PATTERSON HEALTHCARE CENTER

910 LIA ST, PATTERSON, LA 70392 (985) 395-4563
For profit - Corporation 121 Beds NEXION HEALTH Data: November 2025 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
14/100
#234 of 264 in LA
Last Inspection: December 2024

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

Overview

Patterson Healthcare Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about its operations and care quality. Ranking #234 out of 264 facilities in Louisiana places it in the bottom half, and it is the least favorable option in St. Mary County. Although the facility shows a trend of improvement, decreasing issues from 27 to 3 over the last year, it still faces serious staffing challenges, reflected in a 2 out of 5 star rating for staffing. There is a concerning history of incidents, such as a severely cognitively impaired resident eloping from the facility unnoticed, which highlights a lack of adequate supervision. Additionally, the facility has accumulated $17,280 in fines, suggesting compliance problems. However, it is worth noting that the staff turnover is relatively low at 30%, which is better than the state average, and the RN coverage is average, meaning there is some level of consistent care.

Trust Score
F
14/100
In Louisiana
#234/264
Bottom 12%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
27 → 3 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
30% turnover. Near Louisiana's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
$17,280 in fines. Lower than most Louisiana facilities. Relatively clean record.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 10 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Louisiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
⚠ Watch
33 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Overall Rating
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Staff Levels
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 27 issues
2025: 3 issues

The Good

  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (30%)

    18 points below Louisiana average of 48%

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: 30%

15pts below Louisiana avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Federal Fines: $17,280

Below median ($33,413)

Minor penalties assessed

Chain: NEXION HEALTH

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 33 deficiencies on record

2 life-threatening
Jun 2025 1 deficiency
MINOR (B) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents

Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure documentation was complete and accurate for residents' activities of daily living (ADL) for 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure documentation was complete and accurate for residents' activities of daily living (ADL) for 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3) of 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3) sampled residents investigated for ADLs. Findings: Review of the facility's Charting and Documentation policy, dated July 2017, revealed, in part, all services provided to the resident, progress toward the care plan goals, or any changes in the resident's medical, physical, functional or psychosocial condition, shall be documented in the resident's medical record. Resident #1 Review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 03/18/2025 revealed Resident #1 required supervision and set up help with transfer. Further review of Resident #1's MDS revealed Resident #1 required partial to moderate assistance with personal hygiene. Review of Resident #1's Care Plan with a documented goal date of 06/19/2025 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had an ADL self-care performance deficit. Further review revealed Resident #1 required supervision or touch assistance with chair/bed-to-chair transfers and partial to moderate assistance with personal hygiene. Review of Resident #1's March 2025 Documentation Survey Report revealed, in part, the following: -Personal Hygiene: no documented evidence personal hygiene assistance was provided on the 6:00AM - 6:00PM shift on 03/21/2025; and, -Transfers: no documented evidence transfer assistance was provided on the 6:00AM - 6:00PM shifts on 03/12/2025, 03/13/2025, 03/21/2025, or on the 6:00PM - 6:00AM shifts on 03/13/2025, 03/14/2025, and 03/31/2025. Review of Resident #1's April 2025 Documentation Survey Report revealed, in part, the following: -Personal hygiene: no documented evidence personal hygiene assistance was provided on the 6:00AM - 6:00PM shifts on 04/02/2025 or on the 6:00PM - 6:00AM shift on 04/05/2025 and 04/11/2025; and, -Transfers: no documented evidence transfer assistance was provided on the 6:00AM - 6:00PM shift on 04/01/2025, or on the 6:00PM - 6:00AM shifts on 04/04/2025 and 04/11/2025. In an interview on 06/09/2025 at 2:55PM, S3MDS Coordinator confirmed Resident #1's transfer and personal hygiene assistance was not documented as provided on the above mentioned dates. S3MDS Coordinator further indicated the Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) were responsible for documentation of assistance provide to Resident #1 for transfers and personal hygiene. Resident #2 Review of Resident #2's MDS with an ARD of 05/23/2025 revealed Resident #2 was dependent for transfers. Further review of Resident #2's MDS revealed Resident #2 required partial to moderate assistance with personal hygiene. Review of Resident #2's Care Plan with a documented goal date of 08/29/2025 revealed, in part, Resident #2 had an ADL self-care performance deficit. Further review revealed Resident #2 required total assistance of 2 staff persons for transfers. Review of Resident #2's May 2025 Documentation Survey Report revealed, in part, the following: -Personal Hygiene: no documented evidence personal hygiene assistance was provided on the 6:00AM - 6:00PM shifts on 05/02/2025, 05/16/2025, 05/17/2025, 05/18/2025, and 05/31/2025 or on the 6:00PM - 6:00AM on 05/21/2025; and, -Transfers: no documented evidence transfer assistance was provided on the 6:00AM - 6:00PM shifts on 05/02/2025, 05/16/2025, 05/17/2025, 05/18/2025, and 05/31/2025 or on the 6:00PM - 6:00AM shift on 05/21/2025. Review of Resident #2's June 2025 Documentation Survey Report revealed, in part, the following: -Personal Hygiene: no documented evidence personal hygiene assistance was provided on the 6:00AM - 6:00PM shifts on 06/04/2025 and 06/05/2025; and, -Transfers: no documented evidence transfer assistance was provided on the 6:00AM - 6:00PM shifts on 06/04/2025 and 06/05/2025. Resident #3 Review of Resident #3's MDS with an ARD of 03/21/2025 revealed Resident #3 was dependent for transfers and personal hygiene. Review of Resident #3's Care Plan with a documented goal date of 06/30/2025 revealed, in part, Resident #3 had an ADL self-care performance deficit and required assistance with transfers and personal hygiene. Review of Resident #3's May 2025 Documentation Survey Report revealed, in part, the following: -Personal Hygiene: no documented evidence personal hygiene assistance was provided on the 6:00AM - 6:00PM shifts on 05/03/2025, 05/12/2025, 05/13/2025, 05/16/2025, 05/17/2025, 05/21/2025, 05/22/2025, 05/26/2025, 05/27/2025, 05/30/2025 or on the 6:00PM - 6:00AM shifts on 05/20/2025, 05/30/2025, and 05/31/2025; and, -Transfers: no documented evidence transfer assistance was provided on the 6:00AM - 6:00PM shifts on 05/03/2025, 05/12/2025, 05/13/2025, 05/14/2025, 05/16/2025, 05/17/2025, 05/18/2025, 05/21/2025, 05/22/2025, 05/26/2025, 05/27/2025, and 05/30/2025 or on the 6:00PM - 6:00AM shifts on 05/02/2025, 05/20/2025, 05/30/2025, and 05/31/2025. Review of Resident #3's June 2025 Documentation Survey Report revealed, in part, the following: -Personal Hygiene: no documented evidence personal hygiene assistance was provided on the 6:00AM - 6:00PM shifts on 06/1/2025 and 06/04/2025; and, -Transfers: no documented evidence transfer assistance was provided on the 6:00AM - 6:00PM shifts on 06/01/2025 and 06/04/2025. In an interview on 06/10/25 at 11:29AM, S2Director of Nursing (DON) indicated the CNA staff were responsible for ADL documentation. S2DON confirmed Resident #1's, Resident #2's, and Resident #3's transfer and personal hygiene assistance was not documented as provided on the above mentioned dates and should have been documented.
May 2025 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

Deficiency F0800 (Tag F0800)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide a diet to meet a resident's needs for 1 (Resident #3) of 2 (Resident #2, and Resident #3) sampled residents observ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide a diet to meet a resident's needs for 1 (Resident #3) of 2 (Resident #2, and Resident #3) sampled residents observed during dining. Findings: Review of the facility's Therapeutic Diet policy and procedure last reviewed on 06/12/2024 revealed, in part, therapeutic diets were prescribed by the attending physician to support the resident's treatment and plan of care and in accordance with his or her goals and preferences. Review of the facility's Assistances with Meals policy and procedure reviewed on 05/21/2024 revealed, in part, a resident shall receive assistance with meals in a manner that meets the individual needs of each resident. Further review revealed residents who could not feed themselves will be fed with attention to safety, comfort, and dignity. Review of Resident #3's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed, in part, Resident #3 had a diagnosis of oropharyngeal phase dysphagia (a swallowing problem that occurs in the mouth and throat.) Review of Resident #3's Speech Therapy evaluation dated 04/23/2025 revealed, in part, the speech therapist made diet recommendations, which included, Resident #3 was to receive heavily iced liquids. Review of Resident #3's Diet Order and Communication form dated 04/23/2025 revealed, in part, Resident #3 was to receive heavily iced liquids. Review of Resident #3's May 2025 Physician's orders revealed, in part, an order dated 02/14/2025 for Resident #3 to receive a regular diet with heavily iced liquids. Observation on 05/05/2025 at 12:06PM revealed S9Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) offered Resident #3 a sip of an unknown yellow liquid that contained no ice. Further observation revealed after swallowing a sip of the unknown yellow liquid, Resident #3 cleared her throat and made a slight cough. Observation on 05/05/2025 at 12:10PM revealed S9CNA offered Resident #3 a sip of an unknown yellow liquid that contained no ice. Further observation revealed after swallowing a sip of the unknown yellow liquid, Resident #3 coughed once and cleared her throat. Observation on 05/05/2025 at 12:12PM with S10Speech Therapist (ST) revealed Resident #3's above mentioned glass with an unknown yellow liquid contained no ice. In an interview on 05/05/2025 at 12:12PM, S10ST confirmed Resident #3's above mentioned glass with an unknown yellow liquid was not heavily iced as ordered, and should have been as per Resident #3's prescribed diet. In an interview on 05/05/2025 at 12:18PM, S11Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) indicated staff should be following a resident's physician's prescribed diet order. In an interview on 05/06/22025 at 9:39AM, S3Registered Dietician (RD) indicated Resident #3 should have received heavily iced liquids on 05/05/2025 as ordered by Resident #3's physician. In an interview on 05/06/2025 at 2:10PM, S2Director of Nursing (DON) indicated S9CNA should have been following the physician's prescribed diet order.
MINOR (B) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Staffing Information (Tag F0732)

Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations and interview, the facility failed to post nurse staffing information at the beginning of each shift daily as required. Findings: Observation on 05/06/2025 at 10:45PM revealed th...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations and interview, the facility failed to post nurse staffing information at the beginning of each shift daily as required. Findings: Observation on 05/06/2025 at 10:45PM revealed the facility's posted nurse staffing information was dated 05/05/2025. Observation on 05/06/2025 at 3:02PM revealed the facility's posted nurse staffing information was dated 05/05/2025. Observation on 05/08/2025 at 9:28AM revealed the facility's posted nurse staffing information was dated 05/07/2025. Observation on 05/08/2025 at 11:32AM revealed the facility's posted nurse staffing information was dated 05/07/2025. In an interview on 05/08/2025 at 11:33AM, S2Director of Nursing (DON) S2DON acknowledged the nurse staffing information should have been posted on 05/06/2025 and 05/08/2025 as required.
Dec 2024 14 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0554 (Tag F0554)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to assess a resident for self-administration of a medication for 1 (Resident #25) of 2...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to assess a resident for self-administration of a medication for 1 (Resident #25) of 2 residents observed for accidents/hazards. Findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration, dated 07/08/2024, revealed resident may self-administer their own medications only if the attending physician, in conjunction with the interdisciplinary care planning team, has determined that they have the decision-making capacity to do so safely. Review of Resident #25's Quarterly Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 10/03/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #25 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 15, which indicated Resident #25 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #25's December 2024 Physician's Orders revealed an order dated 01/21/2023 for Flonase Sensimist Nasal Suspension (a nasal spray used to treat stuffy/itchy nose, and sneezing) 1 spray in each nostril one time a day for allergic rhinitis (inflammation in the nose). Further review revealed no evidence Resident #25 had a physician's order to self-administer medications. Review of Resident #25's Care Plan revealed, in part, no evidence Resident #25 had been care planned to address the self-administration of medications. Observation on 12/09/2024 at 10:29 AM, revealed Resident #25 had a bottle of Flonase Sensimist Nasal Suspension at her bedside. In an interview on 12/09/2024 at 10:29 AM, Resident #25 indicated she had an order for Flonase nasal spray to be administered daily, but she had been self-administering the nasal spray as needed. Resident #25 further indicated the last time she self-administered the nasal spray was one day last week. In an interview on 12/10/2024 at 3:53 PM, S5Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) indicated Resident #25's should not have been self-administering nasal spray. In an interview on 12/10/2024 4:30 PM, S15Minimum Data Set (MDS) Coordinator indicated Resident #25 did not have a physician's order or was care planned for self-administration of medications. In an interview on 12/10/2024 at 4:30 PM, S20Clinical Nurse Specialist indicated Resident #25 should not have been self-administering nasal spray. In an interview on 12/10/2024 at 4:23 PM, S2Director of Nursing (DON) indicated Resident #25 did not have a physician's order for self-administration of medications, and was not care planned for self-administration of medications. S2DON confirmed Resident #25 should not have been self-administering nasal spray.
CONCERN (D)

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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure shower rooms were maintained in a safe and sanitary manner for 2 (shower room y and shower room z) of 3 shower roo...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure shower rooms were maintained in a safe and sanitary manner for 2 (shower room y and shower room z) of 3 shower rooms reviewed for physical environment. Findings included: Review of Resident #82's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/05/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #82 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12, which indicated Resident #82 was moderately impaired. Observation of shower room y on 12/10/2024 at 8:50 AM revealed shower stalls were in use and had an unknown black/brown substance on the surface and around the edges of the shower tiles. Observation of shower room z on 12/10/2024 at 8:55 AM revealed 3 shower stalls were in use and had an unknown black/brown substance on the surface and around the edges of the shower tiles. In an interview on 12/10/2024 at 9:06 AM, S14Housekeeping Manager indicated the housekeeper assigned to the hall was responsible for cleaning the shower room on that hall. In an interview on 12/10/2024 at 9:20 AM, S17Housekeeper indicated she was responsible for cleaning shower room z. S17Housekeeper confirmed the shower stalls in shower room z had a black/brown unknown substance on the tiles and should have been cleaned. In an interview on 12/10/2024 at 9:30 AM, Resident #82 indicated the facility's shower rooms were not kept clean by the housekeeping staff. Resident #82 further indicated he showered in the front left stall of shower room z a couple of days ago and noticed mildew along the surface and cracks of the tiles. In an interview on 12/10/2024 at 9:40 AM, S14Housekeeping Manager indicated the shower stalls in shower room y and shower room z were not clean and should not have a black/brown unknown substance on the surface of the shower stalls. Observation on 12/10/2024 at 10:11 AM, of shower room y revealed a sharps container mounted to the wall which was overflowing and had 3 used shaving razors on top of the sharps container. Further review revealed a red/brown substance had dripped down the lid of the sharps container. During an interview on 12/10/2024 at 10:14 AM, S19License Practical Nurse (LPN) indicated she did not know who was responsible for replacing the full sharps container located in shower room y. S19LPN further indicated the used shaving razors overflowing from the sharps container was definitely not, safe or sanitary. During an interview on 12/10/2024 at 10:18 AM, S3Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) indicated the sharps container located in shower room y should not have been overflowing with used shaving razors.
CONCERN (D)

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

PASARR Coordination (Tag F0644)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement recommendations from the Office of...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to implement recommendations from the Office of Behavioral Health (OBH) for a resident with a mental health diagnosis for 1 (Resident #39) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR). Findings included: Review of Resident #39's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, in part, of anxiety disorder, depression, and schizophrenia. Review of Resident #39's Level II PASARR with an authority period of 04/09/2024 through 04/08/2025 revealed Resident #39 was referred to OBH for recommendations of psychiatric treatment. Review of Resident #39's OBH's recommendations dated 04/09/2024 revealed, in part, a recommendation for a comprehensive psychiatric evaluation. Review of Resident #39's EMR revealed no documented evidence, and the facility did not present any documented evidence that Resident #39 had a comprehensive psychiatric evaluation completed. In an interview on 12/11/2024 at 10:10 AM, S20Corporate Clinical Specialist confirmed Resident #39 did not have a comprehensive psychiatric evaluation completed as recommended by OBH.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0657 (Tag F0657)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based observations, interviews, record reviews, facility document review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident was involved in the development an...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based observations, interviews, record reviews, facility document review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident was involved in the development and revision of the resident's Comprehensive Care Plan for 1 (Resident 58) of 2 residents reviewed for involvement in their Comprehensive Care Plan. Findings included: Review of a facility policy titled, Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, last reviewed November 2024, indicated the care planning process would facilitate resident and/or representative involvement. The interdisciplinary team must review and update the care plan when there was a significant change in the resident's condition, when the desired outcomes are not met, when the resident was re-admitted to the facility from a hospital stay; and at least quarterly, in conjunction with the required quarterly MDS assessment. Review of Resident #58's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/03/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #58 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated Resident #58 was cognitively intact. Review of the facility's document indicated Resident #58 had an annual MDS assessment review dated 05/12/2024, quarterly MDS assessment review dated 08/12/2024, an entry MDS assessment review dated 09/25/2024, and a quarterly MDS assessment review dated 10/03/2024. In an interview on 12/09/2024 at 11:07AM, Resident #58 indicated he had not participated in and was not notified of his care plan meetings during the time of the above mentioned assessments. In an interview on 12/10/2024 at 9:23AM, S19Social Worker (S19SW) indicated Resdient #58 was his own responsible party. In an interview on 12/11/2024 at 11:55AM, S19SW indicated she had no documented evidence, and the facility could not produce any documented evidence that Resident #58 participated in and/or was notified of his care plan meetings for the above mentioned care plan assessments.
CONCERN (D)

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, interviews, and record review, facility document review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to provide nail care to a dependent resident for 1 (Res...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interviews, and record review, facility document review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to provide nail care to a dependent resident for 1 (Resident #76) of 5 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL). Findings included: Review of the facility's admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #76 on 10/27/2023 with diagnosis that included hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body) and hemiparesis (weakness of one side of the body) followed by a cerebral infarction affecting Resident #76's right dominant side. Review of Resident #76's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/03/2024 revealed Resident #76 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated Resident #76 was cognitively intact. Further review revealed Resident #76 required supervision and assistance with personal hygiene. Review of Resident #76's Care Plan initiated on 11/06/2024 revealed Resident #76 had an ADL self-care performance difficulty related to hemiplegia and required assistance and supervision with personal hygiene. Review of the facility's policy titled Care of Fingernails/Toenails last revised February 2018 revealed, nail care included daily cleaning, regular trimming, and the documentation thereof should be in the resident's medical record. Observation on 12/09/2024 at 9:44 AM revealed Resident #76 had half inch long nails to his left ring and middle fingers and one fourth inch long nails to all fingers on his right hand. Observation on 12/10/2024 at 9:04 AM revealed Resident #76 had half inch long nails to his left ring and middle fingers and on fourth inch long nails to all fingers on his right hand. There was no documented evidence, and the facility could not produce any documented evidence Resident #76 was provided nail care. In an interview on 12/10/2024 at 9:05 AM, Resident #76 indicated he had asked staff to trim his nails, but staff had not trimmed his nails. Resident #76 further indicated he was bothered that his fingernails on both his hands were long. In an interview on 12/10/2024 at 9:12 AM, S2Director of Nursing (DON) indicated Resident #76's nails should have been trimmed by staff when resident #76 requested nail care. In an interview on 12/10/2024 at 9:33 AM, S3Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) indicated staff should have trimmed Resident #76's when requested nail care.
CONCERN (D)

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

Respiratory Care (Tag F0695)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, record reviews, interviews, and facility policy it was determined that the facility failed to develop a plan of care for 1 (Resident #287) of 1 residents investigated for oxygen...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, record reviews, interviews, and facility policy it was determined that the facility failed to develop a plan of care for 1 (Resident #287) of 1 residents investigated for oxygen use. Findings included: Observation on 12/09/2024 at 9:39 AM revealed Resident #287 received oxygen at 3 liters per minute (LPM) per nasal cannula (NC). Observation on 12/10/2024 at 8:40 AM revealed Resident #287 received oxygen at 3 LPM humidified per NC. Observation on 12/10/2024 at 8:40 AM revealed Resident #287 received oxygen at to 3LPM humidified per NC. Observation on 12/11/2024 at 11:56 AM revealed Resident #287 received oxygen at 2 LPM humidified per NC. Review of Resident #287's Physician's Orders revealed no documented evidence of an order for oxygen. Review of Resident #287's Altered Respiratory Status Care Plan initiated on 12/13/2022 and last revised on 04/08/2024 revealed, in part, no intervention for oxygen use was initiated. In an interview on 12/11/2024 at 11:58 AM, S18Licensed Practical Nurse confirmed Resident #287 was being administered oxygen. Review of the facility's Oxygen Administration policy (revised 2024) revealed, in part, the first step of oxygen administration was to verify that there was a physician's order for this procedure. In an interview on 12/11/2024 at 12:15 PM, S2Director of Nursing confirmed Resident #287 did not have an order for oxygen and he should have .
CONCERN (D)

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

Pharmacy Services (Tag F0755)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure only licensed personnel administered medications for 1 (Resident #25) of 27 ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure only licensed personnel administered medications for 1 (Resident #25) of 27 residents observed during initial pool. Findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration, dated 07/08/2024, revealed only persons licensed or permitted by this state to prepare, administer and document the administration of medications may do so. Review of Resident #25's December 2024 Physician Orders, revealed, in part, an order dated 12/09/2021 for Resident #25's antifungal powder to be administered to Resident #25's lower abdominal skin fold, to skin folds on Resident #25's sides, and behind Resident #25's knees daily and as needed until resolved. Observation on 12/09/2024 at 10:21 AM revealed S21Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) removed a bottle of antifungal powder from Resident #25's bedside table. S21CNA then applied the antifungal powder under Resident #25's right breast. Review of Resident #25's bottle of antifungal powder revealed the active ingredient was miconazole ntrate 2.0% (a medication used to treat fungal infections of the skin). In an interview on 12/09/2024 at 10:21 AM, Resident #25 stated the facility's CNAs had been applying Resident #25's antifungal powder under her right breast as needed. In an interview on 12/10/2024 at 4:20 PM, S21CNA indicated she had been applying Resident #25's antifungal powder under Resident #25's right breast daily as needed. S21CNA further indicated she was not aware the antifungal powder contained medication and she should not have been applying it. In an interview 12/10/2024 at 4:35 PM, S2Director of Nursing (DON) indicated S21CNA should not have applied antifungal powder to Resident #25.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, it was facility determined the facility failed to ensure the following: 1. An insulin pen wa...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, it was facility determined the facility failed to ensure the following: 1. An insulin pen was not used past the expired open date [DATE]; 2. an open medication on a blister pack was not taped to secure it inside the pack for 1 medication cart (medication cart a) of 2 medication carts reviewed; and, 3. The facility's medication refrigerator stored medication at the proper temperature for 1 medication refrigerator c of 1 medication refrigerators observed. Findings included: 1. Observation of medication cart a on [DATE] at 8:50AM, revealed a medication insulin pen, Solastor (a medication used to lower blood sugar) pen with an open date of [DATE]. Observation further revealed a medication card with Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen 5/325 milligrams (mg). Further observation revealed pill #19 on the Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen 5/325 mg had been opened then secured in the medication card with a piece of tape. In an interview on [DATE] at 8:54 AM, S13Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) indicated insulin pens should be discarded 28 days after opening and confirmed the previous mentioned insulin pen should have been discarded. S13LPN further indicated tape should not be placed on opened pills on medication cards. In an interview on [DATE] at 11:12 AM, S2Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed insulin pens should be discarded after 28 days of opening. S2DON further confirmed medication should not be placed back into the medication card and secured with tape after it was opened. 2. Observation on [DATE] at 4:10 PM of the medication room b revealed the medication refrigerator's c temperature was 50 degrees Fahrenheit. Observation on the outside side of the refrigerator revealed a Daily Temperature Log. Further observation of medication refrigerator e revealed the refrigerator contained insulins (a medication used to lower blood sugar) and influenza vaccines. Review of the Daily Temperature Log for medication refrigerator e revealed documentation of a refrigerated storage temperature range from 36-45 degrees Fahrenheit. Review of the influenza vaccine's package information revealed, in part, the influenza vaccine should be stored at a temperature between 36 to 46 degrees Fahrenheit. In an interview on [DATE] at 4:10 PM, S3Assistant Director of Nursing indicated the temperature to store the insulin and influenza medications were not stored at the proper temperature. In an interview on [DATE] at 4:42 PM, S2DON indicated the temperature in the refrigerator should not be over 45 degrees Fahrenheit.
CONCERN (D)

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

Menu Adequacy (Tag F0803)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility document review, it was determined that the facility failed to follow the facility's lunch menu and ensure the substitution to the menu w...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility document review, it was determined that the facility failed to follow the facility's lunch menu and ensure the substitution to the menu was approved by the facility's dietician for 6 (Resident #22, Resident #23, Resident #34, Resident #47, Resident #50, and Resident #61) of 6 residents lunch meal tickets observed for dining. Findings included: Observation on 12/09/2024 at 12:10 PM revealed the posted menu in the facility's dining room revealed a baked pork chop, broccoli and cauliflower, a dinner roll, and a frosted cake would be served for lunch. Review of the facility's approved menu for 12/09/2024 revealed beef roast, mashed potatoes, broccoli and cauliflower with cheese, dinner roll, and a frosted cake. Observation on 12/09/2024 at 12:10 PM revealed Resident #22's, Resident #23's, Resident #34's, Resident #47's, Resident #50's, and Resident #61's 12/09/2024 lunch meal served was baked pork chop, mashed potatoes, broccoli and cauliflower, and a frosted cake. Further review revealed the meal served to Resident #22, Resident #23, Resident #34, Resident #47, Resident #50, and Resident #61 was not the meal advertised on the lunch menu. In an interview on 12/09/20245 at 12:05 PM, Resident #22 indicated the chopped meat on her ordered mechanical soft diet ticket was not a pork chop as indicated on the posted menu in the facility's dining room. Resident #22 further indicated the broccoli and cauliflower did not have any cheese. In an interview on 12/09/2024 at 12:07 PM, S22Dietary Manager (S22DM) indicated she substituted the beef roast with a grilled pork chop, and S23Cook did not add cheese to the broccoli and cauliflower. S22Dietary Manager further indicated she did not get the lunch menu revision approved by the facility's dietician on 12/09/2024. In an interview on 12/09/2024 at 1:04 PM, S24Regisitered Dietician (S24RD) indicated she should have been made aware of the 12/09/2024 lunch menu revision, and the revision should have been recorded and approved the day the revision was made to the menu.
CONCERN (D)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program by: 1. not performing hand hygiene while administering med...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program by: 1. not performing hand hygiene while administering medications for 1 (Resident #1) of 2 residents observed during medication administration; and, 2. failing to cover a resident's urinal for 1 (Resident #3) of 32 residents observed during the initial pool. Findings included: 1. Review of the facility's Handwashing-Hand Hygiene Policy and Procedures policy last revised in 2020 revealed hand hygiene during medication administration was achieved by use of an alcohol-based hand rub containing at least 62% alcohol; or alternatively, soap (antimicrobial or non-antimicrobial) and water before preparing or handling medications. Observation on 12/09/2024 at 8:40 AM revealed Resident #1 asked S13Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) to cut their Tylenol, cranberry, and Carafate (a medication used for gastric reflux) tablets in half. Further observation revealed S13LPN took the medication cup from Resident #1 and walked to her medication cart. Observation then revealed S13LPN removed keys from her pocket, unlocked her medication cart, and removed the pill cutter from the medication cart. Observation revealed S13LPN removed the above mentioned pills from the medication cup with her ungloved hand, cut the medications in half, and then placed the medications back into the medication cup without performing hand hygiene. Observation revealed S13LPN administered the medications to Resident #1. In an interview on 12/09/2024 at 8:44 AM, S13LPN confirmed she did not perform hand hygiene before she cut Resident #1's medications in half, and she should have. In an interview on 12/09/2024 at 11:12 AM, S2Director of Nursing confirmed hand hygiene should be performed before administering medications to residents. 2. Observation of Resident #3's bathroom on 12/11/2024 at 9:30 AM revealed Resident #3's urinal was hanging on the hand rail, which was not contained to prevent the spread of infection. In an interview on 12/11/2024 at 9:32 AM, S12Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) confirmed Resident #3's urinal was not in a plastic bag but should have been. In an interview on 12/11/2024 at 9:45 AM, S2Director of Nursing indicated Resident #3's urinal should have been contained in a plastic bag for infection control compliance.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0919 (Tag F0919)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a functional call bell system was available for 1 (Resident #18) of 32 sampled residents. Findin...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a functional call bell system was available for 1 (Resident #18) of 32 sampled residents. Findings included: Review of Resident #18's Minimum Data Set (Minimum Data Sheet) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/15/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #18 required assistance with activities of daily living. Review of Resident #18's Care Plan initiated on 06/12/2019 and last revised on 12/09/2024 revealed Resident #18 had a self-care deficit with an intervention to encourage Resident #18 to use the call bell to call for assistance. Observation on 12/10/2024 at 8:50 AM revealed Resident #18's call light was wrapped around the bed's side rail and not plugged into the wall. Observation on 12/10/2024 at 4:30 PM revealed Resident #18's call light was wrapped around the bed's side rail and not plugged into the wall. Observation on 12/11/2024 at 8:50 AM, revealed Resident #18's call light was wrapped around the bed's side rail and not plugged into the wall. In an interview on 12/11/2024 at 9:05 AM, S5Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) confirmed Resident #18's call light was not plugged into the wall. S5LPN further indicated Resident #18's call light should be plugged into the wall in order for the call system to function and have it available for use. In an interview on 12/11/2024 at 9:08 AM, S11Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) indicated Resident #18 knew how to use the call light. S11CNA confirmed Resident #18's call light was wrapped around his bed's side rail and not plugged into the wall. S11CNA further confirmed Resident #18's call light must be plugged into the wall to be functional. In an interview on 12/11/2024 at 9:10 AM, S3Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) indicated Resident #18's call light should not be wrapped around the side rail of his bed. S3ADON further indicated Resident #18's call light should be plugged into the wall. In an interview on 12/11/2024 at 9:12 AM, S2Director of Nursing confirmed Resident #18's call light should be plugged into the wall.
CONCERN (E)

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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility document review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident that was cognitively impaired and had a high risk of falls had appropriate interventions to prevent future falls for 1 (Resident #12) of 2 residents reviewed for accidents. Findings included: The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 09/30/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #12 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9, which indicated Resident #12 had moderate cognitive impairment, and was dependent on staff for toileting transfers. Further review revealed, prior to admission, Resident #12 had a previous history of falls and one fall which resulted in a fracture. Review of Resident #12's NSG: Morse Fall Scale Evaluation - V1 dated 09/25/2024 revealed Resident #12 had a previous history of falls, used a wheelchair, and overestimated and often forgot his limitations. Further review revealed Resident #12's score was 55, which indicated Resident #12 was a high risk for falls. Review of the facility's incident report titled Incident by Incident Type revealed, in part, Resident #12 had fall without injury on 09/25/2024, fall with injury on 10/23/2024 and 11/22/2024, and an unwitnessed fall on 12/09/2024. Review of Resident #12's Care Plan revealed, in part, Resident #12 had a risk for falls related to abnormal gait, muscle weakness, and a previous fall which resulted in a fracture. Further review revealed the following dated staff interventions: -On 09/25/2024, educate Resident #12 to call for assistance with transfers; -On 10/01/2024, encourage Resident #12 to use the call bell system; -On 10/23/2024, educate Resident #12 to call for assistance with bed mobility and transfers; -On 11/22/2024, re-educate Resident #12 to call for assistance when needing an adult brief and bed linen change; and, -On 12/09/2024, re-educate Resident #12 on the importance of calling for assistance with transfers and demonstrate the proper use of the facility's call bell system. During an interview on 12/11/2024 at 3:30PM, S15Minimum Data Set Coordinator (MDSC) indicated Resident #12 was cognitively impaired, and to educate and re-educate Resident #12 to use the call bell system for assistance, were not appropriate interventions for a resident with cognitive impairment. S15MDS further indicated Resident #12's fall care plan interventions should have been updated with new appropriate interventions. In an interview on 12/11/2024 at 3:55PM, S16Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) indicated Resident #12 was admitted from another facility with a history of frequent falls. S16LPN further indicated to use the call bell system was not an appropriate fall care plan intervention for Resident #12 because of his cognitive impairment.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0757 (Tag F0757)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to monitor for the effectiveness and potentia...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to monitor for the effectiveness and potential side effects of hypnotics, antidepressants, anti-anxiety medications, antipsychotics, and opioids for 1 (Resident #4) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings identified: Resident #4's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed, in part, Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, in part, of unspecified dementia, anxiety disorder, depression, restlessness and agitation Review of Resident #4's November 2024 and December 2024 Physician's Orders revealed the following orders: - Haloperidol lactate (a medication used to treat psychosis) oral concentrate 2 milligrams (mg)/milliliter (ml), give 0.5 mls by mouth two times a day related to restlessness and agitation beginning on 11/13/2024 - Trazodone hydrochloride (a medication used to treat depression and/or anxiety) 50 mg oral tablet, give 2 tablets by mouth at bedtime for insomnia beginning 11/04/2024 - Morphine sulfate (a medication used to treat pain) oral solution 20 mg/5 ml, give 0.5 mls every 2 hours as needed for shortness of breath related to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with a start date of 10/17/2024 - Lorazepam (a medication used to treat anxiety) oral tablet 0.5 mg, give 1 tablet by mouth every 6 hours as needed for anxiety disorder beginning on 10/17/2024 - Zoloft (a medication used to treat depression) 25 mg tablet, give 25 mg by mouth 1 time a day related to depression beginning on 10/18/2024 Review of Resident #4's November 2024 and December 2024 Electronic Medication Administration Record revealed no documented evidence and the facility failed to present any documented evidence Resident #4 was monitored for the effectiveness and possible side effects of the previous mentioned medications. Review of Resident #4's Electronic Medical Record did not reveal any documented evidence and the facility was unable to present any documented evidence Resident #4 was monitored for the effectiveness and possible side effects of the previous mentioned medications. In an interview on 12/11/2024 at 3:08 PM, S2Director of Nursing confirmed Resident #4 was not monitored for the effectiveness and possible side effects of the previous mentioned medications and should have been. In an interview on 12/11/2024 at 3:50 PM, S20Corporate Clinical Specialist confirmed Resident #4 was not monitored for the effectiveness and possible side effects of the previous mentioned medications and should have been.
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 interviews and observations, it was determined that the facility failed to: 1. Ensure the facility's hood fan was kept clean and sanitary; 2. Ensure the facility's double fryer was kept clea...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews and observations, it was determined that the facility failed to: 1. Ensure the facility's hood fan was kept clean and sanitary; 2. Ensure the facility's double fryer was kept clean and sanitary; 3. Ensure stored foods in the facility's cooler were properly contained and had an open date for 1 (cooler d) of 2 coolers observed; 4. Ensure a dietary cook wore a proper hair restraint during food handling and preparation; and, 5. Ensure Auto-Chlor test strips were not expired. Findings included: 1. Observation on 12/09/2024 at 8:28 AM revealed the facility's hood fan had an unknown white and orange/red substance on the outside surface of the hood fan. In an interview on 12/09/2024 at 10:14 AM, S1Administrator indicated the facility's hood fan should not have an unknown white and orange/red substance on the outside surface and should have been kept in a sanitary manner. 2. Observation on 12/09/2024 at 10:15 AM revealed the facility's double fryer had a white substance on the outside of the fryer; and an unknown brown substance on the back ledge of the fryer. In an interview on 12/09/2024 at 10:16 AM, S1Administrator indicated the facility's double fryer should not have had an unknown white substance on the outside and an unknown substance on the back ledge and should have been kept clean and in a sanitary manner. 3. Observation on 12/09/2024 at 8:30 AM of cooler d revealed: -a bag of frozen fish with no open date; -a bag of sliced turkey, not contained, open to air, and with no open date; and, -a bag of shredded lettuce, not contained, open to air, and with no open date. In an interview on 12/09/2024 at 8:30 AM, S22Dietary Manager (DM) indicated the bag of frozen fish in cooler d should have had an open date, the bag of sliced turkey in cooler d should have been contained and had an open date, and the bag of shredded lettuce in cooler d should have been contained and had an open date. 4. Observation on 12/09/2024 at 8:30 AM revealed S23Cook was prepping lunch in the facility's kitchen without a hair restraint covering his beard. In an interview on 12/09/2024 at 8:31 AM, S22DM indicated S23Cook should have worn a proper hair restraint to cover his beard while he handled and prepped food. 5. Observation on 12/10/2024 at 11:55 AM revealed the facility's Auto-Chlor test strips for the facility's dishware and the facility's 3 compartment sanitization sink had an expiration date of 06/2024. In an interview on 12/10/2024 at 11:55AM, S22DM indicated the facility's Auto-Chlor test strips were expired and should not have been.
Oct 2024 4 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

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 allegation of physical abuse was reported to the required state survey agency for 1 (Resident #1) of 4 (Resident #1, Resident #...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of physical abuse was reported to the required state survey agency for 1 (Resident #1) of 4 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, and Resident #4) sampled residents investigated for abuse. Findings: Review of facility's Abuse Prohibition Policy dated 05/17/2024 revealed, in part, the facility's policy intent was to prevent and prohibit neglect, mental or physical abuse of residents. Further review revealed the definition of abuse means the willful infliction of injury, withholding or misappropriating property or money, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish. Physical abuse includes, hitting, slapping, kicking, shoving, pinching and controlling behavior through corporal punishment. Further review revealed residents have the right to be free from abuse, mistreatment, neglect, corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion and financial abuse. Further review also revealed, in part, any employee who becomes aware of an allegation of abuse, shall report the incident to the Abuse Coordinator immediately. Failure to do so will result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination. Further review also revealed, the facility's Abuse Coordinator will report all allegations of abuse, neglect with serious bodily injury, mistreatment with serious bodily injury, exploitation with serious bodily injury, and injury within two hours of the allegation. Review of Resident #1's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with an assessment reference date of 08/08/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated Resident #1 cognition was intact. Review of Resident #1's nurse progress note dated 10/15/2024 at 4:54 p.m. revealed, in part, S3Director of Nursing (DON) indicated Resident #1 was heard out in the front lobby cursing and yelling after coming from the smoking patio. Review of facility's incidents log dated 08/01/2024 - 10/23/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had no documented incidents on 10/15/2024. Review of facilities Statewide Incident Management System (SIMS) Report revealed no record of Resident #1's allegation of S1Administrator shoving him in the back on 10/15/2024. Review of Resident #1's behavioral hospital progress note dated 10/18/2024 at 3:49 p.m., revealed, in part, Resident #1 reported that he was pushed and grabbed by one side after an altercation with S1Administrator at nursing home. Review of Resident' #1's behavioral hospital progress note dated 10/18/2024 at 3:55 p.m., revealed, revealed Resident #1's Social Worker at the behavioral hospital reported S1Administrator pushed and grabbed his side during an altercation at the nursing home. In a telephone interview on 10/23/2024 at 09:15 a.m., Resident #1's son indicated Resident #1 his father, Resident #1, reported to him that he (Resident #1) was shoved from the back by S1Administrator on 10/15/2024. Resident #1's son further indicated he received a phone call from S1Administrator that same day and denied Resident #1's allegations the he had shoved Resident #1 from the back on 10/15/2024. In an interview on 10/28/2024 at 9:25 a.m. S2Corporate Nurse indicated she was not made aware of Resident #1's allegation that he was shoved by S1Administrator until 10/25/2024 and further confirmed the incident was not reported to the state agency as required. S2Corporate Nurse further indicated that upon receipt of the allegation on 10/18/2024 by Resident #1, a SIMS report should have been opened and reported to state. In an interview on 10/28/2024 at 10:00 a.m., S5Social Services indicated the social worker at the behavioral hospital informed her on 10/18/2024 that Resident #1 made allegations that S1Administrator had shoved him from the back causing him to hit his leg on the smoker's patio door. S5Social Services indicated she notified S1Administrator of the allegations to which he responded okay. S5Social Services further indicated she did not report the above mentioned allegation to anyone else. In an interview on 10/28/2024 at 10:06 a.m., Resident #1 indicated on 10/15/2024, S1Administrator yelled at him then grabbed him by the shoulders and shoved him from behind inside the smoking patio doors and he almost fell down. There was no documented evidence, and the provider did not present any documented evidence that Resident #1's allegation of staff to resident abuse on 10/15/2024 was reported to the state agency. Review of S1Administrator's witness statement dated 10/28/2024 at 12:13p.m., revealed, in part, S1Administrator became aware of Resident #1's allegations of staff to resident abuse on 10/18/2024 by S5Social Services. Further review revealed S1Administrator did not report Resident #1's allegations of staff to resident physical abuse as required because he stated, I never thought it would go this far. In an interview on 10/28/2024 at 10:10 a.m., S2Corporate Nurse verified S1Administrator had knowledge of Resident #1's allegations of staff to resident abuse on 10/18/2024. S2Corporate Nurse confirmed Resident#1's allegations of staff to resident physical abuse should have been reported to state agency by the facility on 10/18/2024 within two hours of becoming aware of the allegation, but was not. S2Corporate Nurse indicated S1Administrator did not report Resident #1's allegation of staff to resident physical abuse to her until 10/25/2024.
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 reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an alleged incident of staff to resident physical abuse was thoroughly investigated for 1 (Resident #1) of 4 (Resident #1, Residen...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an alleged incident of staff to resident physical abuse was thoroughly investigated for 1 (Resident #1) of 4 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, and Resident #4) sampled residents investigated for abuse. Findings: Review of facility's Abuse Prohibition Policy dated 05/17/2024 revealed, in part, the facility's policy intent was to prevent and prohibit neglect, mental or physical abuse of residents. Further review revealed the definition of abuse means the willful infliction of injury, withholding or misappropriating property or money, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish. Physical abuse includes, hitting, slapping, kicking, shoving, pinching and controlling behavior through corporal punishment. Further review revealed residents have the right to be free from abuse, mistreatment, neglect, corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion and financial abuse. Further review also revealed the facility will conduct a thorough investigation of alleged or suspected abuse, neglect, or misappropriation of property, will provide notification of information to the proper authorities according to state and federal regulations and take appropriate actions. Further review also revealed the facility's Abuse Coordinator will report all allegations of abuse, neglect with serious bodily injury, mistreatment with serious bodily injury, exploitation with serious bodily injury, and injury within two hours of the allegation. Investigations will be prompt, comprehensive to the situation and contain founded conclusions. Review of Resident #1's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an assessment reference date of 08/08/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated Resident #1's cognition was intact. Review of Resident #1's behavioral hospital progress note dated 10/18/2024 at 3:49 p.m., revealed, in part, Resident #1 reported that S1Administrator grabbed and pushed him during an altercation at nursing home. Review of Resident' #1's behavior hospital progress note dated 10/18/2024 at 3:55 p.m., revealed, in part, Resident #1's social worker at the behavioral hospital reported the above mentioned allegation of physical abuse by S1Administrator to Resident #1 to the facility's social worker, S5Social Services. In a telephone interview on 10/23/2024 at 09:15 a.m., Resident #1's son, indicated his father, Resident #1, reported to him that he (Resident #1) was shoved from the back by S1Administrator on 10/15/2024. Resident #1's son further indicated he received a phone call from S1Administrator that same day and denied Resident #1's allegations the he had shoved Resident #1 from the back on 10/15/2024. In an interview on 10/28/2024 at 9:25 a.m. S2Corporate Nurse indicated the above mentioned allegation of physical abuse should have been properly investigated and it was not. In an interview on 10/28/2024 at 10:00 a.m., S5Social Services indicated the social worker at the behavioral hospital informed her on 10/18/2024 that Resident #1 alleged S1Administrator shoved him from the back causing him to hit his leg on the smoker's patio door. S5Social Services indicated she notified S1Administrator of the allegations to which he responded okay. S5Social Services further indicated she did not report the above mentioned allegation to anyone else. In an interview on 10/28/2024 at 10:06 a.m., Resident #1 indicated on 10/15/2024, S1Administrator yelled at him then grabbed him by the shoulders and shoved him from behind inside the smoking patio doors and he almost fell down. Review of S1Administrator's witness statement dated 10/28/2024 at 12:13 p.m., revealed, in part, S1Administrator became aware of Resident #1's allegations of staff to resident physical abuse on 10/18/2024 by S5Social Services. Further review revealed S1Administrator did not notify S2Corporate Nurse of Resident #1's allegations of staff to resident abuse until 10/25/2024 because he stated, I never thought it would go this far. In an interview on 10/28/2024 at 10:10 a.m., S2Corporate Nurse verified S1Administrator had knowledge of the allegations of staff to resident physical abuse on 10/18/2024. S2Corporate Nurse further indicated the allegation of staff to resident physical abuse should have been investigated by facility upon becoming aware of the allegation on 10/18/2024 by S5Social Services, and the facility did not investigate the allegation and should have. S2Corporate Nurse indicated the investigation of the alleged of staff to resident physical abuse did not begin until 10/25/2024 at 4:00 p.m.
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 F0561 (Tag F0561)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility the facility failed to ensure residents identified as safe smokers maintained their rights to smoke at their leisure for 4 (Resident#1, Resident #2...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility the facility failed to ensure residents identified as safe smokers maintained their rights to smoke at their leisure for 4 (Resident#1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4) of 4 (Resident#1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4) sampled residents. Findings: Review of facility's smoking policy, revised date 03/2024 revealed, in part, it is the responsibility of the facility to provide a safe and hazard-free environment for those residents having been assessed as being safe for facility smoking privileges. Residents wishing to smoke while at the facility will have a Smoking Safety Evaluation completed by the interdisciplinary team to determine the resident's ability to follow smoking policies safely. If a resident is determined to be a Safe Smoker and can smoke unsupervised then the resident can keep their smoking supplies, and smoke in designated areas at their leisure. Review of facility's safe smoker's list, revealed, in part, that Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3 and Resident #4 was listed as being safe smokers. Resident #1 Review of Resident #1's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/08/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated Resident #1's cognition was intact. Review of Resident #1's current Care Plan provided by the facility revealed, in part, Resident #1 was a safe smoker. Review of Resident #1's Medical Record revealed, in part, Resident #1 had a Smoking Safety Evaluation completed on 08/09/2024. Further review revealed, in part, Resident #1 was deemed a safe smoker and was able to smoke unsupervised. Resident #2 Review of Resident #2's MDS with an ARD of 08/20/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #2 had a BIMS of 15, which indicated Resident #2's cognition was intact. Review of Resident #2's current Care Plan provided by the facility revealed, in part, Resident #2 was a safe smoker. Review of Resident #2's Medical Record revealed, in part, Resident #2 had a Smoking Safety completed on 10/10/2024. Further review revealed, in part, that Resident #2 was deemed a safe smoker. Resident #3 Review of Resident #3's MDS with an ARD of 08/30/2024 revealed, in part, the following: Resident has a BIMS of 14, which indicated Resident #3's cognition was intact. Review of Resident #3's current Care Plan provided by the facility revealed, in part, Resident #3 was a safe smoker. Review of Resident #3's medical record, in part, Resident #3 had a Smoking Safety Evaluation completed on 10/15/2024. Further review revealed Resident #3 was deemed a safe smoker and was able to smoke unsupervised. Resident #4 Review of Resident #4's MDS with an ARD of 07/26/2024 revealed, in part, Resident #4 has a BIMS of 15, which indicated Resident #4's cognition was intact. Review of Resident #4's current Care Plan provided by the facility revealed, in part, Resident #4 was a safe smoker. Review of Resident #4's medical record, in part, Resident #4 had a Smoking Safety Evaluation completed on 07/26/2024. Further review revealed Resident #4 was deemed a safe smoker and was able to smoke unsupervised. In an interview on 10/23/2024 at 10:09 a.m., S4Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), indicated the facility has designated smoking times. S4ADON further indicated smoking items for all residents were kept at nurse's station regardless if they were deemed a safe smoker. Observation on 10/23/2024 at 10:15 a.m. revealed, in part, that smoking times were posted by the facility's smoker's patio with the smoking times 8:30 a.m., 10:45 a.m., 12:45 p.m., 2:45 p.m., 4:45 p.m., 6:45 p.m., and 8:45 p.m. In an interview on 10/23/2024 at 12:15 p.m. Resident #3 indicated he enjoys smoking. Resident #3 indicated he would like to smoke more often and did not like to have to wait for staff. Observation on 10/24/2024 at 10:47 a.m., revealed S3Director of Nursing (DON) entered the facility's smoker's patio with a tackle box and passed out cigarettes to residents. Interview on 10/24/2024 at 10:50 a.m., S3DON indicated, staff used the smoking safety assessment to indicate which resident was a safe smoker. S3DON indicated the safe smoker list is updated quarterly and as needed by herself, S3DON, S4ADON, and the MDS nurse. S3DON further indicated, the facility provided the most recent Safe Smoker's list to the surveyors. In an interview on 10/24/2024 at 10:50 a.m., Resident #2 indicated that he would prefer to keep his own smoking materials. Resident #2 further indicated he would like to be able to smoke at his leisure. In an interview on 10/28/2024 at 01:06 p.m., Resident #4 indicated the new smoking times were impeding on the resident's rights. Resident #4 further indicated he used to be able to go out and smoke at will and smoking at night helped him go to sleep. Resident #4 indicated he was a safe smoker and should be able to smoke at leisure and be keep his own cigarettes on his person. In an interview on 10/28/2024 at 1:46 p.m., S3DON confirmed Resident #1's 08/09/2024 smoking evaluation deemed him a safe smoker and was able to smoke unsupervised. S3DON further indicated residents were only allowed to smoke supervised at times designated by the facility. S3DON further indicated that residents who are safe smokers should be allowed to smoke at their leisure and they are not.
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

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure grievances was addressed and acted upon promptly per the facility's Grievance procedure for The Resident Council Meeting for 3(08/...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure grievances was addressed and acted upon promptly per the facility's Grievance procedure for The Resident Council Meeting for 3(08/08/2024, 09/05/2024,10/03/2024) of 3(08/08/2024, 09/05/2024,10/03/2024) months reviewed for grievances. Findings: Review of the facility's policy entitled, Filing Grievances/ Complaints, revised date 06/2024, revealed, in part, that all grievances, complaints, or recommendations stemming from resident or family groups concerning issues of resident care in the facility will be considered. Actions on such issues will be responded to including rationale for the response. The Administrator has delegated the responsibility of grievance and/or complaint investigation to the Grievance Officer. Upon receipt of a grievance and/or complaint, the Grievance Officer will review and investigate the allegations and submit a written report of such findings to the Administrator within 72 hours of receiving the grievance and/or complaint. The Grievance Officer, Administrator, and Staff will take immediate action to prevent further potential violations of resident rights while the alleged violation was being investigated. The Administrator will review the findings with the Grievance Officer to determine what corrective actions, if any, need to be taken. The resident, or person filing the grievance and/or complaint on behalf of the resident, will be informed of the findings of the investigation and the actions that will be taken to correct any identified problems. Interview on 10/23/2024 at 8:47 S1Administrator indicated the facility did not have any grievances in the last three months. Review of the facility's Resident Council Meeting minutes dated 08/08/2024 revealed, in part, residents had complaints as follows: mail being open prior to residents receiving their mail, not being able to choose bath/shower schedule, ice and water not being passed every shift, Certified Nursing Assistant care, call lights not being answered timely, and coffee being unavailable to residents. Review of the facility's Resident Council meeting minutes dated 09/05/2024 revealed, in part, residents had complaints as follows: CNAs are not helping residents, CNAs come in and turn the light off and leave without providing care, CNAs placing residents to bed in their day clothes, residents have to wait 2-3 hours for CNA help, CNA staff talking down to residents, a LPN administered medications late to a resident, and a LPN having an attitude towards a resident. Review of the facility's Resident Council Meeting minutes dated 10/03/2024 revealed, in part, residents had complaints about the smoking schedule, residents and the resident's responsible party being uninformed to the sudden change in smoking policy, the conditions of linens, and the Administrator being seen as cocky, arrogant and did not talk and discuss situations with residents. In an interview on 10/24/2024 at 3:15 p.m. S6Activities Director, indicated she brings all Resident Council meeting grievances and brings them to S1Administrator. S6Activities Director indicated that most grievances have been about cigarettes, the new smoking policy, and S1Administrator being rude and arrogant. In an interview on 10/24/2024 at 3:20 p.m., S5Social Services indicated no formal grievance forms had been filed from any residents. In an interview on 10/24/2024 at 3:30 p.m., S1Administrator indicated that S5Social Services was the Grievance Officer and all grievances from residents and resident council meetings should go through S5Social Services. S1Administrator indicated he handles all grievances, and the facility had not had a grievance in the past three months. S1Administrator further indicated he has no documented evidence and could not provide any evidence that any of the above mentioned grievances were resolved. In an interview on 10/28/2024 at 09:25 a.m. Resident #R5 indicated, residents cannot bring grievances to S1Administrator or any staff member in the facility due to fear of retaliation. Resident #R5 indicated if residents complain to S1Administrator about any staff in the building, he will pull the staff member in and tell them about the complaint in front of the resident with the concern. Resident #R5 indicated he had brought a few issues to S1Administrator and S1Administrator did not actively listen, so the concerns were never addressed. Resident #R5 further indicated most of the staff are related so the only safe person to voice their concerns to was the facility Ombudsman. In an interview on 10/28/2024 at 03:15 p.m. S2Corporate nurse confirmed, grievances should have been entered and acted on for the Resident Council Meeting, complaints and were not.
Jan 2024 9 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0553 (Tag F0553)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review the facility failed to complete a plan of care meeting for 1 (Resident #433) of 19 (Resident #28, Resident #19, Resident #24, Resident #2, Resident #29, Resident #...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to complete a plan of care meeting for 1 (Resident #433) of 19 (Resident #28, Resident #19, Resident #24, Resident #2, Resident #29, Resident #3, Resident #68, Resident #433, Resident #12, Resident #70, Resident #58, Resident #13, Resident #11, Resident #64, Resident #79, Resident #76, Resident #22, Resident #183, and Resident #133) sampled residents. Findings: In an interview on 01/09/2024 at 11:30 a.m., the responsible party for Resident #433 stated she had never been informed of a plan of care meeting nor never attended a plan of care meeting for Resident #433. Review of Resident #433's record revealed, in part, no documented evidence of plan of care meetings for Resident #433. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 9:50 a.m., S10Assisstant Administrator stated there was no documentation of plan of care meetings for Resident #433.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0554 (Tag F0554)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to assess a resident for self-administration of medications for 1 (Resident #58) of 19 (Resident #28, Resident #19, Resident ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to assess a resident for self-administration of medications for 1 (Resident #58) of 19 (Resident #28, Resident #19, Resident #24, Resident #2, Resident #29, Resident #3, Resident #68, Resident #433, Resident #12, Resident #70, Resident #58, Resident #13, Resident #11, Resident #64, Resident #79, Resident #76, Resident #22, Resident #183, and Resident #133) sampled residents. Findings: Review of the facility's Self-Administration of Medications policy revealed, in part, residents had the right to self-administer medications if the interdisciplinary team had determined that it was clinically appropriate and safe for the resident to do so. Further review revealed if it was deemed safe and appropriate for a resident to self-administer medications, this was documented in the medical record and the resident's care plan. Review also revealed self-administered medications were stored in a safe and secure place, which was not accessible by other residents. Review of Resident #58's Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 11/15/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #58 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 13 which indicated Resident #58 was cognitively intact. Observation on 01/08/2024 at 11:17 a.m. revealed two bottles of Alaway (a medication instilled into the eye to relieve itching) eye drops on Resident #58's bedside table. In an interview on 01/08/2024 at 11:18 a.m., Resident #58 stated that his daughter brought the two bottles of eye drops to him because his eyes were itching. Resident #58 further stated he had self-administered the eye drops for months. Observation on 01/09/2024 at 1:03 p.m. revealed two bottles of Alaway eye drops on Resident #58's bedside table. Observation on 01/10/2024 at 9:27 a.m. revealed two bottles of Alaway eye drops on Resident #58's bedside table. Review of Resident #58's record revealed no documented evidence and the facility was unable to present any documented evidence Resident #58 was assessed or care planned to self-administer medication. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 12:19 p.m., S9Licensed Practical Nurse confirmed Resident #58 had two bottles of Alaway eye drops at his bedside. S9Licensed Practical Nurse confirmed Resident #58 was not assessed or care planned to have medications at his bedside to self-administer. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 12:23 p.m., S15Minimum Data Set Nurse confirmed there was no self-administration care plan for Resident #58. In an interview 01/10/2024 at 12:26 p.m., S7Minimum Data Set Coordinator confirmed there was no self-administration care plan for Resident #58. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 11:41 a.m., S2Director of Nursing confirmed Resident #58 was not assessed to self-administer medication, and the facility was unaware Resident #58 had eye drops at his bedside.
CONCERN (D)

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

Deficiency F0578 (Tag F0578)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's clinical record contained a completed Advance Directive for 1 (Resident #183) of 2 (Resident #24 and Resident #183) sam...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's clinical record contained a completed Advance Directive for 1 (Resident #183) of 2 (Resident #24 and Resident #183) sampled residents reviewed for advance directives. Findings: Review of Resident #183's record revealed, in part, an admissions date of 12/18/2023. Further review of Resident #183's record revealed no documentation of an advance directive for Resident #183. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 10:28 a.m., S11License Practical Nurse (LPN) stated she was not able to find documentation of a code status or an advance directive in Resident #183's record. In an interview on 01/10/2023 at 10:40 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated code status and Advance Directive should be documented in the Resident's record. S2DON further stated there was no documentation and the facility could not present documentation of a code status or Advance Directive for Resident #183.
CONCERN (D)

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

PASARR Coordination (Tag F0644)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with an identified mental health diagnosis was re...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with an identified mental health diagnosis was referred for a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) evaluation as required for 1 (Resident #29) of 1 (Resident #29) sampled residents reviewed for PASARR. Findings: Review of Resident #29 Level I PASARR dated 11/24/2021 revealed, in part, Resident #29 was assessed to have an active diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder (mental health disorder characterized by persistently depressed mood or loss of interest in activities, causing significant impairment in daily life). Further review revealed Level I PASARR was completed and Resident #29 did not require a Level II PASARR upon admission [DATE]. Review of Resident #29 Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/05/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #29 was assessed to have an active diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (mental health condition that is triggered by experiencing or witnessing a terrifying event). Review of Resident #29's clinical record revealed, in part, Resident #29 was assessed to have an active diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder with a start date of 04/29/2023. The facility did not present any documented evidence a Level II PASARR was completed for Resident #29. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 11:15 a.m., S10Assistant Administrator confirmed Resident #29 had a diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Syndrome Disorder and stated a Level II PASARR should have been done at the time of the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder diagnosis. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 3:02 p.m. S3Corporate Nurse stated a Level II PASARR should have been completed at the time of the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder diagnosis.
CONCERN (D)

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

Drug Regimen Review (Tag F0756)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review and interview the facility failed to act on two pharmacist's irregularities sent to the attending physician for 1 (Resident #19) of 5 sampled residents (Resident #13, Resident #...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to act on two pharmacist's irregularities sent to the attending physician for 1 (Resident #19) of 5 sampled residents (Resident #13, Resident #19, Resident #22, Resident #28 , and Resident #70). Findings: Review of the consultant pharmacists' letters revealed, in part, any irregularities identified were communicated to the director of nursing and the attending physician(s) via consultant letters. Review of Resident #19's record revealed, in part, was reviewed by the consultant pharmacist on the following dates listed below. On 10/11/2023 the pharmacist sent a letter for psychiatric; and, On 11/17/2023 the pharmacist sent a letter for the medication Neudexta (a medication used to treat a certain mental/mood disorder) with no other noted explanation. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 2:30 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated that the facility did not have the medical doctor's response to the consultant pharmacist's request for the letter requests of 10/11/2023 and on 11/17/2023 and should have. S2DON further stated we should have the report sent back from the MD within a week.
CONCERN (D)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff performed hand hygiene while passing ice. This deficient practice was observed for 1 (S4Certified Nursing Assistant) of 2 (S4Cer...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff performed hand hygiene while passing ice. This deficient practice was observed for 1 (S4Certified Nursing Assistant) of 2 (S4Certified Nursing Assistant and S16Certified Nursing Assistant) Certified Nursing Assistants observed passing ice. Findings: Review of the facility's Handwashing-Hand Hygiene Policy and Procedures revealed personnel shall use alcohol-based hand rub or alternatively soap and water after contact with objects in the immediate vicinity of the resident. Observation on 01/08/2024 at 10:47 a.m. revealed S4Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) went into room a, grabbed the pitcher with an ungloved hand for Resident #5 and Resident #52, filled the pitchers with ice using an ice scoop, returned ice pitchers back to Resident #5 and Resident #52, and exited the room without performing hand hygiene. Observation on 01/08/2024 at 10:51 a.m. revealed S4CNA go into room b, grabbed the pitcher with an ungloved hand for Resident #13 and the cup for Resident #67, filled the pitcher and cup with ice, returned the pitcher and cup back to residents and exited the room without performing hand hygiene. In an interview on 01/08/2024 at 10:58 a.m., S4CNA confirmed she did not perform hand hygiene between residents while passing ice and she should have. In an interview on 01/09/2023 at 12:21 p.m., S2Director of Nursing stated staff should perform hand hygiene between rooms when passing ice.
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** The facility failed to develop and implement a resident's plan of care. Resident #133 Accidents Resident # 133 was admitted to ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility failed to develop and implement a resident's plan of care. Resident #133 Accidents Resident # 133 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of, in part, Alzheimer's disease, Dementia unspecified severity, without behavioral disturbance. psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, and anxiety, seizures, left foot drop. Review of Resident #133's Physician Orders revealed, in part, the following: Physical therapy and occupational therapy 5 times a week for 8 weeks for therapeutic exercises, therapeutic activities, neuromuscular re-education, gait training, manual therapy, group therapy, wheelchair mobility, and patient caregiver education with start date of 01/03/2024, Memantine HCL oral tablet 5 mg one time a day with start date of 01/03/2024, Buspirone HCL tablet 5mg by mouth two times a day for anxiety with start date of 01/05/2024, Briviact tablet 50 mg by mouth two times a day for seizures with start date of 01/05/2024, Skilled services for surgical wound with start date of 01/04/2024, Sling to right are status post dislocation on 01/08/2024. Review of Resident #133 Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of January 3, 2024 revealed, in part, the following: Minimum Data Set in progress, Resident #133 admitted to facility 01/03/2024. Review on 01/08/2024 at 11:00 a.m. of Resident #133's Care Plan revealed, in part, the following: No interventions and goals in place for falls or fall prevention. Review on 01/08/2024 at 2:33 p.m. of Resident #133's Care Plan revealed, in part Resident #133 at risk for falls related to disruption of external surgical wound of right knee. Goal Resident #133 will not sustain serious injury with intervention of application of a fall mat. Further documentation revealed, in part, care plan dated 01/08/2024 for fall and was created on 01/10/2024 by [NAME], RN MDS Coordinator. Review of facility Fall Prevention Program Policy revealed, in part all residents will be screened for risk for falls utilizing the Fall Risk Assessment at the time of admission, quarterly, after each fall, and upon significant change. Further review revealed residents licensed nurse will complete a thorough assessment of the resident to evaluate for injury and the plan of care updated to reflect fall interventions. Review of facility policy on Care Plans Comprehensive Person Centered revealed, in part assessment of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the residents and the residents condition changes. Review of facility policy on Resident Incident and Visitor Accident Report revealed, in part, facility must examine the resident after incident/accident, obtain vital signs, and if the incident is unwitnessed initiate neurological checks every thirty minutes for four hours, every hour for four hours, every four hours for twenty-four hours, and every eight hours for remaining seventy-two hours or as ordered by physician. Observation on 01/09/2024 at 11:25 a.m. revealed Resident #133 lying in bed, magenta and red colored skin to cheeks, both eyes, and forehead. Swelling noted to cheeks, eyes, and forehead. Further observation revealed a contusion with a small laceration to right side of forehead. When asked if Resident # 133 pressed her call bell she tried to put it in her mouth. Further observation revealed no physical evidence of fall preventions in place. In an interview on 01/09/2024 at 11:25 a.m. Resident #133 stated she does not know how her face got bruised or how the contusion on her forehead got there. When asked Resident #133 stated she can not see. Resident #133 denied falling or could not recall what happened. Resident #133 further stated she can not get up without assistance and when asked if she knew how to use her call bell. When asked to demonstrate how to use the call bell Resident #133 attempted to put call bell in her mouth. Observation on 01/10/2024 at 10: 45 a.m. Resident #133 lying in bed, red colored skin around both eye minimal swelling, magenta colored skin noted to forehead, cheeks, chin, and under her neck. Hematoma to right forehead with small laceration. Resident # 133 denies falling and does not know what happened. No physical evidence of fall precautions in place. Observation on 01/10/2024 at 12:50 p.m. Resident # 133 lying in bed, sling to right arm, and fall mat on floor on the left side of bed. Call bell wrapped around the left upper bed rail. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 2:33 p.m. [NAME], Corporate Nurse confirmed that fall prevention care plan should have been entered on 01/08/2024 the day of the fall and should not have been initiated on 01/10/2024. She further stated that fall mat should have been initiated the day of the fall and not on 01/10/2024. In an interview on 01/10/2023 at 12:45 p.m., [NAME], resident's daughter stated, her mother fell on Monday and she was notified at 9:45 a.m. [NAME] stated she was informed that her mother fell after she was instructed to stay where she was by two staff members and then the staff members left to go get supplies. [NAME] further stated she was told by the floor nurse during notification that 2 staff members went into the room to change her mother. The 2 staff members then left the room to get the supplies needed and then her mother fell after they left the room. Review of incident report indicated incident report was completed at 01/08/2024 at 10:15 a.m., with no indication of time in which incident occurred. Witness statement: [NAME] - upon entry with floor nurse resident noted sitting at the edge of bed requesting to go to the bathroom. Reposition resident and instructed to stay seated until this nurse and floor nurse were able to further assist. When staff attempting to reposition bedside table resident stood up and fell to the floor unable to break fall without causing injury. Note written by [NAME], RN DON on 01/10/2024: Resident found sitting on side of bed stating she need to use the restroom. While staff was moving bedside table on the side the resident screamed and she fell to the floor, staff could not catch her fall. A fall matt was placed on the left side of the bed. Therapy screen: Effective date: 01/08/2024 10:19 a.m. Signed by [NAME], OT signed on 01/10/2024 Incident Description: [NAME] - Resident's roommate notified I, [NAME] and ADON [NAME] that Mrs. [NAME] had to use the restroom. Upon entering the room the resident Mrs. [NAME] was sitting on side of her bed anxious and trying to get up to go to the restroom in her room by herself. Resident was instructed by myself and the ADON to sit still in one position so we can get further assistance to accommodate her needs. As we proceeded to get assistance the resident proceeded to get up off the bed and lost her balance and fell on the floor. Upon assessing the resident we noticed the resident had a bruise on the right side of her forehead also complained of right shoulder pain. Resident was lifted back into the bed by several employees including the nurse practitioner, [NAME], NP. Review of Neurological Record Started on 01/08/2024 at 10:15 a.m., revealed an entry at 10:15 a.m. and the resident in the hospital at 10:45 a.m. until 3:45 p.m. Observation on 01/09/2023 at 12:45 p.m., revealed resident sitting up in bed with no issues noted. There are no noted fall interventions in place. In an interview on 01/10/2023 at 1:55 p.m., [NAME], OT stated OT admission screening was completed on Saturday, PT admission screening was completed on Sunday, and ST admission screening was completed on Monday. She further stated when an incident report for a fall is created, a subsequent Therapy screening is created and sent to therapy to address. [NAME] stated she screened Resident on Tuesday and that it was normal to screen residents about 24 hours after a fall. In an interview on 01/10/2023 at 2:20 p.m. [NAME], ADON stated she was the nurse in the room with the resident when she fell. She stated she and the floor nurse were in the hall and heard the resident hollering out for help. She stated they went into the room and the resident was sitting on the side of the bed with her feet on the floor and requested assistance to the restroom. [NAME] further stated she told the resident to hold on and give her a minute then turned away from the resident to move the bedside table. At that time, Resident stood up and fell to the floor. [NAME] stated she could not prevent the fall because she felt that it would have caused injury to the resident. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 2:30 with [NAME], Corporate RN stated the note on the incident report that stated Resident found sitting on side of bed stating she need to use the restroom. While staff was moving bedside table on the side the resident screamed and she fell to the floor, staff could not catch her fall. A fall matt was placed on the left side of the bed was the note from the DON to wrap up and close the incident report. It is not to indicate another fall had occurred. [NAME] further stated the fall mat was not put into place until 01/10/2024 as the note indicated. When discussing the care plan, [NAME] pulled up the care plan and revealed a care plan in place and initiated on 01/08/2024. I informed [NAME] that we had been looking for any documentation concerning the fall, to include a care plan since Monday and there had not been any documentation indicating resident had a fall. [NAME] confirmed that the care plan was not there and that even though it had an initiation date of 01/08/2024, it was not initiated until 01/10/2024. [NAME] confirmed the care plan should have been initiated before today and a fall intervention should have been put into place before today. [NAME] further confirmed there were no progress notes indicating the resident fell, nor the assessment of the resident, in fact there were no progress notes written at all by the nurse. In an interview on 01/10/2023 at 2:35 pm with [NAME], Corporate RN about Neuro and time of resident pick up by ambulance. [NAME] called Acadian and found out that the facility called Acadian at 9:43 a.m. on 01/08/2023 and the resident was picked up by Acadian at 9:59 a.m. [NAME] confirmed there was a Neurological Record documented at 10:15 a.m. and there should not have been an entry at that time because Resident was not in the building at that time. The facility failed to develop and implement a resident's plan of care. Resident #13 Dementia Care 01/10/24 09:32 AM Resident # 13 admitted to the facility on [DATE] Diagnosis: Altered Mental Status, unspecified; NSTEMI; Alzheimer's Disease; Unspecified; Depression, unspecified. Review of current orders revealed, in part, medications and treatments had appropriate dosage and indication for use. Labs ordered. Review of Psych Progress notes dated 10/03/2023 revealed, in part, Chief Complaint: Routine follow up evaluation for medication management and review. Pt has a diagnosis of: Depression, Unspecified. Unspecified Psychosis. Medications at time of visit: Cymbalta 20 mg PO QD; Namenda 5 mg PO BID; Remeron 7.5 mg PO QHS; and Seroquel 12.5mg PO BID Treatment Plan: Increase Namenda 5 mg to 10 mg PO BID Review of Pharmaceutical Consultant Report dated 10/11/2023 revealed, in part, Cymbalta 20 mg qd (5/23) Cyproheptadine 4 mg tid (1/23) Mirtazepine 7.5 hs (6/23) Seroquel 12.5mg bid (6/23) Please also evaluate the concurrent use of 2 or more antidepressant. Dose reduction: No Clinical rationale written, best manual dose. 01/09/24 12:39 PM Observation, Resident # 13 in room, seated in w/c. [NAME]/CNA communicated with Resident # 13 in a calm and respectful manner. Assistance with meal setup provided. In an interview on 01/09/24 12:46 PM [NAME] stated she dementia training, couple of months. has hearing problems. no hearing aides. In an interview on 01/09/24 12:51 PM [NAME]/LPN facility staff. Resident # 13 has mild back pain, apply lidocaine to his lower back. done once on her shift, 6a to 6p, done during am pass. Received Dementia training 12/01/2023. A class offered by the facility. Assist him, a smoker, whenever he wants to go, takes med whole. Resident # 13 use rollator and w/c alternating as tolerated. Check at least every 2 hours. Take am and pm meds. Has had prn pain med if needed. took some last week. 01/07/24 at 17:31pm. MMR: Cymbalta oral capsule delayed release particles 60 mg (Duloxitine) Give 1 capsule by mouth one time a day r/t Depression 4/23, Cymbalta oral capsule delayed release particles 20 mg (Duloxitine) Give 20mg, by mouth one time a day. Mirtazapine 7.5 mg 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime for depression. Namenda oral tablet 5 mg (Memantine HCl) Give 5 mg by mouth 2 times a day. Quetiapine Fumarate Oral tablet. Give 12.5 mg by mouth 2 times a day related to Depression, unspecified. MMR 11/17/2023 and 12/15/2023 completed. GDR last dated 10/11/2023 Care Plan reviewed, target date Resident at risk for altered moods and depression r/t Psychosis, Altered Mental Status, Depression. Resident has impaired cognitive function r/t Alzheimer's Disease, use antidepressant, psychotropic medications r/t Depression; Administer medication as ordered; cue, reorient and supervise as needed. 01/10/24 11:48 AM Staff reported Resident # 13 resting today. 01/10/24 11:55 AM Resident # 13 resting in bed today with c/o back pain Review of eMAR dated January 2024 revealed, in part, Norco 325mg documented 01/08/2024 at 17:31, pain level 8, effective. Progress notes: appt with Gulf Coast Orthopedic on 01/16/2024 at 1:40pm. RP notified. Progress notes dated 1/10/2024 at 10:06 am, Cyclobenzapine HCl 5 mg, give q12h as needed for pain, Res c/o back pain. Acetaminophen Tablet 325 mg, give 2 tablet by mouth every 8 hours as needed for pain. No additional information to provide regard, it was not done. In an interview on 01/10/24 03:07 PM [NAME] /corporate stated their was no follow through to the order for increase Namenda 5mg to 10 mg dated 10/03/2023. She further stated they are working on it, we are going back to the dr. first and inform md before starting the increased dose Namenda. MDS: ARD/Target Date 11/16/2023 01/10/24 03:38 PM [NAME] stated, there was a change in the PCA system. They are working on the new order. Review of Resident # 13 record revealed , in part, appropriate dementia care treatment and services being provided to meet the resident’s individual needs. 01/10/24 03:59 PM [NAME] stated Pharmacy verified there has never been a change from Namenda 5 mg to 10 mg BID. There is a progress note attached. 01/11/24 10:16 AM [NAME] stated the order was missed and the nurse called the NP and the order was verified and started. Review of Progress notes dated 01/10/2024 at 15:26 pm revealed, in part, spoke with in house NP, she agreed the following orders. ( SS Department, Social worker, [NAME]) Review of Progress notes dated 01/10/2024 at 15:21 p.m, spoke with [NAME] from Oce33an's BH verbal order given from [NAME] NP to increase Namenda 10 mg BID. ( SS Department, Social worker, [NAME]) Review of physician orders dated 1/10/2024, start 1/10/2024 at 19:00 Namenda Oral Tablet,10 mg (Memantine HCL ). Give 10 mg by mouth two times a day related to Alzheimer's Disease, Unspecified. Ordered by [NAME]. Created by [NAME] Review of eMAR [DATE] revealed, in part, order dated 1/10/2024 at 15:27. Namenda Oral Tablet 10 mg. Give 10 mg by mouth two times a day r/t Alz. Disease 01/11/24 01:22 PM Observation: Resident # 13 resting in bed, quiet, room clean, no mal odor. Assist device close by, call bell in reach. 01/11/24 01:34 PM [NAME] stated Resident # 13 had issues hearing and needed assistance with ADLs. She further stated Resident # 13 does well and call for assistance. rounds done q2h and as needed. Administers medication as ordered. 01/11/24 01:37 PM [NAME]/CNA stated she provided care for Resident # 13 and checks on him q2h. provide assistance with ADLs. The facility failed to develop and implement a resident's plan of care. Resident #433 Accidents admit: [DATE] DX: Unspecified fracture of right femur, Unspecified psychosis not due to a substance or known physiological condition, bipolar disorder. Schizoaffective disorder. History of Falling. MDS/ARD 09/26/2023 Sections: C- 12; E- no behaviors; G- extensive assistance, 2 persons with bed mobility, total dependence for transfers, toileting, extensive assistance with 1 person for personal hygiene. H- always incontinent of bowel and bladder. J- Received no scheduled pain medication, no scheduled PRN pain medication. N- meds in last 7 days antipsychotics, antidepressants, anticoagulant, diuretic. MD orders- assist bars for positioning, care plan- At risk for falls- Intervention Landing strip on floor for safety. Review of Resident #433's record revealed, in part, no documented evidence and the facility could not present any documented evidence of care plan meetings for Resident #433. Resident # 433 Review of Resident #433's record revealed, in part, a Fall Risk assessment dated [DATE] with a score of 55 High Risk for Falling. Review of Resident #433's progress notes revealed, in part, an entry dated 12/22/2023 at 2:46 p.m. stating resident found laying on the floor with her right hip and lower back on the legs of the bedside table. Resident stated [NAME] and [NAME] saw her laying in bed and pushed her on the floor. Resident c/o pain to right hip joint stating when she moves her right leg she has sharp pain. AASI contacted to transport resident . Resident continued auditory and visual hallucinations Rp notified. entry dated 12/22/2023 call from hospital resident right hip broken transferred to another hospital for evaluation with ortho surgeon. Further review revealed on 12/20/2023, and 12/21/2023 entires of refusal of services, and delusions. Discussed with physician and orders where givenfor labs and if unable to obtain to sent to ER for medical clearance for inpatient psych admit. Review of incident log revealed, in part, documentation of a fall with an injury for Resident #433 on 12/22/2023 at 2:10 p.m. Observation on 01/09/2023 at 11:25 a.m. revealed Resident #433 lying in her bed, low pressure mattress in use, bed in high position, and no fall mat at bedside. In an interview on 01/09/2023 at 11:30 a.m., [NAME] Rp for Resident #433 stated she has never been attended or been informed of a care plan meeting for Resident #433. Observation on 01/09/2023 at 3:00 p.m. revealed Resident #433 lying in her bed, low pressure mattress in use, bed in high position, and no fall mat at bedside. Observation on 01/10/24 at 08:36 a.m. revealed Resident #433 lying in her bed, low pressure mattress in use, bed in high position and no fall mat at bedside. In an interview on 01/10/24 at 8:36 a.m. Resident #433 stated she felt well. She further stated she was pushed out of bed by a drug pusher (Resident #433) has history of psychosis and schizophrenia She further stated she did not have surgery on her hip, they popped in back in place. Bed in high position, no fall mat next to bed. 01/10/24 11:16 AM Observation low pressure mattress in use. bed in high position, positioning rails in use on both sides of the bed. no fall mat next to bed. resident able to operate bed control herself. In an interview 01/10/2024 at 12:31 p.m., [NAME], CNA stated on 12/22/2023 another CNA came to her and told her Resident #433 fell out of her bed and was lying on the floor. She stated she reported this to the nurse and the nurse went to assess her. She further stated Resident #433's bed should be in low position, but resident put it up high. She further stated Resident #433 does not have a fall mat next to her bed and she has never seen a fall mat beside Resident #433's bed. She stated she uses a [NAME] Lift to transfer. Observation on 01/10/2024 at 1:00 p.m. of Resident #433's room in the presence of [NAME], Corporate Clinical Specialist revealed no landing strip/fall mat at Resident #433's bedside. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 1:00 p.m., [NAME], , Corporate Clinical Specialist stated there was not a landing strip/fall mat at Resident #433's bedside. She further stated a landing strip/fall mat should be on the side on Resident #433's bed side. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 9:50 a.m., [NAME], LPN stated on 12/22/2023 in the afternoon the CNA informed her Resident #433 was on the floor. She stated when she entered the room Resident #433 was on the right side of her bed on the floor. She stated she asked Resident #433 what happened and Resident #433 told her [NAME] and [NAME] pushed her out the bed. She stated she asked Resident #433 if she had pain and Resident #433 told her her right hip was broken. She stated she and the CNA did not move her obtained virtal signs and called EMS. She further stated the RP and MD were called. Resident #433 was taken to the hospital for evaluation . She further stated she could not say if a fall mat was at the bedside She further stated Resident #433 control her bed height and will leave it in high position. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 09:50 a.m., [NAME], Assisstant Administrator stated there was no documentation and she could not present documentation of a care plan meetings for Resident #433. 01/09/24 09:24 AM FALL BROKEN HIP Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews the facility failed to: 1). Act on a physician's progress note that contained an order to increase a medication dosage (Resident #13); 2). Implement a plan of care (POC) fall intervention to place two fall mats near a resident's bed (Resident #22); 3). Develop a POC after a resident's fall (Resident # 133); 4). Develop a POC for a resident's resuscitation status (Resident #183); and 5). Implement the POC for a fall intervention to place a fall mat near a resident's bed (Resident #433). This deficient practice was identified for 5 residents (Resident #13, Resident #22, Resident #133, Resident #183, and Resident #433) in a total sample of 19 residents (Resident #28, Resident #19, Resident #24, Resident #2, Resident #29, Resident #3, Resident #68, Resident #433, Resident #12, Resident #70, Resident #58, Resident #13, Resident #11, Resident #64, Resident #79, Resident #76, Resident #22, Resident #183, and Resident #133) sampled residents. Findings: Resident # 13 Review of Resident # 13's clinical record revealed, in part, diagnosis in part: for altered mental status and alzheimer's disease. Review of Psychiatric Progress notes dated 10/03/2023 revealed, in part: Medications at time of visit: Namenda (medication used for treatment of Alzheimer's disease) 5 mg by mouth two times a day. The treatment plan was to Increase Namenda 5 milligrams (mg) to 10 mg by mouth twice a day. Further review of Resident #13's physician's progress notes revealed, in part, Resident #13's nurse practitioner signed and dated this note on 10/05/2023. Review of Resident #13's Medication Administration Record dated October 2023 through January 2024 revealed, in part, Namenda 5 mg by mouth twice a day was administered and had an order start date of 06/02/2023. Further review revealed Namenda 10 mg twice a day was not administered from 10/03/2023. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 3:07 p.m., S3Corporate Nurse stated the progress notes was the plan of care for the facility staff were to follow through with to increase Namenda 5mg to 10 mg twice a day. S3Corporate Nurse further stated the staff failed to follow through with the new order. Resident #22 Review of Resident #22's plan of care revealed, in part, he had multiple falls and one intervention on 03/19/2023 was to place two fall mats by his bed. Observation on 01/09/2024 at 12:28 p.m. revealed Resident #22 was in bed with one fall mat on the floor next to his bed. Observation on 01/10/2024 at 10:00 a.m. revealed Resident #22 was in his bed with one fall mat on the floor next to his bed. Observation on 01/10/2024 at 3:15 p.m. revealed Resident #22 was in his bed with one fall mat on the floor next to his bed. Observation on 01/11/2024 at 9:07 a.m. revealed Resident #22 was in his bed with one fall mat on the floor next to his bed. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 9:15 a.m., S7Minimum Data Set Coordinator confirmed Resident #22's should have two landing strips on the floor by his bed. In an observation/interview on 01/11/2024 at 9:17 a.m., S7Minimum Data Set Coordinator observed Resident #22's room with the surveyor, and Resident #22 only had one fall mat on the floor next to his bed. S7Minimum Data Set Coordinator stated that Resident #22 should have two fall mats on the floor. In an observation/interview on 01/11/2024 at 9:20 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) observed Resident #22's room with the surveyor, and Resident #22 only had one fall mat on the floor next to his bed. S2DON confirmed there was only one fall mat on the floor in Resident #22's room and should have had two fall mats. Resident #133 In an interview on 01/08/2024 at 9:21 a.m., Resident #133 stated she had a fall this morning. Review of Resident #133's plan of care by the surveyor on 01/10/2024 at 10:00 a.m., revealed, in part, no plan of care was developed for falls or fall prevention. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 2:33 p.m., S3Corporate Nurse confirmed that Resident #133's plan of care was not developed after her fall on 01/08/2024, and S3Corporate Nurse further stated the plan of care fall interventions were implemented on 01/10/2024 after the plan of care was reviewed by the surveyors. S3Corporate Nurse stated plan of care fall interventions should have been implemented after Resident #133's fall on 01/08/2024. Resident #183 Review of Resident #183's plan of care revealed, in part, no documentation of Resident #183's resuscitation status. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 10:28 a.m., S11License Practical Nurse (LPN) stated she was unable to find documentation of Resident #183's resuscitation status. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 10:40 a.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated there should be a resuscitation status documented in Resident #183's record and it was not documented. Resident #433 Review of Resident #433's plan of care revealed, in part, Resident #433 had multiple falls and one intervention dated 02/08/2021 was to place a fall mat on the floor for safety. Observation on 01/09/2024 at 11:25 a.m. revealed Resident #433 lying in her bed and no fall mat on the floor at the bedside. Observation on 01/09/2024 at 3:00 p.m. revealed Resident #433 lying in her bed and no fall mat on the floor at the bedside. Observation on 01/10/2024 at 8:36 a.m. revealed Resident #433 lying in her bed and no fall mat on the floor at the bedside. Observation on 01/10/2024 at 11:16 a.m. revealed Resident #433 lying in her bed and no fall mat on the floor at the bedside. In an interview 01/10/2024 at 12:31 p.m., S12Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) stated Resident #433 did not have a fall mat on the floor next to Resident #433's bed. S12CNA further stated she had never seen a fall mat on the floor beside Resident #433's bed. Observation on 01/10/2024 at 1:00 p.m. by this surveyor and S3Corporate Nurse revealed no fall mat was on the floor at Resident #433's bedside. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 1:00 p.m., S3Corporate Nurse stated there was no fall mat at Resident #433's bedside. S3Corporate Nurse further stated a fall mat should have been on the floor at Resident #433's bed side.
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, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure a resident's enteral feeding was being administered per physician's orders (Resident #76); 2. Document the admi...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure a resident's enteral feeding was being administered per physician's orders (Resident #76); 2. Document the administration of a resident's enteral feeding (Resident #76); and, 3.Document the assessment of a resident's gastric tube (tube inserted into the stomach used to administer enteral feedings) placement and gastric residual volume (Resident #76). This deficient practice was identified for 1 (Resident #1) of 1 (Resident #76) residents investigated for enteral feeding. Findings: Review of the facility's Enteral Tube Feeding via Continuous Pump policy revealed, in part, the verification of a resident's gastric tube placement and the amount and type of enteral feeding administered to the resident should be documented in the resident's medical record. Review of Resident #76's medical record revealed Resident #76 had diagnoses including dysphagia (a swallowing disorder) and protein-calorie malnutrition. Review of Resident #76's Minimum Data Sheet with an Assessment Reference Date of 12/07/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #76 required a feeding tube (a medical device inserted into the stomach used to administer enteral feedings). Review of Resident #76's enteral feeding care plan initiated on 07/14/2023 revealed, in part, interventions for facility staff to assess Resident #76's gastric tube for accurate placement, check and record Resident #76's gastric content residual volume per facility protocol, and provide Resident #76's enteral feeding as ordered. Review of Resident #76's December 2023 and January 2024 physician's orders revealed an order initiated on 10/30/2023 for the continuous infusion of Glucerna 1.2 (a low glycemic enteral feeding formula) at a rate of 40 milliliters per hour (mL/hr) via gastric tube. Observation on 01/09/2024 at 12:03 p.m. revealed a bottle of Jevity (a type of enteral formula) infusing to Resident #76's gastric tube per feeding pump at 40 mL/hr. Observation on 01/09/2024 at 2:44 p.m. revealed a bottle of Jevity infusing to Resident #76's gastric tube per feeding pump at 40 mL/hr. Observation on 01/10/2024 at 9:23 a.m. revealed a bottle of Jevity infusing to Resident #76's gastric tube per feeding pump at 40 mL/hr. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 11:21 a.m., S9Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated Resident #76 had a physician's order for Glucerna 1.2 enteral feeding to be infused at 40 mL/hr via gastric tube. Observation on 01/10/2024 at 11:22 a.m. revealed a bottle of Jevity infusing to Resident #76's gastric tube per feeding pump at 40 mL/hr. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 11:23 a.m., S9LPN confirmed Jevity enteral formula was infusing into Resident #76's gastric tube at 40 mL/hr. S9LPN stated Jevity was the incorrect enteral feeding formula. Review of Resident #76's December 2023 and January 2024 electronic medication administration record (eMAR) revealed, in part, there was no documentation that order for Glucerna1.2 at 40 mL/hr was administered. Further review revealed there was no documented evidence Resident #76's gastric tube was assessed for accurate placement or Resident #76's gastric content residual volume was assessed. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 11:50 a.m., S9LPN stated the administration of enteral feeding, and placement via gastric content residual volumes should be documented in the resident's eMAR. S9LPN further stated the administration of Resident #76's enteral feeding and gastric content residual volumes were not documented in Resident #76's eMAR. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 12:02 p.m., S2Director of Nursing (DON) stated the administration of enteral feeding, and placement via gastric content residual volumes should be documented in the resident's eMAR. S2DON further stated the administration of Resident #76's enteral feeding and gastric content residual volumes were not documented in Resident #76's eMAR.
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: 1. Ensure dented cans in the dry storage room were disposed of and not readily available for use; 2. Ensure cooking and serving items (ov...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to: 1. Ensure dented cans in the dry storage room were disposed of and not readily available for use; 2. Ensure cooking and serving items (oven, deep fryer, pots and pans) were clean and did not contain dark brown substance; and 3. Ensure the kitchen walls and two air vents were clean and did not contain black, furry substance. Findings: Observation of the facility's kitchen with S13Dietary Manager (DM) on 12/08/2024 at 9:46 a.m., revealed the dry storage room had 1 can of Rosarita Traditional refined beans, 2 cans of Mandarin orange in light syrup, and 1 can of Lucky Leaf filling/toping that were dented near the lip of the cans. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 9:47 a.m. with S13DM confirmed the cans identified above were dented, available for use, and should have been discarded. Observation of the facility's kitchen with S13DM on 01/08/2024 at 10:24 a.m., 01/09/2024 at 1:13 p.m., 01/10/2024 at 10:53 a.m., and 01/11/2024 at 1:34 p.m., revealed, in part, the facility's deep fryer had dark brown buildup of unknown substance on the inside, front, sides, and surrounding area including the base that extended about 6 inches from the corners. Further observation revealed the front and sides of the oven had an unknown brown substance in a drip pattern on the oven's door, and a buildup of an unknown black substance on the oven stands. The observation also revealed 6 baking pans were stacked on a storage rack and had built up brown substance on their outer and inner surfaces and were available to use for food preparation. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 1:35 p.m., S13DM acknowledged the above mentioned were not as clean as they should be. Observation of the facility's kitchen with S13DM on 01/08/2024 at 10:50 a.m., revealed the facility's kitchen walls had a black, furry visible substance from one to eighteen inches down the walls from the ceiling and on two vent outlets. Observation of facility's kitchen with S13DM and S17Maintenance on 01/10/2024 at 11:50 a.m., revealed the facility's kitchen walls had black, furry substance visible at one to eighteen inches down the walls from the ceiling and on 2 vent outlets. In an interview on 01/10/2024 at 11:51 p.m., S17Maintenance confirmed the black furry substance on the facility's kitchen walls from one to eighteen inches from the ceiling and both vents were build-up from oil and dust accumulating and should be cleaned. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 3:26 p.m., S2Corporate Nurse confirmed the facility's kitchen walls and vents needed to be cleaned.
Aug 2023 2 deficiencies 2 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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to have a system in place to ensure staff increased su...

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 have a system in place to ensure staff increased supervision to prevent elopement for severely cognitively impaired residents who displayed exit seeking behaviors for 2 (#1 and #3) of 7 (#1-#7) sampled residents to prevent elopement. The Immediate Jeopardy situation began on 08/01/2023 at approximately 1:00 a.m. when Resident #1, a severely cognitively impaired resident, eloped from the facility without the facility staff's knowledge. On 08/01/2023 at approximately 1:00 a.m., Resident #1 climbed through his bedroom window and exited the facility grounds through the unlocked fence located at the end of Hall W. Resident #1 walked approximately 1 mile, crossed a set of railroad tracks and a busy four lane highway, and stopped at a friend's house. According to the facility's incident report, the facility did not discover Resident #1 was missing from the facility until 08/01/2023 at approximately 8:00 a.m. Resident #1 was later found on 08/01/2023 at approximately 2:51 p.m. when S24Driver arrived at a local hospital and recognized Resident #1 in the lobby of the hospital. S24Driver then notified local authorities and S2Director of Nursing (DON). Resident #1 returned to the facility assisted by local police at approximately 4:00 p.m. on 08/01/2023. An order was received on 08/02/2023 to transport Resident #1 to the hospital for an inpatient psychiatric visit. The immediate jeopardy ended when Resident #1 was placed on 1 on 1 supervision until Resident #1 was transported to the hospital on [DATE] at 3:09 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy continued for Resident #3, a severely cognitively impaired resident, who began displaying exit seeking behaviors on 02/24/2023 and staff supervision was not increased. S5Regional [NAME] President of Operations (RVPO) was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on 08/03/2023 at 4:23 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 08/04/2023 at 4:33 p.m. as confirmed by onsite verification through observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility implemented an acceptable Plan of Removal (POR) prior to the survey exit. The deficient practice had the likelihood to cause more than minimum harm to the remaining 4 residents identified (#1, #3, #4, and #8) identified as elopement risks. Findings: Review of the facility's policy for Wanderer Management, Monitoring System and Resident Elopement Protocol revealed, in part, an elopement risk was determined by the use of the Wander Data collection tool. Review revealed the assessment should also include review of the resident's medical records, if available, interview with resident/family, or conference with the interdisciplinary team member. Review revealed the Wander Data collection tool was to be completed on admission, quarterly, upon change of condition, or after an elopement incident. Review revealed, an elopement risk binder would be maintained in a central area and would contain a current picture of the resident and a current face sheet. Further review revealed, after an elopement incident the interdisciplinary team must review the resident's plan of care to determine changes that may be warranted. The family must be included to assure that all areas are addressed. The facility would provide proper psychosocial support to the resident and/or family. The facility may assess the resident to determine if alternate placement was necessary to assure the resident's safety. The facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement Team shall review facility system to evaluate if all systems are working appropriately. On 08/02/2023, review of the facility's elopement risk binder revealed Resident #1 and Resident #4 were identified as an elopement risk. Review of the facility's Staffing, Sufficient and Competent Nursing policy revealed, in part, licensed nurses and nursing assistants are trained and must demonstrate competency in identifying, documenting, and reporting resident changes of conditions consistent with their scope of practice and responsibilities. Resident #1 Review of the facility's incident report entered on 08/01/2023, revealed an incident description which read at approximately 8:00 a.m. staff discovered Resident #1 was missing from the facility. The facility completed the following: search of the facility to include all rooms, restrooms, closets, the facility grounds, and staff was deployed to search the surrounding community and local hospitals were notified. A silver alert was issued with the local police to assist with the search. Review of Resident #1's medical record revealed, in part, Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, Unspecified Psychosis, Major Depressive Disorder, Dementia with other behavioral disturbances, and Anxiety Disorder. Review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/06/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #1 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3, which indicated Resident #1 had severe cognitive impairment. Further review revealed, Resident #1 was independent with walking and did not use a wander/elopement alarm daily. Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Care Plan revealed, in part, a focus that included Resident #1 was at risk for elopement related to his impaired safety awareness with an initiation date of 01/06/2023. Further review revealed no documented evidence and the facility did not present any documented evidence of having interventions implemented to prevent elopement before 08/02/2023. Resident #1's Care Plan also revealed he had impaired cognitive function with an initiation date of 11/07/2022. Further review revealed Resident #1's interventions with an initiated date of 11/07/2022 that staff should cue, reorient, and supervise Resident #1 as needed. Review of Resident #1's Physician's Orders from January 2023- August 2023 revealed, in part, an order with a start date of 01/02/2023 and a status of discontinued that read wander bracelet r/t wandering/exit seeking behaviors 2nd to psychosis. Review of Resident #1's Wander Data Collection form with a completion date of 01/05/2023, revealed, in part, Resident #1 was cognitively impaired, displayed wandering behaviors that put Resident #1 at a significant risk of getting to a potentially dangerous place, was able to ambulate independently, verbally expressed the desire to go home, had a visual, auditory, and/or communication deficits, and was searching and/or seeking to find a spouse and/or family member. Further review Resident #1 was assessed as being at high risk for wandering. Review of Resident #1's Wander Data Collection form with a completion date of 02/06/2023, revealed, in part, Resident #1 was cognitively impaired and did not display wandering behaviors that put Resident #1 at a significant risk of getting to a potentially dangerous place. Further review revealed Resident #1 was able to ambulate independently, did not verbally express the desire to go home, did not have any visual, auditory, or communication deficits, and was not searching and/or seeking to find a spouse and/or family member. Further review Resident #1 was assessed for being at low risk for wandering. Review of Resident #1's Wander Data Collection form with a completion date of 05/05/2023, revealed, in part, Resident #1 was not cognitively impaired and did not display wandering behaviors that put Resident #1 at a significant risk of getting to a potentially dangerous place. Further review revealed Resident #1 was not able to ambulate independently, did not verbally express the desire to go home, did not have any visual, auditory, or communication deficits, and was not searching and/or seeking to find a spouse and/or family member. Further review Resident #1 was assessed for being at low risk for wandering. Review of Resident #1's nurse's notes dated 05/30/2023 at 7:07 a.m. written by S28LPN revealed, in part, that Resident #1 was at the facility's lobby door and wanted to leave to go to a job in Texas. Further review, revealed Resident #1 became upset after the nurse attempted to redirect him and went to his room to pack his belongings. Review revealed an additional nurse's note with a date of 07/13/2023 at 3:45 p.m. written by S31LPN which stated Resident #1 was at the facility's nurse's station and stated he wished he could go run off on the highway and get hit by a car. Review also revealed an additional nurse's note with a date of 08/01/2023 at 9:24 a.m. written by S2DON which stated at approximately 8:30 a.m. S2DON was notified by staff Resident #1 was not able to be located. In an interview on 08/02/2023 at 9:15 a.m. S5RVPO stated he was currently serving as the administrator of the facility. S5RVPO stated in the last 6 months the facility had two incidents of elopement. S5RVPO stated the first incident occurred on 05/27/2023 when, a cognitive resident, Resident #2 climbed out of his window and was found shortly after, still on facility grounds, by a staff member and was brought back into the facility. The second incident occurred on 08/01/2023 when Resident #1 climbed out of his window and left the facility grounds. In an interview on 08/02/2023 at 10:04 a.m. Resident #1 stated he eloped from the facility on 08/01/2023 shortly after midnight. Resident #1 stated throughout the day on 08/01/2023 and into the evening he had been telling staff he was going to leave the facility. Resident #1 stated he opened his window, placed his right leg out of the window, placed his left leg out of the window, climbed out of the window, walked around the building to the fence located at the end of Hall W, and walked out of the unlocked gate. Resident #1 stated he then walked up the road that led to the facility towards the highway, crossed the railroad tracks, crossed the four lane highway, and kept walking until he got to his friend's house that he was going to do a job with. Resident #1 stated it took him about 45 minutes to get to his destination, but he does not remember the address of where he went. Resident #1 stated his friend and he later arrived at a local hospital for his girlfriend's medical care and during that time a staff member from the facility recognized him. Resident #1 stated he then was brought back to the facility by the police. Observation on 08/02/2023 at 10:06 a.m. revealed Resident #1 in his room lying in his bed. Observation further revealed Resident #1's window was able to be unlocked and opened. In an interview on 08/02/2023 at 10:09 a.m. S29CNA stated she works for the facility full time on the night shift. S29CNA further stated she worked on the night of 07/31/2023, which led into the morning of 08/01/2023. S29CNA stated residents who wander are identified by their wander guard bracelets. S29CNA stated she was not notified that Resident #1 was an elopement risk prior to this incident. S29CNA stated she is not aware of any residents in the facility that are elopement risks at this time. In an interview on 08/02/2023 at 10:30 a.m. S9MDS Nurse stated she was assigned to Resident #1. S9MDS Nurse stated Wander Data Collection forms were completed on admission, readmission, when status changes occur, and quarterly. S9MDS Nurse stated in order to complete a Wander Data Collection forms, she gathers information from the floor nurse that was taking care of the resident. S9MDS Nurse stated Resident #1 was an elopement risk as of 01/06/2023 when he began displaying exit seeking behaviors. S9MDS Nurse stated Resident #1 used to wear a wander guard bracelet, but it was discontinued and she did not remember why. S9MDS Nurse further stated prior to the incident on 08/01/2023 she had not been notified Resident #1 was displaying exit seeking behaviors. In an interview on 08/02/2023 at 10:45 a.m. S2DON stated Resident #1 has had exit seeking behaviors since he was admitted to the facility. S2DON stated Resident #1 had a wander guard bracelet in place, but he kept removing the wander guard bracelet so the facility discontinued it. S2DON further stated she was not notified on 05/30/2023 or 07/31/2023 Resident #1 displayed exit seeking behaviors. S2DON further stated the facility identified on 07/26/2023, they could not meet Resident #1's needs due to his suicidal ideations and exit seeking behaviors. S2DON further stated Resident #1 was not placed on 1 on 1 monitoring until after the elopement incident on 08/01/2023. Observation on 08/02/2023 at 10:50 a.m. revealed the windows in Room a, Room b, Room c, Room d, Room e, Room f, Room g, Room h, Room I, Room j, and Room k on Hall Z was able to be unlocked and slide open to access the front of the facility that was not gated and faced the road. In an interview on 08/02/2023 at 11:00 a.m. S6Regional Maintenance Director stated all of the windows in the facility were not secured. S6Regional Maintenance Director stated the windows were able to be locked from the inside, but can be easily opened at any time from the inside. S6Regional Maintenance Director stated half of the facility's windows opened to the back of the facility that was fenced in, but the other half opened to the road. S6Regional Maintenance Director stated Resident #1's window had been sealed, but nothing was keeping him or any other resident from entering another resident's room and crawling out of their window. In an interview on 08/02/2023 at 11:20 a.m. S7Unit Manager stated she completed Resident #1's a Wander Data Collection form on 01/05/2023. S7Unit Manager stated Resident #1 was labeled as an elopement risk because he was cognitively impaired, frequently displayed exit seeking behaviors, and was always looking for his daughter. In an interview on 08/02/2023 at 12:45 p.m. S28Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated she was the nurse on 05/30/2023 when Resident #1 said he wanted to leave to go to a job in Texas. S28LPN further stated she did consider this behavior exit seeking behavior. S28LPN further stated she notified S2DON, but she did not increase supervision for Resident #1. In an interview on 08/02/2023 at 2:45 p.m. S3Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated she was never notified by staff on the evening of 07/31/2023 that Resident #1 was displaying exit seeking behaviors. In an interview on 08/02/2023 at 2:50 p.m. S10Quality Assurance (QA) Nurse stated Resident #1 had been to the psychiatric hospital from [DATE]- 07/26/2023 for suicidal ideations. S10QA Nurse stated upon returning to the facility, the IDT team had discussed the facility could not meet Resident #1's needs and he needed alternate placement. S10QA Nurse stated she was not notified Resident #1 was displaying exit seeking behavior, only that he desired to go to another facility. In an interview on 08/02/2023 at 3:00 p.m. S24Driver stated she was the staff member that found Resident #1 at a local hospital. S24Driver stated she arrived at the hospital to deliver labs and Resident #1 was sitting in the lobby. S24Driver stated she notified authorities and Resident #1 was brought back to the facility around 4:00 p.m. S24Driver stated Resident #1 had left the facility and went to an address which was approximately 1-2 miles from the facility. S24Driver stated she knew the address of the location in which Resident #1 went to because he spoke about going to this address since he was admitted to the facility. S24Driver stated Resident #1 displayed exit seeking behaviors often. Review of the global positioning system revealed when walking from the facility to the address Resident #1 walked to after eloping from the facility was approximately 1 mile. Further review revealed, in order to reach the destination a set of train tracks and a four lane highway had to be crossed. Observation on 08/03/2023 at 12:50 p.m. revealed the windows in Room l, Room m, Room n, Room o, Room p, Room q, Room r, Room s, Room t, Room u, Room v, and Room w were able to be unlocked and slide open to access the front of the facility that was not gated and faced the road. In an interview on 08/03/2023 at 2:33 p.m. Resident #1's Responsible Party (RP) stated S10QA Nurse called and notified her on 08/01/2023 around 9:48 a.m. that Resident #1 was missing and the facility was unaware of his location. Resident #1's RP stated she was currently on vacation out of state and she had no idea where Resident #1 could have went at the time. Resident #1's RP stated she was very concerned because prior to Resident #1 being admitted to the facility, he would wander into random people's homes due to his diagnosis of dementia. Resident #1's RP stated she informed the facility prior to his admission of the above and that was the reason she was admitting him to the facility. Resident #1's RP stated Resident #1 had a wander guard bracelet around his ankle, but he removed it multiple times so the facility chose to leave it off. Resident #1's RP further stated she received a second call from the facility stating they had located Resident #1, he was in no distress, and he would be transferred to a psychiatric facility for evaluation between 08/01/2023 and 08/02/2023. In an interview on 08/04/2023 at 9:30 a.m. S1Administrator stated it was determined Resident #1 got out of the backyard fencing because the gate was left unlocked by the contracted lawn company. S1Adminsitrator stated normal practice of the facility was for himself or S30Maintenance Director to ensure the fence was locked when yard work was completed. S1Administrator stated at the time of the incident himself and S30Maintenance Director were both on leave and was unable to ensure the gate was locked after the lawn company left the facility. In an interview on 08/04/2023 at 10:04 a.m. S2DON stated staff should have immediately recognized Resident #1's behavior as exit seeking and implemented increased supervision. S2DON further stated if staff had notified her of Resident #1's behavior earlier in the shift, she would have been able to implement 1 on 1 monitoring and Resident #1 would've never been able to elope from the facility. In an interview on 08/04/2023 at 10:07 a.m. S1Administrator stated two residents had used the same tactic to elope from the facility through a window. S1Adminstrator further stated if the facility had implemented the above stated interventions after the first time a resident left the facility through a window on 05/27/2023, all residents would have been assessed properly for elopement, appropriate interventions would have been implemented for each resident, and Resident #1's elopement would have been prevented. In a phone interview on 08/04/2023 at 1:02 p.m. S25Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) stated she was the CNA assigned to Resident #1 the night he eloped from the facility. S25CNA stated the last time she had seen Resident #1 was around 10:00 p.m. at the beginning of her shift on 07/31/2023 when Resident #1 requested he be left alone to go to sleep. S25CNA stated she was not notified by the facility that Resident #1 was an elopement risk. S25CNA stated the facility had not ever educated her or communicated to her who the wandering residents in the facility were. S25CNA further stated if the facility had notified her Resident #1 was displaying exit seeking behaviors she would have provided 1 on 1 monitoring and Resident #1 would not have eloped from the facility. In an interview on 08/04/2023 at 1:15 p.m. S9MDS Nurse stated Resident #1's Wander Assessments completed on 02/06/2023 and 05/05/2023 were completed incorrectly, which was the reason Resident #1 was assessed as being at low risk for wandering. S9MDS Nurse further stated Resident #1 should have had a wander assessment completed after each change in condition when he began displaying exit seeking behaviors. S9MDS Nurse further stated Resident #1 should have had interventions put into place prior to 08/02/2023 address his exit seeking behaviors. Resident #3 Review of Resident #3's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date(ARD) of 05/23/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 4, which indicated that he was severely cognitively impaired. Further review revealed, Resident #3 required supervision with one-person physical assistance for locomotion on the unit, locomotion and required supervision with set up help only for transfer, walking in the room, and walking in the corridor. Review of Resident #3's physician progress note dated 01/19/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 was adamant about going home. Review of Resident #3's progress note dated 02/23/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 wanted to go home and did not have any transportation, but insisted on going home. Review of Resident #3's progress note dated 03/23/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 wanted to go home. Review of Progress Note dated 04/26/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 complained of wanting to go home and wanting his truck. Review of Resident #3's progress note dated 05/18/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 still wanted to go home. Review of Resident #3's psychiatric progress note dated 06/01/2023 revealed, in part, staff was reporting Resident #3's was exit seeking and was increasingly confused as dementia was progressing. Review of Resident #3's progress note dated 07/27/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 wanted to go home. Review of Resident #3's nurse's note dated 02/24/2023 at 9:53 a.m., revealed, in part, Resident #3 was in the front lobby screaming and attempting to leave the facility. Further review revealed, Resident #3 stated my truck is outside, and I am leaving out this god damn place Review of Resident #3's nurse's note dated 02/24/2023 at 12:24 p.m., revealed, in part, Resident #3 refused to stay in his room where he was on isolation for COVID-19. Further review revealed, resident swore at staff, attempted to push his walker over staff, and demanded to be let out of the front door to get his car to go home. Further review revealed, Resident #3 had also packed all of his belongings in a large suitcase in his room. Review of Resident #3's nurse's note dated 03/26/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 noted with agitation related to attempting to leave facility to get back to his car. Further review revealed, resident pulled on the door and demanded to, and resident paced up and down the hall while yelling at staff very aggressively. Review of Resident #3's nurse's note dated 03/27/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 continued to request to leave the facility. Further review revealed, staff attempted to redirect, but Resident #3 returned minutes later with identical behavior. Review of Resident #3's nurse's note dated 03/29/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 was noted with increased agitation, attempted to leave the facility, slammed doors, and cussed at the staff. Review of Resident #3's nurse's note dated 04/05/2023, revealed, in part, Resident #3 had been increasingly agitated and seeking to go home. Review of Resident #3's nurse's note dated 04/07/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 was noted with increased agitation in the front lobby and stated, I need to go to [NAME] City, and somebody stole my truck. Further review revealed staff reoriented frequently, but Resident #3 later continued with the same behavior. Review of Resident #3's nurse's note dated 06/18/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 ambulated around the hall with the use of a walker and was hard of hearing. Further review revealed, Resident #3 had a large suitcase packed and talked constantly of going home to see about his house and truck. Review of Resident #3's Wander Data Collection report dated 02/22/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 was assessed as being at low risk for wandering. Review of Resident #3's Wander Data Collection report dated 05/23/2023 revealed, in part, Resident #3 was assessed as being at low risk for wandering. Further review revealed, the answer no was indicated for questions related to if Resident #3 was cognitively impaired, if Resident #3 wandered, did the resident have any auditory deficits, and did the resident verbally express the desire to go home or pack up their belonging to leave. Further review of Resident #3's Wander Data Collection report revealed assessments related to Resident #3's wandering or exit seeking was performed on 02/24/2023, 03/26/2023, 03/27/2023, 03/29/2023, 04/05/2023, 04/07/2023, and 06/18/2023. Observation on 08/02/2023 at 1:57 p.m., revealed Resident #3 was lying in the bed without staff present in his room or within the line of sight of staff. Observation revealed, Resident #3's window was able to be opened at this time. Further observation revealed, Resident #3 without a wander guard bracelet in place. In an interview on 08/02/2023 at 1:28 p.m. Resident #3 stated he wanted to get out of this place and go home. Resident #3 further stated he was going to figure out a way to leave this facility. In an interview on 08/03/2023 at 11:20 a.m., S1Administrator stated if a resident was having wandering or exit seeking behaviors, the facility's procedure was that a wandering assessment should be completed on the resident exhibiting those behaviors. Observation on 08/03/2023 at 8:42 a.m., revealed Resident #3's door to his room was closed and no staff was present to supervise Resident #3. Further observation upon entering room revealed, Resident #3 sitting on the side of his bed. Further observation revealed, Resident #3's window was able to be opened, and a large suitcase was in the middle of Resident #3's room. Observation on 08/03/2023 at 10:57 a.m., revealed Resident #3's door to his room was closed and no staff was present to supervise Resident #3. Further observation upon entering room revealed, Resident #3 lying in bed. Further observation revealed, Resident #3's window was able to be opened, and a large suitcase was in the middle of Resident #3's room . In an interview on 08/03/2023 at 10:57 a.m., Resident #3 stated that he had his suitcase out because it was packed for him to take home. Resident #3 stated that he needed to get out of the facility to go and check on his truck. In an interview on 08/03/2023 at 11:02 a.m., S7Unit Manager stated all resident's wandering evaluations should be completed on admission, quarterly, and as needed when residents displayed wandering or exit seeking behaviors such as trying to leave the facility and having a plan to go home. In an interview on 08/03/2023 at 11:05 a.m., S21Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) stated she saw Resident #3 try to go out into the facility's parking lot and try to get out of the facility on multiple occasions. S21CNA further stated Resident #3 packed his luggage constantly to try to leave with his stuff. In an interview on 08/03/2023 at 11:05 a.m., S23CNA confirmed that Resident #3 has wandered and tried to get out of the building, but stated she was unsure if Resident #3 was a wandering or elopement risk. S23CNA further stated she had witnessed Resident #3's had packed luggage to leave with, and Resident #3 was constantly worried about getting to his truck. In an interview on 08/03/2023 at 11:13 a.m., S24Driver stated Resident #3 constantly asked to go outside or to leave the facility, including this morning, 08/03/2023, at 10:00 a.m. In an interview on 08/03/2023 at 12:00 p.m., S9MDS Nurse stated she had not realized that Resident #3 was displaying wandering or exit seeking behaviors on 02/24/2023, 03/26/2023, 03/27/2023, 03/29/2023, 04/05/2023, 04/07/2023, and 06/18/2023. S9MDS Nurse further stated a wandering assessment should have been conducted for each new behavior noted on the above dates, and Resident #3's care plan should have been updated to reflect his exit seeking and wandering behaviors. In an interview on 08/03/2023 at 2:30 p.m., S8MDS Nurse stated when completing a quarterly wandering assessment, staff assess for wandering or exit seeking behaviors noted in a seven-day lookback period. S8MDS Nurse further stated that this practice was not adequate, because Resident #3's assessments were only being done every quarter. S8MDS nurse also stated that staff should have reported any new wandering or exit seeking behavior done by Resident #3 and a new wandering assessment should have been performed. In an interview on 08/03/2023 at 2:40 p.m. S7Unit Manager stated that she was unaware that Resident #3 had exit seeking behaviors since 02/24/2023. S7Unit Manager further stated each time Resident #3 started exhibiting wandering or exit seeking behaviors, a new wandering evaluation should have been performed, and Resident #3 should have possibly had increased supervision. S7Unit Manager further stated that Resident #3 now has a wander guard bracelet on, but that this device would not alert if resident attempted to exit the building via window. In a phone interview on 08/04/2023 at 9:54 a.m., S20Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated her nurse's note on 04/07/2023 was related to Resident #3's dementia behaviors. S20LPN further stated that Resident #3 was able to ambulate around the facility with his walker, and that on 02/24/2023 Resident #3 attempted to leave the facility with his Guitar packed. S20LPN also stated that Resident #3 always has his luggage packed to go home. In an interview on 08/04/2023 at 10:01 a.m., S3Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated it was important for staff to complete new wandering assessments when residents start exhibiting new wandering or exit seeking behaviors because these assessments give facility information to help keep the residents safe. A phone interview on 08/04/2023 at 10:19 a.m., S22LPN stated she had noted Resident #3 talking about wanting to get out of the facility and packing and unpacking his bag, but was unaware if he had ever attempted to get out of the facility. S22LPN further stated she did not specifically report the behaviors noted above to S2DON or Resident #3's physician because Resident #3 had been having these behaviors and everyone in the facility was aware. In an interview on 08/04/2023 at 10:50 a.m., S2Director of Nursing stated that when she noted Resident #3 was having exit seeking behaviors and packing a bag on 02/24/2023, a wandering assessment should have been completed. S2DON further stated that when Resident #3's was displaying wandering or exit seeking behaviors on 03/26/2023, 03/27/2023, 03/29/2023, 04/05/2023, 04/07/2023, and 06/18/2023, a wandering assessment should have been completed and Resident #3's care plan should have been updated. In an interview on 08/04/2023 at 2:31 p.m., S7Unit Manager stated she was not thorough when completing Resident #3's wandering assessment on 08/03/2023, and should have assessed him fully for wandering behaviors, exit seeking behaviors, verbalizing wanting to go home, or packing a bag. S7Unit Manager further stated that she was in-serviced on correctly completing a wandering evaluation.
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

Administration (Tag F0835)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility failed to be administered in a manner that enabled it to use its resources effectively and efficiently by failing t...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility failed to be administered in a manner that enabled it to use its resources effectively and efficiently by failing to provide supervision to keep a resident free from elopement for 2 (#1 and #3) of 7 (#1 - #7) sampled residents. The facility failed to: 1. Ensure Resident #1, a severely cognitively impaired resident, who was care planned for wandering, was accurately assessed and/or adequately supervised when exit seeking behaviors were displayed; and 2. Ensure Resident #3, a severely cognitively impaired resident, was accurately assessed and adequately supervised when exit seeking behaviors were displayed. The Immediate Jeopardy situation began on 08/01/2023 at approximately 1:00 a.m. when Resident #1, a severely cognitively impaired resident, eloped from the facility without the facility staff's knowledge. On 08/01/2023 at approximately 1:00 a.m., Resident #1 climbed through his bedroom window and exited the facility grounds through the unlocked fence located at the end of Hall W. Resident #1 walked approximately 1 mile, crossed a set of railroad tracks and a busy four lane highway, and stopped at a friend's house. According to the facility's incident report, the facility did not discover Resident #1 was missing from the facility until 08/01/2023 at approximately 8:00 a.m. Resident #1 was later found on 08/01/2023 at approximately 2:51 p.m. when S24Driver arrived at a local hospital and recognized Resident #1 in the lobby of the hospital. S24Driver then notified local authorities and S2Director of Nursing (DON). Resident #1 returned to the facility assisted by local police at approximately 4:00 p.m. on 08/01/2023. An order was received on 08/02/2023 to transport Resident #1 to the hospital for an inpatient psychiatric visit. The immediate jeopardy ended when Resident #1 was placed on 1 on 1 supervision until Resident #1 was transported to the hospital on [DATE] at 3:09 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy continued for Resident #3, a severely cognitively impaired resident, who began displaying exit seeking behaviors on 02/24/2023 and staff supervision was not increased. S5Regional [NAME] President of Operations (RVPO) was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy on 08/03/2023 at 4:23 p.m. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 08/04/2023 at 4:33 p.m. as confirmed by onsite verification through observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility implemented an acceptable Plan of Removal (POR) prior to the survey exit. The deficient practice had the likelihood to cause more than minimum harm to the remaining 4 residents identified (#1, #3, #4, and #8) identified as elopement risks. Findings: Cross Reference F-689. In an interview on 08/04/2023 at 10:04 a.m. S2DON stated staff should have immediately recognized Resident #1's behavior as exit seeking and implemented increased supervision. S2DON further stated if staff had notified her of Resident #1's behavior earlier in the shift, she would have been able to implement 1 on 1 monitoring and Resident #1 would've never been able to elope from the facility. In an interview on 08/04/2023 at 10:07 a.m. S1Administrator stated two residents had used the same tactic to elope from the facility through a window. S1Adminstrator further stated if the facility had implemented the above stated interventions after the first time a resident left the facility through a window on 05/27/2023, all residents would have been assessed properly for elopement, appropriate interventions would have been implemented for each resident, and Resident #1's elopement would have been prevented. In an interview on 08/04/2023 at 2:00 p.m., S5RVPO stated he completed an in-service with S1Administrator, S2DON, S3ADON, S10QA Nurse, S8MDS Nurse, S9MDS Nurse, S16Maintenance Assistant, S7Unit Manager, S15Housekeeping and Laundry Supervisor, S17Business Office Manager, S18Human Resources, S14Therapy Director, and S11Social Services Director that covered all elements listed in the plan for the above stated deficiencies and discussed listed interventions to ensure continued compliance. S5RVPO further stated he will be coming monthly to ensure all the above stated audits and education is completed by the administrative staff.
Jan 2023 1 deficiency
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0925 (Tag F0925)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on record review, observations, and interviews the facility failed to ensure the facility was free from roaches. The deficient practice had the potential to affect any of the 85 residents who re...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, observations, and interviews the facility failed to ensure the facility was free from roaches. The deficient practice had the potential to affect any of the 85 residents who reside in the facility as identified on the facility census. Findings: Review of the facility's Pest Control Policy with a revised date of May 2008 revealed, in part, the facility shall maintain an on-going pest control program to ensure the building is kept free of insects and rodents. Record review revealed, in part, a grievance dated 10/13/2022 which indicated maintenance was to call the exterminator to return to the facility to treat Room B due to the observation of roaches. Observation on 01/24/2023 at 09:35 a.m. of Hall Y revealed a roach crawling on the door frame of Room A. Observation on 01/24/2023 at 11:30 a.m. of the dining room revealed 15 roaches crawling on the floor under bedside tables in a corner. Observation on 01/24/2023 at 12:02 p.m. in the kitchen revealed a roach crawling in the doorway of the dishwashing room. Observations were made on 01/24/2023 at 12:11 p.m. with S1Administrator of the dining room. In an interview on 01/24/2023 at 12:11 p.m., S1Administrator confirmed roaches were present and crawling on the floor in the dining room. Observation on 01/26/2023 at 09:35 a.m. of the dining room revealed 2 roaches crawling on the floor under a rolling rack that contained 2 empty food serving trays. In an interview on 01/26/2023 at 9:55 a.m., S3Housekeeper stated roaches can be found crawling on the cabinet and behind the papers pinned to the wall. During the interview with S3Housekeeper she moved the papers on the wall of Resident #7's room and a roach was observed crawling from behind the papers. S3Housekeeper further stated roaches climb up the walls on the inside and outside of Resident #7's room. In an interview on 01/25/2023 at 09:35 a.m., S4Housekeeper stated she saw a live roach yesterday when she was cleaning down Hall X. In an interview on 1/25/2023 at 09:40 a.m., S2Housekeeper Supervisor stated there have been times when she has seen roaches in various places in the building. In an interview on 01/25/2023 at 10:00 a.m., S8Treatment Nurse stated she has seen roaches in the facility in various resident rooms and in the shower room on Hall Z. In an interview on 01/25/2023 at 10:05 a.m., Room E stated he has seen a lot of roaches in the hallways and it has been a problem since he was admitted 2 years ago. In an interview on 01/25/2023 at 10:15 a.m., S5Certified Nursing Assistant stated he commonly sees roaches in Resident #7's room, in the shower rooms, and in the dining room. In an interview on 01/25/2023 at 10:20 a.m., S3Housekeeper stated there were many times where she saw roaches down Hall Z, in Resident #7's room, and Room C. S3Housekeeper further stated she saw roaches when she moved the cabinets and refrigerators in resident rooms. In an interview on 01/25/2023 at 11:25 a.m., S6Dietary Aide stated she had seen roaches in the dishwashing room of the kitchen. In an interview on 01/25/2023 at 01:05 p.m., S1Administrator stated the problem of roaches stems from the construction of the building and the fact this was an older building. S1Administrator further stated the problem was here long before he was and there was nothing they could do except to treat the problem by putting out roach bait traps where an issue has been identified and call the contracted exterminator. In an interview on 01/26/2023 at 09:20 a.m., Room D stated she noticed a roach in her room in the past two days. In an interview on 01/26/2023 at 09:55 a.m., S7Hospitality Aide stated the first time she saw roaches was 2 months ago. Review of facility's contracted Exterminating Company's Annual Pest Control Service Agreement dated 01/04/2022 revealed, in part, exterminating services for the control of German roaches. Further review of the facility's Pest Control Agreement revealed, in part, the contract included one treatment monthly and additional retreatment when requested by the customer. In an interview on 1/25/2023 at 03:20 p.m., the facility's exterminating company stated no reservice call was made in the month of October 2022. In an interview on 01/26/2023 at 10:15 a.m., S1Administrator stated the roach problem is an on-going issue that reoccurs when the weather changes. S1Administrator acknowledged the roaches go away for a while and then return. S1Administrator confirmed there was no retreatment services provided to Room B by the exterminating company in October 2022 as per documented grievance corrective action dated 10/13/2022. Record review of exterminating company statements from 01/01/2022 through 01/25/2023 revealed, in part, the only time the facility requested retreatment was on 09/07/2022 and 01/24/2023.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

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

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • 30% turnover. Below Louisiana's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 33 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $17,280 in fines. Above average for Louisiana. Some compliance problems on record.
  • • Grade F (14/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: Trust Score of 14/100 indicates significant concerns. Thoroughly evaluate alternatives.

About This Facility

What is Patterson Healthcare Center's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns PATTERSON HEALTHCARE 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 Patterson Healthcare Center Staffed?

CMS rates PATTERSON HEALTHCARE CENTER's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 30%, compared to the Louisiana average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Patterson Healthcare Center?

State health inspectors documented 33 deficiencies at PATTERSON HEALTHCARE CENTER during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 29 with potential for harm, and 2 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Patterson Healthcare Center?

PATTERSON HEALTHCARE CENTER is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by NEXION HEALTH, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 121 certified beds and approximately 82 residents (about 68% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in PATTERSON, Louisiana.

How Does Patterson Healthcare Center Compare to Other Louisiana Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Louisiana, PATTERSON HEALTHCARE CENTER's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.4, staff turnover (30%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Patterson Healthcare 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?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the below-average staffing rating.

Is Patterson Healthcare Center Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, PATTERSON HEALTHCARE CENTER has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 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 Patterson Healthcare Center Stick Around?

PATTERSON HEALTHCARE CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 30%, which is about average for Louisiana nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Patterson Healthcare Center Ever Fined?

PATTERSON HEALTHCARE CENTER has been fined $17,280 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Louisiana average of $33,252. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.

Is Patterson Healthcare Center on Any Federal Watch List?

PATTERSON HEALTHCARE 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.