ST. FRANCISVILLE NURSING AND REHAB, LLC

15243 LA HWY 10, SAINT FRANCISVILLE, LA 70775 (225) 635-3346
For profit - Corporation 128 Beds Independent Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
0/100
#247 of 264 in LA
Last Inspection: April 2025

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

Overview

St. Francisville Nursing and Rehab, LLC has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. Ranked #247 out of 264 facilities in Louisiana, this places them in the bottom half of the state, though they are the only option in West Feliciana County. The facility's performance is worsening, increasing from 8 issues in 2024 to 10 in 2025. Staffing is considered average with a turnover rate of 35%, which is better than the state average, but the facility has concerning RN coverage, being below 96% of state facilities. They have accumulated $156,807 in fines, which is higher than 86% of facilities in Louisiana, suggesting serious compliance issues. Specific incidents of concern include a resident being physically abused by another resident, resulting in significant physical harm and distress. Additionally, another resident was not adequately supervised as per their care plan, leading to a serious assault that required hospital treatment. While the staffing turnover is a positive aspect, the overall trend and serious incidents highlight significant weaknesses in the care and safety standards at this facility.

Trust Score
F
0/100
In Louisiana
#247/264
Bottom 7%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Worse
8 → 10 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
35% turnover. Near Louisiana's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
○ Average
$156,807 in fines. Higher than 58% of Louisiana facilities. Some compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 6 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Louisiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
⚠ Watch
24 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★☆☆☆☆
1.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 8 issues
2025: 10 issues

The Good

  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (35%)

    13 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: 35%

11pts below Louisiana avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Federal Fines: $156,807

Well above median ($33,413)

Significant penalties indicating serious issues

The Ugly 24 deficiencies on record

4 actual harm
Apr 2025 10 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G)

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's right to be free from physical abuse and psych...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's right to be free from physical abuse and psychosocial harm for 1 (#75) of 2 (#46 and #75) residents reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure Resident #75 was free from physical abuse and psychosocial harm by Resident #46. This deficient practice resulted in a psychosocial harm on 03/03/2025 at 12:12 p.m. when Resident #75 reported to S2DON she did not feel safe in her home after an incident where Resident #46 hit her on the head. Resident #75 did not want to leave her room on 03/04/2025 because she was afraid of Resident #46. Resident #75 reported to Resident #87 that she was being scared when Resident #46 returned from the hospital on [DATE]. As a result of the investigation, despite there not being a significant decline in mental or physical functioning for Resident #75, Resident #75 experienced psychosocial harm when she verbalized she was afraid of Resident #46 and wanted to stay in her room after Resident #46 hit her in the head. It could be determined a reasonable person would have experienced psychosocial harm as a result of Resident #46 hitting Resident #75 in the head, since a reasonable person would not expect to be treated in this manner in their own home or a health care facility. Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program, dated 2001 revealed, in part, the following: Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. Protect residents from abuse by anyone including, but not necessarily limited to: 2. Other Residents. Review of the facility's policy titled Recognizing Signs and Symptoms of Abuse/Neglect, dated 2001 revealed, in part, the following: All types of abuse .are strictly prohibited. Policy and Interpretation and Implementation 1. Abuse is defined as willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish. 4. The following are signs and symptoms of abuse/neglect . a. Signs of physical abuse 1. Injuries that are non-accidental or unexplained d. Psychological or behavioral signs of abuse or neglect: 1. Expression of fear of a person or place . Resident #46 Review of Resident #46's clinical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, which included, Paranoid Schizophrenia, Cognitive Communication Deficit, Bipolar Disorder and Unspecified Dementia. Review of Resident #46's quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 02/26/2025 revealed a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 7, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Review of the State Agency Report revealed the following: Event Occurred: 03/03/2025 at 9:55 a.m. Victim: Resident # 75 Accused: Resident # 46 Description: Resident #75 was observed standing in the lobby with her hand on the back of her head and stated she hit me and pointed at Resident #46. Resident #75 verbalized she was fearful of Resident #46. Review of Resident #46's nurses' notes revealed, in part, the following: 03/03/2025 at 10:00 a.m. Resident #46 walked up behind Resident #75 sitting on a couch and proceeded to hit Resident #75 on the head. Resident #46 stated, she is trying to kill everyone, and I am going to take care of her myself. Resident #46 was placed on one on one supervision. Resident #75 Review of Resident #75's clinical record revealed she was admitted on [DATE] with medical diagnoses, which included, Unspecified Dementia and Major Depressive Disorder. Review of Resident #75's quarterly MDS with an ARD of 02/26/2025 revealed she had a BIMS of 4, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #75's nurses' notes revealed, in part, the following: 03/03/2025 at 11:07 a.m. Resident #75 reported to staff she was hit on the back of the head by Resident #46. Review of Resident #75's Nurse Practitioner notes revealed the following: 03/03/2025 Assessment/Plan: Resident #75 was seen today because she was hit in the back of the head by Resident # 46. Resident #75 verbalized she was fearful of Resident #46. On 04/15/2025 at 9:21 a.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #75. She stated she did not remember being hit on the head and could not recall the event. On 04/15/2025 at 9:21 a.m., an interview was conducted with S8LPN. She stated on 03/03/2025, staff reported Resident #46 hit Resident #75 in the head. She stated on 03/04/2025, Resident #75 was scared of Resident #46 and wanted to stay in her room. She stated on 03/10/2025 when Resident #46 returned from the hospital Resident #75 appeared nervous and asked her if Resident #46 was going to hurt her again. On 04/15/2025 at 1:17 p.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #87, a cognitively intact resident. She confirmed she shared a room with Resident #75. She stated on 03/03/2025, Resident #75 was sitting on the couch in the activity room and Resident #46 walked behind the couch and hit Resident #75 three times on the head with a closed fist. She stated Resident #75 told her she was scared Resident #46 would hurt her again when Resident #46 returned from the hospital on [DATE]. On 04/16/2025 at 11:25 a.m., an interview was conducted with S14DOO. He stated on 03/03/2025 he walked out of the conference room and into the activity room and saw Resident #75 holding her head. He stated Resident #75 pointed to Resident #46 and stated she hit me. On 04/16/2025 at 12:38 p.m., an interview was conducted with S7NP. She stated she was informed on 03/03/2025 that Resident #46 hit Resident #75 on the head. She stated she assessed Resident #46 and Resident #75 on 03/03/2025. She stated Resident #75 did not have any injuries but verbalized she was afraid of Resident #46 on 03/03/2025. On 04/16/2025 at 12:57 p.m., an interview was conducted with S2DON. She stated on 03/03/2025 it was reported Resident #46 hit Resident #75 on the head. She stated Resident # 75 had short term memory loss and was cognitively impaired. She stated initially Resident # 75 verbalized she was scared of Resident #46 but as time progressed, Resident #75 remembered less and less and was no longer fearful of Resident #46. She confirmed being hit on the head would be considered physical abuse and residents should feel safe in their home. On 04/16/2025 at 1:35 p.m., an interview was conducted with S1ADM. He stated he reviewed the video footage from 03/03/2025 and Resident #75 was sitting on the couch and Resident #46 walked behind her. He stated Resident #46's hand was open and he could not tell if she hit Resident #75. He stated Resident #75 then was seen holding her head with her hand and reported Resident #46 hit her on the head. He stated Resident #46 had an acute psychotic episode on 03/03/2025 and therefore he did not think it was physical abuse.
CONCERN (D)

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

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with respect and dignity in a manne...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and interviews the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with respect and dignity in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 1(#68) of 23 residents reviewed in the final sample. The facility failed to ensure Resident #68's urinary drainage bag remained covered in order to maintain his dignity. Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled, Quality of Life-Dignity with a revision date of 08/2009, revealed the following: Policy Statement - Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances quality of life, dignity, respect, and individuality. Policy Interpretation and Implementations 1. Residents shall be treated with dignity and respect at all times. 2. Treated with dignity means the resident will be assisted in maintaining and enhancing his or her self-esteem and self-worth. 11. Demeaning practices and standards of care that compromise dignity are prohibited. Staff shall promote dignity and assist residents as needed by: a. Helping the resident to keep urinary catheter bags covered; Review of Resident #68's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Paraplegia, Chronic Kidney Disease, Stage 2, Neuromuscular Dysfunction of Bladder, and Injury at Unspecified Level of Cervical Spinal Cord. A review of Resident #68's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 03/19/2025 revealed the resident had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 13 which indicated he was cognitively intact. On 04/15/2025 at 2:45 p.m. an observation was made of Resident #68 sitting in his room in his wheelchair with an uncovered urinary drainage bag. Drainage bag cover was observed on the floor next to the resident's wheelchair. On 04/15/2025 at 2:50 p.m. an observation was made of S13CNA entering Resident #68's room and exiting a few minutes later. On 04/15/2025 at 3:30 p.m. Resident #68 was observed outside on the smoking patio with uncovered urinary drainage bag hanging on his wheelchair. On 04/15/2025 at 3:35 p.m. an interview was conducted with S13CNA. She confirmed Resident #68's urinary drainage bag was uncovered and should have been covered. On 04/16/2025 at 2:03 p.m. an interview was conducted with S2DON. She confirmed staff should ensure resident urinary drainage bags are covered in order to maintain the resident's dignity.
CONCERN (D)

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

Dental Services (Tag F0791)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a referral was made to an oral surgeon as or...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a referral was made to an oral surgeon as ordered for 1 of 1 (#92) resident reviewed for dental services. This deficient practice had the potential to affect any of the 105 residents residing at the facility. Findings: Review of Resident #92's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was diagnosed with a Bacterial Infection on 03/26/2025. Review of Resident #92's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 02/05/2025 revealed he had a BIMS of 8, which indicated he was moderately cognitively impaired. Review of Resident #92's current Physician Orders revealed the following, in part: 03/31/2025: Please make patient an appointment with oral surgery and endodontist. Pt needs an extraction and a root canal. Ordered by S7NP. Review of Resident #92's current Care Plan revealed the following, in part: Focus: Oral care-has a broken tooth that traps food (more of an aggravation not pain). Interventions: Coordinate arrangements for dental care, transportation as needed/as ordered. Review of Resident #92's Nurse's Notes revealed the following, in part: 03/26/2025 at 2:31 p.m.: Resident returned back to facility via facility transportation from an appointment. Resident returned with an order for amoxicillin 500 mg capsule, take 1 capsule by mouth every 6 hours until finished for a tooth infection. Resident will need to be referred to oral surgery for extractions and local Endodontics for a root canal. Signed by S8LPN. Review of Resident #92's Nurse Practitioner Note dated 03/31/2025 revealed the following, in part: Assessment/Plan 1. Dental Abscess. Patient has been on Amoxicillin since 03/26/2025. Referral wrote for endodontist and oral surgery. Signed by S7NP. On 04/16/2025 at 2:30 p.m., an observation and interview was conducted with Resident #92. He was observed in the restroom brushing his teeth. He stated his tooth on the bottom left side of his mouth was broken. He stated food got stuck in it after he ate and aggravated him. He stated it also made him get a bad taste in his mouth, so he brushed his teeth throughout the day. He stated he wished it could be pulled so it would not bother him anymore. On 04/16/2025 at 12:08 p.m., an interview was conducted with S10WC. She stated she was responsible for making follow up and referral appointments. She stated she was not aware Resident #92 had an order for a referral to oral surgery placed on 03/31/2025. She stated when a referral or follow up appointment needed to be made, the DON would print the order report and give it to her so she could schedule the appointment. She reviewed her printed orders and verified she had no order report for Resident #92's oral surgeon referral. S10WC confirmed she had not made the appointment for Resident #92 to have a tooth extraction and root canal. On 04/16/2025 at 12:51 p.m., an interview was conducted with S7NP. She verified she entered the order on 03/31/2025 for Resident #92 to see an oral surgeon for a root canal and tooth extraction. She stated she would have expected facility staff to have made the appointment when the order was placed. On 04/16/2025 at 1:15 p.m., an interview was conducted with S2DON. She stated when an order was placed for a referral or appointment, she ran an order report at the end of the day, then gave it to S10WC so she could schedule the appointment. She stated if S10WC did not have the printed order report for Resident #92's referral, she would have not known to make the appointment. She confirmed the order report should have been given to S10WC so Resident #92's oral surgeon appointment could have been made.
CONCERN (D)

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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · 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 maintain an infection prevention and control progra...

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 maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of infection for 2 of 2 (#77 and #86) resident's reviewed for perineal care. The facility failed to ensure staff performed hand hygiene and proper glove use for Resident #77 and Resident #86 during perineal care. Findings: Review of the facility's policy titled, Perineal Care with a revision date of 02/2018, revealed the following, in part: Purpose: The purpose of this procedure are to provide cleanliness and comfort to the resident, to prevent infections and skin irritation . Steps in the Procedure: 2. Wash and dry your hand thoroughly. 7. Put on gloves. For a male resident: b. Wash perineal area starting with urethra and working outward. f. Continue to wash the perineal area including the penis, scrotum, and inner thighs. m. Wash and rinse the rectal area thoroughly, including the area under the scrotum, the anus, and the buttocks. 10. Remove gloves and discard . 11. Wash and dry your hands thoroughly. 12. Reposition the bed covers. 13. Place the call light within easy reach of the resident. 16. Wash and dry your hands thoroughly. Resident #77 Review of Resident #77's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #77's Care Plan revealed the following, in part: Problem: 03/26/2025-Incontinence, incontinent of bowel and bladder. Intervention: Assist with perineal cleansing as needed. On 04/15/2025 at 9:00 a.m., an observation was made of S12CNA performing perineal care for Resident #77. Without performing hand hygiene, S12CNA donned clean gloves, closed the room door, picked up the bed remote, and elevated the head of the bed. S12CNA unfastened Resident #77's brief and stated Resident #77 had a bowel movement and urinated. Wearing the same gloves, S12CNA opened a clean brief, opened a pack of wipes, removed two perineal wipes and sprayed them with perineal spray. S12CNA cleaned urine and feces from Resident #77's perineal area. Wearing the same gloves, S12CNA removed two more perineal wipes from the pack of wipes and cleaned feces from Resident #77's perineal area. S12CNA removed the soiled brief, wiped crumbs off Resident #77's pad and placed the soiled brief in a trash can. Wearing the same gloves, S12CNA placed the clean brief underneath Resident #77, opened the nightstand drawers, opened a pack of barrier cream and applied to Resident #77's left hip. Resident #77 turned to his back, S12CNA positioned the clean brief and fastened the brief's left tab. S12CNA assisted Resident #77 to turn to the left side and fastened the brief's right tab. S12CNA removed the soiled gloves, adjusted the resident's pillow, his shirt and covered him with the bed linens. S12CNA picked up the bed remote, adjusted Resident #77's head of bed, lowered the bed to the floor, opened the room door, repositioned the resident's wheelchair and call light within reach. S12CNA removed the trash bag from the trash can, held it in her left hand and exited Resident #77's room. S12CNA walked down the hall to the soiled utility room and placed the trash bag in a yellow barrel and then sanitized her hands. On 04/15/2025 at 9:12 a.m., an interview was conducted with S12CNA. S12CNA confirmed the above observations and stated she should have performed hand hygiene and changed her gloves when going from dirty to clean. She confirmed she should not have touched items in the resident's room with soiled gloves or prior to performing hand hygiene. Resident #86 Review of Resident #86's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #86's Care Plan revealed the following, in part: Problem: 08/02/2024-Incontinence, always incontinent of bowel and bladder. Intervention: Check at least every 2 hours and PRN for Incontinence. Wash, rinse, and dry soiled areas. On 04/15/25 at 9:30 a.m., an observation was made of S13CNA performing perineal care for Resident #86. S13CNA donned clean gloves and unfastened resident's brief and stated Resident #86 had a bowel movement and had urinated. With the same gloves S13CNA opened the perineal wipes and proceeded to clean urine and feces from Resident #86's perineal area. With the same gloves, S13CNA removed several more perineal wipes from the pack of wipes, sprayed them with perineal spray, and continued to clean feces from Resident #86's perineal area. Wearing the same gloves, S13CNA removed the soiled brief and placed it and the dirty pad in a trash can. With the same gloves, S13CNA opened a clean brief and placed the clean brief and clean pad under Resident #86. S13CNA positioned the clean brief and fastened the brief's tabs. Resident #86 was turned to his other side and S13CNA, wearing the same gloves, fastened the brief's second set of tabs. Wearing the same gloves, S13CNA continued to put clean clothes on Resident #86. Wearing the same gloves, S13CNA proceeded to change Resident #86's bed linens. On 04/15/2025 at 10:00 a.m., an interview was conducted with S13CNA. S13CNA confirmed the above observations and stated she should have performed hand hygiene and changed her gloves when going from dirty to clean. On 04/15/2025 at 2:00 p.m., an interview was conducted with S2DON. S2DON was made aware of the above findings. S2DON stated staff should perform hand hygiene before providing care, when going from dirty to clean, and at the end of care. S2DON stated staff should change their gloves after providing perineal care, when soiled, and prior to going to clean again. S2DON stated staff should not touch items in a resident's room with soiled gloves or prior to performing hand hygiene.
CONCERN (E)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments accurately reflected the residents' st...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments accurately reflected the residents' status. The facility failed to ensure staff accurately coded the diagnoses of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder for 2 of 2 (#40 and #87) residents reviewed for PTSD. Findings: Resident #40 Review of Resident #40's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included PTSD. Review of Resident #40's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/18/2024 revealed in part, the following: Section I: Active Diagnoses: Psychiatric/Mood Disorder I6100: PTSD was unchecked. Resident #87 Review of Resident #87's Clinical Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included PTSD. Review of Resident #87's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/15/2025 revealed in part, the following: Section I: Active Diagnoses: Psychiatric/Mood Disorder I6100: PTSD was unchecked On 04/16/2025 at 8:24 a.m., an interview was conducted with S17MDS. She stated she was responsible for completing MDS assessments. She reviewed Resident #40 and #87's diagnoses list, and confirmed both had an active diagnosis of PTSD. S17MDS then reviewed Resident #40 and #87's aforementioned MDS assessments and confirmed the PTSD diagnosis was not marked as present and should have been. On 04/16/2025 at 1:30 p.m., an interview was conducted with S2DON. She stated she expected MDS nurses to complete all assessments to accurately reflect each residents' active diagnoses and current status.
CONCERN (E)

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

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident received treatment and care in accordance with p...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice by failing to ensure a resident received an appointment with an ENT specialist for 1 (#34) of 2 (#34 and #51) residents reviewed for hospitalization. Review of Resident #34's clinical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Traumatic Subdural Hemorrhage and Dysphonia. Review of Resident #34's physician orders revealed in part, the following: 02/18/2025 please refer to a private physician for evaluation of persistent hoarseness. Review of Resident #34's Nurse Practitioner Progress notes revealed in part, the following: 03/05/2025 Referral toa private physician was denied for evaluation. Will refer to a local ENT. An interview was conducted with S10WC on 04/16/2025 at 12:17 p.m. She stated she was informed by the nurses, DON, or NP for any new request for appointments. She reviewed Resident #34's physician order dated 02/18/2025 for a referral to a private physician for evaluation. She confirmed on the top of the physician order, in her writing, it stated referral was denied, does not meet internal guidelines. She stated her normal process was to notify the DON or NP, but stated she could not confirm she notified them of the denied referral. She stated she was notified on 04/10/2025 of the physician order to schedule an appointment for Resident #34 with a local ENT. An interview was conducted with S18NP on 04/16/2025 at 12:38 p.m. She reviewed Resident #34's Nurse Practitioner progress note dated 03/05/2025 and confirmed S19NP noted to refer to a local ENT. She confirmed an appointment should have been made at that time. She stated on 04/10/2025 when Resident #34 presented with shortness of breath, she reviewed Resident #34's clinical record and noted the ENT appointment had not been scheduled. She confirmed during this interview time she reached out to S19NP, and S19NP informed her she could not remember if she gave a verbal order for staff to schedule an ENT appointment on 03/05/2025. An interview was conducted with S2DON on 04/16/2025 at 12:57 p.m. She stated the NP should enter their own orders. She stated the appointment for Resident #34 should have been scheduled prior to 04/10/2025 but they were not aware of the request until 04/10/2025. She confirmed there was not a system in place to check Nurse Practitioner progress notes against physician orders.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0699 (Tag F0699)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who are trauma survivors received trauma-informed...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who are trauma survivors received trauma-informed care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice for 2 of 2 (#40 and #87) residents reviewed with a diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Findings: Resident #40 Review of Resident #40's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of PTSD. Review of Resident #40's most recent Care Plan revealed Resident #40 was not care planned for PTSD. Review of Resident #40's Psychiatric Note dated 07/17/2024 revealed in part, the following: Nurse reported that Resident #40 has been actively and aggressively responding to internal stimuli, cursing to himself and agitated. He had been yelling at staff and peers, as well. Resident #87 Review of Resident #87's Clinical Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of PTSD. Review of Resident #87's most recent Care Plan revealed Resident #87 was not care planned for PTSD. On 04/15/2025 at 1:17 p.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #87. She stated her diagnosis of PTSD was from her first husband raping her and her father having tortured and abused her. She stated taking off her clothes in front of males was a trigger and made her feel uncomfortable. On 04/15/2025 at 12:32 p.m., an interview was conducted with S16LPN. She confirmed she was assigned to Resident #40 care. She stated she was not aware of Resident #40 PTSD diagnosis nor interventions to prevent triggers and/or trauma reoccurrence. She stated Resident #40 should have been care planned for PTSD and interventions should have been established through the resident-centered care plan. On 04/16/2025 at 8:24 a.m., an interview was conducted with S17MDS. She stated she was responsible for MDS assessments and care plans. She reviewed Resident #40 and #87's diagnoses list, and confirmed the residents had an active diagnosis of PTSD. S17MDS then reviewed Resident #40 and #87's Care plan and confirmed they were not care planned for the management of PTSD and should have been. On 04/16/2025 at 8:46 a.m., an interview was conducted S15SSD. She stated she completed the trauma assessment on admit and quarterly. She stated she was not aware Resident #87 had a history of sexual abuse and mental abuse. She confirmed she never asked Resident #87 why she had the PTSD diagnosis. She stated she did not know why Resident #40 had a diagnosis of PTSD due to being non-interviewable. She confirmed Resident #40 and #87 were not care planned for the management of PTSD and should have been.
CONCERN (E)

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

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored in accor...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles. The facility failed to ensure: 1. A multi dose vial of insulin was dated upon opening; and 2. Medication Cart #3 was kept locked when not under direct observation of authorized staff. This deficient practice had the ability to affect any of the 105 residents who received medications in the facility. Findings: Review of the facility's policy, titled Medication Labeling and Storage with a revised date of February 2023 revealed the following, in part: Medication Labeling: 5. Multi-dose vials that have been opened or accessed are dated . 1. On 04/14/2025 at 2:38 p.m., an observation was conducted of Refrigerator in Medication room [ROOM NUMBER] with S11LPN. Observed was an opened and undated multi-dose vial of insulin labeled with Resident #84's name. On 04/14/2025 at 2:40 p.m., an interview was conducted with S11LPN. She confirmed the observation of the opened multi-dose vial of insulin, and stated it should have been dated when opened and was not. 2. On 04/14/2025 at 2:56 p.m., an observation was conducted of Medication Cart #3 left unattended and unlocked in the hallway from 2:56 p.m., until S3LPN returned at 3:05 p.m. On 04/14/2025 at 3:06 p.m., an interview was conducted with S3LPN. She confirmed Medication Cart #3 was left unattended and unlocked while she performed resident care with the resident's door closed, and the cart should have been locked before she walked away. On 04/15/2025 at 2:34 p.m., an interview was conducted with S2DON. She confirmed she expected staff to label and date any multi-dose vial of medication such as insulin upon it being opened. She stated she expected staff to keep all medication carts locked when unattended.
CONCERN (E)

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

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observations, and interviews, the facility failed to store, distribute and serve food in sanitary conditions in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The facility fa...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, and interviews, the facility failed to store, distribute and serve food in sanitary conditions in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The facility failed to ensure: 1. Opened food was properly labeled and dated in the refrigerator and freezer of the facility's kitchen; 2. Staff properly sanitized food thermometer when checking food temperatures to prevent cross contamination; 3. Ground beef was served at safe temperatures; and 4. The Air Conditioner (AC) in the kitchen remained in sanitary condition. This deficient practice has the potential to affect 104 residents who were served meals from the facility's kitchen. Findings: 1. Review of the facility's policy, titled Food Receiving and Storage with a revision date of November 2022, revealed the following, in part: Refrigerated/Frozen Storage: 1. all foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer are covered, labeled and dated. During the initial tour of the facility's kitchen with S4DM on 04/14/2025 at 09:30 a.m., the following observations were made of the refrigerator and freezer: 4 bags of green grapes unsealed, unlabeled, and undated 1 large box precooked pancakes opened, unlabeled, and undated 2 large boxes of frozen dough opened, unlabeled, and undated 1 large box of 4 ounce individual cups of vanilla ice cream opened, unlabeled, and undated 1 large box of frozen pie dough sheets opened, unlabeled, and undated 1 box of frozen beef patties opened, unlabeled, and undated 1 container of frozen sliced green onions was unsealed, unlabeled, and undated 1 three pound container of chocolate syrup opened, unlabeled, and undated 1 package of frozen waffles opened, unlabeled and undated On 04/14/2025 at 09:45 a.m., an interview was conducted with S4DM during the initial tour of the kitchen. She verified the above observations and acknowledged the facility failed to properly store foods. She confirmed all opened food products should be sealed, labeled, and dated. On 04/14/2025 at 10:40 a.m., an interview was conducted with S1ADM. He stated kitchen staff were expected to keep all opened items in the facility's refrigerator and freezer covered, labeled and dated. 2. On 04/14/2025 at 11:30 a.m., an observation was conducted of S5CK obtaining food temperatures prior to serving lunch. She had a coffee mug of ice water and a thermometer. S5CK dipped the thermometer into the ice water and without sanitizing the thermometer she inserted the thermometer into a ground beef patty. S5CK checked the temperature of the ground beef patty which was 95 degrees Fahrenheit, S5CK immediately checked the mashed potatoes without sanitizing the thermometer. On 04/15/2025 at 11:38 a.m., an interview was conducted with S4DM who confirmed the thermometer was not properly sanitized while checking food temperatures between the ground beef patty and the mashed potatoes on 04/14/2025, and should have been. On 04/15/2025 at 11:45 a.m., an interview was conducted with S1ADM. He confirmed he was at the doorway of the kitchen on 04/14/2025 and observed S5CK checking food temperatures. He confirmed she did not properly sanitize the thermometer when checking food temps, and should have. He confirmed that not propperly sanitizing the thermometer could cause cross contamination. 3. On 04/14/2025 at 11:30 a.m., an observation was conducted of S5CK obtaining food temperatures prior to serving lunch. She obtained the internal temperature of a ground beef patty which was 95 degrees Fahrenheit. She removed the ground beef patties from the warming table and placed them on the stove to reheat them. After reheating the ground beef patties, S5CK rechecked the temperatures which read 142 degrees Fahrenheit. On 04/14/2025 at 11:35 a.m., an observation was made of S5CK rechecking the internal temperature of the ground beef patties. The temperature read 142 degrees Fahrenheit. S5CKproceeded to serve residents the ground beef patties. On 04/14/2025 at 11:42 a.m., an interview was conducted with S5CK. She verbalized ground meat should reach an internal temperature of 160 degrees Fahrenheit or higher prior to serving. She confirmed the ground beef patty's temperature was 145 degrees Fahrenheit and should not have been served to residents and was. On 04/15/2025 at 11:45 a.m., an interview was conducted with S1ADM. He confirmed kitchen staff were expected to ensure internal food temperatures were appropriate prior to serving the food. 4. During the initial tour of the facility's kitchen with S4DM on 04/14/2025 at 09:30 a.m., an observation was conducted of the kitchens air conditioner. The AC was a self- contained window unit. The front vent of the AC unit was covered in a thick fluffy gray substance. To the left of the AC unit was a plastic piece which ensured the unit fit in the window. The plastic piece was covered in a spotted black substance. On 04/14/2025 at 9:45 a.m., an interview was conducted with S4DM. She confirmed the AC unit should be maintained clean and sanitary, but was not. On 04/14/2025 at 10:40 a.m., an interview was conducted withS1ADM. He stated the AC in the kitchen should be cleaned by S6MS. He confirmed the AC should be maintained cleaned and sanitized, and was not.
CONCERN (F)

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

Staffing Data (Tag F0851)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on record review and interview the facility failed to submit accurate payroll information for direct care staffing as required. Findings: Review of the Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to submit accurate payroll information for direct care staffing as required. Findings: Review of the Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data Report for Fiscal Year (FY) Quarter (QTR) 1 2025 dated 10/01/2024 through 12/31/2024 revealed triggers for the following: One Star Staffing Rating, Excessively Low Weekend Staffing, No Registered Nurse (RN) Hours, and Failed to have Licensed Nursing Coverage 24 Hours/Day. Further review of the PBJ staffing report revealed the triggers for No RN Hours and Failed to have Licensed Nursing Cover 24 Hours/Day had infraction dates of 12/01/2024 through 12/31/2024. On 04/16/2025 at 9:32 a.m., an interview was conducted with S1ADM. He stated he was responsible for uploading the PBJ reports. He confirmed he did not have a PBJ Final Validation Report for December 2024. He stated the codes for direct care staffing were not transferred over to the PBJ report accurately for December 2024, and should have been.
Dec 2024 2 deficiencies 2 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident had the right to be free from physical abuse...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident had the right to be free from physical abuse by another resident for 2 (#1 and #3) of 3 (#1, #2, and #3) sampled residents reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 and Resident #3 were free from physical abuse by Resident #2. This deficient practice resulted in an actual harm on 11/22/2024, at 3:56 p.m., when Resident #2, a resident know with physically abusive behaviors towards other residents, physically punched Resident #1 in the face and neck multiple times resulting in Resident #1 being evaluated and treated at a local hospital with diagnostic testing. Resident #1 experienced physical pain, facial swelling, and bloody drainage from the nose as a result of this incident. The facility implemented corrective actions which were completed prior to the State Agency's investigation, thus it was determined to be a Past Noncompliance Harm. Findings: Cross Reference F656 Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program, revised April 2021, revealed the following, in part: Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. Protect residents from abuse by anyone including but not limited to .other residents. Resident #1 Review of Resident #1's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included Hypertensive Heart Disease and Stroke with Left Sided Weakness. Review of Resident #1's Quarterly Minimum Date Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/08/2024 revealed in part, a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Resident #2 Review of Resident #2's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included Dementia with Behavioral Disturbances and Psychotic Disorders. Review of Resident #2's admission MDS with an ARD of 10/08/2024 revealed, in part, a BIMS of 5, which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #2's Plan of Care, dated 09/30/2024, and updated 11/22/2024, revealed in part: Focus: Behavior Management History of sun downing, confusion, wandering, delusional, hallucinations, cursing, yelling/screaming, takes items from others, refusal of meds at times. 11/04/2024 verbal altercation with peer. 11/06/2024 pushed a peer causing her to fall. Interventions: emergency room Evaluation, Psych NP evaluation, Medications adjusted. 1:1 Observation, and 11/19/2024 stepped down to line of sight observation. Review of the facilities incident report dated 11/22/2024, revealed the following in part: On 11/22/2024 at 3:56 p.m. Resident #2 entered the room of Resident #1. Resident #1 told Resident #2 to leave his room. Resident #2 pushed the door open and hit Resident #1 in the face and neck. Resident #1 was sent to the local emergency room. Resident #2 sustained no injuries and was transported to emergency room for evaluation. Review of Resident #2's Nurses' Note dated 11/22/2024 at 7:30 p.m., revealed the following, in part: S3LPN: This nurse was in a room with another resident. I was called down to Resident #1's room. I was informed that Resident #2 had tried to go into Resident #1's room. When Resident #1 tried to close the door, Resident #2 hit Resident #1. Residents were separated. Received order to send residents out for evaluation. On 12/16/2024 at 2:23 p.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #1. He stated on 11/22/2024, Resident #2 entered his room and appeared confused. He stated he made an attempt to redirect Resident #2. Resident #1 stated he was closing his bedroom door when Resident #2 pushed the door open and punched him 3 or 4 times in the face and neck. Resident #1 further stated staff came in the room and removed Resident #2 immediately. Resident #1 stated he had a bloody nose and swollen lip after the incident. He further stated he was given an ice pack for his face, pain medication, and was sent to the emergency room where a CT scan was done of his head. On 12/16/2024 at 2:30 p.m., an interview was conducted with S3LPN. S3LPN confirmed she was the nurse on duty when the incident occurred with Resident #1 and Resident #2 on 11/22/2024. She confirmed Resident #2 had behavioral issues which included becoming agitated. She stated on 11/22/2024 Resident #2 punched Resident #1 in the face, causing blood to come from his nose and a cut on his upper lip. S3LPN stated this was abuse. She stated Resident #2 and Resident #1 were separated immediately. She stated Resident #1 was given an ice pack, Tylenol for pain, and sent to the emergency room for further evaluation. She stated Resident #2 was sent to the emergency room to be evaluated for behaviors on 11/22/2024 and did not return to the facility. She further stated she has had in-services on Wandering Residents, Behavior De-escalation techniques, Identifying Behaviors and Abuse upon hire and on 12/01/2024. S3LPN was able to verbalize processes correctly. On 12/17/2024 at 1:50 p.m., an interview was conducted with S7LPN. She confirmed on 11/22/2024 Resident #2 hit Resident #1. She confirmed Resident #1 had a bloody nose and swollen lip and she provided an ice pack and pain medication to Resident #1 following the incident. She confirmed Resident #2 hitting Resident #1 in the face and neck was physical abuse. She further stated she has had in services on Wandering Residents, Behavior De-escalation techniques, Identifying Behaviors and Abuse upon hire and on 12/01/2024. S7LPN was able to verbalize processes correctly. On 12/18/2024 at 9:35 a.m., an interview was conducted with S5CNA. S5CNA stated he was assigned to care for Resident #2 on 11/22/2024. S5CNA stated Resident #2 was to be in line of sight observations at all times, which meant to keep eyes on Resident #2. He stated he was called away assist another resident and when Resident #2 was out of his line of sight, Resident #2 punched Resident #1. S5CNA confirmed Resident #2 punching Resident #1 in the face was physical abuse. He stated following the incident he was immediately asked to provide a written statement of events and was sent home until the facility's investigation was completed. He stated he was later terminated on 11/26/2024. He stated he was in-serviced, in October 2024 upon hire, on Identifying Behaviors and Abuse. On 12/18/2024 at 12:00 p.m., an interview was conducted with S6SW. She confirmed a transfer summary indicated Resident #2 was discharged from the facility as of 11/29/2024. Resident #3 Review of the Clinical Record revealed Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included Major Depressive Disorder and Heart Failure. Review of the Quarterly MDS with ARD dated 10/09/2024 revealed Resident #3 had a BIMS score of 14, which indicated she was cognitively intact. Review of facilities incident report dated 11/06/2024 at 8:30 p.m. revealed, in part: At 7:25 p.m. Resident #2 entered Resident #3's room and pushed Resident #3's left shoulder causing her to lose her balance and fall. Resident #3 complained of pain to the right hip, x-ray was ordered, and Resident #2 was placed on 1:1 observation. On 12/16/2024 at 2:10 p.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #3. She stated on 11/06/2024 Resident #2 entered her room, she asked Resident #2 to leave, Resident #2 pushed her on the shoulder causing her to fall. She stated Resident #2 was immediately removed from her room. She was given pain medication and had an x-ray done of her right hip and right elbow. On 12/17/2024 at 1:30 p.m., an interview was conducted with S1DON. She stated on 11/06/2024 Resident #2 went into Resident #3's room, and when she asked him to leave he pushed her on the shoulder causing her to fall down. S1DON confirmed this was resident to resident abuse. S1DON stated Resident #3 was evaluated with x-ray of right hip and right elbow, and was given pain medication as needed. S1DON stated Resident #2 was sent to the emergency room for behaviors and was placed on 1:1 observations upon return to the facility on [DATE]. On 12/18/2024 at 1:32 p.m., an interview was conducted with S1DON. S1DON confirmed Resident #2 pushing Resident #3 causing her to fall and Resident #2 punching Resident #1 was physical abuse. S1DON confirmed S5CNA was aware Resident #2 was to be in line of site at all times prior to leaving the resident unsupervised. S1DON confirmed S5CNA was terminated following the incident that occurred on 11/22/2024. She further on 11/22/2024 a poll was conducted with all CNAs to determine understanding of line of sight supervision and Resident #2's plan of care was updated due to additional behaviors. She stated an in-service was conducted on all nursing staff on supervision and posttest competencies was completed on 12/01/2024. On 12/18/2024 at 3:30 p.m., an interview was conducted with S2ADM. S2ADM confirmed Resident #2 pushing Resident #3 causing her to fall, and Resident #2 punching Resident #1 is abuse. S2ADM confirmed S5CNA was terminated following the incident that occurred on 11/22/2024. He confirmed on 11/22/2024 a poll was conducted with all CNAs to determine understanding of line of sight supervision and Resident #2's plan of care was updated due to additional behaviors. S2ADM stated an in-service was conducted on all nursing staff on supervision and posttest competencies was completed on 12/01/2024. He stated a prevention plan was implemented for behaviors on 11/22/2024 with an expected completion date of 02/15/2025. S2ADM provided documentation the facility initiated an effective Plan of Correction on 11/8/2024, which included: 1. Problem identified: Resident #2 was on direct line of sight supervision due to previous altercation with Resident #3 on 11/06/2024, and left unattended by the CNA on 11/22/2024. Resident #2 got into a physical altercation with Resident #1. 2. Plan of action with projected completion date of: 12/01/2024 Immediate Action: Residents were separated, assessed, and first aid provided. Resident #2 resumed 1:1 supervision until being sent out to the emergency room for evaluation. Facility performed audit to identify all residents with behaviors that could or do affect others. Completed 10/15/2024. Assessment and social history by Director of Social Services on Resident #2 to identify potential causes of behaviors, needs, triggers, or Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Completed 10/14/2024. Corporate review of Care Plans and behavior residents identified by staff. All care plans were updated by team. Completed 11/15/2024. In-service education on: Wandering Residents, Behavior De-escalation techniques, Identifying Behaviors. Completed 11/17/2024. In-service Staff Supervision and when to report, with written posttest. Completed 12/01/2024. CNA Poll and written statements to determine understanding of Supervision. Completed on 11/22/2024. Plan was revised on 11/22/2024 due to additional behaviors that occurred on 11/22/2024. In-service education on supervision, and posttest competencies. Completed 12/01/2024. S3LPN was verbally educated to report non-compliance with supervision to S1DON. S5CNA was terminated on 11/26/2024 due to failure to follow procedures. Resident #2 never returned to facility and was discharged from facility on 11/29/2024. Plan reviewed and it was determined that Plan of Correction was effective, resolved 12/01/2024. QAPI on behavior interventions initiated on 11/22/2024. Expected completion date 02/15/2025. Throughout the survey from 12/16/2024 to 12/18/2024, observations, interviews, and record reviews revealed the above listed actions were implemented. Random staff interviews revealed staff received training on the facility's abuse policy and procedure and were given questionnaires testing their knowledge. Observations were made throughout the survey with no abuse identified. Observations, interviews, and record review, revealed monitoring had begun with no further issues identified.
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to implement the comprehensive person centered care plan for 1 (#2) o...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to implement the comprehensive person centered care plan for 1 (#2) of 3 (#1, #2, and #3) residents reviewed. The facility failed to maintain line of sight supervision per Resident #2's care plan. This deficient practice resulted in an actual harm on 11/22/2024 at 3:56 p.m., when S3LPN noticed S5CNA failed to maintain line of sight supervision per the care plan on Resident #2, a resident with known physical behaviors towards other residents. During this time, Resident #2 physically assaulted Resident #1. Resident #1 was evaluated and treated at a local hospital with diagnostic testing. Resident #1 experienced physical pain, facial swelling, and bloody drainage from the nose as a result of this incident. The facility implemented corrective actions which were completed prior to the State Agency's investigation, thus it was determined to be a Past Noncompliance Harm. Findings: Cross Reference F600 Review of the facility's policy, dated 07/2017, titled, Safety and Supervision of Residents, revealed the following, in part: Individualized, Resident Centered Approach to Safety: 4) Implementing interventions to reduce accident risks shall include: a. Communicating interventions to all relevant staff; b. Assigning responsibility for carrying out interventions; c. Providing training; and d. Ensuring interventions are implemented Review of Resident #2's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses, which included Dementia with Behavioral Disturbances and Psychotic Disorders. Review of Resident #2's admission Minimum Date Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/08/2024 revealed in part, a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5, which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #2's Plan of Care, dated 09/30/2024, and updated 11/22/2024, revealed in part: Focus: Behavior Management History of sun downing, confusion, wandering, delusional, hallucinations, cursing, yelling/screaming, takes items from others, refusal of meds at times. 11/04/2024- verbal altercation with peer. 11/06/2024- pushed a peer causing her to fall. Interventions: 11/06/2024- emergency room Evaluation, Psych NP evaluation, Medications adjusted. 1:1 Observation. 11/19/2024 stepped down to line of sight observation. 11/22/2024- Resident #2 entered the room of a peer and hit peer. Resident separated immediately. Received order from NP to send Resident #2 for eval, 1:1 with staff until left building Review of the facilities incident report dated 11/22/2024, revealed the following in part: On 11/22/2024 at 3:56 p.m. Resident #2 entered the room of Resident #1. Resident #1 told Resident #2 to leave his room. Resident #2 pushed the door open, and hit Resident #1 in the face and neck. Resident #1 was sent to the local emergency room. Resident #2 sustained no injuries and was transported to emergency room for evaluation. Review of Resident #2's Nurses' Note dated 11/22/2024 at 7:30 p.m. revealed the following, in part: S3LPN: This nurse was in a room with another resident. I was called down to Resident #1's room. I was informed that Resident #2 tried to go into Resident #1's room. When Resident #1 tried to close the door, Resident #2 hit Resident #1. Residents were separated. Received order to send residents out for evaluation. On 12/17/2024 at 2:35 p.m., an interview was conducted with S3LPN. She stated on 11/22/2024 she was called from another resident's room because Resident #2 was hitting Resident #1. She stated Resident #2 was care planned to be line of sight supervision by staff after the resident pushed another resident down on 11/06/2024. S3LPN stated line of sight supervision meant keeping a resident in eye view and at arm's reach at all times. She stated, on 11/22/2024 prior to Resident #2's incident, she had to redirect S5CNA 4 to 5 times regarding keeping Resident #2 in line of sight supervision. She stated S5CNA was on his phone, standing in the hall not within arm's reach of Resident #2, and sitting outside when she had to redirect him. She stated she never notified S1DON of having to redirect S5CNA prior to Resident #2 assaulting Resident #1. She further stated she was in-serviced again on line of sight supervision and reporting non-compliance of line of sight supervision by S1DON on 11/22/2024. On 12/18/2024 at 9:35 a.m., a telephone interview was conducted with S5CNA. He confirmed, on 11/22/2024, he was assigned to Resident #2 for line of sight supervision. He stated he understood line of sight to mean keep his eyes on the resident at all times. He confirmed he was not assigned to any other residents during his shift on 11/22/2024. He stated, on 11/22/2024, he took his eyes off of Resident #2 to assist another resident with care. He stated at that time, Resident #2 entered another resident's room and punched that resident in the face. He confirmed he should not have let Resident #2 out of his line of sight. He confirmed he was in-serviced on line of sight supervision prior to his shift on 11/22/2024. He stated he was immediately relieved of his assignment, asked to write a statement of what occurred, sent home until further investigation, and was later terminated on 11/26/2024. On 12/18/2024 at 11:38 a.m., an interview was conducted with S8CNA. S8CNA stated line of sight supervision meant keeping a resident in eye view and at arm's reach at all times. She confirmed she was in-serviced and took a test on supervision of residents in November 2024. On 12/18/2024 at 11:57 a.m. an interview was conducted with S9CNA. S9CNA stated line of sight supervision meant keeping a resident in eye view and at arm's reach at all times. She confirmed she was in-serviced and took a test on supervision of residents in November 2024. On 12/18/2024 at 1:32 p.m., an interview was conducted with S1DON. She stated, on 11/22/2024, she conducted an in-service with S5CNA regarding line of sight supervision prior to the start of his shift. She stated, after Resident #2 hit Resident #1 on 11/22/2024, S3LPN reported she previously had to redirect S5CNA regarding line of sight supervision. S1DON stated the physical abuse could have been prevented if she was made aware S5CNA required redirection to provide line of sight supervision. S1DON stated she immediately in-serviced all nursing staff on line of sight supervision and when to report non-compliance with supervision by polling staff and posttest. On 12/18/2024 at 4:02 p.m., an interview was conducted with S2ADM and S1DON. S2ADM and S1DON confirmed, on 11/22/2024, line of sight supervision was not maintained for Resident #2 and should have been. The facility had implemented the following actions to correct the deficient practice on 11/22/2024: 1. Immediate Action: S3LPN was verbally educated to report non-compliance with supervision to S1DON. 2. S5CNA relieved of duties on 11/22/2024 and later terminated post facility investigation. 3. Resident #2's care plan was revised on 11/22/2024 due to additional behaviors that occurred on 11/22/2024. 4. 11/22/2024 new education implemented with posttest competencies. Random poll conducted to evaluate effectiveness of education on types of supervision. 5. 11/22/2024 in-service nursing staff understanding on different types of supervision the facility provides for residents. 6. In-service staff on supervision and when to report, with written posttest. Completed 12/01/2024. 7. Continued daily monitoring of behaviors that could potentially affect others by DON or designee. Education materials added to new hire packets and annual competencies. 8. Initiated a QA for wandering/behavior preventions and intervention with a target completion date of 02/15/2025. Throughout the survey from 12/16/2024 to 12/18/2024, observations, interviews, and record reviews revealed the above listed actions were implemented. Random staff interviews revealed staff received training on the facility's safety and supervision policy and procedure and questionnaires testing their knowledge. Observations were made throughout the survey with no supervision concerns identified. Observations, interviews, and record review, revealed monitoring had begun
May 2024 2 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a cognitively impaired resident received treatment and car...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a cognitively impaired resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 (#2) of 3 (#1, #2, and #3) sampled residents. The facility failed to ensure: 1. S5LPN transcribed new telephone orders for Tylenol and an X-Ray for Resident #2; 2. S5LPN implemented a new telephone order for an X-Ray for Resident #2 after a fall and complaint of pain; and 3. S5LPN communicated Resident #2's change in status, fall, or new orders of Tylenol and an X-Ray to oncoming staff prior to leaving the facility at the end of her shift. This deficient practice resulted in an actual harm for Resident #2, a severely cognitively impaired resident, beginning on 04/01/2024 at 6:30 a.m. when S5LPN left the facility without communicating Resident #2's fall and new X-Ray order to any other staff. On 04/01/2024, between 10:30 a.m. and lunch time, Resident #2's CNA notified S4LPN that Resident #2 had complained of pain and required increased assistance with a transfer. S2NP assessed Resident #2, and she complained of left leg pain and would not allow S2NP to touch her leg. On 04/01/2024 around 1:41 p.m., a local imaging company was notified of S2NP's left leg and hip X-Ray order. On 04/01/2024 at 4:00 p.m., X-Ray revealed Resident #2 had a Displaced Left Femoral Neck Fracture that required surgical intervention. Due to Resident #2's impaired cognition, she did not recall the above events, but it could be determined that a reasonable person would have suffered physical harm as a result of the failed communication and delayed treatment. Findings: Review of the facility's policy with a revision dated of July 2016 and titled, Medication and Treatment Orders revealed the following, in part: Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 3. Drug and biological orders must be recorded on the Physician's Order Sheet in the resident's chart. 7. Verbal Orders must be recorded immediately in the resident's chart by the person receiving the order . Review of Resident #2's Clinical Record revealed an admission date of 01/31/2021 and diagnoses, which included Unspecified Signs and Symptoms Involving Cognitive Functions and Awareness, Cognitive Communication Deficit, History of Falling, Major Depressive Disorder, and Dementia. Further review revealed a new diagnosis of a Displaced Intertrochanteric Fracture of Left Femur on 04/01/2024. Review of Resident #2's MDS with an ARD of 04/12/2024 revealed she had a BIMS summary score of 99, which indicated Resident #2 had severely impaired cognition. Review of Resident #2's Nurses' Notes dated 04/01/2024 revealed the following, in part: 04/01/2024 at 2:29 a.m. Called to Resident #2's room by her roommate. Resident #2 found on the floor in bathroom. Resident #2 complained of pain to Left Knee. Spoke with S3OCNP at about 1:50 a.m. S3OCNP advised giving Tylenol for Knee Pain and X-Ray on 04/01/2024. Signed S5LPN. Review of Resident #2's Telephone Orders dated 03/31/2024 through 04/01/2024 revealed no evidence S5LPN transcribed the orders for Tylenol or X-Ray received from S3OCNP on 04/01/2024. Review of Resident #2's Hallway 24-Hour Report Log dated 03/31/2024 revealed the following, in part: Change of Condition: Resident #2 - unwitnessed fall New orders 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.: Resident #2 - X-Ray 04/01/2024 Review of Resident #2's Electronic Physician Orders dated April 2024 revealed no evidence Tylenol or an X-Ray was ordered on 04/01/2024. Review of Resident #2's Nurses' Notes dated 04/01/2024 revealed the following, in part: 4/01/2024 at 6:00 p.m. Late entry 04/01/2024 at 2:00 p.m. Resident #2 sitting in lobby in wheelchair. Resident #2 has complaints of pain to leg to staff. S2NP making rounds and assessed resident. S2NP with orders for X-Ray of Left Hip and Left Leg. Resident propelling self in wheelchair. Resident given Tylenol 650 mg for pain. Signed S4LPN. Review of Resident #2's Telephone Orders dated 04/01/2024 revealed the following: (04/01/2024) X-Ray of Left Leg and Left Hip Signed by S4LPN and S2NP. Review of Resident #2's Physician Progress Note dated 04/01/2024 revealed the following, in part: Assessment/Plan: 1. Left Hip Pain (Primary) Overview: will obtain X-Ray at this time Review of Resident #2's Nurses' Notes dated 04/01/2024 revealed the following, in part: 04/01/2024 at 6:08 p.m. At 4:00 p.m., a local imaging company arrived for X-Rays. Signed S4LPN. Review of Resident #2's Left Hip and Femur X-Ray results dated 04/01/2024 revealed the following, in part: Significant Findings: Displaced Left Femoral Neck Fracture Review of Resident #2's Nurses' Notes dated 04/01/2024 revealed the following, in part: 04/01/2024 at 11:30 p.m. Resident sent to a local emergency room. X-ray results showed Left Femoral Neck Displaced Fracture. An interview was conducted with Resident #2 on 05/06/2024 at 9:10 a.m. Due to Resident #2's impaired cognition, she was unable to recall having a fall, fracture, and/or surgery. A telephone interview was conducted with S5LPN on 05/06/2024 at 11:25 a.m. She confirmed she was assigned to Resident #2 on the early morning of 04/01/2024 when Resident #2 had a fall. S5LPN stated Resident #2's roommate notified her around 1:50 a.m. that Resident #2 was on the floor in the bathroom. She stated Resident #2 complained of left knee pain prior to her getting off the floor. S5LPN stated she notified the on-call nurse practitioner who gave her orders to administer Tylenol and obtain X-Rays in the morning. She stated she did not notify the X-Ray Company of Resident #2's order for an X-Ray. S5LPN stated she documented Resident #2's fall and X-Ray order in the 24-hour report book. She stated she left the facility around 6:30 a.m. that morning, and her relief was not present in the facility to verbally communicate report. S5LPN stated she did not notify any facility oncoming staff of Resident #2's fall, new order for Tylenol, and/or the order for an X-Ray. She stated she administered Tylenol, but did not transcribe the verbal order. She stated she did not transcribe or implement the new order for the X-Ray. An interview was conducted with S6CNA on 05/06/2024 at 1:15 p.m. She confirmed she was assigned to Resident #2 on 04/01/2024 from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. She stated she was not aware Resident #2 had a fall on the night shift. She stated she was unable to recall the exact timeline of events, but Resident #2 complained of pain intermittently on 04/01/2024. She stated Resident #2 needed more assistance than normal during a transfer and complained of pain to her leg. She stated she notified S4LPN of Resident #2's change in condition and complaint of pain. An interview was conducted with S4LPN on 05/06/2024 at 11:49 a.m. She confirmed she was assigned to Resident #2 on 04/01/2024 from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. S4LPN stated she arrived late to the facility on [DATE] around 7:00 a.m., and S5LPN had already left. S4LPN stated, between BINGO and lunch time, Resident #2's CNA notified her Resident #2 complained of pain and required increased assistance with a transfer. She stated at that point, she read Resident #2's Nurses' Notes and determined Resident #2 had a fall. S4LPN stated she then notified S2NP of Resident #2's change in condition and complaints of pain. S4LPN reviewed Resident #2's Hallway 24-hour report log dated 03/31/2024 and confirmed under new orders for 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. shift, Resident #2 had a new order for an X-Ray on 04/01/2024. She confirmed the 24-hour report log revealed Resident #2 had an unwitnessed fall. S4LPN confirmed she should have been aware of Resident #2's fall, complaint of pain, and X-Ray order at the beginning of her shift. She stated if she had been aware of Resident #2's change in condition and X-Ray order at the beginning of her shift, she would have immediately assessed Resident #2 and ordered the X-Ray. She stated S5LPN should have notified the X-Ray company when she received Resident #2's X-Ray order. S4LPN explained the nurse who received the X-Ray order was responsible to notify the X-Ray company of the order. She stated she notified a local imaging company of Resident #2's Left Hip and Leg X-Ray order around 2:00 p.m. on 04/01/2024. S4LPN stated the x-ray was performed around 4:00 p.m. A telephone interview was conducted with S3OCNP on 05/06/2024 at 2:26 p.m. She stated she was unable to recall the specified date, time, and scenario regarding Resident #2. She stated if after Resident #2's fall, she complained of pain to her left knee, she would have told the nurse to administer Tylenol and obtain an X-Ray. She stated the expectation would be for the nursing home to notify the X-Ray company first thing the next morning, which was 7:00 a.m. She stated a 2:00 p.m. notification the next day would not have been incredibly sufficient. An interview was conducted with S2NP on 05/06/2024 at 12:22 p.m. She stated, on 04/01/2024 around lunch time, S4LPN reported to her Resident #2 had a fall and was complaining of pain to her left leg. She stated she assessed Resident #2 at that time. She stated Resident #2 was seated in the dining room in her wheelchair. She stated when she attempted to perform range of motion to Resident #2's left leg, Resident #2 would not allow her to touch the leg, and Resident #2 complained of pain. She stated, at that time, she ordered an x-ray of the left hip and leg. She stated she was unaware the on-call Nurse Practitioner ordered x-rays. She stated if the x-rays were ordered overnight, the x-ray company should have been notified at that time. An interview was conducted with a representative from a local imaging company used by the facility on 05/06/2024 at 3:08 p.m. She stated the facility contacted the imaging company on 04/01/2024 at 1:17 p.m. for an x-ray for Resident #2. She stated the imaging company received X-Ray orders 24/7. An interview was conducted with S1DON on 05/07/2024 at 9:33 a.m. She stated residents' change in condition and any new orders should be communicated from shift to shift. S1DON stated there was a 24-hour communication tool at each nurses' station, and there should be a shift to shift verbal report given at the beginning and end of each shift. She stated, ideally, if the day nurse was running late, she would expect the night nurse to give the keys to another day shift nurse and give report so it could be communicated to the oncoming nurse once they arrived. S1DON stated she expected each nurse to review the 24-hour report communication tool at the beginning of their shift. She confirmed Resident #2's fall and X-Ray order was placed on the 24-hour report communication tool. She stated S5LPN should have notified the X-Ray company of Resident #2's X-Ray order when the order was received. S1DON reviewed Resident #2's Physician Orders and Telephone Orders and confirmed the orders S5LPN received for Tylenol and an X-Ray for Resident #2 from S3OCNP were not transcribed and should have been.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's medical record was maintained accurately and systematically in accordance with accepted professional standards and pra...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's medical record was maintained accurately and systematically in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices by failing to transcribe and document administration of Tylenol on the MAR for 1 (#2) of 3 (#1, #2, and #3) sampled residents. Findings: Review of Resident #2's Clinical Record revealed an admission date of 01/31/2021 and diagnoses, which included Unspecified Signs and Symptoms Involving Cognitive Functions and Awareness, Displaced Intertrochanteric Fracture of Left Femur, Cognitive Communication Deficit, History of Falling, and Dementia. Review of Resident #2's MDS with an ARD of 04/12/2024 revealed she had a BIMS summary score of 99, which indicated the interview was unsuccessful and Resident #2 had severely impaired cognition. Review of Resident #2's Nurses' Notes dated 04/01/2024 revealed the following, in part: 04/01/2024 at 2:29 a.m. Called to Resident #2's room by her roommate. Resident #2 found on the floor in bathroom. Resident #2 complained of pain to Left Knee. Spoke with S3OCNP at about 1:50 a.m. S3OCNP advised giving Tylenol for Knee Pain and X-Ray on 04/01/2024. Signed S5LPN. 04/01/2024 at 6:00 p.m. Late entry 04/01/2024 at 2:00 p.m. Resident #2 sitting in lobby in wheelchair. Resident #2 has complaints of pain to leg to staff. S2NP making rounds and assessed resident. S2NP with orders for X-Ray of Left Hip and Left Leg. Resident propelling self in wheelchair. Resident given Tylenol 650 mg for pain, effective. Signed S4LPN. Review of Resident #2's Physician Orders revealed no evidence an order for Tylenol was transcribed into her Electronic Medical Record. Review of Resident #2's MAR dated April 2024 revealed no evidence Resident #2 received Tylenol on 04/01/2024. A telephone interview was conducted with S5LPN on 05/06/2024 at 11:25 a.m. She confirmed she was assigned to Resident #2 on the early morning of 04/01/2024 when Resident #2 had a fall. S5LPN confirmed she received an order and administered Tylenol to Resident #2 around 2:00 a.m. on 04/01/2024. An interview was conducted with S4LPN on 05/06/2024 at 11:49 a.m. She confirmed she was assigned to Resident #2 on 04/01/2024 from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. S4LPN stated, between BINGO and lunch, Resident #2's CNA notified her Resident #2 complained of pain. She stated she administered Tylenol to Resident #2. S4LPN stated she thought she documented the administration of Tylenol on Resident #2's MAR. She stated if the Tylenol administration was not on the MAR, then she did not document it, and should have. An interview was conducted with S1DON on 05/07/2024 at 9:33 a.m. She reviewed Resident #2's Physician Orders and MAR dated April 2024 and confirmed there was no documented evidence Resident #2's order was transcribed into her Electronic Medical Record. S1DON confirmed there was no documented evidence Resident #2 received Tylenol on 04/01/2024. S1DON stated Physician Orders should be transcribed into the resident's electronic record and administration of medications should be documented on the resident's MAR.
Mar 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

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interviews and observations, the facility failed to ensure that residents had a clean and safe environment for 1 (#36) of 2 (#36 and #65) residents reviewed for environment. The facility fail...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews and observations, the facility failed to ensure that residents had a clean and safe environment for 1 (#36) of 2 (#36 and #65) residents reviewed for environment. The facility failed to ensure: 1. The front face covering for Resident #36's air condition/heater unit was properly secured; and 2. Resident #36's nightstand was not missing the third drawer. Findings On 03/18/2024 at 9:23 a.m., an observation was made of Resident #36's room. The air conditioner's front cover was detached and laying on the floor in front of the unit by the window. The night stand on the left side of his bed was missing the 3rd drawer. On 03/19/2024 at 8:08 a.m., an observation was made of Resident #36's room. The air conditioner's front cover was detached and laying on the floor in front of the unit by the window. The night stand on the left side of his bed was missing the 3rd drawer. On 03/19/2024 at 8:10 a.m., an observation was made with S3DON of Resident #36's room. She confirmed the air conditioner cover was detached and laying on the floor and the 3rd drawer missing from Resident #36's night stand. She said staff should have reported both of these to maintenance. On 03/19/2024 at 8:20 a.m., an interview was conducted with S3DON. She said staff should write environmental concerns in the maintenance log book to notify maintenance of any issues. She confirmed nothing had been written on the maintenance log for Resident #36's room. On 03/20/2024 at 2:12 p.m., an interview was conducted with S10MD. He said if staff saw something in a room needing fixed, they were to write it in the log book. He stated he checked the log book every other day. He said he also randomly checked rooms in the mornings when he clocked in. He said he was made aware of the detached air conditioning cover and the missing drawer for Resident #36's night stand yesterday and did not know how long they had been an issue.
CONCERN (D)

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents' assessments accurately reflected the residents' ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents' assessments accurately reflected the residents' status by failing to ensure a resident's Minimum Data Set was accurately coded for PASRR (Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review) for 2 (#27 and #52) of 4 (#13, #27, #42, and #52,) sampled residents reviewed for PASRR. Findings: Resident #27 Review of Resident #27's clinical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a 142 Form Notification of Medical Certification with an approval for admission by the state Level II Authority dated 02/07/2013. Review of Resident #27's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/10/2023 revealed Section A1500 PASRR: Has the resident been evaluated by Level II PASRR and determined to have a serious mental illness and/or mental retardation or a related condition, was coded as 0. No. Section A1510 Level II PASRR conditions was blank. Resident #52 Review of Resident #52's clinical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a 142 Form Notification of Medical Certification with an approval for admission by the state Level II Authority dated 10/11/2017. Review of Resident #52's Annual MDS with an ARD of 09/07/2023 revealed Section A1500 PASRR: Has the resident been evaluated by Level II PASRR and determined to have a serious mental illness and/or mental retardation or a related condition, was coded as 0. No. Section A1510 Level II PASRR conditions was blank. An interview was conducted with S3DON on 03/20/2024 at 3:25 p.m. She verified Resident #27's Form 142 indicated Resident #27 was approved for nursing home admission by Level II authority effective 02/07/2013. She reviewed Resident #27's annual MDS assessment dated [DATE]. S3DON confirmed Section A1500 should have been coded as 1-Yes, and was not. S3DON verified Resident #52's Form 142 indicated Resident #52 was approved for nursing home admission by Level II authority effective 10/11/2017. She reviewed Resident #52's annual MDS assessment dated [DATE]. S3DON confirmed Section A1500 should have been coded as 1-Yes, and was not. An interview was conducted with S2CCO on 03/20/2024 at 3:35 p.m. She verified Resident #27's Form 142 indicated Resident #27 was approved for nursing home admission by Level II authority effective 02/07/2013. She reviewed Resident #27's annual MDS assessment dated [DATE]. S2CCO confirmed Section A1500 should have been coded as 1-Yes, and was not. She verified Resident #52's Form 142 indicated Resident #52 was approved for nursing home admission by Level II authority effective 10/11/2017. She reviewed Resident #52's annual MDS assessment dated [DATE]. S2CCO confirmed Section A1500 should have been coded as 1-Yes, and was not.
CONCERN (D)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to developed a comprehensive person-centered plan of care for 1 (#59) ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to developed a comprehensive person-centered plan of care for 1 (#59) of 25 residents reviewed in the final sample. The facility failed to ensure interventions related to hydration for Resident #59 were reflected in the plan of care. Findings: Review of Resident #59's medical records revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Dysphagia. Review of Resident #59's care plan revealed an entry for Nectar thick liquids on 04/19/2023, there was no documentation of interventions related to removing the water pitcher from Resident #59's room. On 03/19/2024 at 1:00 p.m., an interview was conducted with S6CNA. She said Resident #59 cannot have a water pitcher in his room because he will dump out the thickened liquids and replace it with regular water. On 03/19/2024 at 1:11 p.m., an interview was conducted with S5LPN. She said Resident #59 is on thickened liquids. She stated Resident #59 cannot have a water pitcher in his room because he will dump out the thickened liquids and replace it with regular water from the faucet. On 03/19/2024 at 1:20 p.m., an interview was conducted with S4MDS. She said she is responsible for updating the care plans after a resident has a change in care. She stated Resident #59 cannot have a water pitcher in his room because he will dump out the thickened liquids and replace it with regular water from the faucet. She reviewed Resident #59's care plan and confirmed Resident #59's care plan was not updated to reflect the interventions related to the water pitcher. On 03/19/2024 at 2:00 p.m., an interview was conducted with S3DON. She confirmed all resident's care plans should reflect the care they are receiving.
MINOR (B)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Staffing Information (Tag F0732)

Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to post the required nurse staffing information on a daily basis. Findings: Review of the facility's policy dated August 2022 an...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to post the required nurse staffing information on a daily basis. Findings: Review of the facility's policy dated August 2022 and titled Posting Direct Care Daily Staffing Numbers revealed in part, the following: 1. Within 2 hours of the beginning of each shift, the number of licensed nurses and the number of unlicensed nursing personnel directly responsible for resident care is posted in a prominent location and in a clear and readable format. 2. The information recorded on the form shall include the following: a. The name of the facility; c. The resident census at the beginning of the shift for which the information is posted; g. The actual time worked during that shift for each category and type of nursing staff. An observation was made on 03/18/2024 at 8:10 a.m. of the posted staffing data near the nurse's station. Further review revealed it was dated 03/17/2024 with no documentation of name of facility, resident census, or actual hours worked. An interview was conducted on 03/18/2024 at 9:18 a.m. with S7ADON. She stated she was responsible for posting the facility's staffing at the beginning of each shift. She reviewed facility's report titled Nursing Assignment Sheet with a date of 03/17/2024. She confirmed this report was not posted per regulation for 03/18/2024, and revealed no documentation of the following information: 1. facility name, 2. census, 3. total number and actual hours worked per shift for licensed and unlicensed staff responsible for resident care.
Jun 2023 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Assessment Accuracy (Tag F0641)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments accurately reflected the resident's st...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 (#1) of 6 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and R6) residents reviewed for weight loss. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's MDS accurately reflected the resident's nutritional status. Findings: Review of Resident #1's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #1's MDS, with an ARD of 03/22/2023, revealed, in part, the following: Section K - Swallowing/Nutritional Status: Weight Loss: Yes, on physician prescribed weight loss regimen. Review of Resident #1's Physician's Progress Notes revealed, in part, the following note written on 03/28/2023 by S3NP, which indicated monitoring weight loss. Visit diagnoses included Weight Loss. Review of Resident #1's current Physician Orders revealed, in part, the following: 03/28/2023: Regular, NAS, extra eggs, and mighty shake with breakfast. 03/10/2023: Regular, NAS, extra eggs, and mighty shake with breakfast, magic cup with supper. Sandwich at 10:00 a.m., 2:00 p.m., and HS. 02/28/2023: Add mighty shake with breakfast. 02/16/2023: Extra eggs with breakfast. Magic cup with lunch. 01/31/2023: Add sandwich at HS. 01/20/2023: Regular, NAS. A review of Resident #1's Weight Log, dated 01/20/2023 through 04/03/2023, revealed, in part, the following: 04/03/2023: 129.8 pounds 03/20/2023: 132.6 pounds 03/13/2023: 135.8 pounds 03/06/2023: 136.1 pounds 02/20/2023: 143.9 pounds 02/06/2023: 142.8 pounds 01/30/2023: 142.6 pounds 01/23/2023: 144.6 pounds An interview was conducted on 06/09/2023 at 2:00 p.m. with S3NP. S3NP confirmed Resident #1 had been having weight loss, but stated it was not planned. She stated they were monitoring his weight loss very closely in attempt to stop it, not continue it. An interview was conducted on 06/09/2023 at 2:20 p.m. with S2MDS. S2MDS reviewed Section K of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] and confirmed he was incorrectly coded as having a prescribed weight loss in the assessment. She confirmed he should have been coded for an unplanned weight loss. She confirmed MDS Assessments should be submitted with correct information and this assessment had not been. An interview was conducted on 06/09/2023 at 2:50 p.m. with S1DON. S1DON confirmed Resident #1 was never on a prescribed weight loss regimen and his MDS dated [DATE] was coded incorrectly. She confirmed Resident #1 should have been coded for an unplanned weight loss not a physician prescribed weight loss regimen. She confirmed MDS Assessments should be submitted with correct information and this assessment had not been.
Mar 2023 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

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

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from physical abuse by another resident for 1 (#98) of 3 (# 63, #85, #98) residents reviewed for abuse. Findings: Review of the facility's policy, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program revealed, in part, the following: Policy Statement: Residents have the right to be free from abuse . This includes but is not limited to freedom from corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion, verbal, mental, sexual or physical abuse and physical or chemical restraint not required to treat the resident's symptoms. Review of the facility's Incident Log for the past 120 days revealed two incidents of Resident to Resident Physical Altercation between Resident #98 and Resident #63 on 03/02/2023 and on 03/03/2023. Review of the facility's Incident Report dated 03/02/2023 at 5:00 p.m., revealed, in part, the following: Incident Type: Patient Contact - Resident to Resident Report Prepared by: S5LPN Resident #98 was sitting at a table talking to another resident when suddenly Resident #63 pushed Resident #98 without warning. Review of the facility's Incident Report dated 03/03/2023 at 7:37 a.m., revealed, in part, the following: Incident Type: Patient Contact - Resident to Resident Report Prepared by: S5LPN Narrative of Incident: Resident #98 sitting in dining room when coffee was thrown at her by Resident #63. Dime sized skin tear noted to left wrist. Resident #98 Review of Resident #98's Clinical Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #98's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/27/2023, indicated the resident had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 9, which indicated she had moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #98's Nurses Notes revealed, in part, the following: 03/03/2023 at 9:06 a.m. written by S5LPN, Resident #98 was sitting in the dining room when Resident #63 threw coffee on her. Resident #98 sustained a dime sized skin tear to the left wrist. Review of Resident #98's current Care Plan revealed, in part, resident experienced physical behaviors from another resident on 03/02/2023 and 03/03/2023. Resident #63 Review of Resident #63's Clinical Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #63's most recent MDS, with an ARD of 01/25/2023, indicated the resident had a BIMS of 15, which indicated she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #63's current Care Plan revealed, in part, Behavior Socially Inappropriate/Disruptive with behaviors demonstrated on 03/02/2023 and 03/03/2023. Review of Resident #63's Nurses Notes revealed, in part, the following; 03/03/2023 at 5:49 p.m. written by S4LPN, 03/02/2023 at 05:00 p.m., Resident #63 was standing in the dining room talking to Resident #98. Resident #63 became upset with Resident #98 and pushed her out of the chair. 03/03/2023 at 08:53 a.m. written by S11LPN, 7:45 a.m. Resident #63 got up from table and splashed her coffee on Resident #98. 03/03/2023 at 2:04 p.m. written by S2DON, Resident #98 was sitting at the dining table when Resident #63 pushed Resident #98 on the shoulder. Resident #63 had another behavior this morning. Resident #63 walked up to Resident #98 and threw her coffee on her. On 03/30/2023 at 9:30 am, an interview was conducted with S4LPN. She stated on 03/02/2023 Resident #63 got up, walked across the dining room towards Resident #98 then physically shoved Resident #98 out of her chair. On 03/30/2023 at 9:40 a.m., an interview was conducted with S5LPN. He stated on 03/02/2023 Resident #63 pushed Resident #98 out of her chair. He then stated on 03/03/2023 Resident #63 threw coffee on Resident #98. He stated he assessed Resident #98 following the incident on 03/03/2023, he found a dime sized skin tear to her left wrist. He confirmed both incidents between Resident #63 and Resident #98 were abuse. On 03/30/2023 at 9:55 a.m., an interview was conducted with S9CNA. She stated she was present in the dining room on 03/02/2023 and witnessed the incident between Resident #63 and Resident #98. She stated Resident #63 was seated in the dining room when she got up, walked over to Resident #98 and pushed her out of her chair. She stated she and other staff members had to pull Resident #63 away from Resident #98 because she would not have stopped otherwise. She confirmed a resident shoving another resident hard enough to knock them out of their chair was abuse. She also confirmed a resident throwing coffee on another resident was abuse. On 03/30/2023 at 10:32 a.m., a telephone interview was conducted with S7CNA. She stated on the morning of 03/03/2023, she saw Resident #98 being walked back to her unit with her clothes all wet from coffee. She stated Resident #98 told her a lady had thrown coffee all over her so she had to change clothes. She confirmed a resident throwing coffee on another resident was abuse. She also confirmed a resident shoving another resident out of their chair was abuse. On 03/30/2023 at 11:20 a.m., an interview was conducted with S2DON. She confirmed staff reported on 03/02/2023, Resident #63 approached Resident #98 and shoved her and on 03/03/2023, Resident #63 tossed coffee on Resident #98. She confirmed Resident #98 was found to have a dime sized skin tear to her left wrist following the incident on 03/03/2023. On 03/30/2023 at 11:45 a.m., an interview was conducted with S1ADM. He confirmed on 03/02/2023, Resident #63 approached Resident #98 and shoved her. He then confirmed on 03/03/2023, Resident #63 poured coffee on Resident #98, resulting in a skin tear to Resident #98's left wrist.
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

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of physical abuse was reported within 2 hour...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of physical abuse was reported within 2 hours to the state agency for 1 (#98) of 3 (#63, #85, and #98) residents reviewed for abuse. Findings: Review of the facility's policy, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Reporting and Investigating revealed, in part, the following: All reports of resident abuse . are reported to local, state and federal agencies as required by current regulations and thoroughly investigated by facility management. Findings of all investigations are documented and reported. Policy Interpretations and Authorities Reporting Allegations to the Administrator and Authorities 1. If resident abuse, . is suspected, the suspicion must be reported immediately to the administrator and to other officials according to state law. 2. The administrator or the individual making the allegation immediately reports his or her suspicion to the following persons or agencies: a. The state licensing/certification agency responsible for surveying/licensing the facility; 3. Immediately is defined as: a. Within two hours of an allegation involving abuse or result in serious bodily injury; Review of the facility's Incident Log revealed two incidents of Resident to Resident Physical Altercation between Resident #98 and Resident #63 on 03/02/2023 and on 03/03/2023. Review of the facility's Incident Report, dated 03/02/2023 at 5:00 p.m., revealed, in part, the following: Incident Type: Patient Contact - Resident to Resident Narrative of Incident: Resident #98 was sitting at a table talking to another resident when suddenly Resident #63 pushed Resident #98 without warning. Review of the facility's Incident Report, dated 03/03/2023 at 7:37 a.m., revealed, in part, the following: Incident Type: Patient Contact - Resident to Resident Narrative of Incident: Resident #98 sitting in dining room when coffee was thrown at her by Resident #63. Dime sized skin tear noted to left wrist. Review of the facility's state agency reportable incident reports revealed no entries involving Resident #98 or Resident #63 on 03/02/2023 and 03/03/2023. Resident #98 Review of Resident #98's Clinical Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #98's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/27/2023, indicated resident had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 9, which indicated resident had moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #98's current Care Plan revealed, in part, resident experienced physical behaviors from another resident on 03/02/2023 and 03/03/2023. Review of Resident #98's Nurses Notes revealed, in part, the following: 03/03/2023 at 9:06 a.m. written by S5LPN, Resident #98 was sitting in the dining room when Resident #63 threw coffee on her. Resident #98 sustained a dime sized skin tear to the left wrist. Resident #63 Review of Resident #63's Clinical Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #63's most recent MDS, with an ARD of 01/25/2023, indicated the resident had a BIMS of 15, which indicated she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #63's current Care Plan revealed, in part, Behavior Socially Inappropriate/Disruptive with behaviors demonstrated on 03/02/2023 and 03/03/2023. Review of Resident #63's Nurses Notes revealed, in part, the following; 03/03/2023 at 5:49 p.m. written by S4LPN, late entry for 03/02/2023 at 05:00 p.m., Resident #63 was standing in the dining room talking to Resident #98. Resident #63 became upset with Resident #98 and pushed her out of the chair. 03/03/2023 at 8:53 a.m. written by S11LPN, 7:45 a.m. Resident #63 got up from table and splashed her coffee on Resident #98. 03/03/2023 at 2:04 p.m. written by S2DON, Resident #98 was sitting at the dining table when Resident #63 pushed Resident #98 on the shoulder. Resident #63 had another behavior this morning. Resident #63 walked up to Resident #98 and threw her coffee on her. On 03/30/2023 at 9:30 am, an interview was conducted with S4LPN. She stated on 03/02/2023 Resident #63 got up, walked across the dining room towards Resident #98 then physically shoved Resident #98 out of her chair. On 03/30/2023 at 9:40 a.m., an interview was conducted with S5LPN. He stated on 03/02/2023 Resident #63 pushed Resident #98 out of her chair. He stated on 03/03/2023 Resident #63 threw coffee on Resident #98. He stated he assessed Resident #98 following the incident on 03/03/2023, he found a dime sized skin tear to her left wrist. He confirmed both incidents between Resident #63 and Resident #98 were abuse. On 03/30/2023 at 9:55 a.m., an interview was conducted with S9CNA. She stated she was present in the dining room on 03/02/2023 and witnessed the incident between Resident #63 and Resident #98. She stated Resident #63 was seated in the dining room when she got up, walked over to Resident #98 and pushed her out of her chair. She stated her and other staff members had to pull Resident #63 away from Resident #98 because Resident #63 would not have stopped otherwise. She confirmed a resident shoving another resident hard enough to knock them out of their chair was abuse. She also confirmed a resident throwing coffee on another resident was abuse. On 03/30/2023 at 10:32 a.m., a telephone interview was conducted with S7CNA. She stated on the morning of 03/03/2023, she saw Resident #98 being walked back to her unit with her clothes all wet from coffee. She stated Resident #98 told her a lady had thrown coffee all over her so she had to change clothes. She confirmed a resident throwing coffee on another resident was abuse. She also confirmed a resident shoving another resident out of their chair was abuse. On 03/30/2023 at 11:20 a.m., an interview was conducted with S2DON. She confirmed staff informed her on 03/02/2023, Resident #63 approached Resident #98 and shoved her and on 03/03/2023, Resident #63 tossed coffee on Resident #98. She confirmed Resident #98 had a dime sized skin tear on her left wrist following the incident on 03/03/2023. She confirmed S1ADM was responsible for reporting incidents involving physical abuse to the state agency. On 03/30/2023 at 11:45 am, an interview was conducted with S1ADM. He confirmed on 03/02/2023, Resident #63 approached Resident #98 and shoved her. He confirmed on 03/03/2023, Resident #63 poured her coffee on Resident #98, resulting in a skin tear to Resident #98's left wrist. He also confirmed he was the person responsible for reporting incidents involving physical abuse to the state agency. He confirmed he did not report either incident on 03/02/2023 and 03/02/2023 between Resident #98 and Resident #63 to the State Agency.
CONCERN (E)

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

Comprehensive Care Plan (Tag F0656)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's comprehensive plan of care was ...

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 ensure a resident's comprehensive plan of care was implemented for 1 (#75) of 3 (#6, #39, and #75) residents reviewed for nutrition in the final sample. The facility failed to ensure Resident #75 received a mighty shake with lunch as ordered by the physician. Findings: Resident #75 Review of the clinical record for Resident #75 revealed the resident was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident had diagnoses which included Dementia, Pressure Ulcer of Sacral Region, Stage 2, and Cognitive Communication Deficit. Review of the Care Plan for Resident #75 revealed the following, in part: Onset Date: 01/17/2023 I have a potential for impaired skin. Intervention: Provide supplemental support. Review of the March 2023 Physician Orders for Resident #75 revealed the following, in part: 02/16/2023 Mighty Shake with lunch. Review of the Meal Ticket for Resident #75, dated 03/29/2023, revealed, in part: No request for a mighty shake with lunch. On 03/28/2023 at 12:05 p.m., an observation was conducted of staff at bedside feeding Resident #75. No mighty shake noted on tray. On 03/29/2023 at 12:00 p.m., an observation and interview was conducted with S10CNA. S10CNA stated she is assigned to Resident #75 on her rotating 12 hour shifts. She confirmed Resident #75 did not have a mighty shake with her lunch tray. She stated Resident #75 received chopped meats, drank regular liquid, and she was unaware she received a might shake with her lunch tray. On 03/29/2023 at 2:11 p.m., an interview was conducted with S6FSD. She provided a printed meal ticket for Resident #75, and confirmed a mighty shake was not on the ticket and should have been. On 03/30/2023 at 9:22 a.m., an interview was conducted with S4LPN. At this time, she printed the Physician Orders for March 2023 and confirmed Resident #75 had an order for a mighty shake at lunch. On 03/30/2023 at 9:32 a.m., an interview was conducted with S2DON. S2DON confirmed if an order was written for a mighty shake at lunch, Resident #75 should have been receiving it with lunch.
Feb 2023 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

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

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

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's physician was notified of a change in conditio...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's physician was notified of a change in condition for 1 (#1) of 2 (#1 and #5) residents reviewed with surgical wounds. The facility failed to ensure nursing staff notified Resident #1's doctor or nurse practitioner when he experienced bleeding from his Left Lower Extremity Surgical Incision. Review of the facility's policy entitled Change in a Resident's Condition or Status revealed in part, the following: 1. The nurse will notify the resident's attending physician when there has been a(an): d. Significant change in the resident's physical condition. 8. The nurse will record in the resident's medical record information relative to changes in the resident's medical condition or status. Review of Resident #1's clinical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, which included CABG without angina pectoris, Parkinson's disease, Type II Diabetes Mellitus, Ischemic Cardiomyopathy, and Muscle Wasting and Atrophy. Further review revealed Resident #1 admitted to the facility with a Left Lower Extremity Surgical Wound. Review of Resident #1's MDS with an ARD of 02/05/2023 revealed he had surgical wounds. Review of Resident #1's current care plan, revealed in part, the following: Report changes in condition to physician, monitor vital signs, and full skin evaluation with shower. Review of Resident #1's Nursing Notes dated 02/02/2023 to 02/05/2023 revealed no documentation pertaining to surgical wounds. On 02/24/2023 at 9:00 a.m., a telephone interview was conducted with S4LPN. She stated she was responsible for performing wound care for Resident #1 on 02/04/2023 and 02/05/2023. She stated during morning medication administration on 02/05/2023, she noticed blood on Resident #1's dressing to his left lower extremity. She stated after removing the soiled dressing, the site began to bleed a fair amount. She stated she applied a pressure dressing and then went to other residents' rooms to pass out medications. She stated she was not able to make it back into Resident #1's room until hours later. She stated she removed the pressure dressing and applied a clean dressing. She explained Resident #1's left lower extremity was still actively bleeding. She stated she did not document her assessment or notify the physician or NP. On 02/23/2023 at 3:15 p.m., an interview was conducted with S2NP. She stated she would expect staff to notify her of any bleeding, swelling, change in drainage, or warmth to a surgical site.
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 F0658 (Tag F0658)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure services were provided by the facility to meet quality pro...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure services were provided by the facility to meet quality professional standards for 1 (#1) of 2 (#1 and #5) sampled residents reviewed for surgical wounds. The facility failed to ensure Physician orders for wound care were obtained for Resident #1 from 01/31/2023 through 02/02/2023. Review of the facility's policy titled, Wound Care revealed the following, in part: Documentation: The following information should be recorded in the resident's medical record: 1. The type of wound care given. 2. The date and time the wound care was given. 4. Any change in the resident's condition. 5. All assessment data (wound bed color, size, drainage, etc.) obtained when inspecting the wound. Review of Resident #1's clinical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, which included CABG Without Angina Pectoris, Parkinson's Disease, Type II Diabetes Mellitus, Ischemic Cardiomyopathy, and Muscle Wasting and Atrophy. Further review revealed Resident #1 admitted to the facility with a Left Lower Extremity Surgical Wound. Review of Resident #1's MDS with an ARD of 02/05/2023 revealed he had surgical wounds. Review of Resident #1's Physician orders dated 01/31/2023 to 02/02/2023 revealed no orders pertaining to surgical wounds. Review of Resident #1's Nursing Notes dated 02/02/2023 to 02/05/2023 revealed no documentation pertaining to surgical wounds. Review of Resident #1's eTAR dated 01/31/2023 to 02/03/2023 revealed no documentation pertaining to surgical wounds. Review of Resident #1's hospital records dated 02/07/2023 at 9:11 a.m. revealed the following Emergency Department assessment upon arrival: 1. Left Lower Extremity Cellulitis Patient has clinical signs of cellulitis (erythema, warmth, tenderness to palpation) along his EVH harvest site. He also has a probable fluid collection in the EVH tunnel in the left lower extremity. Diagnosis Principal: Left Lower Extremity Cellulitis and Weakness/Deconditioning. Chief complaint: Left Lower Extremity Cellulitis. On 02/23/2023 at 1:50 p.m., an interview was conducted with S6LPN. She stated each shift was required to chart on Resident #1 daily. She stated when Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], he had 2 incisions to the left leg and a sternal incision. She stated on 01/31/2023, Resident #1's left leg was warm around the border of the bandage but stated she did not remove the bandage. She stated she reported her assessment to the wound care nurse, S3LPN. On 02/23/2023 at 2:30 p.m., an interview was conducted with S1DON. She confirmed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with surgical wounds present and no wound care orders were obtained and implemented until 02/03/2023. She confirmed physician orders should have been obtained and implemented for Resident #1 on 01/31/2023. She stated she expected the admitting nurse to obtain orders for wound care upon a resident's admission. On 02/24/2023 at 11:25 a.m., an interview was conducted with S3LPN. She stated she was the facility's wound care nurse, and she performed skin assessments on all admissions. She stated it was she or S1DON's responsibility to obtain, implement, and/or seek physician clarification on wound care orders. She confirmed wound care orders should have been initiated for Resident #1 on 01/31/2023 and they were not.
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 safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • 35% turnover. Below Louisiana's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 4 harm violation(s), $156,807 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 24 deficiencies on record, including 4 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
  • • $156,807 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Louisiana. Major compliance failures.
  • • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: This facility has a substantiated abuse finding. Extreme caution advised. Explore alternatives.

About This Facility

What is St. Francisville Nursing And Rehab, Llc's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns ST. FRANCISVILLE NURSING AND REHAB, LLC 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 St. Francisville Nursing And Rehab, Llc Staffed?

CMS rates ST. FRANCISVILLE NURSING AND REHAB, LLC's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 35%, compared to the Louisiana average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at St. Francisville Nursing And Rehab, Llc?

State health inspectors documented 24 deficiencies at ST. FRANCISVILLE NURSING AND REHAB, LLC during 2023 to 2025. These included: 4 that caused actual resident harm, 19 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.

Who Owns and Operates St. Francisville Nursing And Rehab, Llc?

ST. FRANCISVILLE NURSING AND REHAB, LLC is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 128 certified beds and approximately 103 residents (about 80% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in SAINT FRANCISVILLE, Louisiana.

How Does St. Francisville Nursing And Rehab, Llc Compare to Other Louisiana Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Louisiana, ST. FRANCISVILLE NURSING AND REHAB, LLC's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.4, staff turnover (35%) 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 St. Francisville Nursing And Rehab, Llc?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the substantiated abuse finding on record.

Is St. Francisville Nursing And Rehab, Llc Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, ST. FRANCISVILLE NURSING AND REHAB, LLC has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). 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 St. Francisville Nursing And Rehab, Llc Stick Around?

ST. FRANCISVILLE NURSING AND REHAB, LLC has a staff turnover rate of 35%, 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 St. Francisville Nursing And Rehab, Llc Ever Fined?

ST. FRANCISVILLE NURSING AND REHAB, LLC has been fined $156,807 across 3 penalty actions. This is 4.5x the Louisiana average of $34,647. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.

Is St. Francisville Nursing And Rehab, Llc on Any Federal Watch List?

ST. FRANCISVILLE NURSING AND REHAB, LLC 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.