abuse incident that occurred on 03/06/2023 between Resident #4 and Resident R6.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record reviews, observations, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's indwelling urinary catheter was secured for 1 (Resident #3) of 5 sampled residents Findings: Review of ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews, observations, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's indwelling urinary catheter was secured for 1 (Resident #3) of 5 sampled residents Findings: Review of the facility's Catheter Care (Indwelling Catheter) policy and procedure revealed, in part, staff should ensure not to pull on a resident's catheter tubing during care. Review of Resident #3's Care Plan for indwelling catheter revealed, in part, the staff should avoid pulling on Resident #3's catheter tubing. Observation on 03/20/2023 at 2:06 p.m. revealed Resident #3's catheter tubing was pulled taunt under Resident #3's left leg with no secure device in place. Observation on 03/21/2023 at 11:55 a.m. revealed S9Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) entered Resident #3's room to provide incontinence care. Observation further revealed S9CNA proceeded to perform incontinence care on Resident #3, turn Resident #3 on her right side, which caused Resident #3's catheter to be pulled taunt. Observation also revealed no secure device in place. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 12:13 p.m., S9CNA stated Resident #3 did not have a secure device in place and she did not secure Resident #3's catheter during incontinence care. S9CNA further stated she should have ensured Resident #3's catheter was secured. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 12:37 p.m., S2DON stated Resident #3's catheter should have been secured.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure staff changed gloves and performed hand hygiene during incontinence care for 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resid...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure staff changed gloves and performed hand hygiene during incontinence care for 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) of 4 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, and Resident #4) residents observed for incontinence care. Findings: Review of the facility's Incontinence Care policy revealed, in part, general infection control guidelines should be followed, which included staff are to maintain sterility and cleanliness. Observation on 03/21/2023 at 11:55 a.m. revealed S9Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) entered Resident #3's room to provide incontinence care. Observation further revealed S9CNA donned clean gloves, opened Resident #3's soiled diaper, and cleaned the top of Resident #3's genital area and down Resident #3's left and right groin area. Observation revealed S9CNA then cleaned Resident #3's face without changing her gloves or completing hand hygiene. S9CNA then continued to complete Resident #3's incontinent care area and removed Resident #3's soiled brief. Observation revealed S9CNA's personal purse was hanging over her shoulder, and S9CNA pushed the purse behind her back with her soiled gloves in place. Observation also revealed S9CNA did not change her gloves or perform hand hygiene prior to placing a new diaper on Resident #3 and covering Resident #3 with her linens. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 12:19 p.m., S9CNA confirmed she used the same pair of soiled gloves to provide incontinence care, clean Resident #3's face, touch her personal belongings, and touch Resident #3's bed linen. S9CNA stated she did not perform hand hygiene at any time while providing Resident #3 incontinence care. S9CNA further stated she should have cleaned Resident #3's face prior to starting incontinence care, she should have changed her gloves and performed hand hygiene after removing Resident #3's visibly soiled brief, and she should not have touched her personal belongings while providing incontinence care. Observation on 03/21/2023 at 12:55 a.m. revealed S15CNA entered Resident #1's room to provide incontinence. Observation further revealed S15CNA donned clean gloves, opened Resident #3's soiled diaper, and cleaned the top of Resident #3's genital area and down Resident #3's left and right groin area. Observation revealed S15CNA proceeded to clean Resident #1 without changing her gloves or completing hand hygiene. S15CNA then continued to complete Resident #3's incontinent care area and removed Resident #1's soiled brief. Observation revealed S15CNA placed a new clean brief on Resident #1, assisted Resident #1 with replacing her pants, and transferred Resident #1 back into her wheelchair with the Hoyer lift without changing her gloves or performing hand hygiene. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 1:06 p.m., S15CNA stated she should have changed her gloves and completed hand hygiene after cleaning Resident #1's incontinent episode and prior to touching Resident #1's clothing and facility equipment used for other residents. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 1:17 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed S9CNA should not have used the same pair of soiled gloves to provide incontinence care, clean Resident #3's face, touch her personal belongings, and touch Resident #3's bed linen and did not perform hand hygiene. S2DON further stated S9CNA should have cleaned Resident #3's face prior to performing incontinence care. Observation on 03/21/2023 at 2:50 p.m. revealed S8CNA entered Resident #4's room to provide incontinence care after Resident #4's bowel movement. S8CNA donned gloves and cleaned Resident #4's soiled buttocks, discarded the wipe, and then moved Resident #4's garbage can without changing gloves or performing hand hygiene. Observation further revealed S8CNA rolled up Resident #4's soiled sheet, raised Resident #4's right upper bedrail, and then placed a clean diaper on Resident #4 without changing gloves or performing hand hygiene. Observation revealed S8CNA then removed the soiled sheet from the bed and secured Resident #4's clean brief. S8CNA then opened Resident #4's closet, sifted through Resident #4's clothing, and removed a pair pants from the closet. S8CNA then opened two drawers on Resident #4's dresser, three drawers on Resident #4's nightstand, and one drawer on Resident #4's closet. Observation revealed S8CNA then placed Resident #4's clothing on and transferred her to her wheelchair. Observation revealed S8CNA then grabbed Resident #4's personal belongings and handed it to Resident #4. In interview on 03/21/2023 at 3:02 p.m., S8CNA stated she should have removed her gloves and completed hand hygiene after cleaning Resident #4 incontinent episode and prior to touching objects in the room and Resident #4's personal items. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 3:05 p.m., S2DON stated S8CNA should have changed her gloves and completed hand hygiene after cleaning Resident #4's incontinent episode and prior to touching equipment and Resident #4's personal belongings.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility's floors were clean and sanitary. This deficient practice was identified for 3 (Hall A, Hall B, and Hall C) of 3 halls ob...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility's floors were clean and sanitary. This deficient practice was identified for 3 (Hall A, Hall B, and Hall C) of 3 halls observed. Findings: Observation on 03/20/2023 at 10:57 a.m. revealed Hall B had a brown and black residue along the baseboards throughout the hallway. Observation further revealed a thick buildup of the residue in the corners of the door frame of resident rooms located on Hall B. In an interview on 03/20/2023 at 11:01 a.m., Resident #1 stated the facility was dirty. Observation on 03/20/2023 at 11:17 a.m. revealed Hall C had brown and black residue along the baseboards throughout the hallway. Observation further revealed a thick buildup of the residue in the corners of the door frames of resident rooms located on Hall C. Observation on 03/20/2023 at 11:20 a.m. revealed Hall A had a brown and black residue along the baseboards throughout the hallway. Observation further revealed a thick buildup of the residue in the corners of the door frame of resident rooms located on Hall A. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 11:30 a.m., S4Wound Care Nurse stated there was a buildup of residue along the floor and in the door jambs on Hall B. S4Wound Care Nurse further stated the floor looked dirty and needed to be cleaned. Observation on 03/21/2023 at 11:38 a.m. revealed brown and black residue along the baseboards of Hall B. Observation also revealed a thick buildup of the brown and black residue in the corners of door frames throughout Hall B. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 11:40am, S6Plant Operations stated the facility's floor technician were responsible for cleaning and stripping the floors every month. S6Plant Operations confirmed there was a buildup of residue, which he identified as dirt and wax, along the baseboards and in the corners of the door frames of resident rooms on Hall B. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 11:52 a.m., S10Housekeeping Supervisor confirmed there was a buildup of residue along the baseboards and in the corners of the door frames on Hall B. Observation on 03/21/2023 at 11:59 a.m. revealed a brown and black residue along the baseboards of Hall C. Observation further revealed a thick buildup of residue in the corners of the door frames on Hall C. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 12:00 p.m., S7Plant Operations confirmed the presence of residue buildup of dust, dirt and wax along the baseboards and in the door frames. He stated the buildup needed to be cleaned out or scraped out because it looked dirty. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 1:17 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated the residue along the baseboards and in the door frames throughout the facility was gross. S2DON further stated if she were a resident living in the facility, the residue along the baseboards and in the door frames would bother her. In an interview on 03/31/2023 at 1:58 p.m., S1Administrator stated there was a buildup of dirt, dust, and wax along the baseboards and in the door frames throughout the facility. S1Administrator further stated the buildup needed to be cleaned.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure: 1. Insulins were labeled properly for 2 (...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure: 1. Insulins were labeled properly for 2 (Medication Cart Y and Medication Cart Z) of 6 medication carts; and 2. Medications were not left unattended at the bedside for 2 (Resident #2 and Resident #3) of 11 residents observed during medication administration. This deficient practice had the potential to affect any of the 116 residents who resided in the facility as documented on the facility's Resident Census and Conditions of Residents form, CMS-672. Findings: #1 Review of the facility's Insulin Administration policy revealed, in part, the expiration date and time should be recorded upon opening insulin. Observation on [DATE] at 11:40 a.m. revealed S3Licensed Practical Nurse(LPN) removed a Lantus insulin pen (a medication used to lower a resident's blood sugar) and a Humalog insulin pen (a medication used to lower a resident's blood sugar) from Medication Cart Z. Observation further revealed the Humalog and Lantus insulin pens did not have an open date recorded. Observation then revealed S3LPN administered both the Lantus insulin pen and the Humalog insulin pen to Resident #2. S3LPN entered Resident #2's room, and administered both insulins to Resident #2. Observation on [DATE] at 11:07 a.m. revealed S5LPN removed a Novolog insulin pen (a medication used to lower a resident's blood sugar) from Medication Cart Y that did not contain an open date, entered Resident #3's room, and administered the Novolog insulin to Resident #3. Observation on [DATE] at 11:10 a.m. revealed Resident #3's Levemir insulin pen (a medication used to lower a resident's blood sugar) without an open date in Medication Cart Y. In an interview on [DATE] at 11:15 a.m., S5LPN stated Resident #3's Novolog insulin pen and Levemir insulin pen were not labeled with an open date. S5LPN further stated without knowing the insulin pens' open date, there was no way to ensure the insulin pen had not expired. Observation on [DATE] at 11:29 a.m. revealed S3LPN removed a Lantus insulin pen (a medication used to lower a resident's blood sugar) and a Humalog insulin pen ( a medication used to lower a resident's blood sugar) from Medication Cart Z. Observation further revealed the Lantus insulin pen and Humalog insulin pens did not have an open date recorded. Observation then revealed S3LPN administered both the Lantus insulin pen and the Humalog insulin pen to Resident #2. Observation revealed S3LPN entered Resident #2's room and administered both insulins to Resident #2. In an interview on [DATE] at 11:35 a.m., S3LPN confirmed Resident #2's Humalog insulin pen and Lantus insulin pen were not labeled with an open date. S3LPN further stated without knowing the insulin pens' open date, there was no way to ensure the insulin pen had not expired. In an interview on [DATE] at 12:37 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated insulins and all medications should always be dated with an open date. #2 Review of the facility's Medication Administration policy revealed, in part, the licensed nurse should remain with the resident until all medications are swallowed. Review of Resident #2's [DATE] physician orders revealed, in part, no current physician order for Resident #2 to self-administer medications or have medications at the bedside. Review of Resident #3's [DATE] physician orders revealed, in part, no current physician order for Resident #3 to self-administer medications or have medications at the bedside. Observation on [DATE] at 9:59 a.m. revealed S3LPN placed a cup of medication on Resident #2's bedside table and exited Resident #2's room. S3LPN then obtained additional medication from Medication Cart Z and placed an additional cup of medication on Resident #2's bedside table. S3LPN then exited the room and left Resident #2's two cups of medications unattended. Observation on [DATE] at 11:40 a.m. revealed S3LPN placed a cup of Carafate suspension (a medication used to prevent acid reflux) and Simethicone gel capsules (a medication used to prevent gas) on Resident #2's beside table and exited Resident #2's room. During this time, Resident #2's medication was left at his bedside unattended. Observation on [DATE] at 11:07 a.m. revealed S5LPN placed a Novolog insulin pen on Resident #3's bedside table and exited Resident #3's room. Observation on [DATE] at 11:29 a.m. revealed S3LPN placed Resident #2's Lantus insulin pen and Humalog insulin pen on Resident #2's bedside table and exited Resident #2's room. During this time, Resident #2's insulin pens were left unattended at the bedside. In an interview on [DATE] at 11:35 a.m., S3LPN confirmed that medications were left at the bedside for the above mentioned observations. S3LPN further stated oral medications should not be left unattended at Resident #3's bedside, but she was unaware insulin could not be left unattended at Resident #3's bedside. In an interview on [DATE] at 12:37 p.m., S2DON stated medications should not be left unattended at a resident's bedside unless the resident had a physician order.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0925 (Tag F0925)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an environment that was free from gnats. This deficient practice was identified for the facility and for 3 (Resid...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an environment that was free from gnats. This deficient practice was identified for the facility and for 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) of 5 sampled residents. Findings: Review of the facility's Pest and Insect Control policy and procedure revealed, in part, the facility must maintain an effective, regular basis pest control program so the facility may be free of pests through a contracted source. Review also revealed when there was a report, of any type, of pest or insect in the facility or on grounds, maintenance must be notified to coordinate with the pest control contractor to come treat the facility and look at preventative measures for the future. Observation on 03/20/2023 at 9:32 a.m. revealed more than 10 gnats flying around Resident #2's room. Further observation revealed two gnats landed on Resident #2's bedside table. In an interview on 03/20/2023 at 11:01 a.m., Resident #1 stated the facility was infested with gnats. Observation on 03/20/2023 at 11:12 a.m. revealed a gnat flying in Resident #1's room. Observation on 03/20/2023 at 11:30 a.m. revealed a red ice chest located on Hall B. Observation further revealed upon opening the ice chest, a gnat flew out of the ice chest. In an interview on 03/20/2023 at 11:33 a.m., S3Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated the red ice chest on Hall B was the ice chest utilized to pass ice to the residents. Observation on 03/20/2023 at 11:39 a.m. revealed a gnat flying in S2Director of Nursing's (DON) office. Observation on 03/20/2023 at 11:42 a.m. revealed two gnats flying around Resident #2's head. In an interview on 03/20/2023 at 11:43 a.m., S3LPN stated the gnats are extremely bad in the facility. S3LPN further stated the facility staff cannot leave open containers or drinks around at any time or the gnats will climb into them. In an interview on 03/20/2023 at 11:43 a.m., Resident #2 stated when he was out of the facility for therapy every Wednesday, he had to ensure the staff covered his lunch tray or his food would be covered in gnats when he returned. Observation on 03/20/2023 at 11:45 a.m. revealed a gnat flying in the conference room. Observation on 03/20/2023 at 12:47 p.m. revealed a gnat flying in the conference room. In an interview on 03/20/2023 at 2:37 p.m., the facility's contracted exterminator stated he treated the facility on a monthly basis for roaches, ants, and silverfish. The exterminator further stated he was not providing any services to the facility for gnats. Observation on 03/20/2023 at 2:52 p.m. revealed a gnat landed on the surveyor's hair. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 10:05 a.m., S1Administrator stated he has had residents inform him of the increased gnats in the facility. S1Administrator additionally stated he had not implemented any new interventions for the current gnat issue. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 11:29 a.m., S4Wound Care Nurse stated there was a gnat problem in the facility. Observation on 03/21/2023 at 11:31 a.m. revealed a gnat flying on Hall B. Observation on 03/21/2023 at 11:35 a.m. revealed multiple gnats on the walls and ceiling of Resident #2's room. Observation further revealed multiple gnats flying in Resident #2's room as Resident #2 was being administered his medication. At this time, S3LPN confirmed the multiple gnats on the walls and ceiling of Resident #2's room. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 11:40 a.m., S6Plant Operations stated he was aware the facility had a gnat problem. S6Plant Operations further stated the contracted pest control company did not provide services to exterminate the gnats. S6Plant Operations also stated the facility had never obtained another pest control company's opinion regarding the gnats. S6Plant Operations stated there had been no new interventions implemented regarding the current gnat issue in the facility, and S1Administrator had not directed S6Plant Operations to do anything new. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 12:00 p.m., S7Plant Operations stated he was aware of the gnat issue in the facility. S7Plant Operations confirmed the contracted pest control company came every month, but the contracted pest control company did not provide services for the gnat issue. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 1:17 p.m., S2DON stated she was aware of the bad gnat issue in the facility. S2DON further stated she had told S1Administrator about the gnats, but nothing had been done. Observation on 3/21/2023 at 2:02 p.m. revealed a gnat flying around Resident #3's face. Observation further revealed S5LPN began to swat at the gnat to get it away from Resident #3's face. In an interview on 03/21/2023 at 2:03 p.m., S5LPN confirmed she was swatting at a gnat near Resident #3's face.
Feb 2023 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to: 1. Complete weekly skin assessments per the plan of care for 3 (Resident #1, #2, and #5) of 5 sampled residents; and 2. Ensure a resident...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to: 1. Complete weekly skin assessments per the plan of care for 3 (Resident #1, #2, and #5) of 5 sampled residents; and 2. Ensure a resident had a person-centered care plan for behaviors for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 sampled residents. Findings: 1. Resident #1 Review of Resident #1's Care Plan with a goal date of 02/13/2023 revealed a problem of Resident #1 had a potential for skin integrity impairment. Further review of Resident #1's approaches revealed, in part, skin assessments weekly by nursing staff. Review of Resident #1's Physician Orders for November 2022, December 2022, and January 2023 revealed, in part, weekly skin assessment. Review of Resident #1's record revealed no documented evidence and the facility presented no documented evidence of a weekly skin assessment having been completed since 09/04/2022. In an interview on 02/22/2023 at 2:23pm, S2DON (Director of Nursing) stated skin assessments were not placed into the computer system to prompt for weekly skin assessment by the floor nurse. S2DON confirmed Resident #1's last skin assessment was September 2022. S2DON further stated skin assessments should have been completed weekly. Resident #2 Review of Resident #2's February 2023 Physician Orders revealed, in part, weekly skin assessment. Review of Resident #2's record revealed no documented evidence of weekly skin assessments having been completed for February 2023. Resident #5 Review of Resident #5's February 2023 Physician Orders revealed, in part, weekly skin assessment. Review of Resident #5's record revealed Resident #5's last documented weekly skin assessment was completed on 07/24/2022. In an interview on 02/22/2023 at 12:45 p.m., S2DON stated skin assessments were to be performed weekly by the floor nurse if the resident had no active wound treatment. S2DON further stated Resident #5's skin assessment should be completed every Monday and confirmed the last skin assessment was completed on 07/24/2022. In an interview on 2/22/2023 at 1:30 p.m., S2DON stated the weekly skin assessments for Resident #1, #2, and #5 were not on the MAR (Medication Administration Record) for November 2022, December 2022, and January 2023 to be completed weekly and should have been on the MAR to be completed by the nurse. S2DON confirmed weekly skin assessments were not completed for the residents noted above and should have been completed weekly. 2. Resident #1 Review of Resident #1's Nurses Notes dated 06/13/2022 revealed Resident #1 continued to have multiple bowel movements on a daily basis. Review revealed Resident #1 would soil one bed in his room and then would get in the second bed and soil that one too. Resident #1 was always ravenous (very hungry) and thirsty. Review of Resident #1's Nurses Notes dated 08/31/2022 revealed Resident #1 went out into the hallway and took his diaper off while in his wheelchair, and had feces falling out his wheelchair rolling down the hallway. In an interview on 02/22/2023 at 12:42 p.m., S10LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) stated Resident #1 would take off his own diaper and play in his feces, and would spit on the floor. In an interview on 02/22/2023 at 1:24pm, S11LPN stated staff had to watch Resident #1 around other residents' food and drinks because Resident #1 would eat or drink anything he could get his hands on. S11LPN further stated if Resident #1 urinated on himself he would remove all his clothing and lay nude in his room with the door open. In an interview on 02/22/2023 at 1:28pm, S12CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) stated Resident #1 would take his diapers off often. S12CNA further stated Resident #1 was known to eat and drink others food and drink. In an interview on 02/22/2023 at 1:34pm, S13CNA stated Resident #1 would play in his diaper. Review of Resident #1's Care Plan with goal date of 02/13/2023 revealed no documented evidence and the facility presented no documented evidence of Resident #1 having had a person centered care plan developed for his behaviors of seeking and eating other residents' and staff food and drinking other residents' drinks; and/or removing his diaper and playing in his feces In an interview on 02/22/2023 at 2:23pm, S2DON stated Resident #1 would attempt to take the extra sandwiches from the nurse's station and was always looking for water. S2DON stated Resident #1 always needed extra showers because he would try to go to the bathroom on his own and would be full of feces. S2DON further stated after reviewing Resident #1's Care Plan, that Resident #1's Care Plan was not specific to Resident #1 or Resident #1's behaviors.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure wound care was performed using standard precautions for 1 (Resident #4) of 3 residents observed during wound care. Findings: Observat...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure wound care was performed using standard precautions for 1 (Resident #4) of 3 residents observed during wound care. Findings: Observation on 02/20/2023 at 1:30 p.m., revealed, S7CertifiedNursingAssistant (CNA) did not perform hand hygiene prior to application of gloves. S7CNA then removed the soiled dressing from Resident #4's left heel. Observation on 02/20/2023 at 1:32 p.m., revealed, S3LicensedPracticalNurse (LPN) did not perform hand hygiene prior to application of gloves S3LPN then performed wound care to Resident #4's left heel. Observation on 02/20/2023 at 1:35 p.m., revealed, S7CNA did not perform hand hygiene prior to application of gloves. S7CNA then removed the soiled dressing from Resident #4's outer aspect of smallest toe on right foot. Observation on 02/20/2023 at 1:37 p.m., revealed, S3LPN did not perform hand hygiene prior to application of gloves. S3LPN then performed wound care to Resident #4's outer aspect of smallest toe to right foot. Observation on 02/20/2023 at 1:38 p.m., revealed, S7CNA did not perform hand hygiene prior to application of gloves. S7CNA then removed the soiled dressing from Resident #4's right outer ankle. Observation on 02/20/2023 at 1:40 p.m., revealed, S3LPN did not to perform hand hygiene prior to application of gloves. S3LPN then performed wound care to Resident #4's right outer ankle. In an interview on 02/20/2023 at 2:31 p.m., S3LPN confirmed he did not perform hand hygiene after each time he removed gloves when he performed wound care on Resident #4's wounds. In an interview on 02/20/2023 at 2:41 p.m., S7CNA confirmed she did not perform hand hygiene after each time she removed gloves during Resident #4's wound care. In an interview on 02/22/2023 at 2:50 p.m., S2DON confirmed hand hygiene should have been performed after each glove change when performing wound care.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that completed care was documented correctly in resident's records for 5 (Resident #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5) of 5 sampled residents. ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that completed care was documented correctly in resident's records for 5 (Resident #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5) of 5 sampled residents. Findings: Resident #1 Review of Resident #1's ADL (Activity of Daily Living) Flow Sheet for November 2022 revealed no documentation of care provided for toilet use on 11/28/2022 and 11/29/2022 for both day (a.m.) and night (p.m.) shifts, and night shift (p.m.) on 11/30/2022. Further review revealed no documentation of bathing having been provided on 11/28/2022, 11/29/2022, and 11/30/2022 on either the day (a.m.) or night (p.m.) shifts. Review of Resident #1's ADL Flow Sheet for December 2022 revealed no documentation of care provided on the day shift (a.m.) on following dates: 12/21/2022, 12/22/2022, 12/24/2022, 12/30/2022, and 12/31/2022. Further review revealed no documentation of care provided on the night (p.m.) shift on the following dates: 12/22/2022, 12/24/2022, 12/30/2022, and 12/31/2022. In an interview on 02/22/2023 at 1:28pm, S9CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) stated due to Resident #1's behaviors of taking off his own diaper he was bathed almost daily, however staff failed to document the care provided. Resident #2 Review of Resident #2's ADL Flow Sheet for February 2023 revealed no documentation of care provided by the CNA for the day (a.m.) shift on the following dates: 02/04/2023, 02/10/2023, 02/11/2023, 02/12/2023, 02/13/2023, 02/14/2023, 02/15/2023, 02/18/2023, and 02/19/2023. Further review revealed no documentation of care provided by the CNA for the night (p.m.) shift on the following dates: 02/01/2023, 02/02/2023, 02/03/2023, 02/04/2023, 02/05/2023, 02/06/2023, 02/07/2023, 02/08/2023, 02/09/2023, 02/11/2023, 02/12/2023, 02/13/2023, 02/14/2023, 02/15/2023, 02/16/2023, 02/17/2023, 02/18/2023, 02/19/2023, 02/20/2023, and 02/21/2023. In an interview on 2/22/2023 at 10:00 a.m., S6CNA stated if the boxes on the ADL form were blank, it meant the CNA did not document completed care for that shift. In an interview on 2/22/2023 at 10:15 a.m., S8LPN stated the blank boxes on the ADL form are blank which indicated the CNA did not document completed care for that shift. In an interview on 2/22/2023 at 2:32 p.m., S2DON (Director of Nursing) stated the ADL flowsheet for February 2023 was missing documented initials for completed care for each shift for Resident #2. Resident #3 Review of Resident #3's ADL (Activity of Daily Living ) Flowsheet for February 2023 revealed no documentation on the day shift (a.m.) of ADL care was provided on 02/01/2023 and 02/08/2023. Further review revealed no documented evidence of ADL care was provided on the night shift (p.m.) on the following dates: 02/01/2023, 02/02/2023, 02/03/2023, 02/04/2023, 02/05/2023, 02/06/2023, 02/07/2023, 02/08/2023, 02/09/2023, 02/10/2023, 02/11/2023, 02/12/2023, 02/13/2023, 02/14/2023, 02/15/2023, 02/16/2023, 02/17/2023, 02/18/2023, 02/19/2023, 02/20/2023, and 02/21/2023. In an interview on 2/22/2023 at 9:55 a.m., S4LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) confirmed the ADL flowsheet for Resident #3 was missing documentation of care of the above dates. Resident #4 Review of Resident #4's ADL flowsheet dated February 2023 revealed, no documentation of completed care on the following night (p.m.) shifts: 02/12/2023, 02/14/2023, 02/16/2023, 02/19/2023, and 02/20/2023. Resident #5 Review of Resident #5's ADL flowsheet dated February 2023 revealed, no documentation of completed care on the following day (a.m.) shifts: 02/04/2023, 02/06/2023, 02/10/2023, 02/11/2023, 02/12/2023, 02/14/2023, 02/15/2023, 02/17/2023, 02/18/2023, and 02/19/2023. Further review revealed no documentation of completed care on the following night (p.m.) shifts: 02/01/2023,02/02/2023, 02/03/2023, 02/04/2023, 02/05/2023, 02/06/2023, 02/07/2023, 02/08/2023, 02/09/2023, 02/10/2023, 02/11/2023, 02/12/2023, 02/13/2023, 02/14/2023, 02/15/2023, 02/16/2023, 02/17/2023, 02/18/2023, 02/19/2023, 02/20/2023, and 02/21/2023. In an interview on 02/22/2023 at 1:00 p.m., S5CNA stated she worked with Resident #5 on 02/06/2023, 02/10/2023, and 02/15/2023 and forgot to document the care provided on the ADL flowsheet. In an interview on 02/20/2023 at 9:45 p.m., S7CNA stated ADL flowsheets were to be completed before the end of each shift. In an interview on 02/22/2023 at 10:45 a.m., S6CNA stated the blank boxes on the ADL flowsheet indicated there was no documentation completed by the CNA from that shift for ADL care provided. In an interview on 02/22/2023 at 2:32 p.m., S2DON confirmed the ADL flowsheet for Resident #1, #3, #5 is missing documentation of care provided of the above dates mentioned. S2DON further stated the CNAs should have documented the care provided every shift.
Nov 2022 12 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0557 (Tag F0557)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated with dignity by failing to change the resident into her night clothing to sleep for 1 of 5 sampl...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated with dignity by failing to change the resident into her night clothing to sleep for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #2) reviewed for resident rights. Findings: Review of Resident #2's record revealed, in part, Resident #2 has a diagnosis of: Alzheimer's disease and Vascular Dementia. Observation on 11/02/2022 at 11:20am, revealed S21CNA (certified nursing assistant) provided personal care to and changed Resident #2's clothes which consisted of into a dress with a pink top and navy blue bottom with a floral pattern. Observation on 11/03/2022 at 5:04am, revealed Resident #2 was asleep in bed wearing the same dress with a pink top and navy blue bottom with a floral pattern that was placed on Resident #2 on 11/02/2022 at 11:20am. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 5:29am, S8CNA stated Resident #2 was not changed into night clothing because she wakes up at night and she yells when her clothes are changed. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 1:06pm, S2DON (Director of Nursing) stated Resident #2 should not have been put into bed for the night wearing her day clothing, and should have been changed into a gown or pajamas. S2DON further stated it was a dignity issue to put Resident #2in bed for the night wearing the dress she wore throughout the day, the day before.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation and interview the facility failed to provide a homelike environment during meal time by serving meals on disposable dishware for 1 of 1 meals observed. Findings: Observation on ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to provide a homelike environment during meal time by serving meals on disposable dishware for 1 of 1 meals observed. Findings: Observation on 11/02/2022 at 11:29 a.m., revealed resident meals were being served on disposable dishware and disposable cups on Hall A. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 11:30 a.m., S7Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) stated the facility serves meals on disposable dishware frequently. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 11:35 a.m., S5Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated she is aware the residents are being served on disposable dishware. S5LPN stated she is not sure why the residents are being served on disposable dishware. Observation on 11/02/2022 at 11:55 a.m., revealed meals were being served on disposable dishware and disposable cups to residents on Hall B. Observation on 11/02/2022 at 12:05 p.m., revealed meals were being served on disposable dishware and disposable cups to residents on Hall C. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 1:20 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated the residents throughout the facility have been served on disposable dishware for a very long time. S2DON stated she has notified S1Administrator and S6Dietary Manager that residents being served on disposable dishware was a resident rights and dignity issue. S2DON stated even after being informed, S6Dietary Manager continued to serve on disposable dishware. S2DON stated the residents should be served on non-disposable dishware. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 1:26 p.m., S6Dietary Manager stated the reason the residents were being served on disposable dishware was because it just makes it easier on the staff. S6Dietary Manager stated the residents have been served on disposable dishware since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 2:13 p.m., S1Administrator confirmed he was aware the residents were being served on disposable dishware and should be served on non-disposable dishware. Observation on 11/02/2022 at 5:00 p.m., revealed the dinner meal being served on disposable dishware and disposable cups to residents on Hall A.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to: 1. Have a written grievance with the date the grievance was filed; 2. Have a summary statement of a grievance by a resident'...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to: 1. Have a written grievance with the date the grievance was filed; 2. Have a summary statement of a grievance by a resident's responsible party; 3. Have documented evidence of the investigation summary of the grievance; and 4. Have documented evidence of the corrective action implemented to resolve the grievance. This failed practice was identified for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #2). Findings: Review of the facility's Grievance Policy revealed, in part: a prompt investigation and resolution will be made for all grievance residents may have. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 10:53a.m., S2DON (Director of Nursing) stated she had received complaints from Resident #2's family about her being soiled often a few months ago. S2DON stated she had addressed the issues with staff, but did not have any documented evidence of the grievance, the date the grievance was filed, the summary of the grievance, the investigation into the grievance, and or any follow-up correction action taken to resolve the grievance. S2DON confirmed she should have completed a written grievance with the above mentioned information. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of a documented written grievance decisions include the date the grievance was received, a summary statement of the resident's grievance, the steps taken to investigate the grievance, a summary of the pertinent findings or conclusions regarding the resident's concerns(s), a statement as to whether the grievance was confirmed or not confirmed, any corrective action taken or to be taken by the facility as a result of the grievance, and the date the written decision was issued, and corrective action.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0605 (Tag F0605)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review the facility: 1) failed to treat or eliminate the cause of a resident's behavior before a chemical restraint was administered (Resident #5); and 2) failed to ass...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review the facility: 1) failed to treat or eliminate the cause of a resident's behavior before a chemical restraint was administered (Resident #5); and 2) failed to assess a resident after a chemical restraint was administered (Resident #5). This deficient practice was identified for 1 (Resident #5) of 5 sampled residents (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, and Resident #5). Findings: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) defines: Chemical Restraints as a psychopharmologic drug that is used for discipline or convenience and not required to treat medical symptoms. Convenience is defined as the result of any action that has the effect of altering a resident's behavior such that the resident requires a lesser amount of effort or care, and is not in the resident's best interest. Indication for use is defined as the identified, documented clinical rationale for administering a medication that is based upon an assessment of the resident's condition and therapeutic goals and is consistent with manufacturer's recommendations and/or clinical practice guidelines, clinical standards of practice, medication references, clinical studies or evidence-based review articles that are published in medical and/or pharmacy journals. Medical symptom is defined as an indication or characteristic of a medical, physical or psychological condition. Review of Resident #5's clinical record revealed she had the following diagnoses in part: vascular dementia without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, or anxiety. Review of Resident #5's Minimal Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) date of 08/15/2022 revealed, in part, Resident #5 was rarely/never understood. Review of a facility incident report revealed, in part, that an incident occurred on 09/02/2022 at 4:00 a.m. related to Resident #5's behavior. Further review of the incident description revealed Resident #5 went into R1 and R2's room and slapped R2 on her leg, and threw a water pitcher with water in it on R1. Review of the incident also revealed the steps taken to prevent reoccurrence included an order to administer Seroquel 50mg tablet (antipsychotic medication used to treat schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, psychosis, and major depression) by mouth every morning to Resident #5. Review of Resident #5's physician orders revealed, in part, an order with a start date of 09/02/2022 for Seroquel 50mg by mouth every morning for a diagnosis of Insomnia. Review of Resident #5's clinical record revealed no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that Resident #5 was assessed for a specific medical symptom which warranted the use of a chemical restraint. Further review revealed no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of an attempt to treat or eliminate the cause of Resident #5's above mentioned behaviors was attempted prior to administering Seroquel. The clinical record also provided no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of an assessment of Resident #5 after the chemical restraint was administered. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 1:58 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated following the incident on 09/02/2022 the only intervention implemented was to administer an additional dose of 50mg of Seroquel. S2DON stated the Seroquel was given to Resident #5 for a diagnosis of dementia with behavioral disturbances. S2DON stated Seroquel was a black box warning drug and should not be used for dementia or as a behavioral intervention because it would be considered a chemical restraint. S2DON stated she, nor the nurse, attempted to implement any other interventions following the incident on 09/02/2022 prior to the nurse administering Seroquel to Resident #5 because she did not know what other interventions could be used. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 2:30 p.m., S1Administrator stated Seroquel should not have been used as an intervention. S1Administrator further stated the facility did not have a chemical restraint policy. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 11:31 a.m., S11Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated she redirected Resident #5 to her room and notified the physician after the incident on 09/02/2022. She stated the physician ordered Seroquel 50mg every morning and no other interventions were completed prior to administering the Seroquel to Resident #5 because the incident was not a big deal. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 11:56 a.m., Resident #5's Responsible Party stated Resident #5 had received Seroquel before and it calmed her down when she acted out. In an interview on 11/03/2022 12:28 p.m., S2DON stated the nurse did not attempt to do any interventions prior to administering Seroquel. S2DON stated the nurse did not reassess if the medication was effective.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Abuse Prevention Policies (Tag F0607)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility: 1.) Failed implement their Abuse policy and procedures to ensure the Administ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility: 1.) Failed implement their Abuse policy and procedures to ensure the Administrator and/or Administrator Designee were immediately contacted regarding an allegation of physical abuse to a resident (Resident #1); 2.) Failed to implement their Abuse policy and procedures to ensure a resident was immediately protected after an allegation of physical abuse was made (Resident #1); and, 3.) Failed to implement their Abuse policy and procedures to ensure a resident's responsible party was immediately notified after an allegation of physical abuse was made about the resident (Resident #1). This deficient practice was identified for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 sampled residents (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, and Resident #5) reviewed for abuse. Findings: Review of the facility's Abuse, Neglect, and Misappropriation of Property Policy and Procedure revealed, in part: -a resident is considered mistreated, abuse and/or neglected when the resident has been attacked, struck, pushed, shoved or kicked in any manner by an employee or any person other than another resident. Further, physical abuse would include the use of rough or physical force beyond that necessary to protect the resident from injuring himself or others. - The facility protects individuals from abuse during investigation of any allegations of abuse. -Any employee who witnesses or is informed of an incident of abuse, neglect, or misappropriation of resident property must report the incident in accordance with the following procedure: - at the time of the incident or when the employee is informed of the incident, the employee or person witnessing the incident must verbally notify the Director of Nursing (DON), Assistant Administrator, or Administrator immediately. - the DON, Assistant Administrator, or Administrator shall immediately notify the designated representatives through SIMS (Statewide Incident Management System). This action must be done within 2 hours after the allegation if the allegation involves abuse. -the DON, Assistant Administrator, or Administrator shall immediately notify the responsible person of the resident and document such notification attempt. -within twenty four (24) hours of the incident, a written description of all facts pertaining to exactly what happened must be submitted by each person or persons witnessing the incident to the manager submitting the claim Review of Resident #1's record revealed he was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of in part: dependence of respirator/ventilator status; acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (low blood oxygen levels); muscular dystrophy (genetic disorder affecting the muscles); dysphagia (difficulty swallowing); and aphonia (loss of ability to speak). Review of Resident #1's MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) dated 09/27/2022 revealed a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 15 (score of 13-15 indicated cognitively intact). Further review revealed Resident #1 was totally dependent on one staff for bed mobility and toilet use. Review of Resident #1's Progress Notes dated 10/28/2022 at 9am revealed S2DON (Director of Nursing) documented being notified Resident #1 stated S14LPN (Licensed Practical Nurs) hit him last night. Resident #1 was able to mouth words and write some words on a paper. Further review revealed S2DON asked him if the nurse (S14LPN) hit him, and he nodded his head yes and pointed to his left shoulder. Resident #2 pointed to his abdomen and indicated the nurse was handling his peg tube (feeding tube) rough. Further review revealed S2DON attempted to call Resident #1's responsible party, but there was no answer. There was no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence that Resident #1's responsible party was immediately notified about the above mentioned allegation of physical abuse. In an interview on 11/01/2022 at 12:53pm, S9CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) stated on 10/27/2022 upon walking into Resident #1's room S15RT (Respiratory Therapist) informed her (S9CNA) that Resident #1 communicated to her that S14LPN had hit him. S9CNA stated later during the shift, S14LPN pulled Resident #1's peg tube and stated how she (S14LPN) hated to work with Caucasians. S9CNA stated she tried to call S2DON to report this, but S2DON never returned her call. S9CNA also stated S14LPN was able to contact S3ADON, and S3ADON had asked me, S9CNA, to leave since S14LPN stated she could not work with me. S9CNA stated she was able to contact S20Admissions, and S20Admissions stated she would notify S1Administrator. S9CNA further stated S1Administrator never returned her (S20Admissions) phone call. In an interview on 11/01/2022 at 7:25pm, Resident #1 communicated one nurse had hurt him about 5 days ago on the night shift. Resident #1 then communicated he had notified two girls on the night shift of the nurse hitting him. Resident #1 stated S1Administrator and S2DON had come to talk to him about the nurse (S14LPN) hitting him. When asked what happened, Resident #1 acted out being hit in his left arm with a closed first and then pointed to his lower chest area. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 2:24pm, S3ADON stated on 10/27/2022 she received a call from S14LPN who reported that S9CNA was trying to tell her how to do her job. S3ADON stated she (S3ADON) heard S9CNA yell in the background that S14LPN had punched him in the face (Resident #1). S3ADON asked S14LPN and S9CNA if they could work together to finish the shift. S3ADON further stated S15RT was trying to yell her cell phone number to S3ADON in the background, but S3ADON stated she was unable to speak with S15RT. S3ADON did not come to the facility to start the investigation and did not contact anyone to ensure Resident #1 was protected after the above mentioned allegation of abuse was received. S3ADON stated S14LPN ended up leaving the facility because S9CNA asked her (S14LPN) to leave. S3ADON also indicated if S9CNA would have left her shift when requested, I (S3ADON) probably would not have asked S14LPN to leave, because I really didn't think S14LPN had hit Resident #1. S3ADON further stated she did not notify S1Administrator or S2DON of the above mentioned allegation of abuse after the above mentioned telephone call, rather she waited until the next morning to notify them. S3ADON further stated per the facility's Abuse Policy and Procedure she should have immediately had S14LPN leave the building, notified staff to protect Resident #1, and should have immediately contacted S1Administrator and S2DON of the above. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 10:13am, S2DON stated she had seen she had missed telephone calls on her cell phone from the facility on 10/27/2022, but she was not feeling well and never heard her phone ring; therefore, was unaware of the allegation of abuse until the morning of 10/28/2022. S2DON further stated she did attempt to contact Resident #1's responsible party; however, when she did not receive a return call she did not attempt to notify any other or Resident #1's contacts or call back Resident #1's responsible party of the above mentioned allegation of physical abuse. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 3:48pm, S1Administrator stated he did not get the phone call on 10/27/2022 due to his phone was off that night. S1Administrator stated he thought he was the abuse coordinator and was not sure if everything was handled appropriately related to the above mentioned allegation of physical abuse.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility failed to develop a plan of care for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #1) re...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility failed to develop a plan of care for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care and services. Findings: Review of Resident #1's record revealed Resident #1 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of, in part: Dependence of Respirator/Ventilator Status, Acute Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia (low blood oxygen level), Pneumonia (infection in the lung), Muscular Dystrophy (genetic condition that causes muscle weakness), Dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), Aphonia (loss of ability to speak), and Purulent Endopthalmitis (inflammation of the eye with white discharge). Review of Resident #1's MDS (Minimal Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 09/27/2022 Care Area Assessment (CAAs) Summary revealed the following care area triggered and care planning decision was marked as needed: ADL (activities of daily living), Functional/Rehabilitation Potential, Urinary Incontinence and Indwelling Catheter (tube in bladder used to drain urine), Psychosocial (mental health) Well-Being, Falls, Feeding Tube, Dehydration/Fluid Maintenance, Pressure Ulcer, and Psychotropic (medication used to treat mental health issues) Drug Use. Review of Resident #1's Record revealed no documented evidence and the facility presented no documented evidence the facility had developed a comprehensive care plan or an interim care plan since Resident #1 was admitted on [DATE]. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 1:20pm, S4MDS Coordinator/Care Plan Nurse stated Resident #1 did not have a care plan developed. S4MDS Coordinator/Care Plan Nurse stated a care plan should have been developed. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 1:06p.m., S2DON (Director of Nursing) stated Resident #1 did not have a care plan developed prior to yesterday, as required.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's care plan was developed to reflect a resident's (Resident #5) combative behavior and antipsychotic medication drug use....

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's care plan was developed to reflect a resident's (Resident #5) combative behavior and antipsychotic medication drug use. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #5). Findings: Review of facility's Unnecessary Drugs policy revealed, in part, antipsychotic drug therapy shall be administered according to each resident's plan of care. Review of facility's incident report revealed, in part, revealed steps taken to prevent reoccurrence of an incident that occurred on 09/02/2022 included an order to increase resident #5's quetiapine (antipsychotic medication used to treat mental illness) to one additional dose of quetiapine 50mg one tablet by mouth every morning. Review of Resident #5's care plan revealed no careplan for combative behavior, medication changes, or reflection of the incident that occurred on 09/02/2022. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 1:50 p.m., S4MDS Coordinator/Care Plan Nurse confirmed Resident #5 did not have an appropriate careplan for combative behavior and antipsychotic medication use. S4MDS Coordinator/Care Plan Nurse confirmed she should have updated Resident #5's careplan after the incident occurred and Resident #5's medications were changed. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 1:58 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated Resident #5 did not have an appropriate careplan for combative behavior and antipsychotic medication use. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 2:30 p.m., S1Admministrator stated a careplan should have been put into place for Resident #5 following the incident that occurred on 09/02/2022.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure dependent residents were provided incontinence care as needed for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #2, and Resident #4) revie...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure dependent residents were provided incontinence care as needed for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #2, and Resident #4) reviewed for incontinence care and 2 of 4 randomly selected residents (Resident #R3 and Resident #R4) interviewed regarding incontinent care. Findings: Resident #2 Review of Resident #2's MDS (Minimum Data Set) with ARD (Assessment Reference Date) dated 10/10/2022 revealed, in part: Resident #2 had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 04 (score of 00-07 indicated severe cognitive impairment), was always incontinent of bowel and bladder and required extensive assistance of one person for toileting. Review of Resident #2's Care Plan for urinary incontinence with goal date of 01/22/2023 revealed Resident #2 was to be checked frequently and provided incontinence care past each episode. Review of Resident #2's Case Mix ADL (Activities of Daily Living) Tracking Tool for October 2022 revealed no documented evidence of incontinence care having been provided on the day shift (7am to 7pm) on 10/12/2022, 10/13/2022, 10/22/2022, 10/29/2022, 10/30/2022, and 10/31/2022. Review of Resident #2's Case Mix ADL Tracking Tool for November 2022 revealed no documented evidence of incontinence care having been provided on the day shift on 11/01/2022. Observation on 11/02/2022 at 11:19am, Resident #2 was in small dayroom and upon Resident #2 getting up to walk, she was observed with the bottom of her pants, next to the buttock area, and left leg visibly soiled and smell of urine was noted. Observation on 11/02/2022 at 4:00pm, revealed Resident #2 was lying in bed sleeping with a strong urine odor. Observation on 11/03/2022 at 5:04am, Resident #2 was asleep with a strong smell of urine noted. Observation on 11/03/2022 at 10:29am, revealed incontinent care was provided to Resident #2. Further observation revealed a diaper soiled with feces and urine which weighed 1.2 pounds. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 1:06pm, S2DON (Director of Nursing) stated the facility had no documented evidence of Resident #2 was receiving incontinent care as needed. S2DON stated 1.2 pounds was a lot of weight for a diaper if she was being changed every 2 hours, and Resident #2 should have never been soiled enough to have wet pants. Resident #4 Review of Resident #4's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) dated 09/06/2022 revealed, in part a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated Resident #4 was cognitively intact. Further Review revealed Resident #4 was always incontinent of bowel and bladder and required extensive assistance of one person for toileting. Review of Resident #4's Care Plan with goal date of 11/25/2022 and a category of incontinence of bladder revealed an intervention that Resident #4 was to be checked frequently and provided incontinence care past each episode. Review of Resident #4's Case Mix ADL (Activities of Daily Living) Tracking Tool for October 2022 revealed no documented evidence of incontinence care having been provided on the day shift (7am to 7pm) on 09/20/2022, 09/21/2022, and 09/30/2022. Further review revealed no documented evidence on incontinence care having been provided on the night shift (7pm- 7am) on 09/20/2022, 09/21/2022, 09/23/2022, 09/24/2022, 09/25/2022, 09/28/2022, 09/29/2022, and 09/30/2022. Review of Resident #4's Case Mix ADL Tracking Tool for October 2022 revealed no documented evidence of incontinence care having been provided on the day shift (7am-7pm) on October 26th, October 30th, and October 31st. Further review revealed no documented evidence on incontinence care having been provided on the night shift (7pm- 7am) on 10/31/2022. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 1:03 p.m., Resident #4 stated she goes to bed around 7pm and she does not get changed until 6am in the morning. Observation on 11/03/2022 at 5:20 a.m., revealed S13Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) removed one saturated purple brief and one saturated green brief both previously secured to the Resident #4's buttock. Further observation revealed a pink and white bed pad under Resident #4 visibly soiled. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 5:27 a.m., S13CNA stated Resident #4 had two briefs on. S13CNA stated the two briefs and the bed pad were soiled. S13CNA stated both briefs were heavily saturated with urine. S13CNA stated Resident #4 always wears two briefs so that urine does not leak through on her clothes. S13CNA stated Resident #4 tells the day shift does not lay her down during the day and change her. S13CNA stated when she comes in at 7pm and assists Resident #4 into bed both briefs are visibly saturated with urine. Observation on 11/03/2022 at 11:05 a.m., revealed Resident #4 being pushed to her room by S17Certified Nursing Assistant Supervisor (CNA Supervisor). Observation revealed Resident #4 stated Why do you all want to check my brief, you all never do that during the day. Resident #4 presented with a green brief with a blue brief on the inside. S17CNA Supervisor checked her brief to ensure Resident #4 was not soiled, then reapplied both briefs to Resident #4 per Resident #4's request. S2DON and S13CNA Supervisor were in the room and made no attempt to explain the risks to Resident #4 on wearing two briefs. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 11:08 a.m., S17CNA Supervisor stated Resident #4 had two briefs on and should not have two briefs on at any time. She further stated a brief would not be saturated if the resident was being changed every 2 hours. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 11:13 a.m., S2Director of Nursing stated the risks of wearing two briefs was not explained to Resident #4 and it should have been. She stated Resident #4's preferences should also have been care planned properly and they were not. She further stated a brief would not be saturated if the resident was being changed every two hours or as needed. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 1:30 p.m., Resident #4 stated the only reason she requests two briefs was because she got tired of wetting her clothes. Resident #4 stated staff never explained or discouraged her from wearing two briefs. Resident #4 stated if they would have explained it to her, she wouldn't have requested to wear two briefs. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 5:43am, S9CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) stated when she arrived for the night shift the residents were soiled. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 6:33am, Resident #R3 stated she was changed once at night, and stayed soiled until 5am. Resident #R3 further stated the nurse or CNAs did not check on her at night unless she pressed the call light. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 7:01am, Resident #R4 stated she had an issue in the last month were she was placed on the bedpan and then had to wait a long time after she had pressed the call bell to receive assistance. Resident #R4 further stated another night she had pressed the call bell at midnight, and she had to call her son to come to the facility at 2:30am to get staff to change her because she was heavily soiled.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0838 (Tag F0838)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility failed to have a facility assessment which identified the number and types of ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility failed to have a facility assessment which identified the number and types of personnel needed, their trainings, and their competencies neededto provide care and services to the resident population. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 1 facility assessments reviewed for the facility's evaluation of its resources needed to provide care and services to residents. Findings: Review of the facility's Facility assessment dated [DATE] revealed resident demographic information included, in part: 4 residents on dialysis, 25 residents with psychiatric diagnosis. 22 with cognitive disabilities; and 2 with ventilators. Review further revealed the ADL (activities of daily living) Acuity Level were: 73 residents required assistance of one or two staff members for feeding and 38 residents were dependent for feeding; 95 resident required one or two staff members for bathing and 19 were dependent for bathing; 95 residents required one to two persons for dressing and 7 were dependent for dressing; 64 residents required one to staff members for toilet and 44 were dependent for toileting; and 60 residents required one to 2 staff members for transferring and 46 were dependent for transferring. Further review revealed the total number of staff needed for 09/30/2022 only of 272 hours required. Review revealed competency and/or performance reviews shall include at least one of the following: checklist where supervisor signed off and dated each item that the staff member showed competency, lecture with return demonstration on physical activities or equipment use, and posttest for documentation purposes. There was no documented evidence and the provider presented no documented evidence the number of staff required to address to acuity of the residents population, a formula to determine the staff needs for the resident population, and/or a listing of staff competencies required to properly take care of the resident population identified in the facility assessment. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 2:00pm, S2DON (Director of Nursing) stated when making the facility assignments for nursing staff the facility looks at census and based on what she knows about the residents; she would make a determination on how many staff was needed. S2DON stated there was no system or calculation used to determine the number of staff needed to provide care based on the acuity level of the residents. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 12:04pm, S1Administrator stated the facility did not have anything in the facility assessment and/or any system in place to determine the number and type of staff required based on the facility census and acuity of residents. S1Administrator stated the facility ensures they are meeting the state staffing requirements, and on a weekly basis, they would look at acuity, and just make a determination on the number of staff needed to provide the care.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0725 (Tag F0725)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to maintain adequate staffing levels for resident acuity and to meet resident needs. This deficient practice was identified for ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to maintain adequate staffing levels for resident acuity and to meet resident needs. This deficient practice was identified for 3 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #1, Resident #2 and Resident #4), and for 2 random residents (Resident #R3 and Resident #R4). Findings: In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 1:20p.m., S4MDS (Minimum Data Set) Coordinator/Care Plan Nurse stated Resident #1 did not have a care plan. S4MDS Coordinator/Care Plan Nurse stated the other care plan nurse had quit and she was not sure what had been completed. S4MDS Coordinator/Care Plan Nurse further stated she did her best to keep up with the MDS assessments and care plans while also having to assist on the floors with resident care. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 2:00p.m., S2DON (Director of Nursing) stated all department heads are having to help provide direct care on the floors, so they are not able to perform their department head job duties properly; therefore, supervision of care, care plans, etc were not being done causing us to be out of compliance. S2DON stated this was placing a strain on the staff responsible for overall supervision and other administrative duties. S2DON further stated the facility does allow us the use of agency staff, but highly discourage it. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 5:43a.m., S9CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) stated when she arrived for the night shift the residents were soiled. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 5:57a.m., S12CNA stated she had arrived to her night shift in the past when the facility was short staffed and had difficulty providing care the residents needed. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 6:33a.m., Resident #R3 stated she was changed once at night, and stayed soiled until 5am. Resident #R3 further stated the nurse or CNAs did not check on her at night unless she pressed the call light. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 7:01a.m., Resident #R4 stated she had an issue in the last month were she was placed on the bedpan and then had to wait a long time after she had pressed the call bell to receive assistance. Resident #R4 further stated another night she had pressed the call bell at midnight, and she had to call her son to come to the facility at 2:30am to get staff to change her because she was heavily soiled. Resident #2 Review of Resident #2's MDS (Minimum Data Set) with ARD (Assessment Reference Date) dated 10/10/2022 revealed, in part: Resident #2 had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 04 (score of 00-07 indicated severe cognitive impairment), was always incontinent of bowel and bladder and required extensive assistance of one person for toileting. Review of Resident #2's Care Plan for urinary incontinence with goal date of 01/22/2023 revealed Resident #2 was to be checked frequently and provided incontinence care past each episode. Review of Resident #2's Case Mix ADL (Activities of Daily Living) Tracking Tool for October 2022 revealed no documented evidence of incontinence care having been provided on the day shift (7am to 7pm) on 10/12/2022, 10/13/2022, 10/22/2022, 10/29/2022, 10/30/2022, and 10/31/2022. Review of Resident #2's Case Mix ADL Tracking Tool for November 2022 revealed no documented evidence of incontinence care having been provided on the day shift on 11/01/2022. Observation on 11/02/2022 at 11:19a.m., Resident #2 was in small dayroom and upon Resident #2 getting up to walk, she was observed with the bottom of her pants, next to the buttock area, and left leg visibly soiled and smell of urine was noted. Observation on 11/02/2022 at 4:00p.m., revealed Resident #2 was lying in bed sleeping with a strong urine odor. Observation on 11/03/2022 at 5:04a.m., Resident #2 was asleep with a strong smell of urine noted. Observation on 11/03/2022 at 10:29a.m., revealed incontinent care was provided to Resident #2. Further observation revealed a diaper soiled with feces and urine which weighed 1.2 pounds. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 10:53a.m., S2DON (Director of Nursing) stated she had received complaints from Resident #2's family about her being soiled often a few months ago. S2DON stated she had addressed the issues with staff, but did not have any documented evidence of the grievance, the date the grievance was filed, the summary of the grievance, the investigation into the grievance, and or any follow-up correction action taken to resolve the grievance. S2DON confirmed she should have completed a written grievance with the above mentioned information In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 1:06p.m., S2DON (Director of Nursing) stated the facility had no documented evidence of Resident #2 was receiving incontinent care as needed. S2DON stated 1.2 pounds was a lot of weight for a diaper if she was being changed every 2 hours, and Resident #2 should have never been soiled enough to have wet pants. Resident #4 Review of Resident #4's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) dated 09/06/2022 revealed, in part a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated Resident #4 was cognitively intact. Further Review revealed Resident #4 was always incontinent of bowel and bladder and required extensive assistance of one person for toileting. Review of Resident #4's Care Plan with goal date of 11/25/2022 and a category of incontinence of bladder revealed an intervention that Resident #4 was to be checked frequently and provided incontinence care past each episode. Review of Resident #4's Case Mix ADL (Activities of Daily Living) Tracking Tool for October 2022 revealed no documented evidence of incontinence care having been provided on the day shift (7am to 7pm) on 09/20/2022, 09/21/2022, and 09/30/2022. Further review revealed no documented evidence on incontinence care having been provided on the night shift (7pm- 7am) on 09/20/2022, 09/21/2022, 09/23/2022, 09/24/2022, 09/25/2022, 09/28/2022, 09/29/2022, and 09/30/2022. Review of Resident #4's Case Mix ADL Tracking Tool for October 2022 revealed no documented evidence of incontinence care having been provided on the day shift (7am-7pm) on October 26th, October 30th, and October 31st. Further review revealed no documented evidence on incontinence care having been provided on the night shift (7pm- 7am) on 10/31/2022. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 1:03 p.m., Resident #4 stated she goes to bed around 7pm and she does not get changed until 6am in the morning. Observation on 11/03/2022 at 5:20 a.m., revealed S13Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) removed one saturated purple brief and one saturated green brief both previously secured to the Resident #4's buttock. Further observation revealed a pink and white bed pad under Resident #4 visibly soiled. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 5:27 a.m., S13CNA stated Resident #4 had two briefs on. S13CNA stated the two briefs and the bed pad were soiled. S13CNA stated both briefs were heavily saturated with urine. S13CNA stated Resident #4 always wears two briefs so that urine does not leak through on her clothes. S13CNA stated Resident #4 tells the day shift does not lay her down during the day and change her. S13CNA stated when she comes in at 7pm and assists Resident #4 into bed both briefs are visibly saturated with urine. Observation on 11/03/2022 at 11:05 a.m., revealed Resident #4 being pushed to her room by S17Certified Nursing Assistant Supervisor (CNA Supervisor). Observation revealed Resident #4 stated Why do you all want to check my brief, you all never do that during the day. Resident #4 presented with a green brief with a blue brief on the inside. S17CNA Supervisor checked her brief to ensure Resident #4 was not soiled, then reapplied both briefs to Resident #4 per Resident #4's request. S2DON and S13CNA Supervisor were in the room and made no attempt to explain the risks to Resident #4 on wearing two briefs. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 11:08 a.m., S17CNA Supervisor stated Resident #4 had two briefs on and should not have two briefs on at any time. She further stated a brief would not be saturated if the resident was being changed every 2 hours. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 11:13 a.m., S2Director of Nursing stated the risks of wearing two briefs was not explained to Resident #4 and it should have been. She stated Resident #4's preferences should also have been care planned properly and they were not. She further stated a brief would not be saturated if the resident was being changed every two hours or as needed. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 1:30 p.m., Resident #4 stated the only reason she requests two briefs was because she got tired of wetting her clothes. Resident #4 stated staff never explained or discouraged her from wearing two briefs. Resident #4 stated if they would have explained it to her, she wouldn't have requested to wear two briefs.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0726 (Tag F0726)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to: 1. Ensure staff were competent to provide incontinence care for 2 (S10Certified Nursing Assistant and S13 Certified Nursing A...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to: 1. Ensure staff were competent to provide incontinence care for 2 (S10Certified Nursing Assistant and S13 Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) of 5 sampled staff reviewed during pericare observations; and 2. Ensure staff were competent on infection control standards for 5 (S7CNA, S10CNA, S13CNA, S18CNA, and S19CNA) of 5 sampled staff reviewed during facility observations. Findings: Observation on 11/03/2022 at 10:29am, S10Certfiied Nursing Assistant (CNA) did perform hand hygiene and applied gloves prior to grabbing a pack of wipes and entering Resident #2's room. S10CNA then went into Resident #2's room and removed Resident #2's incontinence brief at which time stool fell onto the resident's floor. S10CNA then proceeded to place the soiled diaper on the floor. S10CNA then without changing gloves or completing hand hygiene proceeded to use a wipe to clean the stool off the floor. S10CNA without changing gloves began providing pericare again to Resident #2 placing the soiled wipes onto the floor. S10CNA then placed Resident #2 sitting on the bed to change her incontinent brief and pants. Upon Resident #2 standing up S10CNA noticed a soiled area to the bedding. S10CNA did not remove her gloves or perform hand hygiene and proceeded to move Resident #2's pillows to the over bed table, and removed Resident #2's bedding with the same gloved hands and placed the soiled linen on the floor. S10CNA then went across the hall, with same gloved hands into another resident room and grabbed a garbage bag from the trash and came back into Resident #2's room. S10CNA then bagged the soiled incontinence brief and wipes. S10CNA then without changing her gloves or performing hand hygiene took Resident #2 by the hand and brought Resident #2 to activities. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 10:35am, S10CNA stated she forgot to wash her hands before providing care to Resident #2 and thought she only had to change gloves between residents. S10CNA stated she did not receive a competency for hand hygiene, incontinent care, or glove usage. Review of S10CNA's personnel file revealed a date of hire of 05/27/2022. Further review revealed no documented evidence and the facility presented no documented evidence of S10CNA having a competency evaluation. Observation on 11/01/2022 at 7:20 p.m., revealed S19CNA in Resident #3's room performing pericare with visibly soiled linen not contained on the floor. In an interview on 11/01/2022 at 7:25 p.m., S19CN stated the soiled linen from Resident #3's bed was not contained and was placed on the floor. S19CNA further stated the soiled linen should not be stored on the floor it and it should be in a bag or a barrel at all times. Observation on 11/02/2022 at 10:59 a.m., revealed S7CNA holding a clean blanket to her chest and abdomen while walking down the hallway. Observation revealed the blanket was not bagged or contained. Observation revealed, S7CNA exited Room c with gloves on both hands and walked down the hallway. Observation on 11/02/2022 at 11:03 a.m., revealed S18CNA approached Room a with the dirty linen barrel and the clean linen cart approximately 6 inches away from each other while coming down the hall. Observation revealed, S18CNA entered Room a with clean linen in her hands. Observation revealed, S18CNA opened the door the room with gloves on her hands and had visibly soiled linen in her hand not bagged. Observation revealed, S18CNA placed the linen in a dirty linen barrel, and accessed the clean linen cart without removing gloves, and returned to Room a. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 11:21 a.m. S18CNA stated she had not completed any type of competency since being employed at the facility. In an interview on 11/02/2022 at 3:09 p.m., S17Certified Nursing Assistant Supervisor (CNA Supervisor) stated competencies are not currently being completed. S17CNA Supervisor stated she is aware that competencies should be completed on hire and annually and she began to start them on 11/08/2022. Observation on 11/03/2022 at 5:02 a.m., revealed a linen cart on Hall B with linen exposed and a clear half-filled bottle of water sitting on the top shelf near the towels. Observation on 11/03/2022 at 5:11 a.m., revealed a linen cart on Hall B near the nurse's station with cover open leaving the linen exposed. Observation on 11/03/2022 at 5:20 a.m., revealed S13CNA approached Resident #4's room with the linen being held touching her clothing on her abdominal area. Observation revealed S13CNA entered Resident #4's room and placed the linen on the bedside table. Observation revealed S13CNA performed pericare and placed the soiled linen at the foot of Resident #4's bed not bagged or contained. Observation revealed S13CNA did not perform hand hygiene. Observation revealed S19CNA changed gloves and dressed Resident #4. Observation revealed, S13CNA exited the room wearing gloves. Further observation revealed, S13CNA removed her gloves, did not perform hand hygiene, and assisted Resident #4 to Hall A's nurse's station via wheelchair. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 8:31 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated during September it was noted that CNA competencies were not being completed. S2DON stated she discussed the issue with S17Certified Nursing Assistant Supervisor and the certified nursing assistants competencies was supposed to be initiated on all new hires and all current employees. S2DON stated she was informed yesterday they still had not been initiated for new hires or any current employees. S2DON stated the dirty linen barrel and the clean linen cart should not be parked in the door way at the same time together. S2DON stated the clean linen cart should not be accessed after touching soiled or dirty linen. S2DON stated changing gloves does not substitute for handwashing. S2DON stated she cannot say the certified nursing assistants are competent to provide care because they have not been trained according to policy. Review of Perineal Care Return Demonstration form dated 08/03/2022 and 10/10/2022 revealed, no signature for S13CNA, S18CNA, and S19CNA on either perineal care competency forms.
CONCERN (E) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Deficiency F0940 (Tag F0940)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review and interview the facility failed to maintain documented evidence of staff training to demonstrate an effective training program for existing and new staff upon hire. This defic...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to maintain documented evidence of staff training to demonstrate an effective training program for existing and new staff upon hire. This deficient practice was identified for 8 of 8 sampled staff (S1Administrator, S2DON (Director of Nursing), S3ADON (Assistant Director of Nursing), S9CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) , S10CNA, S14LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse), S15RT (Respiratory Therapist), and S16RT Director) reviewed for training requirements. Findings: Review of S1Administrator's personnel file revealed S1Administrator's date of hire was 01/24/2022. Further review revealed no documented evidence and the provider presented no documented evidence of any training being completed since hire. Review of S2DON's personnel file revealed S2DON's date of hire was 12/01/2021. Further review revealed no documented evidence and the provider presented no documented evidence of any training being completed since hire. Review of S3ADON's personnel file revealed S3ADON's date of hire was 03/16/2020. Further review revealed no documented evidence and the provider presented no documented evidence of any training being completed since hire. Review of S9CNA's personnel file revealed S9CNA's date of hire was 03/18/2022. Further review revealed no documented evidence and the provider presented no documented evidence of any training being completed since hire. Review of S10CNA's personnel file revealed S10CNA's date of hire was 05/27/2022. Further review revealed no documented evidence and the provider presented no documented evidence of any training being completed since hire. Review of S14LPN's personnel file revealed S14LPN's date of hire was 08/10/2022. Further review revealed no documented evidence and the provider presented no documented evidence of any training being completed since hire. Review of S15RT's personnel file revealed S15RT's date of hire was 09/01/2022. Further review revealed no documented evidence and the provider presented no documented evidence of any training being completed since hire. Review of S16RT Director's personnel file revealed S16RT Director's date of hire was 01/01/2022. Further review revealed no documented evidence and the provider presented no documented evidence of any training being completed since hire. In an interview on 11/03/2022 at 1:52pm, S1Administrator stated the facility did not have any trainings on any of the 8 records reviewed other than the staff having signed reviewing the staff handbook. S1Administrator further stated the facility did not have any documented evidence the review of the handbook was sufficient for the skills needed to provide care of residents.
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?"
  • "What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
  • "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 5 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s), $402,870 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 86 deficiencies on record, including 5 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $402,870 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Louisiana. Major compliance failures.
  • • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: This facility has a substantiated abuse finding. Extreme caution advised. Explore alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Ferncrest Manor Living Center's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns Ferncrest Manor Living Center an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within Louisiana, 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 Ferncrest Manor Living Center Staffed?

CMS rates Ferncrest Manor Living Center's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 58%, which is 12 percentage points above the Louisiana average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.

What Have Inspectors Found at Ferncrest Manor Living Center?

State health inspectors documented 86 deficiencies at Ferncrest Manor Living Center during 2022 to 2025. These included: 5 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, and 80 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Ferncrest Manor Living Center?

Ferncrest Manor Living Center is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 200 certified beds and approximately 113 residents (about 56% occupancy), it is a large facility located in New Orleans, Louisiana.

How Does Ferncrest Manor Living Center Compare to Other Louisiana Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Louisiana, Ferncrest Manor Living Center's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.4, staff turnover (58%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Ferncrest Manor Living Center?

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?" "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations, the substantiated abuse finding on record, the facility's high staff turnover rate, and the below-average staffing rating.

Is Ferncrest Manor Living Center Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, Ferncrest Manor Living Center has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). Inspectors have issued 5 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Louisiana. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Ferncrest Manor Living Center Stick Around?

Staff turnover at Ferncrest Manor Living Center is high. At 58%, the facility is 12 percentage points above the Louisiana average of 46%. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?

Was Ferncrest Manor Living Center Ever Fined?

Ferncrest Manor Living Center has been fined $402,870 across 3 penalty actions. This is 10.9x the Louisiana average of $37,108. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.

Is Ferncrest Manor Living Center on Any Federal Watch List?

Ferncrest Manor Living 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.